Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you mean the range? If that's the case then I agree, I don't know what they were thinking. If not then I guess it's a lot different from the 2019 Mazda 6 I own. It's been great. Not what the parent is looking for probably but it has no gimmicks - I find every convenience usable. The adaptive lights, the active cruise, lane assist, automatic transmission, keyless system, seat memory, HUD, 360 cam. Yes, I know these…
The whole electric part is shit. The range is low but it would be manageable if the charging speed wasn't so slow. The consumption is very high, the performances very poor. It's a front wheel drive, a lot of space is not available for storage because of the design. And it's expensive.
Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
311–320 of 340 posts
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
I drive a 2019 Volvo as well (bought in 2020), and the "safety" features have activated for me maybe a hundred times! Out of those, safety system was helpful once (arguably) in that it reacted and activated the brakes the same time I pressed them (so it still wasn't really needed, but I can see how it would have helped when I was less attentive due to eg planning to switch lanes and looking at side mirrors). All the…
> All the other times, it's causing me frustration and pain. It signals a collision as I am avoiding potholes in a tight one-way street and cars parked on both sides of the road (yep, I am going to slam into that parked car for sure — at least it did not forcibly brake which would definitely cause cars behind me to slam into me). The only time I've gotten false positives on the collision avoidance was when I was goin…
I find the braking is far too abrupt. I can see the car in front of me slowing down, but the system will continue accelerating until some magical distance threshold before it begins to brake.
In addition the follow distance doesn't seem to be dynamic relative to my speed. When I increase the follow distance, the car leaves too much distance at lower speeds, but increasing the follow distance causes tail-gating at higher speeds.
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can actually be worse, trapping heat in. But yea, completely non-functional. Remove it if the clips are broken. You aren't missing anything.
They're not "non-functional" at all. They reduce wind noise, increase mileage particularly in colder weather (and speed up engine warmup time), protect the engine from road debris/road salt/water, and reduce lift generated at highway speeds. "Trapping heat in" isn't a problem in almost any modern vehicle.
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can actually be worse, trapping heat in. But yea, completely non-functional. Remove it if the clips are broken. You aren't missing anything.
I assume they are talking about the splash guard / aeroplate underneath the engine which helps with MPGs to some extent. The plastic engine cover doesn't even need to be touched during an oil change.
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#315I have a 2004 buick park ave and i couldn't be happier with it.
3.8 series II. That thing will live forever!! For grad school, I got a cousin of it, a 2002 olds. These w body, V6 GMs are so smooth!! So pleasant on the highway! And get 30 mpg? I can’t bring myself to get rid of the thing. In fact I’m a bit obsessive about keeping it nice. It’s so inexpensive to mantón and run, and it is a good, spacious, smooth car. Not luxurious, but still quiet and smooth. Not sporty, yet it pas…
my dog ate part of the interior. it needed a new mass air flow sensor and water pump this year and probably a new traction control unit before the winter gets bad.
its supercharged, so the transmission is being run into the ground. it's started to not shift correctly, so that's probably gonna be curtains once that goes.
but overall and extremely smooth ride and up until recently had quite the pickup.
I'd get another, but they really don't make them like this anymore. I believe the newest column shifter/boat type thing you can still get is a 2013 chevy impala with a nice trim package.
After that it's floor shifters and touch screens. very sad.
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#316Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And I don't like them. They're not there for you to like - they're there for the people you might kill with your car. > the government taking away our choice... ...to plough into people with your car.
I don't think those devices reduce the number of accidents, so I disagree with your premise. I think they serve to help slowly roll out self-driving capabilities.
Do you have a source for this?
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
They made seatbelts mandatory too. Yuck! JK! These system do save lives though. Driving is a privilege, not a right. So I’m fine with these mandates as they don’t really get in my way.
> Driving is a privilege, not a right Why is that?
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's a dying breed though, complicated "driver assist" systems are becoming standard or even mandated :(. It saves lives, even if the systems are not 100% effective.
You know, actually paying attention to driving saves lives too. But apparently that is not an option. Driving is just too big of a distraction from playing with instagram...
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
I drive a 2019 Volvo as well (bought in 2020), and the "safety" features have activated for me maybe a hundred times! Out of those, safety system was helpful once (arguably) in that it reacted and activated the brakes the same time I pressed them (so it still wasn't really needed, but I can see how it would have helped when I was less attentive due to eg planning to switch lanes and looking at side mirrors). All the…
> All the other times, it's causing me frustration and pain. It signals a collision as I am avoiding potholes in a tight one-way street and cars parked on both sides of the road (yep, I am going to slam into that parked car for sure — at least it did not forcibly brake which would definitely cause cars behind me to slam into me). The only time I've gotten false positives on the collision avoidance was when I was goin…
I may have been going too fast for the collision avoidance system, but not for the situation: cars are parked on both sides, and frequently one or two cars will stick out a bit more than the others (by eg. 70cm) — I wasn't going faster than 30km/h (20mph) in dry, daylight conditions. If you avoid a pothole that turns your car into that parked car sticking out which is a bit ahead (at least 50m), it could signal a collision. At least that was my guess what was happening, I never felt at any risk whatsoever.
> I haven't experienced this personally, but a false positive here doesn't really have any downsides.
Oh, it does. When it happens, I worry if there's something I missed, so I spend another few seconds re-evaluating the situation around the car. As I didn't miss anything, cars do show up behind me in the lane I was entering into, and since my car is stopped only third of the way into the lane, most drivers coming up behind me start "overtaking" my protruding car, and I am in a much worse position. In city driving in traffic-heavy streets, one's got to use any time they've got available or impatient drivers around you start making even worse situations for themselves and you.
> This situation sounds like you may be driving faster than the flow of traffic, or the follow distance is not set far enough.
The situation I am describing is actually from a very low traffic situation on the highway, so there was no "flow of traffic". When a truck going 100km/h decides to overtake another truck going 95km/h on the highway, my car going at the speed limit of 130 km/h seems unable to see that from way ahead like a driver does, and it maintains the speed until way too late.
Contrary to that, if you are driving 130km/h and approach a car driving 125km/h, it starts slowing down probably at the same distance, which is now too soon.
Not to mention that my experience on European highways is that the when there's a lot of traffic, the "flow of traffic" speed is ~140km/h on roads with 130 limit (when I was driving 110-130km/h, I'd be constantly slowing down and speeding up, making for a much more exhausting drive — you can probably go down to 95 km/h to achieve a similar "flow" behind a slow-moving truck). Pilot Assist, however, only works up to exactly 139km/h even on really well-marked roads — this is perfectly fine if you ask me (the limit might be too high even), but we are talking about the state of assistive tech.
> You can also do the simple stay-at-this-speed cruise control, or adaptive cruise control without the automatic steering capabilities.
FWIW, the behaviour I was describing is part of the adaptive cruise system that seems to behave the same whether Pilot Assist is turned on or off.
But sure, you can still turn most of these off. I was just commenting on how bad the current implementation is in my car (2019 high-specced Volvo sedan), and that I can understand why someone might not want any of these today.
Re: Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am guessing you mean automatic braking in inattentive driver's car, because automatic braking in attentive driver's car works with mostly the same data as the driver themselves (it needs to predict collision, and to predict it, it needs to see the approaching car, estimate the speed, likelihood it will stop...). Automated system would have advantage there only where it can better "see" things (eg. LIDAR in pitch da…
I recommend watching TeslaCam on YouTube - there are a few videos where the AI reacts faster than any human could, even a very attentive one. It's by no means perfect (and the city beta is kind of a mess), but the highway safety bits are very functional and useful.
Reaction time in all the car-braking studies is usually measured at 0.2-1s.
That's indeed the time a computer can use to their advantage, and maybe Teslas do, but many in-car systems today are not that fast, and esp not the one in my Volvo. All the things it does it seems to do them slightly later than I'd like to for a seamless, defensive drive.
It's all a matter of cost of per-unit hardware (processing power), development time and state of the art.
We'll get there, but we are not there today.