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

111–120 of 267 posts

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#111

Post by balderdash »

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…

I think you’re right but I think (at least in my own experience) that what gets people to buy a new(er) car is that that people don’t like driving cars that have broken things (windows, switches, lights etc.) that make no sense to fix (say $1500, to fix something non-essential on a car that’s only worth $10k)

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#112

Post by AdamN »

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…

Cars more than about 10-15 years old just aren't as safe as newer ones. That's the fundamental issue. With that said there are ways to mitigate the risk (drive more cautiously/slower, etc...).

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#113

Post by constantcrying »

skhunted wrote: post #108
a1371 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of argument ignores the real cost of having to upkeep a 50s car: the human suffering. Cubans are forced to use this option and their society suffers from it.

From an environmental perspective it’s a good thing. Don’t know if that makes it worth it but we are creating far too much pollution.

Cars from the 50s are less energy efficient and require more overall resources to maintain than a new car. They are also significantly less safe.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#114

Post by jmrm »

toast0 wrote: post #81
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…

> 'Maintenance free' transmissions are very common in newer cars

I take advantage to your comment to write this PSA (that probably you already know):

All transmissions require maintenance, and even manual ones. Those automatic tagged as 'maintenance free' from the brand aren't, and if you call the manufacturer of that transmission, Getrag, ZF, or whatever it is, they should say which ATF and filters it needs and in what interval.

If you do maintenance with an independent technician (not a dealership or a "Jiffy Lube") with some good reputation, they probably help with that

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#115

Post by lasereyes136 »

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…

> just because insurance says its "totaled" doesn't mean it isnt fixable and safe to drive.

"Totaled" to an insurance company means they think the cost of repair at their contracted rates is more than the cost of paying out the "value" of the car. It is a business assessment, not an assessment of the vehicle.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#116

Post by magicalhippo »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #101
toast0 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Modern cars aren't designed to be easy to work on which really inflates the labor hours required for even trivial issues.

The my front left indicator light went on my BMW i3. Tried looking up the specs for the bulb to buy a new one. Of course it wasn't that simple. Oh boy was I naive.

No, it required a whole new headlight assembly, $800 plus labor.

Funnily enough, the car got totalled shortly after, before I had decided to go ahead with the repair. Someone hit my SO as she was in a roundabout, and the impact moved the car several meters. Cracked the carbon fiber chassis. Estimated repair cost was 1.5x price of a new car.

So, never got the pleasure of finding out how much labor would have been for replacing the headlight unit. I'm assuming it would have been a lot more than for replacing a light bulb...

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#117

Post by doubled112 »

talldatethrow wrote: post #103
doubled112 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dealers are charging about $200/hr labour in my area. Independent shops are $150/hr and up. I don't think anybody is replacing my transmission for $500. Did you mean the whole job for less than $5000?

The entire comment seems off. They said thanks to automation labor will be $500. What automation is there in replacing a used transmission in a garage on an oily rusty 200k mile car on a lift.

I caught that too, but decided to ignore it.

There isn't an automation in the world that will take enough of the car apart for you. Or at least my mechanic friends haven't found it.

Will keep waiting for AI to grow itself some arms.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#118

Post by PaulHoule »

lasereyes136 wrote: post #115
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…

> just because insurance says its "totaled" doesn't mean it isnt fixable and safe to drive. "Totaled" to an insurance company means they think the cost of repair at their contracted rates is more than the cost of paying out the "value" of the car. It is a business assessment, not an assessment of the vehicle.

I've totalled two vehicles twice each.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#119

Post by constantcrying »

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…

>Every day in the United States, a large number of cars are being produced. Most of these cars never get sold to customers because people just can’t afford them. The car manufacturing industry can’t stop producing new automobiles because they would have to close their factories and lay off thousands of their workers.

That is an obvious lie. It is obviously more expensive to produce and scrap a car than to not produce one at all. What you do if demand is low is you produce less. It is economically more viable to pay workers for standing around than to pay them to build and scrap a car. So the excuse about jobs is another lie.

>Want to see for yourself? Do a quick search on Google Maps of Baltimore, Maryland, looking south of Broening Hwy in Dundalk, there you will see a massive expanse of space where many unsold cars are currently parked.

Which is evidence of what exactly? That cars exist that aren't sold? Surely that is no surprise.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#120

Post by Ekaros »

lucianbr wrote: post #87
bluGill wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Most of them. Car manufacturers aren't too greatly in vertical integration. One could argue that having a car rental agency for manufacturer would be great idea. Get cars at cost, rent them short to medium term, keep maintenance inhouse sell them after some period for most of the price.

But I don't think there is any manufacturers that rent vehicles for short term and neither there are any rental firms that manufacture their cars...

In the end making things and renting them is different businesses.

Post reply on HN