12 ms·

I totally agree with the point about all new cars looking completely ridiculous. I have never understood why there isn't a low cost automaker that has only the

I totally agree with the point about all new cars looking completely ridiculous. I have never understood why there isn't a low cost automaker that has only the bare minimum - the style barely ever changes and looks decent, manual everything, bare minimum heat/ac, minimum radio that can easily be replaced, as cheap as possible - is the only reason this doesn't exist because of ever increasing regulations?

_carbyau_ 5y ago
I suspect the car market will move to similar form as phones. Fewer models and if you want it cheap you buy the few years older one - either direct from the manufacturer/refurbed/second-hand.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>is the only reason this doesn't exist because of ever increasing regulations? Pretty much. They preclude that car from actually being cheap enough that people would buy it over a nicer used car and as the new car market skews higher and higher end the used car market skews likewise making the competition stiffer. >about all new cars looking completely ridiculous. The front body work is bounded by pedestrian safety requirements in the EU and aerodynamics. The rooflines and beltlines are bounded by US safety requirements. It's no surprise that the designs all converge.
- Aloha 5y ago
  You're not wrong. Airbags, active suspension systems, ABS, backup cameras, etc all increase the cost of cars. Though I dont know how much of that is tied to increasing price of used cars - that seems to have more to do with Cash for Clunkers taking a huge amount of used cars out of the used car market, while it put a bunch of people in new cars, it also skewed the pricing for used cars higher - it took an entire generation of used cars out of the market - which continues to effect pricing today.
  - themitigating 5y ago
    Active air suspension is a performance part and not in most cars
    - Aloha 5y ago
      I didn't say anything about air - active suspensions (electronic stability control) has been required in all US vehicles from 2012. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_stability_control#Third_generation_and_after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_stability_control#T...
      - kllrnohj 5y ago
        Electronic stability control is not active suspension, those are very different things. ESC isn't really even part of the suspension setup at all, it modulates the brakes in response to steering angle input & a yaw sensor.
  - bobthepanda 5y ago
    More recently, with the semiconductor shortage the carmakers shoved what parts they had into expensive products that would make more money.
crispyambulance 5y ago
They do exist, just not in the American market.
cjrp 5y ago
Sounds like Dacia. Or Lada, although they might be a bit tricky to export at the moment...
mgkimsal 5y ago
A few years ago (2013/2014?) there was a bare bones Toyota Yaris I looked at. Cheapest 'new' car on the lot, decent mpg, etc. But... no power windows or power locks, no automatically adjustable seat. And... it was, IIRC, around $15k. For $15-16k I could get something else used with more amenities, and similar mpg/economy. Or possibly even something else new at that time with better amenities. For something with so few amenities, I would have preferred at least a 20% discount compared to other options.
- lnanek2 5y ago
  I bought a Yaris as my first car to go as cheap as possible. Even electrics were more expensive despite the tax breaks. My Dad felt like a new one would break down less than a used one too which is why we avoided used. Yaris worked well in general. I'm not surprised it's popular with college kids. It was pretty bothersome, though, how at the lowest trim level they even disabled things like cruise control. I'm three times older than any college kid and it made my ankle ache on long drives.
  - mgkimsal 5y ago
    One of my first cars was a geo metro hatchback - probably an equivalent. It was $6500 - a fortune (for me) at the time. But I did get around 50mpg. I took a long road trip across the country and averaged 64mpg.
  - LAC-Tech 5y ago
    I've never in my life driven a car with cruise control. Including rentals. I'm not even 100% sure how they work...
    - EvanAnderson 5y ago
      Assuming you drive any significant distance once you have it you'll never want to go back.
      - LAC-Tech 5y ago
aardvarkr 5y ago
Because there isn’t any money in designing a no-frills car. Designing a brand new car and starting a brand new brand is crazy expensive so it makes sense to target the luxury market since sales will be limited.
- bonestamp2 5y ago
  Not to mention, when most people look at a car with manual everything and realize for $10/month more they can have power everything... they go for the car with power everything. So, dealers order their inventory accordingly.
  - KennyBlanken 5y ago
    Ability to resell low trim models is also terrible. Nobody wants to buy a base model car when for a couple hundred bucks or maybe a grand more they can get the nicer stuff.
ycuser2 5y ago
> I have never understood why there isn't a low cost automaker that has only the bare minimum In Europe we have Dacia which is exactly that.
- InCityDreams 5y ago
  Dacia is next on my list (currently have a 17yo ford that's beginning to get too expensive). several of my colleagues have them. Having just filled a Diesel tank that went from €60 (last fill c600km ago) to €80 (today), 1.4l engine, my bicyle is looking even more low cost. *will still get a Dacia for necessity, though.
  - ycuser2 5y ago
    I drive a Dacia with LPG. The car is ok, but of course don't await it to be comfortable. It vibrates more, is loud especially at high speed. And there are many little "quirks" like: To let down the window at the back seats, the buttons to do so are in the middle console instead at the front door. For my needs thats enough. The trick is to never buy a better car, so you don't get used to the more comfortable features. :)
sz4kerto 5y ago
Teslas are very minimalistic I think. That's also why I don't find them interesting, e.g. a BMW iX is much more controversial (maybe uglier?).
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  I would hardly classify Tesla as “as cheap as possible”, at least not in terms of the sticker price. Certainly not “manual everything” with all the touch interfaces.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  Tesla has elevated cost-cutting-as-a-virtue to the highest art form. I'm impressed. But they're also making a run at the "only evolve, never redesign" mantra for their cars. This may change with time as more competition enters the EV market.
- eternityforest 5y ago
  It's cool how Tesla and his companies in general seem to really understand the idea that things should be computers first, and not have anything that could have been software. Sadly a lot of the other stuff is less awesome.
- InitialLastName 5y ago
  Teslas are aesthetically minimalist, but they ship with hardware to cover an eventuality that the car might not last long enough to utilize. That's the opposite of minimalist from a product perspective.
- m463 5y ago
  Outside, I think the teslas are very interesting with respect to minmalism. Nothing sticks out, they are completely smooth aerodynamically. (I do think the aero model 3 wheels may be functional but are not attractive) Inside the car, I think tesla's minimalism has gone too far. The telsa model 3 without a dashboard in front of the driver is cheap, not minimal. They also reduced the stalks and overloaded the controls. Then the recent model S/X changes went further to outright dangerous. There are no stalks at all on the steering column, and turn signals, horn and high beams are touch buttons in the middle of steering wheel. When you move, the car guesses which direction you want to go, there is no gearshift stalk. There are gearshift buttons at the bottom of the console, but no dedicated buttons for other critical functions like defrost. sigh.
djbusby 5y ago
This is how both Hundai and Kia started (in USA) Then both moved up-market. And Ford and GMC can't figure how to step back. Edit: my first truck (1986 Toyota) was $6k. Manual everything and didn't even come with a radio. Most of the stuff was fixable at home (if you're handy). Didn't even have EFI. I feel like Honda used to have some of these simpler models - not just cause it was the 70/80s but also because that was a longer lasting/simpler product. We've replaced longevity with bells/whistles as the key-feature.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  You used to be able to shop for a "work truck" or van from Ford or GM which would be bare-bones. Manual transmission, manual windows, no AC, no carpet, simple vinyl floor and upholstery. Similar features may be available in an SUV or sedan but I've never seen one; would probably be a special order or maybe only available to fleet purchasers. I haven't bought a brand new car in over 20 years so I don't know if you can still get cars like this. Rear cameras are now mandatory, so all new cars will have a screen. And if they have a screen anyway, adding more features to it is likely to happen.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    You can still buy a work truck, yes. Heck, even my F250 XLT has a vinyl floor (and I like it!). But even so, they're 30K. > Rear cameras are now mandatory, so all new cars will have a screen. Nah, the cheap ones just put a tiny little screen in the rear view camera. Nice because it requires no other changes to the dash, and is universal across models.
    - rootusrootus 5y ago
      Just re-read what I wrote. Had camera on the mind, meant to say 'rear view mirror'. How anyone could upvote my nonsensical comment, I'll never know. ;-)
nspattak 5y ago
because the servicing costs are determined by workshops/companies who charge ridiculous amounts of money at will and inevitably make older cars not worth repairing. personal example: for the same repair in my home country (EU country) would normally cost 350-450e but i was asked from 1000e to 1500e in the EU country i currently live
- srmarm 5y ago
  Do you earn more money in your current EU country vs the home one? Certainly in the UK a lot of cars get purchased for scrap value taken to a cheaper country for repair (or just used for spares)
ciceryadam 5y ago
In EU/UK you can buy Dacias, you can check out Dacia Sandero, or Dacia Duster.
- hpkuarg 5y ago
  Good news!
jonasdegendt 5y ago
Dacia does this in Europe, their lowest priced car that has exactly zero features comes in at 9999EUR with an optional spare wheel for an additional 150EUR. If you want AC and a radio you’re looking at about 12k EUR, which definitely isn’t terrible. It’s a Renault subsidiary and you see a fair amount of them driving around. So yeah, it’s not like offering an affordable bare-bone car isn’t possible in mature markets, it’s more likely that Americans just don’t have an appetite for them. The affordable car is definitely being tested though. Renault discontinued the Twingo last year, which was their smallest car. Audi discontinued the A1, claiming there’s just no money to be made in their lowest segment. It’s looking pretty bleak for the utilitarians among us, as electrification happens and safety features such as lane assist and emergency stop systems become mandatory, base prices will consistently be higher. You can only drive down the price of components so much.
- Bayart 5y ago
  The good thing about Dacia is that since they're made from high volume Renault parts, repairs are cheap as well.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- Hamuko 5y ago
  Dacia is so cheap that they even omit features that you might not think of as "features". The base model Dacia Duster doesn't come with height adjustment on the driver's seat or with a glovebox light, you need to upgrade to the Comfort package for those. It does interestingly come with a radio these days, back in the day that used to require one of the upgrade packages.
  - Ancapistani 5y ago
    I drove an older (2000) Jeep Wrangler for much this reason. It came from the factory with no A/C and a bottom-tier AM/FM radio. The seat slides front to back and reclines - manually - but that’s about it. It has a heater, but didn’t work when I bought it in ~2010 and I’ve never bothered to fix it; I almost never used the rear windows when I had them, and I’ve since replaced the vinyl top with a much simpler one that doesn’t even have provision for them, so why bother? It’s has a manual transmission and an inline 4-cylinder with very low output compared to most vehicles. Paradoxically, that combination makes it fun to drive. It also holds its value very well. I’ve owned it for twelve of the 23 years of its life so far, and I could sell it today for more than I paid for it. At the same time, it’s extremely cheap to fix, because the design hasn’t changed often over the years and the powertrain is shared between many popular vehicles of its time. My wife’s vehicle has far more “creature comforts”. She drives a 2015 Kia Sorento that we bought new. We’re considering upgrading hers to a new Kia Telluride in the near future, especially considering recent trends in used car prices. There’s definitely still a place out there for mechanically simple vehicles. It’s a shame that the new Jeep Wranglers - say, the JK and newer - have gotten so much larger, more complex, and expensive to maintain. If I had my druthers, I’d be driving something like a modern Kubelwagen, VW Thing, or perhaps something with a bit more cargo space like a Pinzgauer. It’s a shame no one seems interested in making them.
jsz0 5y ago
I would argue stuff like electric adjustable mirrors, seats, good AC, parking sensors, rear view cameras, even automatic transmissions are essential safety features these days. If you put a modern person in a car lacking modern features they're going to be a hazard on the road.
- QuarterReptile 5y ago
  I do appreciate electric mirrors and air conditioning, but the rest of this list is pretty hard for me to buy. I think I'd be called a 'modern person (and one of my cars even has most of these things!)
KennyBlanken 5y ago
If you want a bare-bones sedan, look no further than the Chevy Malibu Fleet, $23k of rental-car awfulness: https://www.gmfleet.com/cars/chevrolet-malibu https://www.gmfleet.com/cars/chevrolet-malibu In general, if you want the most basic, low-opex car you can find, just look at what rental car companies are buying (though rental companies have been desperate for anything, so this currently doesn't apply.) Regulations and fuel economy standards absolutely influence design. The reason most euro cars/SUVs have a sloping hood (compared to the "RAWR I AM AGGRESSIVE" square front on most American SUVs) is to meet pedestrian Euro-NCAP standards. High door sills are to provide better side impact protection, smaller windows are to lower heat/AC load for fuel economy. "All cars" are not "looking completely ridiculous." He cites some of the most infamously ugly cars (Toyota Camry and Prius) while ignoring, oh, the entire rest of the market. There are loads of conservatively styled cars out there. Toyota intentionally dramatically changes their styling almost every year because underneath those changing body panels and tail/head lights is the stuff that's actually expensive to change. They're intentionally garish because they want the design to look exciting now, and like aged dogshit in 3 years. They also want to push their more conservative buyers into Lexuses. Lots of decent looking cars out there. VW's current "narrow line" design language looks like ass, but go back one or two model years and I think they're pretty fantastically well-styled cars. The Audi A6 hasn't been an ugly looking car in at least ten years. Current model: https://www.topgear.com/sites/default/files/cars-car/image/2020/11/audiuk00028059_audi_a6_saloon_50_tfsi_e_-1.jpg https://www.topgear.com/sites/default/files/cars-car/image/2... Want something more "fashion forward"? Volvo's S90 is a work of art inside and out: https://www.media.volvocars.com/image/low/171020/2_2/1 https://www.media.volvocars.com/image/low/171020/2_2/1 If you want a sporty sedan that looks like sex on wheels and have a big wallet, the Alfa Giulia: https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/alfa-romeo/giulia/2022/oem/2022_alfa-romeo_giulia_sedan_quadrifoglio_fq_oem_1_1600.jpg https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/alfa-romeo/giulia/2022/oe... Want something a bit more conservative but sporty looking? BMW 3 series https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/bmw/3-series/2021/oem/2021_bmw_3-series_sedan_330e_fq_oem_1_1280.jpg https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/bmw/3-series/2021/oem/202... I don't get what the author is on about with the current F150. It feels like Ford is really in stride; usually they're a shitshow of fugly, awkward curves and proportions, but they seem to be making designs that not only look good in the present, but are holding up longer.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
sofixa 5y ago
Because brands like that suffer from poor reputation ( poor people's car), so people prefer buying second hand - it was the case for Dacia in Europe for years, and is among the reasons the Tata Nano flopped.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
randerson 5y ago
This video goes into some reasons about why cheap cars are disappearing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYBR0tlPA8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYBR0tlPA8 One reason I don't see mentioned here is the perverse incentives to manufacturers to make larger cars due to CO2 emissions regulations differing depending on the size of the car. So instead of making more efficient engines to hit the targets (no doubt the intent of the regulations), they just stop making small cars.
- UncleOxidant 5y ago
  Talk about unintended consequences.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    If they had intended to reduce CO2 emissions consumption, they would have just increased taxes on things that cause CO2 emissions (e.g. a tax based on distance driven in a car that emits CO2). Or even easier, increasing taxes on fossil fuels. However, the intent was to say they (politicians, society) did something about CO2 emissions without actually giving up anything. Which was accomplished.
    - bobthepanda 5y ago
      I would hardly call increasing taxes on fossil fuels easy; in France it caused a protest movement of about 3 million people.
      - brewdad 5y ago
        Protesting is practically the national pastime in France though.
kcb 5y ago
Mitsubishi Mirage https://www.mitsubishicars.com/cars-and-suvs/mirage https://www.mitsubishicars.com/cars-and-suvs/mirage One problem with this class of cars is that they do not compete favorably with used cars.
- s0rce 5y ago
  until COVID supply chain issues and chip shortages. Could compete if they didn't need so many chips to run everything.
qbasic_forever 5y ago
Most of the cost of producing a car is in the design, sheetmetal tooling, dies, employee training, etc.--i.e. it's not all from just some circuit boards, knobs, and servo motors that drive all the fancy accessories. So a brand new designed and built from scratch hyper minimal car with no accessories would still cost $15k+ and be extremely hard to sell to the public. In reality someone shopping for a car on a budget is just going to buy a few years used instead of cutting out all the accessories in an attempt to scrimp. So the unfortunate truth is that there is no market and no profitability for a purposefully minimal car. The closest you will find are rental market and commercial fleet vehicles like basic sedans (Chevy Malibu), pickup trucks, and vans where the automakers know there is such high demand and guaranteed income that they don't need to pad them with extra frills.
throw10920 5y ago
Probably because, like software, everyone has a different idea of what the "bare minimum" looks like. For instance, I don't think that a radio is necessary in my "bare minimum" car - but I do want a battery charge indicator, which you didn't mention. So, an automaker can either include neither of those two features (and neither of us will want that car), both of them (which makes it more expensive, and if you adopt the policy of "take the union of all of the bare minimums" then you have a normal car), or just a subset. You lose every way.
- HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
  Reminds me of a friend who bought his Volvo 240(?) brand new. Manual transmission, but without a tachometer because that was like $200 extra. After buying the car, he headed over to the Parts department and bought a tach for $50 then went home and installed it himself.
- eternityforest 5y ago
  Minimalism it tech is pretty pointless. Every simple specialty thing seems to invariably cost way more than a common complicated thing, and usually doesn't have much better reliability. It's philosophy pretending to be engineering. Real engineer requires deep analysis, not just assuming that simple is more reliable.
golemiprague 5y ago
I don't think manual everything is really practical these days, automatic gear box and windows is something most people would want even in a basic car. Even in Europe these days people move to automatic gears. But something like mid 2000 corolla or civic would be a good and reliable basic car, the question is how much it will cost to manufacture such car, if it will be around the 10k mark it will be a viable option.
- bee_rider 5y ago
  Surely the computer is better than us at shifting by now anyway, right?
  - spockz 5y ago
    Until it gets confused like an DSG with broken mechatronics. That might just break the gearbox itself. After that happened I drove a Toyota Corolla hybrid with a CVT and it was awesome. High mileage, tranquil, no gaps in acceleration. The only downside was that it is smaller than a Passat (GTE).
    - golemiprague 5y ago
    - jabl 5y ago
      I have a Toyota with a CVT and it's amazing. I think for a long time CVT's suffered from a poor reputation due to the reliability of those 1970'ies DAF cars.
  - schrijver 5y ago
    Right! In Europe cars with manual transmission remain very common, it allows vendors to sell the automatic version at a higher price point I imagine. At this point I’m not even sure they’re that much cheaper to make. And it’s become a weird experience—you’ll have all these features that make it feel like you’re driving a computer anyway, lane assist etc. And the car tells you when it thinks you should shift gears! I found myself muttering “if you’re so smart, why don’t you do it yourself”.
chadash 5y ago
Let's say you make a "bare minimum" car and after all of your design costs, you can get the MSRP down to say $13,000. The problem is that once I'm already paying 13k for a "bare bones" car, I'll probably think, well, why not just pay $15,000 to get a car with sound/speakers, adjustable seats, air conditioning, automatic windows, etc. Behold, that's basically what a Chevy Spark costs (before supply chain crunch). If I'm really trying to save money beyond that, I'll just buy a used car. What would be nice though is a car that doesn't get redesigned every few years. If I know that redesigns will only happen every 10 years, then that means cheap parts will be abundant and maintaining the car will be much cheaper.
- bushbaba 5y ago
  Personally it's more the used car market offers a greater value than a cheap new car.
- holoduke 5y ago
  I always drive old cars from 10,15 years old. For example driving an Infinity FX35 from 2003 for about 7 years now. Never had a single issue. Bought the car for 8k.
  - colinmhayes 5y ago
    The used car market is currently bonkers. $8k not gonna get you much of anything.
    - 8ytecoder 5y ago
      The car I bought a year ago is worth $5k more than what I paid for it. If I sell it now I’d make a profit.
- olyjohn 5y ago
  You'll "just" spend an extra $2000? I guess when the monthly payment on a 10 year loan only goes up a few bucks...
s0rce 5y ago
10 years ago a base model Suzuki SX4 sedan was pretty much this in the USA. Not sure about more modern stuff.
MisterTea 5y ago
Yup. I have a 2002 Chevy Express 3500 cargo van who's only luxury is AC. The radio was an AM/FM I replaced with a mechless unit that died so there is no radio. The windows are hand cranked. I honestly miss nothing from a modern vehicle when I drive it save for less noise. I also have been shopping for a new car and the selection out there is miserable what with all the stupid option games, horrible butt-ugly design, and everyone insisting that cars need more microchips than CERN for whatever reason. When I find something interesting I always run into some gotcha that turns me off. My latest disappointment was Ford's bait and switch manual transmission Bronco (I love driving manuals)- it's only available paired with the anemic turbo I4 instead of the more powerful V6. No one is buying a 5000 pound vehicle with an I4 in it. I read an article which stated that a ford rep explained this is because manuals are unpopular so they didn't pair it with the more powerful engine option - the engine option that people like me who spec manuals want to order. Of course the manual wont sell if its paired with garbage you idiots.
0xbadcafebee 5y ago
It doesn't exist because nobody goes out to buy a car and says "I'll take the first one that has the fewest useful features."
wycy 5y ago
> I have never understood why there isn't a low cost automaker that has only the bare minimum - the style barely ever changes and looks decent, manual everything, bare minimum heat/ac, minimum radio that can easily be replaced, as cheap as possible - is the only reason this doesn't exist because of ever increasing regulations? No, it's because people who buy new cars don't want this.
- olyjohn 5y ago
  I don't think people know what they want when they buy a car. Manufacturers sell turd crossovers like the Equinox or Highlander in high numbers. Most of them aren't even AWD, and the ones that are AWD have shit systems in them that are barely capable in light snow and rain. They literally have no redeeming qualities, and somehow they fly off the showroom floors.
  - vikingerik 5y ago
    I bought a Nissan Kicks, which is in your "turd crossover" category... and I love it because it's exactly what I want. Its redeeming qualities are light weight and responsive handling, to feel like driving a nimble hatchback rather than a lumbering SUV, while having the raised cockpit, visibility, and most of the cargo space of an SUV. Lack of AWD is a feature; I don't do any towing or driving on snow or dirt to need it; FWD is lighter and cheaper and more efficient. People have preferences that aren't the same as yours, and insulting them isn't necessary. Crossovers are very practical and people buy them for plenty of good reasons.
    - KerrAvon 5y ago
      A Kicks is in the “slightly weird shit from Nissan” category. I don’t think the parent poster was referring to it.
      - HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
        Doesn't change /u/vikingerik's point.
olyjohn 5y ago
Those cars don't have huge profit margins. They require selling in bulk to make a ton of money on them. That's why SUVs and trucks reign supreme here in the US. They're cheap to build, have less safety and emissions requirements, and people pay ridiculous money for them here. There's a reason Tesla started with premium cars, because they make more money. Same reason Ford and GM have stopped selling regular cars here. The day of the cheap car is long gone. $45000 is the average sale price here in the US for a car right now. I dunno how so many people can afford a $700+ car payment... but it's pretty normal.
wlesieutre 5y ago
How about the ‘22 Honda Civic for a not completely ridiculous looking new car? It won’t help you on the minimal features and replaceable radio though.
- brewdad 5y ago
  Have they redesigned the rear end yet? I drove Hondas for over 20 years but went with a VW Golf because no one over 30 should be driving the Civic with how it looks(ed) in 2018.
  - wlesieutre 5y ago
    Yes, 2022 model is the 11th generation, much better looking than the 10th gen in my opinion. https://automobiles.honda.com/civic-sedan https://automobiles.honda.com/civic-sedan
emmo 5y ago
Suzuki are very good at "minimal, but still the few features you want". Unfortunately, it doesn't look like Suzuki sell cars in the US?

_carbyau_ 5y ago

I suspect the car market will move to similar form as phones. Fewer models and if you want it cheap you buy the few years older one - either direct from the manufacturer/refurbed/second-hand.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

>is the only reason this doesn't exist because of ever increasing regulations? Pretty much. They preclude that car from actually being cheap enough that people would buy it over a nicer used car and as the new car market skews higher and higher end the used car market skews likewise making the competition stiffer. >about all new cars looking completely ridiculous. The front body work is bounded by pedestrian safety requirements in the EU and aerodynamics. The rooflines and beltlines are bounded by US safety requirements. It's no surprise that the designs all converge.

Aloha 5y ago
You're not wrong. Airbags, active suspension systems, ABS, backup cameras, etc all increase the cost of cars. Though I dont know how much of that is tied to increasing price of used cars - that seems to have more to do with Cash for Clunkers taking a huge amount of used cars out of the used car market, while it put a bunch of people in new cars, it also skewed the pricing for used cars higher - it took an entire generation of used cars out of the market - which continues to effect pricing today.
- themitigating 5y ago
  Active air suspension is a performance part and not in most cars
  - Aloha 5y ago
    I didn't say anything about air - active suspensions (electronic stability control) has been required in all US vehicles from 2012. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_stability_control#Third_generation_and_after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_stability_control#T...
    - kllrnohj 5y ago
      Electronic stability control is not active suspension, those are very different things. ESC isn't really even part of the suspension setup at all, it modulates the brakes in response to steering angle input & a yaw sensor.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  More recently, with the semiconductor shortage the carmakers shoved what parts they had into expensive products that would make more money.

crispyambulance 5y ago

They do exist, just not in the American market.

cjrp 5y ago

Sounds like Dacia. Or Lada, although they might be a bit tricky to export at the moment...

mgkimsal 5y ago

A few years ago (2013/2014?) there was a bare bones Toyota Yaris I looked at. Cheapest 'new' car on the lot, decent mpg, etc. But... no power windows or power locks, no automatically adjustable seat. And... it was, IIRC, around $15k. For $15-16k I could get something else used with more amenities, and similar mpg/economy. Or possibly even something else new at that time with better amenities. For something with so few amenities, I would have preferred at least a 20% discount compared to other options.

lnanek2 5y ago
I bought a Yaris as my first car to go as cheap as possible. Even electrics were more expensive despite the tax breaks. My Dad felt like a new one would break down less than a used one too which is why we avoided used. Yaris worked well in general. I'm not surprised it's popular with college kids. It was pretty bothersome, though, how at the lowest trim level they even disabled things like cruise control. I'm three times older than any college kid and it made my ankle ache on long drives.
- mgkimsal 5y ago
  One of my first cars was a geo metro hatchback - probably an equivalent. It was $6500 - a fortune (for me) at the time. But I did get around 50mpg. I took a long road trip across the country and averaged 64mpg.
- LAC-Tech 5y ago
  I've never in my life driven a car with cruise control. Including rentals. I'm not even 100% sure how they work...
  - EvanAnderson 5y ago
    Assuming you drive any significant distance once you have it you'll never want to go back.
    - LAC-Tech 5y ago

aardvarkr 5y ago

Because there isn’t any money in designing a no-frills car. Designing a brand new car and starting a brand new brand is crazy expensive so it makes sense to target the luxury market since sales will be limited.

bonestamp2 5y ago
Not to mention, when most people look at a car with manual everything and realize for $10/month more they can have power everything... they go for the car with power everything. So, dealers order their inventory accordingly.
- KennyBlanken 5y ago
  Ability to resell low trim models is also terrible. Nobody wants to buy a base model car when for a couple hundred bucks or maybe a grand more they can get the nicer stuff.

ycuser2 5y ago

> I have never understood why there isn't a low cost automaker that has only the bare minimum In Europe we have Dacia which is exactly that.

InCityDreams 5y ago
Dacia is next on my list (currently have a 17yo ford that's beginning to get too expensive). several of my colleagues have them. Having just filled a Diesel tank that went from €60 (last fill c600km ago) to €80 (today), 1.4l engine, my bicyle is looking even more low cost. *will still get a Dacia for necessity, though.
- ycuser2 5y ago
  I drive a Dacia with LPG. The car is ok, but of course don't await it to be comfortable. It vibrates more, is loud especially at high speed. And there are many little "quirks" like: To let down the window at the back seats, the buttons to do so are in the middle console instead at the front door. For my needs thats enough. The trick is to never buy a better car, so you don't get used to the more comfortable features. :)

sz4kerto 5y ago

Teslas are very minimalistic I think. That's also why I don't find them interesting, e.g. a BMW iX is much more controversial (maybe uglier?).

bobthepanda 5y ago
I would hardly classify Tesla as “as cheap as possible”, at least not in terms of the sticker price. Certainly not “manual everything” with all the touch interfaces.
rootusrootus 5y ago
Tesla has elevated cost-cutting-as-a-virtue to the highest art form. I'm impressed. But they're also making a run at the "only evolve, never redesign" mantra for their cars. This may change with time as more competition enters the EV market.
eternityforest 5y ago
It's cool how Tesla and his companies in general seem to really understand the idea that things should be computers first, and not have anything that could have been software. Sadly a lot of the other stuff is less awesome.
InitialLastName 5y ago
Teslas are aesthetically minimalist, but they ship with hardware to cover an eventuality that the car might not last long enough to utilize. That's the opposite of minimalist from a product perspective.
m463 5y ago
Outside, I think the teslas are very interesting with respect to minmalism. Nothing sticks out, they are completely smooth aerodynamically. (I do think the aero model 3 wheels may be functional but are not attractive) Inside the car, I think tesla's minimalism has gone too far. The telsa model 3 without a dashboard in front of the driver is cheap, not minimal. They also reduced the stalks and overloaded the controls. Then the recent model S/X changes went further to outright dangerous. There are no stalks at all on the steering column, and turn signals, horn and high beams are touch buttons in the middle of steering wheel. When you move, the car guesses which direction you want to go, there is no gearshift stalk. There are gearshift buttons at the bottom of the console, but no dedicated buttons for other critical functions like defrost. sigh.

djbusby 5y ago

This is how both Hundai and Kia started (in USA) Then both moved up-market. And Ford and GMC can't figure how to step back. Edit: my first truck (1986 Toyota) was $6k. Manual everything and didn't even come with a radio. Most of the stuff was fixable at home (if you're handy). Didn't even have EFI. I feel like Honda used to have some of these simpler models - not just cause it was the 70/80s but also because that was a longer lasting/simpler product. We've replaced longevity with bells/whistles as the key-feature.

throwawayboise 5y ago
You used to be able to shop for a "work truck" or van from Ford or GM which would be bare-bones. Manual transmission, manual windows, no AC, no carpet, simple vinyl floor and upholstery. Similar features may be available in an SUV or sedan but I've never seen one; would probably be a special order or maybe only available to fleet purchasers. I haven't bought a brand new car in over 20 years so I don't know if you can still get cars like this. Rear cameras are now mandatory, so all new cars will have a screen. And if they have a screen anyway, adding more features to it is likely to happen.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  You can still buy a work truck, yes. Heck, even my F250 XLT has a vinyl floor (and I like it!). But even so, they're 30K. > Rear cameras are now mandatory, so all new cars will have a screen. Nah, the cheap ones just put a tiny little screen in the rear view camera. Nice because it requires no other changes to the dash, and is universal across models.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    Just re-read what I wrote. Had camera on the mind, meant to say 'rear view mirror'. How anyone could upvote my nonsensical comment, I'll never know. ;-)

nspattak 5y ago

because the servicing costs are determined by workshops/companies who charge ridiculous amounts of money at will and inevitably make older cars not worth repairing. personal example: for the same repair in my home country (EU country) would normally cost 350-450e but i was asked from 1000e to 1500e in the EU country i currently live

srmarm 5y ago
Do you earn more money in your current EU country vs the home one? Certainly in the UK a lot of cars get purchased for scrap value taken to a cheaper country for repair (or just used for spares)

ciceryadam 5y ago

In EU/UK you can buy Dacias, you can check out Dacia Sandero, or Dacia Duster.

hpkuarg 5y ago
Good news!

jonasdegendt 5y ago

Dacia does this in Europe, their lowest priced car that has exactly zero features comes in at 9999EUR with an optional spare wheel for an additional 150EUR. If you want AC and a radio you’re looking at about 12k EUR, which definitely isn’t terrible. It’s a Renault subsidiary and you see a fair amount of them driving around. So yeah, it’s not like offering an affordable bare-bone car isn’t possible in mature markets, it’s more likely that Americans just don’t have an appetite for them. The affordable car is definitely being tested though. Renault discontinued the Twingo last year, which was their smallest car. Audi discontinued the A1, claiming there’s just no money to be made in their lowest segment. It’s looking pretty bleak for the utilitarians among us, as electrification happens and safety features such as lane assist and emergency stop systems become mandatory, base prices will consistently be higher. You can only drive down the price of components so much.

Bayart 5y ago
The good thing about Dacia is that since they're made from high volume Renault parts, repairs are cheap as well.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
Hamuko 5y ago
Dacia is so cheap that they even omit features that you might not think of as "features". The base model Dacia Duster doesn't come with height adjustment on the driver's seat or with a glovebox light, you need to upgrade to the Comfort package for those. It does interestingly come with a radio these days, back in the day that used to require one of the upgrade packages.
- Ancapistani 5y ago
  I drove an older (2000) Jeep Wrangler for much this reason. It came from the factory with no A/C and a bottom-tier AM/FM radio. The seat slides front to back and reclines - manually - but that’s about it. It has a heater, but didn’t work when I bought it in ~2010 and I’ve never bothered to fix it; I almost never used the rear windows when I had them, and I’ve since replaced the vinyl top with a much simpler one that doesn’t even have provision for them, so why bother? It’s has a manual transmission and an inline 4-cylinder with very low output compared to most vehicles. Paradoxically, that combination makes it fun to drive. It also holds its value very well. I’ve owned it for twelve of the 23 years of its life so far, and I could sell it today for more than I paid for it. At the same time, it’s extremely cheap to fix, because the design hasn’t changed often over the years and the powertrain is shared between many popular vehicles of its time. My wife’s vehicle has far more “creature comforts”. She drives a 2015 Kia Sorento that we bought new. We’re considering upgrading hers to a new Kia Telluride in the near future, especially considering recent trends in used car prices. There’s definitely still a place out there for mechanically simple vehicles. It’s a shame that the new Jeep Wranglers - say, the JK and newer - have gotten so much larger, more complex, and expensive to maintain. If I had my druthers, I’d be driving something like a modern Kubelwagen, VW Thing, or perhaps something with a bit more cargo space like a Pinzgauer. It’s a shame no one seems interested in making them.

jsz0 5y ago

I would argue stuff like electric adjustable mirrors, seats, good AC, parking sensors, rear view cameras, even automatic transmissions are essential safety features these days. If you put a modern person in a car lacking modern features they're going to be a hazard on the road.

QuarterReptile 5y ago
I do appreciate electric mirrors and air conditioning, but the rest of this list is pretty hard for me to buy. I think I'd be called a 'modern person (and one of my cars even has most of these things!)

KennyBlanken 5y ago

If you want a bare-bones sedan, look no further than the Chevy Malibu Fleet, $23k of rental-car awfulness: https://www.gmfleet.com/cars/chevrolet-malibu https://www.gmfleet.com/cars/chevrolet-malibu In general, if you want the most basic, low-opex car you can find, just look at what rental car companies are buying (though rental companies have been desperate for anything, so this currently doesn't apply.) Regulations and fuel economy standards absolutely influence design. The reason most euro cars/SUVs have a sloping hood (compared to the "RAWR I AM AGGRESSIVE" square front on most American SUVs) is to meet pedestrian Euro-NCAP standards. High door sills are to provide better side impact protection, smaller windows are to lower heat/AC load for fuel economy. "All cars" are not "looking completely ridiculous." He cites some of the most infamously ugly cars (Toyota Camry and Prius) while ignoring, oh, the entire rest of the market. There are loads of conservatively styled cars out there. Toyota intentionally dramatically changes their styling almost every year because underneath those changing body panels and tail/head lights is the stuff that's actually expensive to change. They're intentionally garish because they want the design to look exciting now, and like aged dogshit in 3 years. They also want to push their more conservative buyers into Lexuses. Lots of decent looking cars out there. VW's current "narrow line" design language looks like ass, but go back one or two model years and I think they're pretty fantastically well-styled cars. The Audi A6 hasn't been an ugly looking car in at least ten years. Current model: https://www.topgear.com/sites/default/files/cars-car/image/2020/11/audiuk00028059_audi_a6_saloon_50_tfsi_e_-1.jpg https://www.topgear.com/sites/default/files/cars-car/image/2... Want something more "fashion forward"? Volvo's S90 is a work of art inside and out: https://www.media.volvocars.com/image/low/171020/2_2/1 https://www.media.volvocars.com/image/low/171020/2_2/1 If you want a sporty sedan that looks like sex on wheels and have a big wallet, the Alfa Giulia: https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/alfa-romeo/giulia/2022/oem/2022_alfa-romeo_giulia_sedan_quadrifoglio_fq_oem_1_1600.jpg https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/alfa-romeo/giulia/2022/oe... Want something a bit more conservative but sporty looking? BMW 3 series https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/bmw/3-series/2021/oem/2021_bmw_3-series_sedan_330e_fq_oem_1_1280.jpg https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/bmw/3-series/2021/oem/202... I don't get what the author is on about with the current F150. It feels like Ford is really in stride; usually they're a shitshow of fugly, awkward curves and proportions, but they seem to be making designs that not only look good in the present, but are holding up longer.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

sofixa 5y ago

Because brands like that suffer from poor reputation ( poor people's car), so people prefer buying second hand - it was the case for Dacia in Europe for years, and is among the reasons the Tata Nano flopped.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

randerson 5y ago

This video goes into some reasons about why cheap cars are disappearing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYBR0tlPA8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYBR0tlPA8 One reason I don't see mentioned here is the perverse incentives to manufacturers to make larger cars due to CO2 emissions regulations differing depending on the size of the car. So instead of making more efficient engines to hit the targets (no doubt the intent of the regulations), they just stop making small cars.

UncleOxidant 5y ago
Talk about unintended consequences.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  If they had intended to reduce CO2 emissions consumption, they would have just increased taxes on things that cause CO2 emissions (e.g. a tax based on distance driven in a car that emits CO2). Or even easier, increasing taxes on fossil fuels. However, the intent was to say they (politicians, society) did something about CO2 emissions without actually giving up anything. Which was accomplished.
  - bobthepanda 5y ago
    I would hardly call increasing taxes on fossil fuels easy; in France it caused a protest movement of about 3 million people.
    - brewdad 5y ago
      Protesting is practically the national pastime in France though.

kcb 5y ago

Mitsubishi Mirage https://www.mitsubishicars.com/cars-and-suvs/mirage https://www.mitsubishicars.com/cars-and-suvs/mirage One problem with this class of cars is that they do not compete favorably with used cars.

s0rce 5y ago
until COVID supply chain issues and chip shortages. Could compete if they didn't need so many chips to run everything.

qbasic_forever 5y ago

Most of the cost of producing a car is in the design, sheetmetal tooling, dies, employee training, etc.--i.e. it's not all from just some circuit boards, knobs, and servo motors that drive all the fancy accessories. So a brand new designed and built from scratch hyper minimal car with no accessories would still cost $15k+ and be extremely hard to sell to the public. In reality someone shopping for a car on a budget is just going to buy a few years used instead of cutting out all the accessories in an attempt to scrimp. So the unfortunate truth is that there is no market and no profitability for a purposefully minimal car. The closest you will find are rental market and commercial fleet vehicles like basic sedans (Chevy Malibu), pickup trucks, and vans where the automakers know there is such high demand and guaranteed income that they don't need to pad them with extra frills.

throw10920 5y ago

Probably because, like software, everyone has a different idea of what the "bare minimum" looks like. For instance, I don't think that a radio is necessary in my "bare minimum" car - but I do want a battery charge indicator, which you didn't mention. So, an automaker can either include neither of those two features (and neither of us will want that car), both of them (which makes it more expensive, and if you adopt the policy of "take the union of all of the bare minimums" then you have a normal car), or just a subset. You lose every way.

HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
Reminds me of a friend who bought his Volvo 240(?) brand new. Manual transmission, but without a tachometer because that was like $200 extra. After buying the car, he headed over to the Parts department and bought a tach for $50 then went home and installed it himself.
eternityforest 5y ago
Minimalism it tech is pretty pointless. Every simple specialty thing seems to invariably cost way more than a common complicated thing, and usually doesn't have much better reliability. It's philosophy pretending to be engineering. Real engineer requires deep analysis, not just assuming that simple is more reliable.

golemiprague 5y ago

I don't think manual everything is really practical these days, automatic gear box and windows is something most people would want even in a basic car. Even in Europe these days people move to automatic gears. But something like mid 2000 corolla or civic would be a good and reliable basic car, the question is how much it will cost to manufacture such car, if it will be around the 10k mark it will be a viable option.

bee_rider 5y ago
Surely the computer is better than us at shifting by now anyway, right?
- spockz 5y ago
  Until it gets confused like an DSG with broken mechatronics. That might just break the gearbox itself. After that happened I drove a Toyota Corolla hybrid with a CVT and it was awesome. High mileage, tranquil, no gaps in acceleration. The only downside was that it is smaller than a Passat (GTE).
  - golemiprague 5y ago
  - jabl 5y ago
    I have a Toyota with a CVT and it's amazing. I think for a long time CVT's suffered from a poor reputation due to the reliability of those 1970'ies DAF cars.
- schrijver 5y ago
  Right! In Europe cars with manual transmission remain very common, it allows vendors to sell the automatic version at a higher price point I imagine. At this point I’m not even sure they’re that much cheaper to make. And it’s become a weird experience—you’ll have all these features that make it feel like you’re driving a computer anyway, lane assist etc. And the car tells you when it thinks you should shift gears! I found myself muttering “if you’re so smart, why don’t you do it yourself”.

chadash 5y ago

Let's say you make a "bare minimum" car and after all of your design costs, you can get the MSRP down to say $13,000. The problem is that once I'm already paying 13k for a "bare bones" car, I'll probably think, well, why not just pay $15,000 to get a car with sound/speakers, adjustable seats, air conditioning, automatic windows, etc. Behold, that's basically what a Chevy Spark costs (before supply chain crunch). If I'm really trying to save money beyond that, I'll just buy a used car. What would be nice though is a car that doesn't get redesigned every few years. If I know that redesigns will only happen every 10 years, then that means cheap parts will be abundant and maintaining the car will be much cheaper.

bushbaba 5y ago
Personally it's more the used car market offers a greater value than a cheap new car.
holoduke 5y ago
I always drive old cars from 10,15 years old. For example driving an Infinity FX35 from 2003 for about 7 years now. Never had a single issue. Bought the car for 8k.
- colinmhayes 5y ago
  The used car market is currently bonkers. $8k not gonna get you much of anything.
  - 8ytecoder 5y ago
    The car I bought a year ago is worth $5k more than what I paid for it. If I sell it now I’d make a profit.
olyjohn 5y ago
You'll "just" spend an extra $2000? I guess when the monthly payment on a 10 year loan only goes up a few bucks...

s0rce 5y ago

10 years ago a base model Suzuki SX4 sedan was pretty much this in the USA. Not sure about more modern stuff.

MisterTea 5y ago

Yup. I have a 2002 Chevy Express 3500 cargo van who's only luxury is AC. The radio was an AM/FM I replaced with a mechless unit that died so there is no radio. The windows are hand cranked. I honestly miss nothing from a modern vehicle when I drive it save for less noise. I also have been shopping for a new car and the selection out there is miserable what with all the stupid option games, horrible butt-ugly design, and everyone insisting that cars need more microchips than CERN for whatever reason. When I find something interesting I always run into some gotcha that turns me off. My latest disappointment was Ford's bait and switch manual transmission Bronco (I love driving manuals)- it's only available paired with the anemic turbo I4 instead of the more powerful V6. No one is buying a 5000 pound vehicle with an I4 in it. I read an article which stated that a ford rep explained this is because manuals are unpopular so they didn't pair it with the more powerful engine option - the engine option that people like me who spec manuals want to order. Of course the manual wont sell if its paired with garbage you idiots.

0xbadcafebee 5y ago

It doesn't exist because nobody goes out to buy a car and says "I'll take the first one that has the fewest useful features."

wycy 5y ago

> I have never understood why there isn't a low cost automaker that has only the bare minimum - the style barely ever changes and looks decent, manual everything, bare minimum heat/ac, minimum radio that can easily be replaced, as cheap as possible - is the only reason this doesn't exist because of ever increasing regulations? No, it's because people who buy new cars don't want this.

olyjohn 5y ago
I don't think people know what they want when they buy a car. Manufacturers sell turd crossovers like the Equinox or Highlander in high numbers. Most of them aren't even AWD, and the ones that are AWD have shit systems in them that are barely capable in light snow and rain. They literally have no redeeming qualities, and somehow they fly off the showroom floors.
- vikingerik 5y ago
  I bought a Nissan Kicks, which is in your "turd crossover" category... and I love it because it's exactly what I want. Its redeeming qualities are light weight and responsive handling, to feel like driving a nimble hatchback rather than a lumbering SUV, while having the raised cockpit, visibility, and most of the cargo space of an SUV. Lack of AWD is a feature; I don't do any towing or driving on snow or dirt to need it; FWD is lighter and cheaper and more efficient. People have preferences that aren't the same as yours, and insulting them isn't necessary. Crossovers are very practical and people buy them for plenty of good reasons.
  - KerrAvon 5y ago
    A Kicks is in the “slightly weird shit from Nissan” category. I don’t think the parent poster was referring to it.
    - HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
      Doesn't change /u/vikingerik's point.

olyjohn 5y ago

Those cars don't have huge profit margins. They require selling in bulk to make a ton of money on them. That's why SUVs and trucks reign supreme here in the US. They're cheap to build, have less safety and emissions requirements, and people pay ridiculous money for them here. There's a reason Tesla started with premium cars, because they make more money. Same reason Ford and GM have stopped selling regular cars here. The day of the cheap car is long gone. $45000 is the average sale price here in the US for a car right now. I dunno how so many people can afford a $700+ car payment... but it's pretty normal.

wlesieutre 5y ago

How about the ‘22 Honda Civic for a not completely ridiculous looking new car? It won’t help you on the minimal features and replaceable radio though.

brewdad 5y ago
Have they redesigned the rear end yet? I drove Hondas for over 20 years but went with a VW Golf because no one over 30 should be driving the Civic with how it looks(ed) in 2018.
- wlesieutre 5y ago
  Yes, 2022 model is the 11th generation, much better looking than the 10th gen in my opinion. https://automobiles.honda.com/civic-sedan https://automobiles.honda.com/civic-sedan

emmo 5y ago

Suzuki are very good at "minimal, but still the few features you want". Unfortunately, it doesn't look like Suzuki sell cars in the US?