Originally Posted by
IdahoMtnSpyder
Rc has it pretty much correct, IMO. However, the poor assembly is covered by the Quality Assurance (QA) program which prescribes what is expected of each assembly line worker. The traditional QC program is nothing more than an inspection system, and I have always characterized the QC inspector as simply a historian. He/she records the history of the upline assembly workers. I have always defined QA as the system that answers the question, "How do we know what are we supposed to do, and how do we know how well we have done it?" I don't believe BRP understands this as well as they should. One example of an inadequate QA system is the user and service manuals. There are thousands of examples where the nomenclature for a part changes from year to year. The organization of the parts manual changes from year to year. Nomenclature for a part is different in the service manual text vs the parts list vs the owner's manual. The lack of attention to documentation consistency is a clear indicator, IMO, that BRP just doesn't understand QA.
Here is one possible scenario I will speculatively offer. I would expect the fasteners are mostly driven in with automatic drivers that are programmed to stop at the correct torque. If someone grabbed a driver that was set for a lighter torque, or the torque was incorrectly set on his driver, and didn't have the experience or knowledge to notice that the torque was wrong, they could be happily driving screw after screw all day and not know they were (pardon the pun) screwing up. Young people today are not being taught to think, or how to troubleshoot. So often they simply take a tool and use it without the foggiest idea of how to truly know if it is operating correctly.