←back to thread

The $25k car is going extinct?

(media.hubspot.com)
319 points pseudolus | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
BanterTrouble ◴[] No.44421284[source]
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 you would find in a door bell and finding faults is normally just tracing wires and using a multi-meter. I had issues with the brake lights / reverse lights not working, the issue turned out that the spade like connector in the fuse box was pushed through and was making partial contact. Price to fix this was £0.

EDIT: Just remembered this isn't accurate. I had to buy a new reverse light. The entire reverse light assembly was ~£20. So the price to fix was about £20. The light assembly itself was like a big bicycle light.

My newer car needs a OB-II scanner to diagnose anything with a phone app. While this is arguably quicker it can be misleading. Sometimes it will be telling you that something is malfunctioning but it is really the sensor itself. These sensors are £200-£300 a piece. Replacing 4 glow plug sensors cost me £800. I was paying essentially to make the "you must service your engine" light to go away. There was nothing wrong with engine itself.

replies(11): >>44421439 #>>44421637 #>>44421640 #>>44421647 #>>44421809 #>>44421901 #>>44422219 #>>44422987 #>>44423114 #>>44423901 #>>44426320 #
alerighi ◴[] No.44421647[source]
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 notice myself), the emergency call button (while everyone has a mobile phone these days), automatic regulating seats (pulling a lever is too much difficult), dual zone clima control (it's the same space in the same car, why I would want to set 2 different temperatures?), etc.

And in all this useless things that they put in a car, they no longer provide you with a spare tire, just an useless repair kit...

replies(6): >>44422137 #>>44422150 #>>44422763 #>>44424544 #>>44424697 #>>44430340 #
bumby ◴[] No.44422150[source]
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.
replies(6): >>44422212 #>>44422310 #>>44422464 #>>44422720 #>>44424022 #>>44428621 #
ekianjo ◴[] No.44422212[source]
Regulations will make cars unaffordable which is exactly what they are pushing for
replies(4): >>44422304 #>>44422475 #>>44422686 #>>44423602 #
threetonesun ◴[] No.44422304[source]
Tire sensors and backup cameras are dirt cheap though. Maybe lane warning and collision avoidance are a bit more but they’re both 10+ year old technology, they can’t cost that much. Also all of these things are good. Redoing the steering wheel or using 22” wheels or adding heating for each individual ass cheek… that I don’t need, and it adds to the cost.
replies(2): >>44422718 #>>44422768 #
BanterTrouble ◴[] No.44422768[source]
Anything that takes control away from me I am not interested in. I am both legally and financially liable for anything the car does. I am also not trusting my life to some poorly maintained software written by someone in another country.
replies(2): >>44423040 #>>44424092 #
LUmBULtERA ◴[] No.44423040[source]
Being legally and financially liable doesn't bring back the kid you ran over because you couldn't see them with your mirrors or turning your head...
replies(1): >>44423140 #
BanterTrouble ◴[] No.44423140[source]
Mandating driving aids (that often don't work properly) won't fix this problem either.

What does increase safety is better driver training. This has be ubiquitously proven BTW.

replies(1): >>44423204 #
LUmBULtERA ◴[] No.44423204{3}[source]
You've had backup cameras often fail? You must be very unlucky. After many years of driving and riding in cars with backup cameras, I have never seen one not work, let alone "often" not work.

Where is the ubiquitously proven support for the assertion that backup cameras don't increase safety?

replies(1): >>44423517 #
1. BanterTrouble ◴[] No.44423517{4}[source]
Deliberately re-framing an argument to force me to accept a conclusion, while misinterpreting what I said is disingenuous.

I've read several of your replies towards me and I can tell that you either unable or unwilling see my point of view. So there is no point in having a discussion with you.

replies(1): >>44427313 #
2. Dylan16807 ◴[] No.44427313[source]
If you want to use "often don't work properly" as an argument, then people are allowed to challenge that argument.

I guess they shouldn't have assumed you were speaking from experience, but I don't think that's a big deal. That's not forcing you to accept any conclusion. If it happens "often" you should have examples and/or data. If you don't then maybe you should reconsider if it actually is "often".

And they directly asked for data that it doesn't increase safety.

That's not unwillingness to see your point of view. If you provide quality evidence, you can win them over.