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

Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

autoexpress.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 325 posts

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#121

Post by AshamedCaptain »

mk89 wrote: post #116
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #112

The really offensive part of this kind of thing is that you already paid for it. Like if you wanted to buy a regular car and you could get the engine with turbo then those are two different cars. The latter costing more because it has more/better stuff in it. This is all fine and good. In this case, all the cars have turbo and you pay to have it turned on or not. The cost of the turbo is in the cost of the normal car…

As I said in other comments, this is already happening since years (and I mentioned Ford, but literally everyone else does it). Car manufacturers already give you the same powerful engine that you can't afford/don't want to buy and "shrink" it with SW. If you jailbreak it, you lose the warranty and bye bye insurance. You should not think that you're paying more for getting less. You should think that finally you can…

That is not true, and even TFA points at why that can't be true: to your insurance, to vehicle taxes, etc. you declare the power _of the installed engine_, not of whatever software interlocks you, your tax advisor, or the manufacturer have decided to install on it.

TFA already says the car is registered at the maximum power level regardless of the actual software cap. So you are _quite literally_ paying for it, at least in terms of increased insurance and taxes.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#122

Post by lurk2 »

mk89 wrote: post #116
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #112

The really offensive part of this kind of thing is that you already paid for it. Like if you wanted to buy a regular car and you could get the engine with turbo then those are two different cars. The latter costing more because it has more/better stuff in it. This is all fine and good. In this case, all the cars have turbo and you pay to have it turned on or not. The cost of the turbo is in the cost of the normal car…

As I said in other comments, this is already happening since years (and I mentioned Ford, but literally everyone else does it). Car manufacturers already give you the same powerful engine that you can't afford/don't want to buy and "shrink" it with SW. If you jailbreak it, you lose the warranty and bye bye insurance. You should not think that you're paying more for getting less. You should think that finally you can…

> Car manufacturers already give you the same powerful engine that you can't afford/don't want to buy and "shrink" it with SW. If you jailbreak it, you lose the warranty and bye bye insurance.

What was the point of doing this prior to selling a subscription to unlock it?

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#123

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

mk89 wrote: post #116
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #112

The really offensive part of this kind of thing is that you already paid for it. Like if you wanted to buy a regular car and you could get the engine with turbo then those are two different cars. The latter costing more because it has more/better stuff in it. This is all fine and good. In this case, all the cars have turbo and you pay to have it turned on or not. The cost of the turbo is in the cost of the normal car…

As I said in other comments, this is already happening since years (and I mentioned Ford, but literally everyone else does it). Car manufacturers already give you the same powerful engine that you can't afford/don't want to buy and "shrink" it with SW. If you jailbreak it, you lose the warranty and bye bye insurance. You should not think that you're paying more for getting less. You should think that finally you can…

> You should not think that you're paying more for getting less. You should think that finally you can now enable more in your engine if you want to. Until today, you couldn't.

I can think the way I want to think. I'm not going to pretend that I'm not paying more and getting less when that is what's happening!

> You just had to know that your car is more powerful than the papers say and live with that.

Or I voice my opposition to this sort of bullshit in the hopes that enough like-minded people can gather enough force to make it change for the better.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#124

Post by stego-tech »

afarah1 wrote: post #71
stego-tech wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cars already have a recurring “subscription” in the form of fuel, maintenance, repairs, insurance, and cleaning. Unless more companies are pulling a Volvo and offering a comprehensive maintenance subscription that covers all the above via a monthly fee, then they can collectively FOAD. EDIT: I am keenly aware how cars work and don’t need eSplaining on them. I articulate my point better in a comment deeper in the thre…

Poor comparison, none of these are attached to the manufacturer, you can and usually do get these services from other companies of your choice. You don't need VW-Gas(TM) from VW-Station(TM) in your tank for the car to run.

That’s…that’s literally what my point was. I didn’t think my snark and vitriol was papering over my opinion of subscriptions in vehicles as being awful things or of maintenance items being cheaper outside of dealerships, but instead merely highlighting that the only really acceptable subscription model was something like Volvo offered - a single monthly or yearly price for handling most maintenance and repair items.

I’m never - let me be clear - never going to condone proprietary bullshit like specialized gas or electricity or what-have-you. But if car dealers and makers really want recurring revenue, just take the pain out of maintenance and repairs via subscription. Most people I know of (across multiple income strata) would gladly pay for that peace of mind instead of fretting over a repair bill.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#125

Post by lurk2 »

jqpabc123 wrote: post #28

Forget Netflix Better idea --- forget Volkswagen. This is just one example of anti-consumer antics bordering on extortion that have been building for a very long time. The overall idea is simple --- reduce the sticker price to a competitive level and try to increase profits with prepaid maintenance, insurance, data collection and other "subscription" services. In VW's case, this appears to be an act of desperation. C…

> The overall idea is simple --- reduce the sticker price to a competitive level and try to increase profits with prepaid maintenance, insurance, data collection and other "subscription" services.

Passenger airline carriers and printer manufacturers have a similar model of using their flagship products (flights and printers) as loss leaders for their actual products (credit cards and ink).

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#128

Post by tgaj »

AshamedCaptain wrote: post #121
mk89 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said in other comments, this is already happening since years (and I mentioned Ford, but literally everyone else does it). Car manufacturers already give you the same powerful engine that you can't afford/don't want to buy and "shrink" it with SW. If you jailbreak it, you lose the warranty and bye bye insurance. You should not think that you're paying more for getting less. You should think that finally you can…

That is not true, and even TFA points at why that can't be true: to your insurance, to vehicle taxes, etc. you declare the power _of the installed engine_, not of whatever software interlocks you, your tax advisor, or the manufacturer have decided to install on it. TFA already says the car is registered at the maximum power level regardless of the actual software cap. So you are _quite literally_ paying for it, at le…

It is true, the performance of the engine depends on the version of the software - manufacturer declares that this engine with this software can achieve this maximum performance and the software can't be legally nad officially tuned or changed. Btw in my country tax depends on engine displacement so it doesn't really change anything.

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#129

Post by i_am_proteus »

whartung wrote: post #104
mk89 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I prefer this to what other car makers do. Example: Ford. In many cases they ship 1 engine type and restrict it by software. This way they reduce manufacturing costs, I understand, it's just unfair that you have the same engine of someone with officially more horsepower and all you can do is cheat (with software that enables the feature) and hence say goodbye to your insurance.

I have one of these, but it’s not a Ford. It’s a BMW motorcycle. At the time, the F-series came in the F-750 and F-850 models. The motors are identical, the computers restrict the top end horsepower. But, those aren’t the only differences. The 850 is more designed for off road than the 750. The bike is taller, large front wheel, spoked wheels. I’m have the 750, the more street oriented version. But here’s the thing.…

Same thing on the current F-800 and F-900: identical engine blocks, different power outputs, F-900 comes with taller suspension, spoked wheels, and so forth.

I believe part of the rationale is that Euro A2 licenses permit a "restrictor kit" to reduce motor power below 47 hp, but only if maximum horsepower is less than 94 hp (double the limit). One can buy an F-800 with a restrictor, and then remove the restrictor once one has obtained the upgraded license.

Now, looking at the motor torque and power curves, most of that extra power comes in the high RPMs. In practical riding of BMW twins, I find that I rarely place the motor into the high RPMs, because the torque curve is nice and flat and there's plenty of pull in the low range :)

Re: Volkswagen locks horsepower behind paid subscription

#130

Post by simonh »

Esophagus4 wrote: post #62
austhrow743 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would this saving in particular get captured by the manufacturer?

I’ve always wanted to see the data for this. Very curious to know - are the efficiencies of scale being passed on, or is this just additional revenue for manufacturers?

If it’s just extra revenue that implies that, if the manufacturer actually made 2 physically different models, they could just sell the cheaper model at the expensive model price and then charge extra for the upgrade on top of that. In other words there is zero customer price sensitivity. That seems unlikely.
Post reply on HN