Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    The $25k car is going extinct?

    (media.hubspot.com)
    319 points pseudolus | 12 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
    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 #
    toxik ◴[] No.44422464[source]
    They are required by law in no small part because car manufacturers want it to be. Compliance is a moat.
    replies(3): >>44422713 #>>44422746 #>>44424579 #
    __s ◴[] No.44422746[source]
    Rearview cameras are effective: https://www.iihs.org/research-areas/bibliography/ref/2130

    I agree with having simpler SKUs, but rearview camera is not where to start

    replies(2): >>44423172 #>>44424346 #
    1. polski-g ◴[] No.44424346[source]
    Funny story about this.

    There was a woman who backed over her own kid in the driveway. For some reason, she was not imprisoned for vehicular manslaughter. So instead of not being in prison, she spent the next half decade lobbying congress to make backup cameras mandatory. And it happened. So now everyone's car costs $3k more.

    It would have been cheaper to put her imprison than impose a $3k cost per every car sold in America since 2018.

    Lots more people need to be imprisoned for manslaughter, and lots of people need their license taken away for "backing crashes".

    replies(5): >>44424461 #>>44424595 #>>44424792 #>>44435559 #>>44436887 #
    2. ceejayoz ◴[] No.44424461[source]
    https://www.cars.com/articles/lawmakers-to-jump-start-backup...

    > A 2012 Harris poll suggests that the public agress with the mandate despite the technology’s costs. NHTSA says adding a backup camera to a car without an existing display screen will cost around $159 to $203 per vehicle, shrinking to between $58 and $88 for vehicles that already use display screens. The Harris poll found that consumers care more about safety features like backup cameras than they do about multimedia systems.

    I'm not sure where you're getting your $3k backup cameras from; the camera is a $30 part, and pretty much every new car has a screen in it already.

    replies(1): >>44427614 #
    3. itsoktocry ◴[] No.44424595[source]
    >So now everyone's car costs $3k more.

    $3000 for a backup camera, okay.

    replies(1): >>44454311 #
    4. Dylan16807 ◴[] No.44424792[source]
    You know prison sentences won't save any children, right?

    And taking away licenses is acting too late.

    5. umbra07 ◴[] No.44427614[source]
    People don't understand and appreciate additional costs until they actually have to pay them. You can see this play out over and over again with additional tax increases jn response for new and improved public services - or customers asking businesses to do a "Made in America" product line, but then not putting their money where their mouth is and actually paying the upcharge for a MiA product.
    replies(2): >>44429351 #>>44430357 #
    6. builtsimple ◴[] No.44429351{3}[source]
    ill never appreciated paying an additional costs
    7. dzhiurgis ◴[] No.44430357{3}[source]
    I’d say 99% of drivers care about backup cameras more than about how hard it’s to replace spark plugs.
    8. dessimus ◴[] No.44435559[source]
    You do not think a mother killing her own child is punishment enough? It's very unlikely she intentionally planned to kill her child in this manner to cover it up as an accident.

    Besides backup cameras have use beyond just making sure a child is not behind you, such as assisting with parking, or seeing if there is oncoming traffic when there is a larger vehicle parked next to you.

    9. Infinity315 ◴[] No.44436887[source]
    A similar argument could be made for any safety feature that adds cost to vehicles--literally, all of them. If a death is preventable and adds on a relatively inconsequential amount to the cost of a vehicle, then it is the morally correct choice optimize for safety.
    replies(1): >>44439402 #
    10. tmn ◴[] No.44439402[source]
    The logic doesn’t scale. You can’t impose arbitrary and subjectives thresholds to gloss over this fact. The obvious conclusion is that safety is one of many moral factors to balance.
    11. polski-g ◴[] No.44454311[source]
    The screen and the camera is $3k

    There's no reason for the screen other than the camera, therefore the camera is $3k

    replies(1): >>44460284 #
    12. bagels ◴[] No.44460284{3}[source]
    Source? A cell phone can be made much cheaper and has all the required parts.