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

181–190 of 267 posts

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#181

Post by babypuncher »

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 bought a Ford Maverick last week and it's pretty close to this. In addition to bluetooth, the head unit supports carplay/android auto. But it has no built-in nav system or subscription bullshit.

It has knobs and buttons for everything you want to use while driving, including volume, transport controls (on both the steering wheel and below the screen), radio tuner, and climate control.

The closest alternative I looked at was the Hyundai Santa Cruz, which was more expensive. All of its buttons except those on the steering wheel and column stalks are capacitive nightmares with no tactile feedback. That alone was enough to help make my decision.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#182

Post by karma_pharmer »

WindyCityBrew wrote: post #124
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…

(USA specific) Depending on the state, "totaled" might still mean YOU can't fix and drive your car again. In Illinois, you can only retain a totaled vehicle if it was hail damage or it's a "vintage (9+ yr old) car.

Totaled means the insurance company buys the car from you.

It's not your car anymore, so obviously you don't get to drive it.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#183

Post by saagarjha »

Clubber wrote: post #168
AdamN wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...).

>Cars more than about 10-15 years old just aren't as safe as newer ones. Can you give some examples? The only safety innovation I can think of recently the side airbags. The backup camera, which is a huge improvement to backing up accidents was probably over 15 years ago.

Side cameras, automatic braking, person avoidance, lane keeping?

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#184

Post by ssl-3 »

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.

"Totaled" means whatever the laws in the insured's state say it means.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#185

Post by labster »

alliao wrote: post #139
snakeyjake wrote: post #127

The increase in total loss designations by insurance companies is due to the extremely high costs charged by the shops contracted by them to do repairs. The designation of a car as "totaled" is often an illusion and there is a thriving parallel market of auction houses, repair shops, salvage titling companies, and resellers who take the "ruined" cars, fix them, and sell them on the used market. Insurance companies co…

PE will literally keep going till society start revolting

Until they start rebelling, society is already revolting

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#186

Post by snakeyjake »

neuralRiot wrote: post #138
snakeyjake wrote: post #127

The increase in total loss designations by insurance companies is due to the extremely high costs charged by the shops contracted by them to do repairs. The designation of a car as "totaled" is often an illusion and there is a thriving parallel market of auction houses, repair shops, salvage titling companies, and resellers who take the "ruined" cars, fix them, and sell them on the used market. Insurance companies co…

The catch is that most banks won’t finance “rebuilt-titled” cars, you don’t have a dealer warranty (and most plainly refuse to work on rebuilt cars) and the vehicle has a 50-60% (or less) resale value than a “clean-title”.

Deep down inside I know that is by design.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#187

Post by _yb2s »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #178
_yb2s wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really only true if you consider within the same class or model of car, where the technology has advanced... but old cars are so affordable you can get a much higher end and much safer car. Do you think a 2024 Chevy Trax is safer than a 2012 Audi Q5? Both are compact SUVs but you can buy 3-4 nice condition low mileage Q5s for the price of the Chevy. Regardless of tech like changes in crumple zone design, you a…

Whatever you save on the upfront cost of a used Q5 you'll pay on the backend the first time it needs service.

Maintenance on an older Audi is expensive compared to, say, a Japanese economy car, but you're talking maybe $1k/year to maintain on average, vs $500/mo payments for the cheapest new car.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#188

Post by _yb2s »

cityofdelusion wrote: post #176
_yb2s wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Older cars are massively undervalued in the USA because of social norms, which is a massive opportunity to anyone willing to exploit it to get reliable transportation for nearly free. People are afraid that older cars are dangerous, unreliable, or (worst of all) will make you look poor, but all 3 are just misinformation. Boats and airplanes are just as reliable when old as new because they're maintained well- and car…

I love older cars, but they are significantly more dangerous. My 93 pickup had no airbags and was notorious for the engine intruding into the passenger compartment in collisions. My 91 sports car only has an air bag for the driver as a premium option, and they are known to not deploy due to the ancient explosives and electrical contacts. The A pillars on both cars are tiny and will fold in any kind of hit or rollover…

It depends on how old and what you are comparing. In another thread on here I suggested comparing a brand new Chevy Trax to a 2012 Audi Q5- I think it's pretty safe to say the Audi will be a much safer car for 1/4 the price.

If safety is important, someone with cheap new economy car money can instead get into a high end vehicle well known for its safety and quality, still for a lot less money.

Sure, if you are going to compare something over 30+ years old, and from a manufacturer not known for safety or quality in the first place, it will be a lot more dangerous.

Still, even with old stuff it varies. Late 80s Mercedes and Volvos, even base models, for example had most of the modern safety tech that other cars didn't see for a very long time.

Weight is also a huge factor- a big old truck with no regard for safety in its design is still a lot safer than a light economy car in a collision. Probably the safest cars on the market are still the over-engineered 20 year old full sized luxury SUVs that weigh as much as a 3/4 ton truck and have tons of heavy offroad gadgets they don't put on SUVs anymore.

Re: The rise of the disposable car

#190

Post by twojacobtwo »

snakeyjake wrote: post #127

The increase in total loss designations by insurance companies is due to the extremely high costs charged by the shops contracted by them to do repairs. The designation of a car as "totaled" is often an illusion and there is a thriving parallel market of auction houses, repair shops, salvage titling companies, and resellers who take the "ruined" cars, fix them, and sell them on the used market. Insurance companies co…

I've seen this market in action. My dad had his car written off years ago and he bought it back the day after he got his payout. We just went to the yard where it was to be 'scrapped' and paid about 1/4 of the payout total to take it home. The only damage was to the side panels and bumper, so we replaced those ourselves and he still had a fair chunk of money left over.

The guy at the yard said any car without damage to the frame or drive train is likely to be picked up by a used car shop or private resellers who do the repairs themselves and flip them.

Post reply on HN