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

The $25k car is going extinct?

media.hubspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#491

Post by lotsofpulp »

leakycap wrote: post #315
dagw wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Driving a car until the wheels fall off generally doesn't make financial sense. Keeping an old car on the road gets really expensive unless you have the space, time and skills to do all the work yourself. Then there is the opportunity cost of not having access to your car for days/weeks at a time while it is being repaired. Finally you have the stress of not being quite sure if your car will start when you turn the k…

Same with technology. If you aren't rich, selling around the time the next model comes out is actually a great way to avoid paying full price for your modern tech. With Apple stuff, waiting more than 1-2 cycles means you've missed the ability to recoup most of your costs AND you got to use an old device for an extra year... yay?

More like extra 2 or 3 years, so yes, yay. Consumption is consumption, you don't get things for free.

If the phone only lasted 1 more year, then the resale price of the phone would reflect that. Either the collective market of buyers lacks the information to evaluate this (doubt), or you got lucky finding the one buyer willing to overpay.

You also always pay full price, because when you buy a new phone (or anything), you always have the option to buy the used or keep using the old one. Cost is opportunity cost, which is defined as your choice minus your second best choice.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#492

Post by habnds »

scotty79 wrote: post #285
ajkjk wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the question we're asking is why the price of cars went up. "Inflation" isn't an answer. Inflation is what we call the price of cars going up. It still happens for a reason...

Inflation is a result of too much money being created than what is needed by the growth of the economy. Average price increase that we use to estimate it is just a useful proxy. Inflation is always the main contribution to price increase. It only makes sense to compare price raise above or below inflation if you want to unearth factors specific to any given product or industry.

Inflation is completely possible with no change in money supply. This is handled in economics with the idea of the "velocity of money" which conceptually captures the large range of factors by which prices can increase due to factors beyond money supply, for example an energy price shock or changing consumer and business expectations that result in changes in spending and investment patterns.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#494

Post by potato3732842 »

cornholio wrote: post #469
potato3732842 wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they're not though. Buyers are juggling many more criteria and safety is only a "nice to have" after fitness for purpose is achieved. Like no amount of internet fanboys screeching about Volvo's safety record will make someone who wants a roadster buy one over a Miata. While I'm sure there is some amount of the affect you're describing the lion's share of it is likely CAFE rules favoring larger footprint vehicl…

> It is by the simple physics Is this a personal theory, a hunch, or do you have data or citations? > of having more distance to dissipate force over and less distance between the occupants and stuff in the cabin. So what we need are bigger vehicles made out of lighter materials, to increase the distance and reduce the forces, perhaps some comically large Styrofoam bumpers protecting our bikes? Now, I can get behind…

>Is this a personal theory, a hunch, or do you have data or citations?

Find any "professional" talking on record about small car safety and they will lament the reduced space for crumple zones, reduced distance from head to structure, etc.

>Another substantial segment is driven by the "perception of masculinity" their large vehicles provides. You couldn't make up this level of lameness.

I suspect the number of people who see a big truck as projecting masculinity is in fact smaller than the people who enjoy that other people will assume they bought the truck for that reason and dislike or be offended by it.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#495

Post by dismalaf »

CalRobert wrote: post #334
dismalaf wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a big part of owning a vehicle is summer roadtrips, ski vacations, visiting family, moving stuff. An SUV is simply more convenient. I've also found road maintenance is getting worse where I live, it's almost necessary having an SUV or truck just to navigate the suburbs. Also the (semi) compact crossover has kind of killed the compact car. You get more space, better ground clearance, for a decent price.

What you don’t mention are the increased negative externalities of your larger vehicle, including a higher chance of killing people, more road space used for parking, worse visibility for others, etc.

Most SUVs (crossovers) have the same or smaller footprint than the equivalent sized sedan.

Keep in mind nowadays most SUVs aren't trucks with the cab extending to the rear instead of a bed. They're cars that are slightly lifted with a taller profile. As an example, I have a Hyundai Elantra, which is longer than the equivalent Hyundai SUV (Tucsan)...

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#496

Post by potato3732842 »

Orygin wrote: post #480
potato3732842 wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Flex is close to identical in form factor and size to a pre-oil crisis station wagon. Probably has less ground clearance too. It takes the honesty of a professional political to call it an SUV.

Are you comparing to the car market of 50 years past to justify a vehicle that is more akin to a tank than a modern regular car? Like you say, the term itself is meaningless but it does encompass the current class of vehicles that are needlessly big, heavy, and so high of the ground that some tanks literally have better forward vision than those SUVs. I don't really care what Americans drove 50 years ago, I care that…

I'm comparing to pre-oil crisis land yachts because I don't want a bunch of nit picking jerks to complain that it's wider than the 1990ish county squire or caprice wagon I would have preferred to to compare it to on account of the comparable internal dimensions.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#497

Post by potato3732842 »

a_c wrote: post #431
BanterTrouble wrote: post #382

I work on my own cars now (as a hobby really) and one of the reasons the new cars are so expensive is they are much more complicated. A lot of this seems to be over-engineering IMO. This is alluded to in the article, but not explicitly stated. The cars I work on are from the early 90s and everything is very simple to understand. e.g. Electronics are normally simple circuits that aren't much more complicated than what…

Any recommendation how to start learning repairing a car? I have absolutely zero experience. A friend of mine said just learn to change a tyre first and I have been procrastinating since.

Buy POS 30yo car and just start getting it in shape to be daily drivable. You can typically screw things up three times over before it'd be cheaper to pay someone.

All you really need is the internet. China tools via Amazon are "fine".

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#498

Post by Hamuko »

alerighi wrote: post #432
BanterTrouble wrote: post #382

I work on my own cars now (as a hobby really) and one of the reasons the new cars are so expensive is they are much more complicated. A lot of this seems to be over-engineering IMO. This is alluded to in the article, but not explicitly stated. The cars I work on are from the early 90s and everything is very simple to understand. e.g. Electronics are normally simple circuits that aren't much more complicated than what…

Yes, if they would make a basic car like in the past I would buy it. Everyone has to sell you too much, I want a simple car, I don't want either the stereo, I will add my own later (I can put it one that is better than the factory one for a cheaper price, but in a modern car replacing the stereo is almost impossible). There are a ton of useless sensors, the sensor that tells you if you have a flat tire (I think I can…

I presume you're gonna buy a Slate truck?

https://www.slate.auto/en

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#499

Post by Ray20 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #429
puzzlingcaptcha wrote: post #261

You can still buy a new subcompact car (like a Renault Clio or Skoda Fabia) in Europe for under 20k EUR. The more interesting question is why these cars disappeared in the US. And while many of the factors discussed here are true for both EU and US (inflation, interest rates, manufacturer profit margins etc) I am surprised no one mentioned the 'SUV loophole' of US regulations that effectively boosted the SUVs (off-ro…

> I am surprised no one mentioned the 'SUV loophole' of US regulations that effectively boosted the SUVs (off-road vehicles are classified as non-passenger automobiles with everything that entails, notably much less stringent emission standards) and made the small cars unprofitable to make in comparison. This has become the irrelevant part because "does it have an electric motor in the powertrain" has become more imp…

>People who can do the math realize that paying more up front for a hybrid or full electric is paying less long-term.

Can they? In long term maintainability decides. And hybrids usually has it with maintainability pretty bad. Large area of potential breaking, expansive spare parts usually with strong vendor-lock.

Hybrids are very costly in maintainability, even if you are privileged elite that buys hybrid and in two years resell it and buy brand new car, even then hybrids looses comparatively big percent of its original cost.

So people that buys hybrids, usually CAN NOT do the math.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#500

Post by bumby »

alerighi wrote: post #432
BanterTrouble wrote: post #382

I work on my own cars now (as a hobby really) and one of the reasons the new cars are so expensive is they are much more complicated. A lot of this seems to be over-engineering IMO. This is alluded to in the article, but not explicitly stated. The cars I work on are from the early 90s and everything is very simple to understand. e.g. Electronics are normally simple circuits that aren't much more complicated than what…

Yes, if they would make a basic car like in the past I would buy it. Everyone has to sell you too much, I want a simple car, I don't want either the stereo, I will add my own later (I can put it one that is better than the factory one for a cheaper price, but in a modern car replacing the stereo is almost impossible). There are a ton of useless sensors, the sensor that tells you if you have a flat tire (I think I can…

Some of those “useless” sensors like tire pressure or backup camera are required by law. Even if you get a bare bones hatchback (manual transmission, manual locks, manual windows etc.) they’ll be forced to include those.
Post reply on HN