随笔南洋网



 
标题: 让我“爱恨不能”的中国车
本帖已经被作者加入个人空间
意水
高级会员
Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4


UID 284
精华 10
积分 3396
帖子 1611
威望 1768 点
阅读权限 20
注册 2006-11-15
来自 中国
状态 离线
发表于 2007-12-22 00:07  资料 个人空间 短消息 
让我“爱恨不能”的中国车

在儿子和老公的要求下,咱就“爱国一把”,在新加坡买了一辆中国自己的品牌汽车,也是在新加坡拥有的第一辆自己的车。
这天,终于拿到“千呼万唤始出来”的车,从车场开出来的第一件事就是找加油站,记得销售员特别提醒过我们,加油时要记得告诉加油的工作人员,车的油嘴和其他车有区别,要提高油枪才能加进油,我们并没当回事,反正不用我们加油。
到油站一加油才知道,这个车加油可不容易,需要加油员一直提着油枪,而且被告知,只有中国车的油嘴是这样的,没有按国际标准制造,惭愧啊。
从此,每次去加油,都感到对加油员心怀歉疚(咱把人家给累着了),有几次遇到油站车多工作人员少的情况下,人家就只给加半箱油,这也不能怪人家啊,因为很多人等着他加油,不能为一辆车而耽搁大家。
我和先生暗下决心,要学会自助加油,咱们不求人,就不会感到愧疚。还有一招就是,尽可能去家附近的那个加油站,因为那个老师傅已经和我们的车熟悉了。
加油的问题算是解决了,但其他的问题不断出现,窗户打开容易关上难,三个月就修两次,最后不得不连遥控器都全换了。
周围朋友买的有“雪佛莱”、现代,单从外观上看,咱的中国车还算过得去,毕竟是“欧洲豪华型”车款,但里面就不敢比了,简陋、粗燥不说,好多“假功能”,想起中国的一句俚语:“羊粪蛋子表面光”,还真是让人郁闷。
常和朋友在他所购买的日产车的服务中心碰面,那里环境舒适,免费的咖啡、奶茶随便喝,不得不私底下感叹:“服务真好啊”。
没办法,车已是咱的了,只能努力的去喜欢。但这车似乎已经知道了我对她的不爽,也常和我闹些小别扭,所以购买的时间虽然不长,我们已和车行的维修人员混得蛮熟了。
无奈啊,虽说我很爱国,但也只能说,让我“爱恨不能”的中国车,什么时候能赶上“小日本”的汽车工艺。




Faith
一个人的品格不应由他的特殊行动来衡量,而应由他的日常行为来衡量。

顶部
Kim88
高级会员
Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4


UID 1067
精华 1
积分 3484
帖子 1695
威望 1756 点
阅读权限 20
注册 2007-3-30
来自 新加坡
状态 离线
发表于 2007-12-22 00:33  资料 个人空间 短消息 
这使我想起第一代的现代车,不过他们进步的蛮快的. 几代后就能把缺点改过来.
给中国车点时间吧,相信制造商能意识到要在国际上立足,就得按国际标准制造,不能做出来,能用就是了.
“假功能”只能暂时用,必须用真功能,比别人的功能还强的真功能才是办法.
顶部
夕野氏
超白金会员
Rank: 6Rank: 6Rank: 6Rank: 6Rank: 6Rank: 6



UID 2862
精华 66
积分 15370
帖子 6859
威望 8308 点
阅读权限 50
注册 2007-9-2
状态 离线
发表于 2007-12-22 01:33  资料 个人空间 短消息 
拥车,是一道漫长的学习过程。以你们的拥车经历看来,做你们的第二或第三部车,应该会是很幸福的...
顶部
清风伴雨
新手上路
Rank: 1


UID 8765
精华 0
积分 6
帖子 3
威望 3 点
阅读权限 3
注册 2007-12-1
状态 离线
发表于 2007-12-31 02:34  资料 短消息 
哎呀我的妈啊!这么多牢骚,爱国好,多好啊。就是脸别长得太爱国




是因为笨才善良,还是因为善良才显得笨?其实没关系,坚持本心最重要...

顶部
豫京粤新
注册会员
Rank: 2Rank: 2


UID 8829
精华 1
积分 293
帖子 138
威望 155 点
阅读权限 5
注册 2007-12-3
状态 离线
发表于 2007-12-31 02:35  资料 个人空间 短消息 
郁闷是快乐的哥哥!你的第二部车虽然是弟弟,却将会是无比地快乐的!!!保持爱国的心态吧!这也是一种伟大!呵呵。
顶部
焚琴煮鹤
超白金会员
Rank: 6Rank: 6Rank: 6Rank: 6Rank: 6Rank: 6


UID 672
精华 63
积分 17799
帖子 8072
威望 9493 点
阅读权限 50
注册 2007-1-14
状态 离线
发表于 2007-12-31 21:20  资料 个人空间 短消息 
我旁边的人说,你应当继续支持国产车零件。




点一下,看看我的部落格

顶部
Kim88
高级会员
Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4


UID 1067
精华 1
积分 3484
帖子 1695
威望 1756 点
阅读权限 20
注册 2007-3-30
来自 新加坡
状态 离线
发表于 2008-1-12 10:07  资料 个人空间 短消息 
今天在Business Time见到一篇对第一位个入口中国车的本地人的采訪.
本地的入口始于2006年七月,虽然人们对中国车还是抱有保留的态度,但是他对制造商充满信心,每次他到南京的制造厂,看到的是技术,厂房,生产,投资的提高.
技术上已经在生产气车引擎.不像起他的制造商得依靠入口引擎.
顶部
dthc1977
高级会员
Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4



UID 6121
精华 5
积分 2125
帖子 971
威望 1150 点
阅读权限 20
注册 2007-11-5
来自 广州
状态 离线
发表于 2008-1-15 12:31  资料 文集 短消息 
引擎? 就是马达(motor) 啦。新马一带的人说引擎,我们说马达。
顶部
天人
中级会员
Rank: 3Rank: 3Rank: 3


UID 371
精华 8
积分 1106
帖子 497
威望 608 点
阅读权限 10
注册 2006-11-20
状态 离线
发表于 2008-1-15 13:03  资料 个人空间 短消息 
引擎? 马达?还是称发动机更专业!
顶部
Kim88
高级会员
Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4


UID 1067
精华 1
积分 3484
帖子 1695
威望 1756 点
阅读权限 20
注册 2007-3-30
来自 新加坡
状态 离线
发表于 2008-1-15 15:04  资料 个人空间 短消息 
回复 #9 天人 的帖子

就是这东东. 英文是 Engine.
顶部
dthc1977
高级会员
Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4



UID 6121
精华 5
积分 2125
帖子 971
威望 1150 点
阅读权限 20
注册 2007-11-5
来自 广州
状态 离线
发表于 2008-1-15 17:35  资料 文集 短消息 
原来是有分别,我们公司就是制造机器的 (automation machine), 我们都只说马达,可是我不懂如何以华语来解释他们的分别;可能engine是自动,motor是被动吧;研究一下。
engine  -  a machine that uses the energy from liquid fuel or steam to produce movement。
motor  -   a device that changes electricity or fuel into movement and makes a machine work。

ENGINE AND MOTOR
Two closely-related words investigated

On the rare occasions we encounter one, we refer to a steam locomotive as an engine, the same word that we give to the motive power of an aircraft. But all electrical devices are driven by motors. In Britain at least, one’s personal transport is a motor car (with compounds such as motor trade, motor vehicle and motor sport), even though it’s always powered by an engine. Small boats may have outboard motors and then are often called motor boats.

However, the propulsion device of a rocket can be called either a rocket motor or a rocket engine, and usage here seems not to have settled on one or the other. The IEEE Spectrum magazine for June 1998 (which Ron Jeffries has thoughtfully sent me) reports that the debate has been so intense, and yet so inconclusive, that some rocket scientist has coined the phrase whoosh generator as “the humorous, genderless, politically correct way to refer to the propulsion device in a hobby rocket, thus avoiding the great motor/engine debate”.

In everyday, non-technical usage the words have much the same meaning. But they have such clearly defined and fixed compounds (except in the rocket case) that they can’t be thought of as entirely interchangeable. The magazine article argues that the difference is that engines contain their own fuel or are part of a highly integrated engine-fuel system, whereas a motor draws on externally supplied energy. That’s the rule given in the Oxford English Dictionary, but on reflection it seems not wholly satisfactory. It doesn’t work for outboard motor or rocket motor for example. And it doesn’t explain why the two words should have been applied in this way. For that we have to look into their history.

Engine is from the Latin ingenium, which referred to one’s ability to create things, one’s native genius; it comes from a root meaning ‘create; beget’ from which we get words like genetic, and is also the source of ingenious and ingenuity (engineer derives from a related word). Its first meaning in English, from about the fourteenth century, was very much this one of mother wit or genius, a skill in devising things. It could also, by obvious extension, refer to the result of such ingenuity, a contrivance or device, particularly any mechanical apparatus. The term was very general; a sixteenth-century text directs that a person should be “put in the stocks or other such engine”; pulleys and their like were also engines (as in Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels of 1727: “With ropes and engines, I made a shift to turn it”). The British pub served its drink by means of beer engines, hand pumps which drew the brew up from casks in the cellar; blazes were extinguished with the help of fire engines, originally hand-operated pumps. In the 1670s one John Worlidge invented a machine for pulping apples in cidermaking; he termed his device the Ingenio, an obvious reference to the Latin original. Engine was commonly applied also to weapons of war, such as the siege engine and to devices such as snares for catching game (hence gin trap, where gin is a short form of engine that also turned up in compounds such as horse gin for a horse-powered windlass).

It was an obvious enough extension to apply the word to the new devices that created power through steam. At first these were static units designed to pump water from mines, hugely complicated even in their early Newcomen incarnations. The steam engine was such an important machine, being one of the crucial developments of the Industrial Revolution, in particular making possible deep mines, that engine soon came to apply almost exclusively to it (being replaced in most other cases by machine, a word that earlier had meant almost the same as engine). And that usage came to influence later extensions of it, as in petrol and diesel engines: no longer just a contrivance, but a system for producing propulsive power.

Incidentally, computer science has several terms that include engine, such as search engine, database engine and recognition engine. In all of them engine has the sense of a central part or kernel of a software application, hidden from the user, which does intensive ‘number-crunching’ work on data, only the results of which are made available. Charles Babbage named his Victorian mechanical computer the Analytical Engine, using the pre-Industrial-Revolution sense of the word. I would guess, in view of the almost iconic regard many computer scientists have for Babbage’s work, that the modern terms derive directly from this phrase.

Motor had quite different origins, coming from the Latin movere, ‘to move’. It was first employed in English in the sense of ‘instigator’, or something that causes motion, often in a figurative sense, as of God as being the cause of the motion of the heavens. Even by the nineteenth century, it was still applied generally to the idea of something that caused change, without necessarily implying a mechanical device; for example the Civil Engineering Journal in 1839 said “The true motor of the system would ... be the weight of the atmosphere”, in which motor here is an agent or force (a sense which is still current). It was also applied early in the same century to classes of muscles or nerves whose job was to cause parts of the body to move. Only in the 1850s did it begin to be applied to a device that employed some source of energy to create movement, being applied first to the electric motor and to hydraulic devices.

When the electric motor appeared, people saw a key difference between it and the steam engine. The latter had an obvious source of energy in its fuel; the source of energy of the former was less clear, being supplied mysteriously from a battery or generator by means of wires. Steam engines obviously consumed their fuel, but electrical and hydraulic devices extracted energy from some source without obviously consuming it. Perhaps this reminded people of the original sense of motor that referred to some intangible or spiritual force, and persuaded them to apply it to these new sources of power.

By the time that vehicles driven by internal combustion engines had begun to appear in any numbers, at the very end of the century, both words had become well established in common usage. The driving force was obviously an engine, which consumed fuel to provide motive power. But why the conveyance as a whole was termed a motor vehicle is less obvious. The mere fact of it moving was obviously not sufficient; that was hardly a new idea, after all. It may be that it was a more elegant word, and also helpfully distinguished the automobile as a system from anything that belched steam and soot, such as the early steam-driven road vehicles like the Stanley Steamer.

By the beginning of the twentieth century, the two words had moved together from very different origins, even though as we’ve seen, for historical reasons they were mostly employed in set compounds. But when new forms of propulsive device came along, analogy (or sometimes chance) decided which was to be applied in a particular case. Aeroplanes were obviously powered by engines, since the earliest ones were taken over directly from petrol engines of the kind that drove cars and lorries. Though there seems to be no clear evidence for the choice, perhaps outboard motor was so termed because it was a compact device that reminded its namers of electric motors.

The confusion between rocket engine and rocket motor is less obvious. By analogy with other devices that consume fuel, it ought to be an engine, but perhaps by the time it came to be named motor had become so close a synonym that either felt right.
顶部
dthc1977
高级会员
Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4



UID 6121
精华 5
积分 2125
帖子 971
威望 1150 点
阅读权限 20
注册 2007-11-5
来自 广州
状态 离线
发表于 2008-1-17 11:16  资料 文集 短消息 
The magazine article argues that the difference is that engines contain their own fuel or are part of a highly integrated engine-fuel system, whereas a motor draws on externally supplied energy.
刚才去工程部门问了工程师,他说engine多数是用在汽车上,只要有油和燃烧,它就会自动操作。motor呢,就是通了电它就才会开动。
原来是这样子,我们公司没用engine,我们每台机器都有用到motor,尤其是conveyor.
顶部
Robin
管理员
Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8


UID 2
精华 12
积分 5680
帖子 2569
威望 2975 点
阅读权限 200
注册 2006-10-16
来自 新加坡
状态 离线
发表于 2008-1-17 22:36  资料 主页 个人空间 短消息 
我也很想买中国车, 看来还要等几年在说了. 咱的要求也不高, 不过也不能太差啊. 相信将来一定会好起来的.




顶部
意水
高级会员
Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4Rank: 4


UID 284
精华 10
积分 3396
帖子 1611
威望 1768 点
阅读权限 20
注册 2006-11-15
来自 中国
状态 离线
发表于 2008-1-17 22:46  资料 个人空间 短消息 
回复 #13 Robin 的帖子

我已和儿子、先生说好,车开三年就换,只要到时中国车质量上来了,俺还支持中国车




Faith
一个人的品格不应由他的特殊行动来衡量,而应由他的日常行为来衡量。

顶部
 




当前时区 GMT+8, 现在时间是 2021-10-19 03:53

    本论坛支付平台由支付宝提供
携手打造安全诚信的交易社区 Powered by Discuz! 5.0.0  © 2001-2006 Comsenz Inc.
Processed in 0.015733 second(s), 7 queries , Gzip enabled

清除 Cookies - 联系我们 - 随笔南洋网 - Archiver