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

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#921

Post by SoftTalker »

LUmBULtERA wrote: post #646
BanterTrouble wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tyre pressure sensor you can make an argument to be required by law as uneven tyre pressures can negatively effect handling. However the backup camera being required by law is absolutely ridiculous. You can just either use the mirrors or turn your head.

I'm pretty sure backup cameras are required because they reduced children being run over and killed... You can't see a small kid behind your car with by just mirrors or turning your head.

Many cars and especially SUVs and trucks are tall enough in front that you could not see a small child right in front of the vehicle. Wide A-pillars also create blind spots that can hide pedestrians and bicycles. Where are the calls for forward- and side- facing cameras to eliminate this claimed risk?

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#922

Post by piuantiderp »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #726
ekianjo wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulations will make cars unaffordable which is exactly what they are pushing for

Who is they? Why would they "push for" that?

Owners of car companies, to make more money. More disposable, more expensive cars, in less easily entered industry. How else will they keep BYD and others from coming in?

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#923

Post by SoftTalker »

wombatpm wrote: post #218
SoftTalker wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chicago. Probably a few other big cities.

Yes, but you have to live in the City. The suburbs are impossible without a car.

Well, around Chicago some of the smaller suburbs have a nice little downtown and are on a train line into the city. If you lived near that you might get by just using online shopping and uber if you occasionally needed to go somewhere. There is bus service too but it's not that good.

But in general, and in the larger suburbs yes you would be pretty inconvenienced without a car. But that is true of suburbs everywhere.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#924

Post by MarcelOlsz »

friendzis wrote: post #246
MarcelOlsz wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand you could have bought a mint condition E30 late model for $10k euro.

Have a car that's effectively uninsurable and then spend months sourcing parts that are not chinesium whenever something breaks? For the same 10k you can get F30 which is not even in the same league as a daily people mover and is actually repairable.

I pay $130 a month to insure my E30. All OEM parts are 98% available and you can do tons of repairs yourself if you're so inclined, it's the Thinkpad of cars. I've run my E30 with raised suspension and some hardcore winter tires and I got through some insanely tough northern winters no problem. I get all my parts via FCPEuro. Here [0] you can see all parts in the car in a 3D way along with prices. Also has a Bentley service manual making maintenance a breeze. Brilliant car/community. Also gets 7.0L/100KM 40 years later.

[0] https://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/partgrp?id=1113-USA-04-1991...

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#925

Post by vkou »

Loudergood wrote: post #804
dgfitz wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't replace a tire sensor without getting it coded. Complete bullshit.

The tool is like $10.

The tool is $10, the two minute walkaround of undoing your pressure caps, measuring the pressure, and redoing them, every trip, adds ~1000 minutes/year.

... Or you could just have the manufacturer spend $30 to embed this into the car's dash.

For similar reasons, your car also comes with a fuel gauge, and doesn't require hand-cranking to start.

If you really want car prices to come down, have the manufacturers fire most of their workers and replace them with robots (I'm not sure if the robots will make for a good consumer base, but that's someone else' problem.)

Look at a BYD car factory versus any one ran by the American auto dinosaurs, and that's where you'll find the price delta.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#926

Post by vkou »

piuantiderp wrote: post #922
knowaveragejoe wrote: post #726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is they? Why would they "push for" that?

Owners of car companies, to make more money. More disposable, more expensive cars, in less easily entered industry. How else will they keep BYD and others from coming in?

The average age of a car on the American roads has been increasing every year.

How does this square with your theory that cars are becoming 'more disposable'? They seem to be running longer than ever before.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#927

Post by vkou »

SoftTalker wrote: post #921
LUmBULtERA wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure backup cameras are required because they reduced children being run over and killed... You can't see a small kid behind your car with by just mirrors or turning your head.

Many cars and especially SUVs and trucks are tall enough in front that you could not see a small child right in front of the vehicle. Wide A-pillars also create blind spots that can hide pedestrians and bicycles. Where are the calls for forward- and side- facing cameras to eliminate this claimed risk?

Anyone who has ever driven a car will note that they have ~200 degree peripheral vision to observe things moving in front of you, while the limited FOV of your mirrors does not provide that for what's behind you.

Unless you really struggle with object permanence, a child somehow ending up in front of you without you seeing them is not a frequent occurrence, compared to one ending up behind you.

But yes, American cars are stupid big and should be smaller.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#928

Post by harambae »

segmondy wrote: post #754
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…

I read an article yesterday about how a simple nail puncture besides affecting tire sensor light, throws off traction control, abs, and all sorts of computing. what would be a 15 minutes patch and go job turns into an hour job of resetting computers and sensors.

I recently had to replace a traction control sensor on my BMW -- it was a pain (and would've been expensive if I had a pro do it), so I can relate.

But it's worth noting that modern traction-control makes life wildly safer for the average driver up north. I was driving an icy Vermont ski road with winter tires, but (because I hadn't yet fixed the sensor) no traction control. There were 2 pretty terrifying moments and I'm an experienced driver. Your average American can't even drive manual, there's no way they're compensating for low-traction winter mountain roads properly in all cases. I'd rank it more critical than any of the backup camera, TPMS or FCW features, and maybe on par with ABS for those of us in cold areas.

Now if I lived in LA, I'd just hold down the "DTC" button to disable traction control on bootup and forget about it.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#929

Post by creeble »

standeven wrote: post #914
matwood wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great comment because I wondering the same thing. Do people not do any of those things on their own anymore? At a minimum, changing the oil was something I did with my dad as a kid. The hardest thing I've done was probably change a starter. ICE's are conceptually pretty simple. Anyone who has built a computer should be able to do basic car maintenance if they want to. The electronics is what makes newer cars more com…

It probably varies between EV manufacturers, but my Tesla Model 3 has been the easiest vehicle to self maintain that I’ve owned yet. Mostly due to how little maintenance there is, but also because of the completely open and online factory service manuals and parts manuals. It’s ridiculously easy to look up a part number, order it online from wherever is most convenient, and follow the steps in the manual to replace i…

I had the opposite experience with my 10-year-old Model S.

Most parts could only come from Tesla, including the Bilstein struts (a part number Bilstein refuses to sell to anyone but Tesla). $900 per corner.

USB port between the console? $400. I found a used one on eBay, fortunately.

When the wheel rotation sensor receiver went bad, it cost $2500 for them to install and reprogram the replacement, because they "upgraded" to a different mfr. When that one started to go bad (water ingress, which wasn't cured by the new part), I sold the car and said good riddance.

Re: The $25k car is going extinct?

#930

Post by bumby »

vkou wrote: post #926
piuantiderp wrote: post #922

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owners of car companies, to make more money. More disposable, more expensive cars, in less easily entered industry. How else will they keep BYD and others from coming in?

The average age of a car on the American roads has been increasing every year. How does this square with your theory that cars are becoming 'more disposable'? They seem to be running longer than ever before.

To play devils advocate, “disposable” doesn’t necessarily mean “unreliable”. It just means that it’s harder to fix once it does break.
Post reply on HN