5 ms·

If I recall, they were referring to an SUV that got maybe 12mpg. Anyhow, what we really need is a car company that produces generic cars and parts that are easi

If I recall, they were referring to an SUV that got maybe 12mpg. Anyhow, what we really need is a car company that produces generic cars and parts that are easily interchangeable and replaceable for like 20 years.

calvinmorrison 4y ago
This exists all over the world. Just not here. Our regulations have killed simplicity in cars. Now we could adjust the regulations to allow more of this - like 'kei trucks' would be a big win. In fact, allowing small horsepower vehicles to skip safety requirements if they operate under 25mph is a great idea, and give a pathway for registration and insurance. instead of motorcycles which are licensed, registered and insured, i now see more electric bicycles, which actually look like motorcycles, cost as much as motorcycles, and just ride around willy nilly. Any small time manufactuer should be allowed to produce road legal vehicles for intracity use, and be allowed to skip most regulations that are onerous. Lighting, fine, brakes fine, but does it need a reverse camera or onstar or lane departure? no probably not.
- TylerE 4y ago
  Reverse cameras are a safety feature, not a luxury. I also doubt any market for what you're describing exists beyond "15 year old Honda Civic/Toyota Camry"
  - nisegami 4y ago
    Safety features can absolutely be a luxury.
    - TylerE 4y ago
      Not when what they're protecting are pedestrians, especially children, who often aren't tall enough to be visible in a mirror.
      - calvinmorrison 4y ago
        This is an issue due to bad visibility in modern vehicles due to safety constraints requiring tiny windows, giant pillars, tinted windows, high position off the ground etc.
        VBprogrammer 4y ago
        This is definitely a thing. In our current car even the rear view mirror is difficult to use because it's looking out of such a small rear window with a head rest for the middle seat in the way.
        Marsymars 4y ago
        I don't typically carry passengers in the rear, so I just removed all of my rear seat headrests for better visibility.
  - calvinmorrison 4y ago
    so why do golf cars not have them? Reverse cameras are definitely helpful, if not a necessity when driving a behemoth vehicle. This is much less of a concern for a golf cart.
    - TylerE 4y ago
      Every golf cart I've ever driven has a buzzer/beeper that is active while reverse is engaged. Works OK on a course... would not work so well on a noisy street.
    - adql 4y ago
      Coz they are not street legal so there is no legal requirement for it. Also they are small enough that you can just turn around. US legislators just decided to not fight the "how small car needs to be to not require backup camera" and required it to be in all of them.
      - abfan1127 4y ago
        golf carts are legal in Arizona. I'd assume they are legal in other states, if not other countries as well.
        TylerE 4y ago
        I’m not aware of anywhere they are street legal. Many gated/retirement communities allow them, but those aren’t public streets.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    hmm I find using the camera to be less safe, and distracting that using my eyes to actually look at the real world not through the lens of a camera
    - criddell 4y ago
      The idea is that the camera is additional information, not a substitute for using your eyes.
    - adql 4y ago
      Now look at most sold cars in US. The whole reason for it was essentially "kids can easily get behind dumb US sized pickups without driver noticing"
      - TylerE 4y ago
        I drive a small hatchback. The camera shows things that are not visible any other way. Even if the rear hatch was entirely transparent there are large areas that wouldn't be visible due to the rear seats. So, no, it isn't only a "giant Canyanero hurr durr" issue
  - encryptluks2 4y ago
    The thing is, a wireless camera costs like $50 these days but car manufacturers will find a way to add it as a $2000 package.
- IgorPartola 4y ago
  The problem started in the US as unintended consequences of trying to create cars with better MPG. In the last century the US government created a standard for how efficient vehicles need to be. At the time most people drove cars and specifically station wagons were among the most popular styles of cars. Trucks were not aspirational vehicles and were used for work only. And since work trucks often times do need a lot more power than a family hauler or at least need to be heavier/larger, the government created two different standards: one for cars and one for trucks (body on frame vehicles). Of course manufacturers immediately saw that they could just make trucks more like cars than make cars more fuel efficient so they started putting modern interiors and such into trucks and modernizing the platforms to create SUVs. Thus the station wagon died and the SUV became the standard family vehicle for a lot of people.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    >as unintended consequences I think we have plently of lessons of how badly things go when the federal government sticks its nose into anything that we can no longer call these as unintended consequences. They are very much intended We need to stop having the government pick winners and losers, or try to influence the market in any way be favoring one thing over another
    - calvinmorrison 4y ago
      >as unintended consequences regulatory capture tells us these consequences are intended. Intended to keep out upstarts without Musk's cash to back it. There's no reason we couldn't have bespoke car manufacturers producing city-cars for a low total cost.
      - IgorPartola 4y ago
        Do you think that anyone should be able to build a street-legal car? Regardless of how well it is manufactured and how safe it is for those inside and outside of it? How do you view the relationship between government-owned, built, and maintained roads and private vehicle manufacturers that use those roads?
cafard 4y ago
My recollection is that we've driven most of our cars for between 15 and 20 years. Hondas are I guess pretty generic.
antiterra 4y ago
Any of the performance SUVs these days are still not doing much better than 12mpg, even if the per mpg emissions are better. I was getting 9mpg city driving with a late model biturbo v12.
adql 4y ago
So you mean like every car company ? The parts are available for at least 15 years, they are making a bank on replacement compared to margins on new cars (pre-covid) Subarus are probably most plug and play but that's because they are small company that build same car for last 20 years... and not exactly super reliable. For example those [1] crazy bastards swapped whole manual gearbox and engine to a different model (that's auto-only) of Subaru and it even had pre-made holes for stuff that automatic gearbox car doesn't have in the first place, cos they used same subframe parts. * [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDcDpUaiwY4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDcDpUaiwY4
- encryptluks2 4y ago
  No, I mean a company that has generic enough parts for 20 years that a replacement part will be competitively priced and easy to replace. No more specialized tools, 2+ service hours to do a basic job, and all their service jobs have simple instructions with a video on how the customer can do it.. not put into some service manual that cost $400.

calvinmorrison 4y ago

This exists all over the world. Just not here. Our regulations have killed simplicity in cars. Now we could adjust the regulations to allow more of this - like 'kei trucks' would be a big win. In fact, allowing small horsepower vehicles to skip safety requirements if they operate under 25mph is a great idea, and give a pathway for registration and insurance. instead of motorcycles which are licensed, registered and insured, i now see more electric bicycles, which actually look like motorcycles, cost as much as motorcycles, and just ride around willy nilly. Any small time manufactuer should be allowed to produce road legal vehicles for intracity use, and be allowed to skip most regulations that are onerous. Lighting, fine, brakes fine, but does it need a reverse camera or onstar or lane departure? no probably not.

TylerE 4y ago
Reverse cameras are a safety feature, not a luxury. I also doubt any market for what you're describing exists beyond "15 year old Honda Civic/Toyota Camry"
- nisegami 4y ago
  Safety features can absolutely be a luxury.
  - TylerE 4y ago
    Not when what they're protecting are pedestrians, especially children, who often aren't tall enough to be visible in a mirror.
    - calvinmorrison 4y ago
      This is an issue due to bad visibility in modern vehicles due to safety constraints requiring tiny windows, giant pillars, tinted windows, high position off the ground etc.
      - VBprogrammer 4y ago
        This is definitely a thing. In our current car even the rear view mirror is difficult to use because it's looking out of such a small rear window with a head rest for the middle seat in the way.
        Marsymars 4y ago
        I don't typically carry passengers in the rear, so I just removed all of my rear seat headrests for better visibility.
- calvinmorrison 4y ago
  so why do golf cars not have them? Reverse cameras are definitely helpful, if not a necessity when driving a behemoth vehicle. This is much less of a concern for a golf cart.
  - TylerE 4y ago
    Every golf cart I've ever driven has a buzzer/beeper that is active while reverse is engaged. Works OK on a course... would not work so well on a noisy street.
  - adql 4y ago
    Coz they are not street legal so there is no legal requirement for it. Also they are small enough that you can just turn around. US legislators just decided to not fight the "how small car needs to be to not require backup camera" and required it to be in all of them.
    - abfan1127 4y ago
      golf carts are legal in Arizona. I'd assume they are legal in other states, if not other countries as well.
      - TylerE 4y ago
        I’m not aware of anywhere they are street legal. Many gated/retirement communities allow them, but those aren’t public streets.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  hmm I find using the camera to be less safe, and distracting that using my eyes to actually look at the real world not through the lens of a camera
  - criddell 4y ago
    The idea is that the camera is additional information, not a substitute for using your eyes.
  - adql 4y ago
    Now look at most sold cars in US. The whole reason for it was essentially "kids can easily get behind dumb US sized pickups without driver noticing"
    - TylerE 4y ago
      I drive a small hatchback. The camera shows things that are not visible any other way. Even if the rear hatch was entirely transparent there are large areas that wouldn't be visible due to the rear seats. So, no, it isn't only a "giant Canyanero hurr durr" issue
- encryptluks2 4y ago
  The thing is, a wireless camera costs like $50 these days but car manufacturers will find a way to add it as a $2000 package.
IgorPartola 4y ago
The problem started in the US as unintended consequences of trying to create cars with better MPG. In the last century the US government created a standard for how efficient vehicles need to be. At the time most people drove cars and specifically station wagons were among the most popular styles of cars. Trucks were not aspirational vehicles and were used for work only. And since work trucks often times do need a lot more power than a family hauler or at least need to be heavier/larger, the government created two different standards: one for cars and one for trucks (body on frame vehicles). Of course manufacturers immediately saw that they could just make trucks more like cars than make cars more fuel efficient so they started putting modern interiors and such into trucks and modernizing the platforms to create SUVs. Thus the station wagon died and the SUV became the standard family vehicle for a lot of people.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  >as unintended consequences I think we have plently of lessons of how badly things go when the federal government sticks its nose into anything that we can no longer call these as unintended consequences. They are very much intended We need to stop having the government pick winners and losers, or try to influence the market in any way be favoring one thing over another
  - calvinmorrison 4y ago
    >as unintended consequences regulatory capture tells us these consequences are intended. Intended to keep out upstarts without Musk's cash to back it. There's no reason we couldn't have bespoke car manufacturers producing city-cars for a low total cost.
    - IgorPartola 4y ago
      Do you think that anyone should be able to build a street-legal car? Regardless of how well it is manufactured and how safe it is for those inside and outside of it? How do you view the relationship between government-owned, built, and maintained roads and private vehicle manufacturers that use those roads?

cafard 4y ago

My recollection is that we've driven most of our cars for between 15 and 20 years. Hondas are I guess pretty generic.

antiterra 4y ago

Any of the performance SUVs these days are still not doing much better than 12mpg, even if the per mpg emissions are better. I was getting 9mpg city driving with a late model biturbo v12.

adql 4y ago

So you mean like every car company ? The parts are available for at least 15 years, they are making a bank on replacement compared to margins on new cars (pre-covid) Subarus are probably most plug and play but that's because they are small company that build same car for last 20 years... and not exactly super reliable. For example those [1] crazy bastards swapped whole manual gearbox and engine to a different model (that's auto-only) of Subaru and it even had pre-made holes for stuff that automatic gearbox car doesn't have in the first place, cos they used same subframe parts. * [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDcDpUaiwY4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDcDpUaiwY4

encryptluks2 4y ago
No, I mean a company that has generic enough parts for 20 years that a replacement part will be competitively priced and easy to replace. No more specialized tools, 2+ service hours to do a basic job, and all their service jobs have simple instructions with a video on how the customer can do it.. not put into some service manual that cost $400.