reverse engineering Baldwins Wurlitzers

[Delwin D Fandrich]

Roger Jolly wrote:

> Hi James,
> . . . .  Reverse engineering is a common practice in many fields, for instance
> GM
> develops a 3.8 motor for a spacific car to begin with and will readapt to
> fit a whole line of other models. This helps with the economy of scale.
>
>   Another way to look at this is to realise that you have a proven scale
> design at half the cost, my view has been to focus on the areas that can be
> improved to bring the product closer to the original.
> Hope this sheds some light.
>

I'm not sure I'd call that "reverse engineering."  What you're describing is
adapting an in-house design for other applications to spread the cost of R&D out a
bit.

Reverse engineering would be if Ford bought one of these engines and took it
apart, measured it, made drawings and built a "clone" with little or no in-house
design and development of their own.

I have no problem with adapting an in-house design -- that's just good business.
I do have a problem with reverse engineering.  There has been way too much of it
in this industry and not nearly enough original thought.