Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 340 posts

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#271

Post by ecf »

screye wrote: post #182

I would recommend Mazda vehicles. Their entire lineup offers a small set of effective and minimally intrusive digital/smart features. But, outside of that, they keep it simple. The no-touchscreen is a much safer way to interact with the vehicle, and afaik they have stuck to the traditional 'car' formula. Most of their cars can be purchased in manual and have pretty good driving mechanics for a honda/toyota competitor…

I’m getting bi-weekly letters from the dealership asking to buy my 2017 Mazda 3 hatch for only $3,000 less than what I paid for it back in 2018.

It’s crazy out there right now.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#272

Post by seattle_spring »

jkodumal wrote: post #161
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #141

Annoyingly, I want an electric car without "digitilization". No distracting central touch screen, no "autopilot" nonsense, proper gauges and indicators, tactile feel. A focus on the driving and safety and ergonomics, not on "we don't need an instrument cluster because iPads are cool, people like their phones and buttons are expensive and break"... A Saab 900 with an electric motor. Please make it.

Not quite a Saab 900, but perhaps the Bollinger B-1? https://bollingermotors.com/bollinger-b1/

It's not clear at all to me why someone would buy that over the much less expensive and seemingly more capable Rivian R1S.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#273

Post by HWR_14 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #203
HWR_14 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wouldn't buy a new daily driver that doesn't have blind spot monitoring, collision avoidance, lane keep assist, etc. Once you have these features and you are accustomed to how they work, you can't go back. And I don't like them. But only one of us has the government taking away our choice by making them mandatory. I wouldn't mind them if it wasn't for the fact that they universally seem to be points of failure th…

> And I don't like them. They're not there for you to like - they're there for the people you might kill with your car. > the government taking away our choice... ...to plough into people with your car.

I don't think those devices reduce the number of accidents, so I disagree with your premise. I think they serve to help slowly roll out self-driving capabilities.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#274

Post by HWR_14 »

willis936 wrote: post #133
HWR_14 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wouldn't buy a new daily driver that doesn't have blind spot monitoring, collision avoidance, lane keep assist, etc. Once you have these features and you are accustomed to how they work, you can't go back. And I don't like them. But only one of us has the government taking away our choice by making them mandatory. I wouldn't mind them if it wasn't for the fact that they universally seem to be points of failure th…

They're not there for you to like them. They're there so you don't kill someone and someone else doesn't kill you. Society collectively fails to give a single ass of a rat about how people feel about their ubiquitous 2-ton death machine.

I mean, I think Tesla's autobraking is dangerous and should be made illegal. I think it likely causes more accidents than it avoids.

I don't trust the features to work well enough to rely on them. And I think other people having them is dangerous.

Meanwhile, they all can be toggled off, so I still won't be using the feature. It's just another point of failure shortening the lifespan of a five-figure environmentally costly purchase.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#275

Post by alphabettsy »

stefan_ wrote: post #130
alphabettsy wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does a defeat-able non-essential feature shorten a vehicle’s lifespan?

Here is a thing that happens: many countries have more or less comprehensive regular vehicle inspections. If your car is showing a warning light or reports an error on the standardized interface, that can cause you to fail the inspection. What a warning light is shown for is at the discretion of the manufacturer though. One example is Anti-lock braking (ABS), which they made mandatory in 2004. If you bought a car wit…

Fair enough, but that’s not what was brought up and I don’t know why you would want a vehicle without ABS.

Since most people don’t know how to panic stop without ABS I think it’s reasonable that it cause an inspection failure.

I’m not aware of a jurisdiction where you would fail an inspection because your rear park assist or lane departure warning didn’t work.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#276

Post by chiph »

avmich wrote: post #264
chiph wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2004 GX470 here. Horrendous gas mileage, but comes with ABS, stability control, full-time 4WD, and airbags. Of the modern safety systems, the one I'd really like to have is the blind-spot monitor. I have had rentals/loaners with collision detection systems (radar/camera) and they have all false-alerted on me and applied max brakes. I'm lucky I wasn't rear-ended as a result.

Airbags since 2004? What's the working age for such things?

Some automakers used to recommend replacement at 10 or 15 years old (my 1999 Mercedes had that on a door-jamb sticker). But from what I've seen, none of them are saying that anymore. Perhaps there was additional operational-life testing done. Or (more cynically) perhaps the automakers decided that replacing the 8+ airbags a modern car has after it's 15 years old, was something that no one was going to do because the cost would exceed the value of the vehicle by that point.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#277

Post by medvezhenok »

necovek wrote: post #257
willis936 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most attentive driver in the world cannot prevent an inattentive driver from T-boning them. Automatic braking can.

I am guessing you mean automatic braking in inattentive driver's car, because automatic braking in attentive driver's car works with mostly the same data as the driver themselves (it needs to predict collision, and to predict it, it needs to see the approaching car, estimate the speed, likelihood it will stop...). Automated system would have advantage there only where it can better "see" things (eg. LIDAR in pitch da…

I recommend watching TeslaCam on YouTube - there are a few videos where the AI reacts faster than any human could, even a very attentive one.

It's by no means perfect (and the city beta is kind of a mess), but the highway safety bits are very functional and useful.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#278

Post by chrisseaton »

HWR_14 wrote: post #273
chrisseaton wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I don't like them. They're not there for you to like - they're there for the people you might kill with your car. > the government taking away our choice... ...to plough into people with your car.

I don't think those devices reduce the number of accidents, so I disagree with your premise. I think they serve to help slowly roll out self-driving capabilities.

> I don't think those devices reduce the number of accidents

Good for you. But society disagrees and requires them.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#279

Post by auslegung »

H1Supreme wrote: post #29
auslegung wrote: post #3

I’ve recently decided I want a classic muscle car. 30 years old or older, in good condition, depending on make, model, and miles can be had easily for under $10k

That's a pipe dream. Even the least desirable muscle cars are fetching $25-30k for "good" condition. Anything remotely desirable is going for far more than that. You could probably get an 80's Camaro or something, but that's not really a "muscle car". That term is generally applied to models from the 60's and 70's.

That price is reasonable according to https://classiccars.com. I’m not looking for something extraordinary.

Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?

#280

Post by auslegung »

sokoloff wrote: post #30
auslegung wrote: post #3

I’ve recently decided I want a classic muscle car. 30 years old or older, in good condition, depending on make, model, and miles can be had easily for under $10k

I have a ‘65 Mustang coupe and ‘66 Mustang convertible and daily drove each of them for a while. The sad truth is: they are beautiful and fun, but aren’t actually very good cars by modern car standards. I remedied some of that by adding a modern 5-speed, hydraulic clutch actuator, front disc brakes, dual circuit brakes, relocated upper control arms, traction bars, limited slip diff, a modern alternator, and modern H4…

That price is reasonable according to https://classiccars.com. I’m not looking for something extraordinary.
Post reply on HN