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

The rise of the disposable car

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 267 posts

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#61

Post by syntheticnature »

skhunted wrote: post #51
dragontamer wrote: post #4

https://www.spglobal.com/mobility/en/research-analysis/avera... The opposite. With cars reaching much more advanced ages today, when a collision happens it's a write-off. The modern car isn't 'disposable'. In fact, all statistics point to us holding onto cars longer today than ever before. Today's cars are the most durable that they've ever been.

What do you think about Cubans keeping cars from 1950s running for as long as they did? It seems to me that maybe we live in a society that is overly permissive of replacing items.

Cars from the 50s and 60s were comparatively less complex and easier to maintain and repair. Of course, they don't get the gas mileage or meet the same emissions criteria, and in a crash they aren't as survivable because they don't compress to reduce force on the occupants.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#62

Post by nixonpjoshua »

userabchn wrote: post #37
jseliger wrote: post #9

I live in Phoenix and now take Waymo regularly, and it seems like we're close to a world in which most people take self-driving cars most of the time, crash rates plummet, and these kinds of articles come to resemble articles from 1910 about horse-related problems. Humans suck at driving: https://jakeseliger.com/2019/12/16/maybe-cars-are-just-reall...

I wonder what we are going to do with all of the car parking that will become as obsolete as horse stables.

This is actually the thing I am most excited about with the prospect of self-driving, the biggest way car-centric infrastructure ruins cities is by parking requirements.

Unfortunately most cities in the USA have parking minimums so even if a market change occurs and they are all empty the lots will stick around for a while until they are no longer legally required.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#63

Post by Terr_ »

notjoemama wrote: post #44

GM requiring Google integration and eliminating Apple Car Play and Android Auto makes me think a brand new model is immediately disposable. If I have choice removed from me, in particular a choice I very much care about, then I’m going to care about owning that car less. The more that happens the more people may view vehicles as pure utility and much easier to walk away from for any reason, especially repair cost. Wh…

> If I have choice removed from me

I think this points to a slightly deeper issue sitting just below "consumer choice", which is "tight coupling."

It sounds like GM has made a tighter-coupling between their vehicle and one particular brand of smartphone, and that's suggestive that other tight-couplings might exist elsewhere the design. The more tightly-coupled parts (to particular brands, form-factors, and proprietary connectors) the harder/more-expensive it will be to keep the overall car-system working over a decade or two as some of its hard-dependencies stop getting built.

So a lack of smartphone choice isn't just annoying, it also suggests something about the designers not planning for long-term maintenance.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#64

Post by timw4mail »

vel0city wrote: post #47
yareally wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a genuine sentiment or just people upset that their favorite vehicle won't have a massive gas guzzling engine anymore? There are a number of people that also dislike trucks with aluminum bodies, despite that aluminum alloys can be strong (aircraft use them all the time) and it keeps your truck from turning into a rust bucket after 5 years of snowy winters. Car ownership is not always a rational thing and peop…

CVTs (generally) rely on belts sliding on cones. With more weight, you need more torque, with more torque you get more wear on the internal components. This is a big reason why CVTs have historically targeted smaller cars instead of larger trucks. When it comes to motor reliability, generally speaking a smaller engine with higher compression running closer to its peak output all the time will have more wear than a sl…

My understanding is that CVTs are more like a chain, i.e. a segmented metal belt.

It sure seems like they would be great for large trucks if they could be made beefy enough.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#65

Post by floxy »

yareally wrote: post #31
hindsightbias wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll add: https://www.youtube.com/@TheCarCareNut SUVs and smaller trucks are now almost universally moving to 4cyl and 6cyl turbos with iffy CVTs. The channels run by folks with greasy overalls are pretty uniform in saying these vehicles won't last like their predecessors (even the Toyotas).

Is this a genuine sentiment or just people upset that their favorite vehicle won't have a massive gas guzzling engine anymore? There are a number of people that also dislike trucks with aluminum bodies, despite that aluminum alloys can be strong (aircraft use them all the time) and it keeps your truck from turning into a rust bucket after 5 years of snowy winters. Car ownership is not always a rational thing and peop…

>There's a number of reliable auto makers using CVTs for years, such as Subaru

Isn't the CVT going bad one of the main complaints people have with Subaru? Like at 100,000-150,000 miles. Other than the head gasket issue which was fixed a decade ago? Asking, since I'm in the market for a used vehicle, and the CVT reliability has me hesitant.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#66

Post by timw4mail »

vel0city wrote: post #53
beretguy wrote: post #5

Tangential but related: There are full parking lots with brand new cars that go under press or get disassembled for parts because dealership don’t want sell them at a cheaper prices. https://www.costulessdirect.com/blog/where-brand-new-unsold-... From article: > the unsold cars that are older than two years old, will have no alternative but to be either crushed, dismantled and/or their parts recycled. Want to see for…

That lot in Baltimore is a vehicle processing lot for the Port of Baltimore. Cars manufactured overaseas usually come by boat and delivered to places like that. The lot they're referencing is owned/managed by Wallenius Wilhelmsen which specializes in this RoRo style of logistics that are common with overseas car shipping. They'll sit there for a short period of time as all the customs work takes place and then shippe…

I'm pretty sure every Mitsubishi car sold in the US is imported, and there are quite a few Mirages and Outlanders on the road.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#67

Post by linkjuice4all »

StableAlkyne wrote: post #23
dragontamer wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition of 'Totaled' is when a comparable car on the used market can replace your vehicle for less than or equal to the repair costs. As such, it makes no sense to repair a totaled vehicle. You should instead buy a comparable used vehicle. But saying the word 'Disposable' is pretty bad with regards to the headline. It doesn't capture the full effect of what the stats are showing. That is, we are all keeping ve…

> As such, it makes no sense to repair a totaled vehicle. You should instead buy a comparable used vehicle. I sometimes wonder how much the carbon footprint of the auto industry would change if people preferred to fix them instead of throwing the whole thing away just because of a fender bender or an expensive part broke

The change to unibody construction in the 70s/80s and the more-recent move to 'gigapressing' an entire car with body work has unfortunately made repair much more difficult.

In the past body shops would realign frames, pull body work back into shape, and weld in new pieces but it's just not safe and practical to do that with unibody vehicles even if you did have the tooling and machinery to ensure that it was done right and everything is actually back into factory spec and alignment.

It's almost a shame that the electric vehicle 'skateboard' concept (essentially a rolling chassis in industrial/truck vehicle terminology) didn't really get anywhere - but I have to imagine that design constraints, extra weight from attaching the body to the chassis, and other relevant factors that pushed us into unibody vehicles in the first place also made concept unfeasible.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#68

Post by hoelle »

salad-tycoon wrote: post #48

I just want a cheap, safe dependable car. Anti lock brakes, a couple of air bags, crumple zones, maybe Bluetooth, real dials, two base versions: AWD and non AWD. That’s it. No telephony, no on star, no breathalyzers. I don’t need to play Witcher in it. Just need it to turn on and then off after running around. I’m holding onto my ancient POS because it’s impossible apparently to find the above. Everything is new and…

Honda and Toyota are still cheap, safe, and dependable.

Our CR-V is such a great value I don't actually understand how they turn a profit.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#69

Post by cratermoon »

SoftTalker wrote: post #25
dragontamer wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition of 'Totaled' is when a comparable car on the used market can replace your vehicle for less than or equal to the repair costs. As such, it makes no sense to repair a totaled vehicle. You should instead buy a comparable used vehicle. But saying the word 'Disposable' is pretty bad with regards to the headline. It doesn't capture the full effect of what the stats are showing. That is, we are all keeping ve…

As GP said, the author recognized that people are keeping cars longer and that they are more durable. However a new wrinkle is that "the proportion of brand new vehicles being written off has increased." This is due to the costs of repairing "Advanced Driver Assistance Systems” such as automatic braking and lane-keeping assistance. These systems include sensors, cameras, and other equipment that must be carefully cal…

Any collision that sets of the airbags in a modern car is almost guaranteed to be a write-off.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#70

Post by vel0city »

timw4mail wrote: post #64
vel0city wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CVTs (generally) rely on belts sliding on cones. With more weight, you need more torque, with more torque you get more wear on the internal components. This is a big reason why CVTs have historically targeted smaller cars instead of larger trucks. When it comes to motor reliability, generally speaking a smaller engine with higher compression running closer to its peak output all the time will have more wear than a sl…

My understanding is that CVTs are more like a chain, i.e. a segmented metal belt. It sure seems like they would be great for large trucks if they could be made beefy enough.

When people use the term "chain" in this context, they're usually thinking of it moving a sprocket with teeth that fit in between gaps on the chain. You're right that automotive CVTs are made with a lot of metal bits connected on a band for greater durability, but most would still just call it a belt as it relies on the friction between the edges of it and the cones to move the cones instead of pulling on teeth. Think the differences between a timing "belt" versus a timing "chain", but I do acknowledge a timing belt is usually non-metallic.

Sure, one could spend quite a bit of money making it even beefier with more and more exotic materials, but in the end its kind of hard to match the friction efficiency of well-fitting gears directly connecting the torque. You're pretty much guaranteed to encounter more friction on the belt sliding on the cones compared to well lubricated and properly made gears, and more friction means more wear which means shorter life.

But this is kind of the idea of eCVTs. Instead of belts sliding on cones (pulleys), they use motor/generators and novel gearset placements to change how the torque flows through the system. In this way friction is considerably reduced. There are no belts to stretch or wear out.

Post reply on HN