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

They Used To Last 50 Years

recraigslist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 877 posts

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#851

Post by ljf »

hx87 wrote: post #775
ljf wrote: post #693

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus 1 - my 2002 v70 had quarter a million on the clock and was very happy. 2.4 diesel was built to last. Not sure how the newer greener engines would be, all diesels now need a DPF that needs changing regularly, or a similar device to keep emissions down. I bought another (newers and sadly non Volvo) diesel, and I'm regretting it on a longevity POV - it's a great car now, but without pouring money into I'm not sure…

Any diesel engine that has SCR and isn't miserly on the urea should be good to go. It's the ones that cheap out and rely excessively on EGR that you should watch out for.

Mine is a citroen so uses a urea system - hopefully good then... It's a lovely family car and easy 53mpg - though as a cyclist and parent I'm now feeling guilty about particulates, but as I say I drive irregularly and mainly motorway miles.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#852

Post by luca_ing »

Arizhel wrote: post #833
jansan wrote: post #820

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO the most frustrating part about moving is having to carry stuff like dumbbells, counterweights etc, because they have only purpose: Being as heavy as possible.

With the counterweights, it'd be nice if it was easy to open up the machine and take the counterweight out. This would make it much easier to move a heavy machine up stairs.

Turns out it was, as I found out later.

I just have muscle than brains (and not particularly much muscle).

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#853

Post by pcvarmint »

ethbro wrote: post #267
foobarian wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem with the current market is that it's next to impossible to determine the quality of a machine. I would gladly pay $3000 for a washer if I could somehow tell that it will be better built, with higher quality metals, inner parts, and overall longer lasting. But it seems that the extra money these days just buys more flashy bells and whistles that just increase the chance of failure. Sadly my strategy has bee…

At the cheaper end of $3000, I've heard great things about Speed Queens. The linked review below is meh, but people who love them love them because they're apparently built like tanks. http://laundry.reviewed.com/content/speed-queen-awne92sp113t...

I bought a top-loading Speedqueen washer and dryer pair. My laundry closet isn't deep or tall enough for front-loading washers or stackable dryers.

They have worked well for over 4 years.

I have never caught on to front-loading washers.

The SpeedQueens are not EnergyStar, and you won't find reviews of them at Consumer Reports, but they are build well.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#854

Post by tokenizerrr »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #840
tokenizerrr wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're not responding to the parent comment at all? The comment: > I think it should be that way with cars. Just include a screen and some buttons, then let people connect their smart phones. Your situation as described: A built-in navigation system which is quite a bit more than just a screen and some buttons. It just happens to use your phone for data connection.

He's saying that he disagrees with the parent comment. That just a screen is great until it means you can't navigate.

Right. Except he doesn't just have a screen. He has some navigation system onboard that happens to use the phone's data system. Not just a screen. If it was just a screen you could hook your phone up to it and see the phone's screen. And then on the phone you use any of the many offline navigator apps. Which is perfectly viable, if it was just a screen, which he doesn't have.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#855

Post by nkrisc »

TheGrassyKnoll wrote: post #822
nkrisc wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to go out of my way to find a dumb TV. But when I found it, it was a few hundred cheaper than smart TVs of the same size. I saved money and headache!

Brand ? Link ?? (Thx)

I'll have to double check the model later but it's an RCA 55" LED display. I don't remember exactly how much I paid at the time, it was a few years ago.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#856

Post by Tepix »

richthegeek wrote: post #604
Tepix wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember when I disassembled a VCR I was suprised to find a lead weight in it.

Presumably to help dampen vibrations from all the spinning parts?

You're probably correct. At the time I thought it was done to make it feel higher quality.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#857

Post by vectorjohn »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #639
fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to disagree with this premise as it pertains to automobile engines. Automobile engines have improved tremendously in "lifespan" or Time Before OverHaul. In the '70's and '80's it was a challenge to get an engine to last 100,000 miles. They needed frequent oil changes, spark plugs replaced, had other short-life wearable parts (ignition parts), water pumps to replace, fuel pumps to replace, alternators went bad,…

This is why I'm rather afraid of Tesla and their batteries - you know batteries, whether intentional or not, only last for about 1000 charge cycles, or in the case of Tesla for about 7-10 years, before they have to be replaced - which won't be cheap. This will be an Issue that will be highlighted very soon. We'll see a huge devaluation in secondhand Tesla cars, since replacing the battery will be more expensive than…

The fear of battery degradation is way way overblown. You'll drive at least a few hundred thousand miles before you might "need" to replace it [1]. And even then, you could keep going.

[1] https://electrek.co/2016/06/06/tesla-model-s-battery-pack-da...

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#858

Post by hx87 »

ljf wrote: post #851
hx87 wrote: post #775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any diesel engine that has SCR and isn't miserly on the urea should be good to go. It's the ones that cheap out and rely excessively on EGR that you should watch out for.

Mine is a citroen so uses a urea system - hopefully good then... It's a lovely family car and easy 53mpg - though as a cyclist and parent I'm now feeling guilty about particulates, but as I say I drive irregularly and mainly motorway miles.

The urea system allows the engine to run lean and hot without excess NOx emissions, which reduces particulate emissions. The particulate filter should take care of the rest.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#859

Post by Arizhel »

jimmies wrote: post #355
IgorPartola wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Came here to say the same thing. I am always skeptical when people use the phrase "they don't make them like they used to" because the reason they used to make them like that is either (a) they had to hand make them and it wa super expensive, (b) they didn't have cheaper materials so they used thick and strong stuff just so it wouldn't fall apart before being delivered, (c) they didn't have the infrastructure to repa…

>jackets I used to buy a nice looking faux-leather jacket from Zara three years ago. The faux leather layer started discoloring making it look like shit after a year and completely peeling off after a year. Worst shit ever. I learned that I have very little need for fancy clothes, and I don't care about styles. But I learned to buy leather jackets after that. A good (not nice) leather jacket is very much worth the mo…

That's what you get for buying fake leather. A polyester jacket will perform better and be lighter, and not need maintenance. It won't look like leather, though. That's why you're having problems: you're trying to get something that looks like leather, because you want that style, not because it actually performs better.

Re: They Used To Last 50 Years

#860

Post by pault »

gue5t wrote: post #699
admax88q wrote: post #654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if global salaries become more equal in the future, > the lowest wages will just move elsewhere. Uhh.

The richest capitalists are planning a move to Mars, and presumably instituting (effective) slave labor or indentured servitude there.

Yeah but if you finish your contract on mars you get the anti-aging treatment for free.
Post reply on HN