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

81–90 of 267 posts

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#81

Post by toast0 »

nimbius wrote: post #75

The rich have been flogging this idea since cash for clunkers. That, because they run through cars like shit through a goose, you will too. Speaking as a master diesel mechanic, this is a deleterious line of thinking for anyone with less than a few million dollars. Every car has 20 years of parts, and most Japanese cars have closer into 50 years of parts. Any engine built after 2010 will likely last half a million mi…

At least in my area, the problem is labor costs. If you can do things yourself, it's great. If you need a mechanic to do it, you're looking at a big expense, because mechanic labor is expensive and there's a lot more covers and harder to get to parts these days. 'Maintenance free' transmissions are very common in newer cars, and they do tend to need less maintenance, but when they do, there's often not a great way to access them. Etc.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#82

Post by lucianbr »

currymj wrote: post #34
DoneWithAllThat wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’ve been “close” for 10+ years now. We are not close.

5 years ago you couldn't hop in a commercial self-driving taxi in a major US city. Now you can. The progress has been slower than everyone's predictions but it is still substantial.

65 years ago we had never traveled outside Earth's atmosphere. 50 years ago we had traveled to the Moon. Surely by now we are visiting the nearest star, no?

It's incredible to me how many people honestly believe they can predict the future, when the future is so clearly unpredictable. Even while you acknowledge that everyone's predictions were too optimistic, in the very same sentence you insist on an optimistic prediction.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#83

Post by emmelaich »

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…

I've spoken to a number of people lately that have had to take their Audi/VW/Mercedes/ other to the shop for repair because of the electronics.

One was charged thousands to fix a snow sensor. We don't get snow in Sydney.

Guy who runs a fleet of luxury vehicles said the sensors are cheap and simply fail after five or so years.

My own VW Passat randomly failed to start occasionally with some mysterious light on. (I forget the details). I sold it.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#84

Post by sokoloff »

linuxftw wrote: post #71
kd5bjo wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't see any reasonable way around this, though. If I have a car that I could replace for $8K and would salvage for $1K, I can't reasonably expect someone else's insurance company to pay $12.5K in costs (for repairs plus rentals/loss of use plus diminished value plus incidentals) to put me back in a place where I then have a crash-repaired car worth $7K plus $1K in cash in my pocket for diminished value. The pro…

What you describe would be insurance over the minimum coverage, which is available. If you take the minimum, expect to get the 'market value' of a replacement because that's what you agreed to when you initiated the policy.

There are two key cases: when you are forced to deal with your insurance company because no one else is at fault. In that case, you get what you bought.

When another driver is at fault and you elect to not use your insurance company for whatever reason. In that case, you didn't have any opportunity to pre-arrange with this other driver's insurance company and you have to fall back on the law as a backstop.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#85

Post by bluGill »

kube-system wrote: post #46
currymj wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5 years ago you couldn't hop in a commercial self-driving taxi in a major US city. Now you can. The progress has been slower than everyone's predictions but it is still substantial.

In 1897, you could hop in a commercial electric taxi in London. Alas, Londoners still have many gasoline cars on the road. Availability and mass adoption are two very entirely different things. The time in which people take most commutes by any kind of car is: today... 51% of people commute by car currently. That took 136 years. 'most of the time' for 'most people' is quite a high bar. That's a lot of travel, for abo…

IF, and this is a big if - self driving cars prove safer than human drivers in all conditions - governments will mandate it in all new cars and in 12 more years they will be the majority, and a few more years and governments will ban everything else (if not directly insurance via high rates).

However right now they are not ready for that. They don't work in all conditions and we don't have unbiased safety studies.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#86

Post by nimbius »

jandrese wrote: post #80
nimbius wrote: post #75

The rich have been flogging this idea since cash for clunkers. That, because they run through cars like shit through a goose, you will too. Speaking as a master diesel mechanic, this is a deleterious line of thinking for anyone with less than a few million dollars. Every car has 20 years of parts, and most Japanese cars have closer into 50 years of parts. Any engine built after 2010 will likely last half a million mi…

It's usually not the engine that fails. The transmission is far more likely to be the weak point, and after that it is rust destroying the body or frame. The average age of a car is like 13 years old. Most people are definitely not buying new ones every 5 years.

I agree, a transmission is really only good for around 200k miles. However, you can buy a used transmission in most cases for under 3 grand, and again labor for this thanks to automation is likely less than $500.

The real blocker I dont mention is time. Your shop will need that car for a few days and shipping will take time too. At some point the wait isnt worth it anymore. The upside is, 2 used Toyotas are still cheaper than a new one new Toyota

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#87

Post by lucianbr »

bluGill wrote: post #79
userabchn wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I think it is silly to think self driving cars gets rid of parking. If you don't use a car much it is cheaper to use a taxi service. However people who use a car often will be money ahead owning their own. Plus if you own the car you can keep your "junk" in it while doing something else. Most cars are needed during rush hour, so there isn't much need for cars the rest of the day. All of which means we need nearly as…

On a tangent, I wonder how many car manufacturers would actually sell a self-driving car if they were able to build one. Creating a taxi fleet and charging for usage seems much more profitable.

Or at the very least, the price would go up a lot. Who cares about the cost, when the value of the sold good is so high? Why sell it cheap? I note that Waymo has no intention of selling the things.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#88

Post by Night_Thastus »

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…

I got a new Corolla and felt that it fit the bill.

It still has newer features like lane centering and radar cruise control. However, it's a good, simple, reliable car at a much more reasonable price point.

As for feature creep - this is inevitable because all 99.99% of consumers care about are features and price. It's like people asking for a "non-smart TV". It's not going to happen, ever. Consumers who care about that aren't a percent of a percent of the market.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#89

Post by bluGill »

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…

If you have a large engine and a small engine producing the same amount of power the large one will have a lot less load and so will last longer (assuming all else is equal - which is never the case). However it doesn't matter in practice as a modern car body and suspension system will wear out long before the engine in most cases.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#90

Post by francisofascii »

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.

Cars can be both disposable, but also true we keep them longer. For example, my car's TPMS tire pressure gauge battery died, but the battery is internal to the system and isn't designed to replace the battery. So a repair/replacement is $600-900. But I am not replacing the car or getting the repair. I am simply living with the warning light on.
Post reply on HN