5 ms·

I have never touched a gun. And I don't intend to. (I'm from a country where people don't have access to guns. And most animals here are considered exotic and

by 2143 4y ago

I have never touched a gun. And I don't intend to. (I'm from a country where people don't have access to guns. And most animals here are considered exotic and shooting them is illegal.) Nevertheless, I can appreciate a piece of good engineering, even if a little dark. I also like other well engineered simple long-lasting stuff. Things like the Toyota Land Cruiser, BMW B57 & B58 straight-6 engines, and ThinkPad laptops come to mind. People sometimes even say "ThinkPad is the AK-47 of laptops". What are some other well engineered long-lasting products? --- Update: explained why I haven't touched guns. Thanks for the downvotes ;)

sufficer 4y ago
What scares you from touching guns? Guns are fun, shooting is one of my favorite hobbies but I don't one a ton like a gun nut.
- zach_garwood 4y ago
  I don't begrudge anyone being scared of guns. They can have carastrophic results even when handled properly. The snake charmer isn't afraid of snakes, but that doesn't mean that your average Joe should go around, blithely picking up every snake they see.
  - f1refly 4y ago
    A snake charmer isn't afraid of snakes because he'll typically mutilate the animal by breaking the fangs or cutting out the venom sacks before going anywhere near it. A snake charmer will be afraid of every other snake.
dreen 4y ago
I had an old Soviet-era made excavator digger standing on my property. It was standing out there long enough for trees to grow through the cabin and way above it. We cleared them and put a little grease here and there and it started like charm. Another random example seems to be a Remington beard trimmer I had which recently gave up after nearly 20 years of service. Edit: I guess we should make an honourable mention for the Opportunity Mars Rover.
wrp 4y ago
> I also like other well engineered simple long-lasting stuff. Soviet engineering as a whole is interesting in this respect. From syllabuses I've read, engineering education in the USSR was at least as rigorous as in the USA. The problem for them was that they had to design things for an extremely unreliable and inefficient society, so they had to emphasize simplicity and durability in both manufacture and use. I've seen a few books covering the social issues facing Soviet engineers and examples of notable designs.
- bluedino 4y ago
  There's a (long-ish) quote out there about Soviet ammunition sizes vs American/NATO. About how it's simpler etc, they have less variety of sizes, do you know what I'm talking about? I can't find it.
  - wrp 4y ago
    Doesn't ring a bell. If you can give more details about who said it, that might help someone find your answer.
- unity1001 4y ago
  That bit about 'having to design for an extremely unreliable and inefficient society' sounds like Cold War Western propaganda. Soviet designs were not made efficient and durable because of that. They were made efficient and durable because that was the default for engineering until capitalism discarded that default and forced profit-maximizing designs that function over bloated specs and planned obsolescence. Otherwise in late 19th century and early 20th century, every country was more or less doing similar engineering design. Also, the science and engineering curriculums were much heavier than the US ones. Just check a few Soviet science/eng textbooks that you can find online.
  - wrp 4y ago
    As someone who remembers the latter part of the Cold War, I can tell you that the actual inefficiencies of the Soviet system were significantly underestimated in the dominant Western narrative. Your ideas about Soviet industry appear to be based on some ideology rather than familiarity with Soviet culture. I can't think of one single book that gives a good overview of Soviet engineering, but some good ones to start with might be Graham's The Ghost of the Executed Engineer, Gerovitch's From Newspeak to Cyberspeak, and Idov's Made in Russia: Unsung Icons of Soviet Design. I think most of the really interesting examples are in military technology, but unfortunately I don't know any good books surveying that area. Even if there was a "good old days" of manufacture in the West when products were always designed to be as efficient and durable as possible, that is different from what I described in the USSR. Since quality of manufacture was usually terrible, Soviet designs could not demand close tolerances in manufacture and had to be considerably over-engineered to avoid catastrophic failure from manufacturing defects. The USSR was also chronically short of equipment, so for things deployed, long life and resistance to abuse was more important than polish.
BoredPuffin 4y ago
Seeing your comment being downvoted is the most American thing I've witnessed on the internet today > What are some other well engineered long-lasting products? How dare you not mention Nokia!? Jokes aside, if you restrict it to "long-lasting" - Japanese woodworking, Toyota Hilux, Honda Super Cub... in fact a lot of post ww2 era Japanese manufacturing. If you include high fault tolerance as well - a lot of USSR engineering is beautiful in this aspect. I recall they design a propeller with 8 blades because they expected 4 of them will crack in early stage of usage. Same apply to screw enclosures.

by 2143 4y ago

sufficer 4y ago

What scares you from touching guns? Guns are fun, shooting is one of my favorite hobbies but I don't one a ton like a gun nut.

zach_garwood 4y ago
I don't begrudge anyone being scared of guns. They can have carastrophic results even when handled properly. The snake charmer isn't afraid of snakes, but that doesn't mean that your average Joe should go around, blithely picking up every snake they see.
- f1refly 4y ago
  A snake charmer isn't afraid of snakes because he'll typically mutilate the animal by breaking the fangs or cutting out the venom sacks before going anywhere near it. A snake charmer will be afraid of every other snake.

dreen 4y ago

I had an old Soviet-era made excavator digger standing on my property. It was standing out there long enough for trees to grow through the cabin and way above it. We cleared them and put a little grease here and there and it started like charm. Another random example seems to be a Remington beard trimmer I had which recently gave up after nearly 20 years of service. Edit: I guess we should make an honourable mention for the Opportunity Mars Rover.

wrp 4y ago

> I also like other well engineered simple long-lasting stuff. Soviet engineering as a whole is interesting in this respect. From syllabuses I've read, engineering education in the USSR was at least as rigorous as in the USA. The problem for them was that they had to design things for an extremely unreliable and inefficient society, so they had to emphasize simplicity and durability in both manufacture and use. I've seen a few books covering the social issues facing Soviet engineers and examples of notable designs.

bluedino 4y ago
There's a (long-ish) quote out there about Soviet ammunition sizes vs American/NATO. About how it's simpler etc, they have less variety of sizes, do you know what I'm talking about? I can't find it.
- wrp 4y ago
  Doesn't ring a bell. If you can give more details about who said it, that might help someone find your answer.
unity1001 4y ago
That bit about 'having to design for an extremely unreliable and inefficient society' sounds like Cold War Western propaganda. Soviet designs were not made efficient and durable because of that. They were made efficient and durable because that was the default for engineering until capitalism discarded that default and forced profit-maximizing designs that function over bloated specs and planned obsolescence. Otherwise in late 19th century and early 20th century, every country was more or less doing similar engineering design. Also, the science and engineering curriculums were much heavier than the US ones. Just check a few Soviet science/eng textbooks that you can find online.
- wrp 4y ago
  As someone who remembers the latter part of the Cold War, I can tell you that the actual inefficiencies of the Soviet system were significantly underestimated in the dominant Western narrative. Your ideas about Soviet industry appear to be based on some ideology rather than familiarity with Soviet culture. I can't think of one single book that gives a good overview of Soviet engineering, but some good ones to start with might be Graham's The Ghost of the Executed Engineer, Gerovitch's From Newspeak to Cyberspeak, and Idov's Made in Russia: Unsung Icons of Soviet Design. I think most of the really interesting examples are in military technology, but unfortunately I don't know any good books surveying that area. Even if there was a "good old days" of manufacture in the West when products were always designed to be as efficient and durable as possible, that is different from what I described in the USSR. Since quality of manufacture was usually terrible, Soviet designs could not demand close tolerances in manufacture and had to be considerably over-engineered to avoid catastrophic failure from manufacturing defects. The USSR was also chronically short of equipment, so for things deployed, long life and resistance to abuse was more important than polish.

BoredPuffin 4y ago

Seeing your comment being downvoted is the most American thing I've witnessed on the internet today > What are some other well engineered long-lasting products? How dare you not mention Nokia!? Jokes aside, if you restrict it to "long-lasting" - Japanese woodworking, Toyota Hilux, Honda Super Cub... in fact a lot of post ww2 era Japanese manufacturing. If you include high fault tolerance as well - a lot of USSR engineering is beautiful in this aspect. I recall they design a propeller with 8 blades because they expected 4 of them will crack in early stage of usage. Same apply to screw enclosures.