Posted: 10/12/2009 5:32:55 PM EDT
|
I'm currently attending school for Mechanical Engineering Technology. I had initially applied for Mechanical Engineering, but was offered MCT instead. What are the key differences between the two, and am I doing myself a disservice by studying MCT? What kinds of jobs does a major in MCT entail? The responses I've received from the people I've asked don't really make a clear definition between the two (that I can understand at least). |
| Currently in Ocean Engineering and considering changing to Mechanical Engineering Technology. MET's take what the engineers design and find the most cost effective way to produce it. The have to figure out how to make what the engineers design. It has less to do with design and more to do with production. At my school there is less Calc before taking upper level classes. Physics and Chemistry is the same for both. |
|
Quoted: Currently in Ocean Engineering and considering changing to Mechanical Engineering Technology. MET's take what the engineers design and find the most cost effective way to produce it. The have to figure out how to make what the engineers design. It has less to do with design and more to do with production. If you're already in Ocean, than why not get a double with Aerospace? |
| You'll get a good job with a decent salary but you'll work for engineers. You'll be smarter and more qualified than some of them but you'll still have to work for them. Your career progression will likely be limited because you don't have a piece of paper that says you have an engineering degree. |
|
BSME Penn State 1995
I've always understood the "_________ Engineering Technology" programs to be somewhat more hands-on and less theoretical than the straight "___________ Engineering" programs. They were fairly new when I was in school, so I must admit my knowledge of them is somewhat slim. After nearly 15 years out in the working world, a four-year technical degree says the following to an employer: I Can (Maybe) Be Taught Compare the courses listed in the two programs, because a lot will depend on your school (I'm guessing Ohio State?). You'll probably find a little more emphasis on hands-on work and possibly industrial engineering classes in the Tech degree, and more upper-level engineering math and physics classes (heat transfer, thermodynamics, and the calculus and differential math stuff to go with them). Don't be afraid to talk with your advisor to bend some rules about classes. I found out (pretty late) that if you can give an articulate and sensible reason for why you want to do things a little different, you have a pretty good chance of getting it to happen. Feel free to IM if you have specific questions. |
|
Quoted: I graduated from CU's ME program. And honestly, I've never heard of this other program you speak of. Can you tell any difference based on the required courses? From my school's site: "UD's engineering technology programs teach you how science and engineering get applied in industry, preparing you for a productive career in design, development and implementation of technical systems in manufacturing, business and service enterprises. We have created an acclaimed program of specialized technical courses that emphasize rational thinking and use engineering and scientific principles to solve technological problems. In addition, you take courses in applied mathematics and science to support your technical courses and communication and humanities courses to ensure that you communicate intelligently, responsibly and professionally." It looks like MCT has less Calc involved, if you want I can post the classes and such required for the two majors. MCT also looks like it teaches how to machine (which I'm learning now and is kind of cool but hard). Quoted: You'll get a good job with a decent salary but you'll work for engineers. You'll be smarter and more qualified than some of them but you'll still have to work for them. Your career progression will likely be limited because you don't have a piece of paper that says you have an engineering degree. Interesting. Don't really like the sound of my career progression being limited. Quoted: BSME Penn State 1995 I've always understood the "_________ Engineering Technology" programs to be somewhat more hands-on and less theoretical than the straight "___________ Engineering" programs. They were fairly new when I was in school, so I must admit my knowledge of them is somewhat slim. After nearly 15 years out in the working world, a four-year technical degree says the following to an employer: I Can (Maybe) Be Taught Compare the courses listed in the two programs, because a lot will depend on your school (I'm guessing Ohio State?). You'll probably find a little more emphasis on hands-on work and possibly industrial engineering classes in the Tech degree, and more upper-level engineering math and physics classes (heat transfer, thermodynamics, and the calculus and differential math stuff to go with them). Don't be afraid to talk with your advisor to bend some rules about classes. I found out (pretty late) that if you can give an articulate and sensible reason for why you want to do things a little different, you have a pretty good chance of getting it to happen. Feel free to IM if you have specific questions. Dayton, actually. I might just drop you some IM's in the future, thanks. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Currently in Ocean Engineering and considering changing to Mechanical Engineering Technology. MET's take what the engineers design and find the most cost effective way to produce it. The have to figure out how to make what the engineers design. It has less to do with design and more to do with production. If you're already in Ocean, than why not get a double with Aerospace? 
Maybe other schools aren't the same, but AE was a SHITLOAD of work where I went. Doubling it up with anything wouldn't be even remotely fun. Of the six of us in our little study group, only two of us graduated in four years. The other four stayed on an extra year; only one of them was doing anything beyond just AE (a minor in something-or-other). From what I could judge with my few non-AE-but-engineering friends, we probably had roughly twice as much work during the last two years (i.e., when you really start taking classes for your discipline). |
|
I'm an ME, we hire a number of METs. There's a big difference between what we offer a new graduate in either of those degrees.
A new ME gets a salaried position with a pay similar to all other MEs (middle 5 figures). A new MET gets an hourly position as a Technician. IF he applies himself he *might* get offered a position as a *real* engineer in 5 years or so. Note, I'm not making judgments about your skills or abilities, just reporting how industry views the difference between the two degrees. I got B,s and C's with a BSME and it's been much more rewarding than an MET. If you can handle the coursework and pass, the BSME will be worth much more to you in the long run. Bet they didn't tell you that, did they? Lots of things they don't reveal in college....
|
|
Quoted:
I'm currently attending school for Mechanical Engineering Technology. I had initially applied for Mechanical Engineering, but was offered MCT instead. What are the key differences between the two, and am I doing myself a disservice by studying MCT? What kinds of jobs does a major in MCT entail? The responses I've received from the people I've asked don't really make a clear definition between the two (that I can understand at least). Assuming you're attending an MET school that is ABET accredited (you can find out at www.abet.org), the tangible differences are that you only have to take two calculus courses (as opposed to three in classical ME) and the physics course for MET is not calculus based as it is in classical ME. Beyond that the requirements set forth by ABET for accreditation are very similar, and in a lot of cases indistinguishable. There are several prominent schools that offer both programs, some even teach the same courses to both sets of students, often with a mixture of MEs and METs in the class. The same number of credits are required to graduate. In theory, the MET program allegedly offers more hands-on laboratory courses, but that varys from program to program. MET students are put forth to prospective employers as "job-ready" having had a lot of hardware experience. Starting salaries are identicle. The downside to the MET program is that entry into engineering graduate school if that's your chosen path can be more difficult, as you'll probably have to make up the missed calc and physics programs. That depends very much on the grad school you're trying to get into, however. Some don't care. Some companies (like a certain large aircraft manufacturer in the PNW) wont assign MET grads to certain high-tech analytical groups. That same company also offers an MET undergraduate program on their premisis and pays the tuition for the students. I'm also told, but can't verify, that NASA wont hire MET grads into Engineering job descriptions. Most states will allow MET grads to sit for the Professional Engineers exam, although some wont. That's being worked on. If you contact ASME, they have a brochure entitled "Which Path" (or something close to that) that explains MET/ME in a bit more detail. That brochure is currently being rewritten to more accurately reflect what's going on, but ASME moves at glacial speeds on such things. The bottom line is that if you're a hands-on person MET might be the way to go. If you're highly analytical with grad school on the horizon, the ME might be more appropriate. |
|
Quoted:
BSME Penn State 1995 I've always understood the "_________ Engineering Technology" programs to be somewhat more hands-on and less theoretical than the straight "___________ Engineering" programs. They were fairly new when I was in school, so I must admit my knowledge of them is somewhat slim. After nearly 15 years out in the working world, a four-year technical degree says the following to an employer: I Can (Maybe) Be Taught Compare the courses listed in the two programs, because a lot will depend on your school (I'm guessing Ohio State?). You'll probably find a little more emphasis on hands-on work and possibly industrial engineering classes in the Tech degree, and more upper-level engineering math and physics classes (heat transfer, thermodynamics, and the calculus and differential math stuff to go with them). Don't be afraid to talk with your advisor to bend some rules about classes. I found out (pretty late) that if you can give an articulate and sensible reason for why you want to do things a little different, you have a pretty good chance of getting it to happen. Feel free to IM if you have specific questions. He's pretty much right. Not that the tech degree is worthless but I would go talk to the department head of ME and try like heck to get accepted to his program. It is easier to learn theory in school and hands on tasks in the workplace. Most of the time schools encourage people to go the tech route when they are weak in math. Make sure you are taking the same Calc and Physics that Engineering/Math majors are taking. I am BSAE 04 and am really glad I didn't go the tech route. |
|
Quoted:
I'm an ME, we hire a number of METs. There's a big difference between what we offer a new graduate in either of those degrees. A new ME gets a salaried position with a pay similar to all other MEs (middle 5 figures). A new MET gets an hourly position as a Technician. IF he applies himself he *might* get offered a position as a *real* engineer in 5 years or so. Note, I'm not making judgments about your skills or abilities, just reporting how industry views the difference between the two degrees. I got B,s and C's with a BSME and it's been much more rewarding than an MET. If you can handle the coursework and pass, the BSME will be worth much more to you in the long run. Bet they didn't tell you that, did they? Lots of things they don't reveal in college....I don't know (as I'm in the Army, and NOT working as an engineer), but if you said it's a bit more calc and such, it sounds like going for ME is def worth it. Calc III wasn't much harder than II, Dif Eq wasn't that hard either. Phys III sucks (but my teacher was a nobel laureate, so i expected it to be hard). We didn't do much machining, from a curriculum standpoint, but if you wanted to learn, there were plenty of opportunities, and we had all kinds of resources for machining, from every lathe, press and CNC machine you could think of to rapid-prototypers and such. So yeah, I'd stick with ME |
|
Quoted:
You'll get a good job with a decent salary but you'll work for engineers. You'll be smarter and more qualified than some of them but you'll still have to work for them. Your career progression will likely be limited because you don't have a piece of paper that says you have an engineering degree. This. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: BSME Penn State 1995 I've always understood the "_________ Engineering Technology" programs to be somewhat more hands-on and less theoretical than the straight "___________ Engineering" programs. They were fairly new when I was in school, so I must admit my knowledge of them is somewhat slim. After nearly 15 years out in the working world, a four-year technical degree says the following to an employer: I Can (Maybe) Be Taught Compare the courses listed in the two programs, because a lot will depend on your school (I'm guessing Ohio State?). You'll probably find a little more emphasis on hands-on work and possibly industrial engineering classes in the Tech degree, and more upper-level engineering math and physics classes (heat transfer, thermodynamics, and the calculus and differential math stuff to go with them). Don't be afraid to talk with your advisor to bend some rules about classes. I found out (pretty late) that if you can give an articulate and sensible reason for why you want to do things a little different, you have a pretty good chance of getting it to happen. Feel free to IM if you have specific questions. He's pretty much right. Not that the tech degree is worthless but I would go talk to the department head of ME and try like heck to get accepted to his program. It is easier to learn theory in school and hands on tasks in the workplace. Most of the time schools encourage people to go the tech route when they are weak in math. Make sure you are taking the same Calc and Physics that Engineering/Math majors are taking. I am BSAE 04 and am really glad I didn't go the tech route. Well fuck. I am weak in math and the thought of doing Calc II and III scares the shit out of me. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm an ME, we hire a number of METs. There's a big difference between what we offer a new graduate in either of those degrees. A new ME gets a salaried position with a pay similar to all other MEs (middle 5 figures). A new MET gets an hourly position as a Technician. IF he applies himself he *might* get offered a position as a *real* engineer in 5 years or so. Note, I'm not making judgments about your skills or abilities, just reporting how industry views the difference between the two degrees. I got B,s and C's with a BSME and it's been much more rewarding than an MET. If you can handle the coursework and pass, the BSME will be worth much more to you in the long run. Bet they didn't tell you that, did they? Lots of things they don't reveal in college....I don't know (as I'm in the Army, and NOT working as an engineer), but if you said it's a bit more calc and such, it sounds like going for ME is def worth it. Calc III wasn't much harder than II, Dif Eq wasn't that hard either. Phys III sucks (but my teacher was a nobel laureate, so i expected it to be hard). We didn't do much machining, from a curriculum standpoint, but if you wanted to learn, there were plenty of opportunities, and we had all kinds of resources for machining, from every lathe, press and CNC machine you could think of to rapid-prototypers and such. So yeah, I'd stick with ME The intellectual challenge pays off in your starting position right out of school. METs perform a valuable function but I wouldn't let them design something unless they had a *lot* more experience. Others will tell you the degrees are the same but I put them at approximately the same comparison as the difference between a doctor and the nurse. Both are important roles but very different levels of responsibility. The comparison doesn't work forever though, because given enough years of work an MET can do the same job as an ME, but that doesn't work with nurses and Drs. But I still think the comparison is valid for comparing the two degrees right out of school. Just depends on what you like and where you want to go. The harder course work pays off later, but they never tell you that when discussing degree programs. The key phrase is "hands on" which you can take to mean you'll be working on an assembly line. If the coursework involves lots of high level calc and differential equations, that means a more "thinking" kind of job. 
|
|
I would assume MCT at your U is MET in others, Mechanical Engineering Technology, which is normally 1 to 1.5 years shorter than a ME program.
All I can quote you is aerospace. MET are techs, and they will remain tech, and they are also unionized. A few got to go salary, but rare, normally you need to play union politics to get to be a supervisor and up. On the other hand, techs get OT pay, which is 1.5X for the first 20 hours, and 2X for 20+ hours. Techs will never go beyond floor manager, and will always work under Manufacturing Engineering. ME, AE, EE, CE/s are Engineers, and are moved on as Engineers. With the exception of Boeing, engineeris are not unionized...Boeing have their scientist / engineer guide. We go salary, and in aerospace, the top is never limited. In LM and NG, we all have dual path, technical and management path, and an engineer can be move up on either path. Two good examples: A co-worker of mine 15 years ago at McDonnell Douglas was a senior engineer, and today, he is the VP of Boeing FCS. A school mate of mine, one year senior than me, have just been moved up to VP of engineering at LM Palmdale. On the other hand, engineers do not normally get OT pay, best you can get is straight time pay, and at senior positions, do not get OT at all. On the other hand, some senior position do get performance bonuses. Put it this way, I have yet seen a tech break a 6 figure annual income without OT, and most engineer that works for me are in the 6 figures, withthe exception of the first year grads, which are on the high 5 figures. Education do counts. Education + experience counts even more. Furthermore, if in the future you want to future your degree, most university ndo not reconize MET as a BS degree, and you need to attend additional courses, wheras Engineering degrees can enter any university's post grad programs. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Well fuck. I am weak in math and the thought of doing Calc II and III scares the shit out of me. Don't let that scare you. It's mostly hype about how hard it is. Most text books are pretty good. Just convince yourself that you can do it. I guess. ME students will already be done with Calc II and Physics I by the end of this year, on my current plan I'll be done with Calc I this year and take Physics I next year. How do I catch up? 5 year plan maybe? I just don't want to get in way over my head here. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well fuck. I am weak in math and the thought of doing Calc II and III scares the shit out of me. Don't let that scare you. It's mostly hype about how hard it is. Most text books are pretty good. Just convince yourself that you can do it. I flunked Calc II 3 times but I didn't quit. Calc 3 was easier, and Diff Eq a thing of beauty. Sometimes you have to suffer a bit to enjoy the rainbow! 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well fuck. I am weak in math and the thought of doing Calc II and III scares the shit out of me. Don't let that scare you. It's mostly hype about how hard it is. Most text books are pretty good. Just convince yourself that you can do it. I flunked Calc II 3 times but I didn't quit. Calc 3 was easier, and Diff Eq a thing of beauty. Sometimes you have to suffer a bit to enjoy the rainbow! I loved Calc III 
|
|
Quoted:
I guess. ME students will already be done with Calc II and Physics I by the end of this year, on my current plan I'll be done with Calc I this year and take Physics I next year. How do I catch up? 5 year plan maybe? I just don't want to get in way over my head here. You are going to do great, and enjoy an engineering career. I took 4.5 to earn an Aero due to aligning pre-req classes. My only regret is that I did not take five. Many engineering internships pay decent, and can treat a college student quite well. Build a life while earning this degree. |
| I'm in college for an Advanced Manufacturing and Engineering degree right now. I would think the difference is a strict engineering degree in say Mechanical or electrical or software etc. is just that. Applies to one disipline of engineering. When you add technology to the mix and broaden the cirriculum used to obtain it, it's more general. In my case it will just be an engineering degree to supplement my 20 plus years of experience in QC, Manufacturing and Mechanical Engineering. If I was starting fresh without on the job experience I would prefer to pursue a degree in a specific discipline. |
|
I got my BSEE on the five year plan. I was in the US Army for three years out of high school so I pretty much had to go back through high school my first year. Been a few years but I seem to remember dropping at least a few classes. I would load up with like 20 to 25 credits and get a feel for what the ass busters were and then cut back to have only one of those a term. I believe there was a date that you had to drop classes by in order to not have to take an I or F. Sometimes I would just sit through them anyway to kind of "pre-run" them. Then when I took them for the go it was almost like a retake.
ETA that I also went summers. You can get through a lot of the bullshit classes taking summer classes and things are a LOT more relaxed. |
|
Quoted:
I'm currently attending school for Mechanical Engineering Technology. I had initially applied for Mechanical Engineering, but was offered MCT instead. What are the key differences between the two, and am I doing myself a disservice by studying MCT? What kinds of jobs does a major in MCT entail? The responses I've received from the people I've asked don't really make a clear definition between the two (that I can understand at least). MET = Technician Pay and works for an Engineer. ME = Engineer Pay has MET's working for them. <––––––-Old Time Mechanical Engineer. Been around, seen it all. |
|
Yeah... get one thing straight... even though it's a bachelor's degree, the "engineering technology" degrees are NOT engineering degrees. Usually, guys with those degrees are high-grade technicians. They are the kind of guy that's a lead tech on a project, or maybe managing an assembly line, or a machine shop... that kind of thing. It's not a shit job, and it's not a throw-away degree, but it's not an engineering degree either. 10 years into the job, you'll be making 1/2-2/3 what your colleagues with an actual engineering degree make.
If you know exactly what you want to do with it, and are satisfied with that, then it might be worth your effort. otherwise, I'd hunker down, look for a BSME program that will accept you, or even look for a Pre-Egineering program that you can get in, and then work your ass off. Good engineers 10-15 years into their careers are making close to, or even more than $100K today. Forgot to add: Engineering technology degrees will give you lots of basics, but you won't get the detailed theory classes that an actual engineering student gets. Your upper classes will tend to focus more on practical issues, whereas the engineers will focus more on the theory. The engineers will tend to focus on coming up with solutions to problems, while the Engineering technology-types will focus on how to implement them. To a certain extent, I think it's a bit of a weed-out process. The practicalities are something every engineer needs to consider (and some are actually criminally BAD at it.... I could tell you some stories of some seriously BONE HEADED things engineers making upwards of $150K have done), but the theory classes are HARD, and tend to scare folks away, or week-out folks who can't handle them. The theory, I guess, is to retain those best suited to engineering. It's almost a hazing ritual. :) I'm not sure it always works, but there ya go. |
|
OP
I have very little experience with these "____ ____ Technology" degrees, but from what I can tell, they will limit your opportunities greatly (compared to ABET-acredited full BSME degrees). If you are just a kid going to school, no young kids, family, etc. going on, do yourself a favor and get into the BSME program right now. Don't worry about catching up or any of that, just try to get internships/co-ops when you can, and get decent grades. This is NO slam on those with "tech" degrees, I was a machinist/toolmaker before I got my BSME, so I am not opposed to "tech" work at ALL. But employers know what they are getting with a full BSME, and it will be worth much more on the open market, especially with today's economics, you are gonna need all the help you can get. Heck, BSME's are having a tough time finding jobs right now (unless you are really free to move around). You CAN do the tough classes, but be prepared for the work, there will be a lot, but once its over, its over. Bust your ass for a while and prepared yourself better. I think I averaged about 20-30 hours of homework a week when I was taking 13-15 credit hours. You can do it! |
|
Quoted:
Well fuck. I am weak in math and the thought of doing Calc II and III scares the shit out of me. Ya wanna know a secret? I wasn;t that strong at math either. I had to work my ASS off in Calc II, III and Diff Eq. I also had to work ridiculously hard in my Junior theory calsses. And then skated through my Senior practicals, cause after the theory stuff, they show you how it's done in the real world. My advice? Cowboy the fuck up. You CAN do it, if you want to. If you can do Calc I, you can do the rest. You just have to want it. Make it happen. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Currently in Ocean Engineering and considering changing to Mechanical Engineering Technology. MET's take what the engineers design and find the most cost effective way to produce it. The have to figure out how to make what the engineers design. It has less to do with design and more to do with production. If you're already in Ocean, than why not get a double with Aerospace? Maybe other schools aren't the same, but AE was a SHITLOAD of work where I went. Doubling it up with anything wouldn't be even remotely fun. Of the six of us in our little study group, only two of us graduated in four years. The other four stayed on an extra year; only one of them was doing anything beyond just AE (a minor in something-or-other). From what I could judge with my few non-AE-but-engineering friends, we probably had roughly twice as much work during the last two years (i.e., when you really start taking classes for your discipline). ^^ That's pretty much the way my husband describes it as well. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well fuck. I am weak in math and the thought of doing Calc II and III scares the shit out of me. Don't let that scare you. It's mostly hype about how hard it is. Most text books are pretty good. Just convince yourself that you can do it. I guess. ME students will already be done with Calc II and Physics I by the end of this year, on my current plan I'll be done with Calc I this year and take Physics I next year. How do I catch up? 5 year plan maybe? I just don't want to get in way over my head here. If you really want to be a BSME, then you won't be satisfied with anything else. Don't worry about tacking on an extra year, or even two. Take out some loans if you have to. It really is worth it. Just don;t blow the money on hookers and blow... and make sure you work your ass off. I did it, and I'm not a genius. Make it happen. |
| One other thing.... did I hear you say you live in Dayton? Cool. That place is GREAT for engineering jobs, if you have an actual engineering degree. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base is there, and it's one of the Air Force's centers for R&D engineering (that's where the Air Force Research Labs (AFRL) are). I work for the Navy and we have a joint program going with them right now. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Currently in Ocean Engineering and considering changing to Mechanical Engineering Technology. MET's take what the engineers design and find the most cost effective way to produce it. The have to figure out how to make what the engineers design. It has less to do with design and more to do with production. If you're already in Ocean, than why not get a double with Aerospace?
Maybe other schools aren't the same, but AE was a SHITLOAD of work where I went. Doubling it up with anything wouldn't be even remotely fun. Of the six of us in our little study group, only two of us graduated in four years. The other four stayed on an extra year; only one of them was doing anything beyond just AE (a minor in something-or-other). From what I could judge with my few non-AE-but-engineering friends, we probably had roughly twice as much work during the last two years (i.e., when you really start taking classes for your discipline). ^^ That's pretty much the way my husband describes it as well. Yeah... poor AE's. Their workload only SEEMS higher because they are dumber. ;) |
|
I'm an ME, we hire a number of METs. There's a big difference between what we offer a new graduate in either of those degrees. A new ME gets a salaried position with a pay similar to all other MEs (middle 5 figures). A new MET gets an hourly position as a Technician. IF he applies himself he *might* get offered a position as a *real* engineer in 5 years or so. Note, I'm not making judgments about your skills or abilities, just reporting how industry views the difference between the two degrees. +1 This has been my experience in the civilian world as well, though I've been away from that for a while now. |
|
Te extra 'T' in your degree will cost you many thousands of dollars in pay over your career.
If you can hack a full BSME it would be much better. There are subtle differences in even the text books used. EETs are shown solved circuit analysis problems and taught to plug in values. EEs are shown how to analyze the circuits from scratch. Similar for MET and ME. METs are taught how to use the beam equation. MEs are taught how to derive it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm an ME, we hire a number of METs. There's a big difference between what we offer a new graduate in either of those degrees. A new ME gets a salaried position with a pay similar to all other MEs (middle 5 figures). A new MET gets an hourly position as a Technician. IF he applies himself he *might* get offered a position as a *real* engineer in 5 years or so. Note, I'm not making judgments about your skills or abilities, just reporting how industry views the difference between the two degrees. I got B,s and C's with a BSME and it's been much more rewarding than an MET. If you can handle the coursework and pass, the BSME will be worth much more to you in the long run. Bet they didn't tell you that, did they? Lots of things they don't reveal in college....I don't know (as I'm in the Army, and NOT working as an engineer), but if you said it's a bit more calc and such, it sounds like going for ME is def worth it. Calc III wasn't much harder than II, Dif Eq wasn't that hard either. Phys III sucks (but my teacher was a nobel laureate, so i expected it to be hard). We didn't do much machining, from a curriculum standpoint, but if you wanted to learn, there were plenty of opportunities, and we had all kinds of resources for machining, from every lathe, press and CNC machine you could think of to rapid-prototypers and such. So yeah, I'd stick with ME The intellectual challenge pays off in your starting position right out of school. METs perform a valuable function but I wouldn't let them design something unless they had a *lot* more experience. Others will tell you the degrees are the same but I put them at approximately the same comparison as the difference between a doctor and the nurse. Both are important roles but very different levels of responsibility. The comparison doesn't work forever though, because given enough years of work an MET can do the same job as an ME, but that doesn't work with nurses and Drs. But I still think the comparison is valid for comparing the two degrees right out of school. Just depends on what you like and where you want to go. The harder course work pays off later, but they never tell you that when discussing degree programs. The key phrase is "hands on" which you can take to mean you'll be working on an assembly line. If the coursework involves lots of high level calc and differential equations, that means a more "thinking" kind of job.
When you go for a PE, most states say ABET-accredited engineering degree and four years of experience or an engineering technology degree (or related science field degree or non-accredited engineering degree) and eight years of experience. My advice is to take the engineering degree and get a couple of the interesting tech courses as electives. Don't fear calculus. If you're even the slightest bit motivated, you'll do better than the rest of the class. I'll tell you the secret to getting good grades in college: go to class and do the homework. It is almost like cheating - if you do those things, the professor just HANDS you an A! Besides, after I graduated, I never used calculus as a structural engineer. Ever. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well fuck. I am weak in math and the thought of doing Calc II and III scares the shit out of me. Don't let that scare you. It's mostly hype about how hard it is. Most text books are pretty good. Just convince yourself that you can do it. I guess. ME students will already be done with Calc II and Physics I by the end of this year, on my current plan I'll be done with Calc I this year and take Physics I next year. How do I catch up? 5 year plan maybe? I just don't want to get in way over my head here. If you get out of college in 4 years, you are cheating yourself. I did 4.5 yrs and HIGHLY recommend it. Plus, job markets tend to get flooded around the May time-frame. I was glad to be a Dec grad |
|
I've got some good friends who are seniors at Dayton right now (some ME, and some BME). It's tough, but then again you're going to have to work hard for anything worth having.
As a senior engineering student (ASE) at UC, I can say go the extra mile for the ME. Don't shortchange yourself; you're paying the same amount, so why settle for 3/4 the education? Suck it up, if you can't hack it you can fall back and graduate with an MET (what a lot of the people I know have done) and come work for me. |
|
Check this thread for more info, OP....
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=930459&page=2� |
|
This is an interesting question... The answer is "it depends"...
I'm a BSEET grad from Purdue (main campus). My experience isn't necessarily consistent with an MET grad, even from Purdue, because there is a bigger difference between ME and MET than there is between EE and EET... I suspect this is because electronics pretty much has to be analytical either way, and mechanical stuff can be less analytical, pretty easily. AAMOF, Purdue's EET program is better than about half of the EE programs (smaller schools, mainly), though an EE degree from a shitty university is still an EE degree to a lot of people. I would have, however, had to take another Calc class to take the PE exam, though. I know EE vs. EET, is pretty much the difference between what you want to do... If you want to design processors and integrated circuits, you want to be an EE, and if you want to learn to design "real life design" circuits USING processors and ICs, you want to be an EET (though AMD was recruiting from Purdue's EET program pretty hard, but I think it was mainly for Production Engineers). My co-worker is an EE from Rose Hulman, and is almost totally worthless in designing circuitry, when we have to design a board for something custom. He can't solder prototypes, and he doesn't know how to lay out PCBs. If we did "micro-fabrication" and designing transistors with different properties by varying the grade of silicon that's in them, he says he'd be all over it. (We work for a relatively small company (<40 people), and "Engineering" does design, prototyping, tech support, etc.) I was an EE (notice the lack of a "T") Co-Op for a large hand/power tool/lots of other stuff (holding) company toward the end of school, then they hired me full time as a "Mechanical Design Engineer", but most of my duties were "Test Engineer." I got laid off from there in one of the bi-weekly RIF's (and offered my job back 2 weeks later, in the new quarter... no thanks), then got hired in my current job, again as a ME, a week later. My Nuclear Engineer friend tells me about the "Air Operated Valves" guy in corporate engineering at the power company he used to work for, who is an EET from Purdue... There is absolutely nothing electrical in an air operated valve. My 6 MET friends from school all have "Engineer" jobs with "Engineer" titles, and the same salaries as "Engineers," but it depends on which company you work for... (2 are Production Engineers, and 4 are Design Engineers) Most of the "we make _____ product" companies don't seem to care, though I know a lot of Aerospace companies (and a few other old, large companies) do care, regardless of whether or not YOU can do the job as well or better than an EE/ME. Even some of the companies who do care about the design side, will hire "T's" to be production and test "Engineers." Having said all of that, since there are still some companies who do care which one you are, so especially on the mechanical side, if you can get into ME, why not? It certainly won't hurt you, the work is temporary, and the stuff you miss out on in MET, you can either get from taking some MET classes, or through experience... (I was a welder/fabricator/machinist/mechanic on my days off school, and in between classes, while I was in college). Mike |
|
Quoted: Currently in Ocean Engineering and considering changing to Mechanical Engineering Technology. MET's take what the engineers design and find the most cost effective way to produce it. The have to figure out how to make what the engineers design. It has less to do with design and more to do with production. At my school there is less Calc before taking upper level classes. Physics and Chemistry is the same for both. Cool. ChE student here, but I hear we have a pretty good Ocean Engineering program. I have a couple of friends in the program and they seem to be playing with robots all day long while I get to handle plumbing and stuff. Robots are cool! |