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

EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 224 posts

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#211

Post by taylodl »

Gravityloss wrote: post #28
KaiserPro wrote: post #13

In Which magazine, EVs were about as reliable as normal cars, however if you removed tesla from the ratings, then EV reliability jumped significantly to way above standard petrol/diesel. https://www.which.co.uk/ has the details, but you need to be a member to find out. Basically the fit, finish and reliability of the accessories were trash.

I've seen the argument that "traditional auto makers" don't "get" how many people think - they concentrate on panel gaps or wind noise or door closing bump noise. Tesla isn't great there, but the Tesla software is good, and what some people call "kids" treat the car more like a smart phone. They don't care if your panel gaps are great - if your infotainment software is very laggy or crashes, it's a low quality car.

Yes, but kids can't afford Teslas, now can they? The people who are actually paying for Teslas care about things such as fit and finish. They also care about reliability and service. I don't know about reliability, and here I'm talking about not getting stranded due to issues with the car, but frankly Tesla gets an 'F' everywhere else. Meanwhile Apple Car Play and Android Auto take care of the "kids" concern for infotainment software.

I've seen many auto manufacturers go under over the course of my life. Tesla is just going to be another one.

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#212

Post by thereddaikon »

Kon-Peki wrote: post #84
thereddaikon wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Affordable trucks have mostly disappeared. They have been climbing up the price brackets for a few generations now. Its gotten to the point that before the Maverick your choices were either absurdly expensive luxury truck or buying a trim meant for commercial use that has no features at all. There did not exist a normal truck anymore. Well, they did nominally. But good luck finding one for sale. Why sell lower tier F…

I spent a lot of time in the early 90s in a cheap Japanese truck. 4-cylinder, manual transmission, RWD, standard suspension. Sure, I can believe that the Maverick is less capable in some ways. But in others, there is no comparison. At all. Modern expensive trucks are amazing, but that is also part of why they are expensive. You are being tricked into thinking the cost is 100% due to the fancy add-ons. It isn't. And w…

It's a front wheel drive unibody. Depending on your definition it isn't actually a truck. That's what I mean by mediocre and lacking capability. Not the extra options you can get on a King Ranch or Raptor. But the core essence of a truck. When I compare the Maverick to previous small, affordable trucks I'm not comparing it to a stripped out F-150. I'm comparing it to a Chevy S-10 or Ford Ranger.

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#213

Post by thereddaikon »

jwozn wrote: post #64
thereddaikon wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Affordable trucks have mostly disappeared. They have been climbing up the price brackets for a few generations now. Its gotten to the point that before the Maverick your choices were either absurdly expensive luxury truck or buying a trim meant for commercial use that has no features at all. There did not exist a normal truck anymore. Well, they did nominally. But good luck finding one for sale. Why sell lower tier F…

I read also read reviews, and while I agree with your conclusions I also think the reviewers still loved it! Mediocre in that you don't get many bells and whistles, less capable because you have a smaller bed, lower towing capacity, and can't be beat to hell like some older trucks. But affordability, size, and utility make it a hit.

Actually I meant mediocre and less capable in that its a fwd unibody and not a body on frame rwd truck. An affordable truck wont have a lot of options. But I consider those two design choices to be kind of core to what a real truck is. A fwd unibody platform is ultimately a car wearing a truck's clothing. Just like crossovers may look like SUVs but when conditions get bad and Karen tries to go up an icey incline and finds out it in fact isn't.

My benchmark with affordable trucks will be past models like the S-10 and Ranger. Those were small, light on options but still trucks with proper frames and a rwd drivetrain.

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#214

Post by _ea1k »

bravetraveler wrote: post #49
_ea1k wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of spare tires is correlated with the increase in tire size, IMO. My first car was a 1987 Mazda with 14" tires. It was a two seat sports car, with a tiny spare mounted vertically. They could do that since it was 14". Modern sports cars are 18-20" and the spare tire is a big cargo compromise.

Makes me mad that my mustang has a spot for a spare... But no actual spare They give you a fix it kit and some good wishes edit: I suspect it's something to do with tire size as you say, but also brakes . Can't fit a donut with what's on the hub For > $40k I would've liked they throw in a real spare wheel/tire lol

I'm sure it depends on the car as to the reason. My RX-8 does not have a spare, but does have space for one. The kit would take up over half the trunk space, though!

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#215

Post by _ea1k »

Plasmoid2000ad wrote: post #172
_ea1k wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of spare tires is correlated with the increase in tire size, IMO. My first car was a 1987 Mazda with 14" tires. It was a two seat sports car, with a tiny spare mounted vertically. They could do that since it was 14". Modern sports cars are 18-20" and the spare tire is a big cargo compromise.

I think it's emissions and range rankings. When you are trying to shave off every last bit of weight to get your car into a lower emissions class, the spare wheel looks like a waste. Why not leave it out, the owner can always put it back in if the really want. In Europe, the automakers are really getting card into Emission bands by the smallest possible margins, and as this effects tax buyers do care. For EVs it's ra…

The effect of a spare on range would be so miniscule as to not matter, tbh. Well, unless it was mounted outside the car for some reason. Some of the designs for mounting them on trucks might have an impact.

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#216

Post by _ea1k »

ehnto wrote: post #60
_ea1k wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of spare tires is correlated with the increase in tire size, IMO. My first car was a 1987 Mazda with 14" tires. It was a two seat sports car, with a tiny spare mounted vertically. They could do that since it was 14". Modern sports cars are 18-20" and the spare tire is a big cargo compromise.

I wonder if another constraint is AWD and modern stability control systems not being able to handle a difference in circumference at one corner, so space saver tires are not an option.

That's a good point. Modern spare has struggled with some of their Tesla spare tire kits because of traction control issues. Even a small difference in diameter will make the car thing one or more wheels are slipping.

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#217

Post by _ea1k »

jvanderbot wrote: post #109
Gravityloss wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen the argument that "traditional auto makers" don't "get" how many people think - they concentrate on panel gaps or wind noise or door closing bump noise. Tesla isn't great there, but the Tesla software is good, and what some people call "kids" treat the car more like a smart phone. They don't care if your panel gaps are great - if your infotainment software is very laggy or crashes, it's a low quality car.

We bought a model Y for two years of mortgage payments. It's a dream to drive! But the user experience is abysmal. Menus are deep, the entire dashboard is wasted, including the most valuable real estate in front of the driver, and everything is just too hard. E.g. Adjusting mirrors takes 3 menu clicks, don't even think of doing it while driving. Adjusting heating takes two clicks, and when you adjust temp, it clears…

Regarding climate, I've found this really depends on how much you like auto. I'm fine with auto most of the time, so I haven't had an issue. Even the auto seat warmers actually work pretty well for me. They barely get warm and then turn off on their own, which is really what I prefer.

Also, you can put the seat warmer icon on the bottom bar, so its just one tap to toggle off/levels 1-3/auto.

I'm not sure what you mean about the map. Every car that I've used has that to the right in a similar position. The tesla layout seems fine to me.

The glovebox is my biggest annoyance, in general. I wish there was a button somewhere.

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#218

Post by _ea1k »

cptskippy wrote: post #199
jvanderbot wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only upside to all the lack of buttons and switches is security. You cannot open the glove box, trunk, drink, or the vehicle without your phone or car key card.

I don't know that it matters. I believe if the car is unlocked, then the screen can be used to open the glove box. If the car isn't unlocked, then you broke in and prying open the glove box isn't beyond what you're willing to do.

Its useful for things like valet mode. You can also have separate passcodes for the glovebox vs regular driving.

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#219

Post by _ea1k »

cptskippy wrote: post #186
ridgered4 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently watched a youtube video where a guy rented a Tesla and was frustrated that he needed to dig through touchscreen menus to open the glove box. Apparently it did not have a release latch.

The Model 3/Y are not good rental cars. They're fantastic cars IMO but they take some time to get accustom to, that's not something you want in a rental car. To open the glove box requires 2 screen presses or activating the voice controls. On the one hand it's an uncommonly used feature, I think I've opened mine once this year. On the other hand it's rather silly that there isn't a button or sensor to allow you to op…

> The Model 3/Y are not good rental cars.

That's an interesting way to think about it. I own a Y and have rented a 3 after owning it for more than a year. Even in that situation, the rental was less good than ownership. The rental didn't have app access, so I had to use a keycard. That made locking/unlocking much more awkward. I also couldn't precondition from the app.

It was still a great car, but it felt nothing like the day to day experience of owning one.

Re: EVs are the least reliable vehicle type: Consumer Reports

#220

Post by _ea1k »

saturn_vk wrote: post #202
jvanderbot wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We bought a model Y for two years of mortgage payments. It's a dream to drive! But the user experience is abysmal. Menus are deep, the entire dashboard is wasted, including the most valuable real estate in front of the driver, and everything is just too hard. E.g. Adjusting mirrors takes 3 menu clicks, don't even think of doing it while driving. Adjusting heating takes two clicks, and when you adjust temp, it clears…

> E.g. Adjusting mirrors takes 3 menu clicks, don't even think of doing it while driving. 20 years ago I was taught that mirrors should have already been adjusted by the time you turn the key. Has this changed? Why would you ever need to adjust the mirrors while driving? > it clears all your other settings and goes to "auto", No it doesn't > Seat warmer? 2+ clicks on center console It's over click. It's still awful b…

Yeah, that and owners will save the mirror positions to their profile. I've never found this aspect annoying, tbh.
Post reply on HN