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

291–300 of 340 posts

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

#291

Post by willis936 »

jjav wrote: post #251
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.

There is nothing automatic braking will do to help you from getting T-boned. In fact only an attentive driver can prevent that one. Automatic braking will prevent you from rear-ending the car in front, yes. Although an attentive driver should also be doing that.

Yes, it will. If someone isn't paying attention then they will T-bone you when they drive a car without automatic braking and will not when they drive a car with automatic braking.

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

#292

Post by KennyBlanken »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #148
worldmerge wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saab 900 with a Mach E crate motor swap.

Wouldn't work well, that crate motor is made for transverse mounting, the 900 is famous for its longitudinal & backwards motor (and perfectly balanced to avoid torque steer). A good candidate for a Tesla drive unit transplant, probably. Too bad I don't have the mechanical skills to do it myself (I have a non-running 1984 900 SPG in my garage)

It's an integrated drive unit, just like the Tesla drive unit (with the exception that the Tesla includes an inverter in the IDU; the Eluminator, sadly, does not.)

The only thing you'd need is a cradle and custom half-shafts.

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

#293

Post by KennyBlanken »

_ea1k wrote: post #156
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't work well, that crate motor is made for transverse mounting, the 900 is famous for its longitudinal & backwards motor (and perfectly balanced to avoid torque steer). A good candidate for a Tesla drive unit transplant, probably. Too bad I don't have the mechanical skills to do it myself (I have a non-running 1984 900 SPG in my garage)

Isn't the Tesla drive unit also mounted transverse? Or do you mean that there are more aftermarket solutions to resolve this for Tesla drive units?

The Tesla unit is offset transverse whereas the Eluminator is coaxial. Both are integrated drive units - electric motor and gearbox.

Telsa includes the inverter in the drive module; the Eluminator requires an external inverter, unfortunately.

Quite the missed opportunity, because it would be nearly drop-in if it included an inverter. That's what is so great about the Tesla module. You feed it power and CAN bus commands and boom, you've got torque.

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

#294

Post by speedgoose »

mszcz wrote: post #72
speedgoose wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They make a very shitty EV though.

Do you mean the range? If that's the case then I agree, I don't know what they were thinking. If not then I guess it's a lot different from the 2019 Mazda 6 I own. It's been great. Not what the parent is looking for probably but it has no gimmicks - I find every convenience usable. The adaptive lights, the active cruise, lane assist, automatic transmission, keyless system, seat memory, HUD, 360 cam. Yes, I know these…

The whole electric part is shit. The range is low but it would be manageable if the charging speed wasn't so slow. The consumption is very high, the performances very poor. It's a front wheel drive, a lot of space is not available for storage because of the design. And it's expensive.

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

#295

Post by thorin1 »

necovek wrote: post #162
fletchowns wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a dying breed though, complicated "driver assist" systems are becoming standard or even mandated :(. I'm on the opposite side of this. All the new safety & driver assist features are the best part about getting a new car. 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, yo…

I drive a 2019 Volvo as well (bought in 2020), and the "safety" features have activated for me maybe a hundred times! Out of those, safety system was helpful once (arguably) in that it reacted and activated the brakes the same time I pressed them (so it still wasn't really needed, but I can see how it would have helped when I was less attentive due to eg planning to switch lanes and looking at side mirrors). All the…

> yet side mirrors are large enough and concave (like on all modern cars) that if you set them up properly, there's really no blind spot a car or bike can fit in.

Not in the US unfortunately. All my European cars had almost no blind spot. Then I moved to the US and was really surprised.

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

#296

Post by rootsudo »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #288
selykg wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can actually be worse, trapping heat in. But yea, completely non-functional. Remove it if the clips are broken. You aren't missing anything.

They're not "non-functional" at all. They reduce wind noise, increase mileage particularly in colder weather (and speed up engine warmup time), protect the engine from road debris/road salt/water, and reduce lift generated at highway speeds. "Trapping heat in" isn't a problem in almost any modern vehicle.

There's an engine cover, and a cowl cover - the one on the bottom is good, the fake plastic trim on the top is worthless.

https://www.forgemotorsport.com/Hyundai_i30NVeloster_N_Carbo...

this is worthless, and better to keep it off.

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

#297

Post by speedgoose »

olyjohn wrote: post #37
speedgoose wrote: post #14

Between privacy risks and road safety, I made my choice very easily. I can understand the nostalgia of old cars with very little electronics, a carburator, a starter with a battery, a mechanical dashboard,... But on a daily basis they are dangerous, smelly, expensive, and not that reliable.

I don't think he's talking about going to a carbureted car though. Just something with a simple EFI system, and not a bunch of proprietary, in-car electronics. Definitely like a post above mentioned, the late 90's to 2000's cars have most modern safety features, good reliable fuel injection, but no integrated LTE modems, or crappy infotainment systems that are horribly out of date like newer cars.

Perhaps. But recent cars are a lot more safe than these old cars though. The electronic stability control has improved a lot, airbags have improved a lot, and perhaps the biggest difference is that a modern car has sensors to not crash full speed into stopped traffic or pedestrian.

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

#298

Post by jjav »

willis936 wrote: post #291
jjav wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing automatic braking will do to help you from getting T-boned. In fact only an attentive driver can prevent that one. Automatic braking will prevent you from rear-ending the car in front, yes. Although an attentive driver should also be doing that.

Yes, it will. If someone isn't paying attention then they will T-bone you when they drive a car without automatic braking and will not when they drive a car with automatic braking.

I see, in that sense yes. If the tboners car has autobraking, it can help. I read it initially as the tbonees car having autobraking, which won't help at all (since there is nothing in front of the tbonees car at any moment for it to sense).

Although, I'm dubious there would be enough time in that scenario to help much. The typical case is someone running a red light and intersecting a car from the other direction, both going full speed. By the time the tbonee car enters the field of the tboner car front sensors they are very close and less than a second from impact. So it'd reduce speed a bit which is good, but won't prevent the hit.

An attentive driver on the other hand, can see far wider than the sensors and has more opportunity to avoid the incident entirely. If paying attention, of course.

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

#299

Post by winrid »

I have a 2015 Chevy Colorado WT trim. I got it for this reason, pretty much the simplest "modern" car you can get.

No remote locking, stick shift, just a radio / aux input. Has reverse camera though, and hill start assist.

RWD, four cylinder (but enough power with the 4.10 rear end gearing). And good safety ratings.

It's quite weird in that it has good torque at low RPM, but revs to 7k RPM. Unusual for a truck, but fun.

I use it for towing a 4k lb trailer and the once a week run to the store. Nothing broke in five years so far.

I think they recently dropped the stick shift option but there are plenty on the market. Usually around $20k.

I average 20mpg. 25 on highway. 20 towing.

Downsides: I have the extended cab for the longer bed, so rear seats are tiny.

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

#300

Post by ThunderSizzle »

willis936 wrote: post #291
jjav wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing automatic braking will do to help you from getting T-boned. In fact only an attentive driver can prevent that one. Automatic braking will prevent you from rear-ending the car in front, yes. Although an attentive driver should also be doing that.

Yes, it will. If someone isn't paying attention then they will T-bone you when they drive a car without automatic braking and will not when they drive a car with automatic braking.

I doubt automatic braking would help a t-bone situation. Do you have evidence of this?

Meanwhile, any driver worth his salt should be checking cross traffic when nearing any intersection. I've avoided several accidents by examining potential cross traffic at intersections.

Accident avoidance should be drivers ed 101, but for some reason, especially in these conversations, no one seems to know how to look for and avoid potential accidents.

Post reply on HN