4 ms·

My frustration with modern cars is that they are under powered, over reliant on digital buttons, and confusing dashboards. Bring back physical buttons!

zrobotics 2y ago
Edit: rereading this, it comes off slightly accusatory or hostile. That's not my intention, I'm genuinely curious why there's this perception that modern cars are underpowered. Under-powdered? I'll definitely agree with you on hating everything being pushed to a crappy iPad mounted in the dash, but what period of cars are you comparing to where today's cars are underpowered? If anything, I think it's the opposite, even a basic econobox has HP numbers that are above what an older performance vehicle used to have. KA24E (1990 240SX), 134HP [0] FA24D (current Toyota GR86 & Subaru Brz), 228–234 hp [1] The corolla has a ton of different engine options, the base US model (that car and driver complains about being sleepy) has 169HP [2] So a older 240, which was a performance car and is still a ton of fun to drive, is 35HP down from the base-spec current gen corolla. The corolla just doesn't feel like it has any power, but it has no issues getting up to speed on a freeway entrance ramp. Whereas an economy car of the same vintage as that 240 will definitely struggle to do so. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_KA_engine#KA24E https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_KA_engine#KA24E [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subaru_FA_engine#FA24D https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subaru_FA_engine#FA24D [2] https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/corolla/specs/2024/toyota_corolla_toyota-corolla-sedan_2024/442320 https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/corolla/specs/2024/toyot...
- fragmede 2y ago
  and the econobox does that while having 4 doors, air conditioning, emissions controls, crumple zones and a stereo system, and being reliable as all hell, vs an old oil burner from back in the day
  - zrobotics 2y ago
    I guess? I mean the econobox I was thinking of was an early 90s accord, my last one I retired 3 years ago since it was starting to get to the point of too much rust. Still had 4 doors, AC, crumple zones, and a stereo that was perfectly acceptable, just needed to add a $25 Bluetooth reciever. A modern corolla is safer than a 91 accord, but the accord isn't exactly a 1960s deathtrap. Definitely better airbags though, the accord just had a driver and I think that was an option. However, I replaced the accord with a SUV since that's basically all that's available anymore, so I don't feel that much safer in my 2023 Ford since the if I end up in a ditch I'm way more likely to roll and being heavier there's way more energy to disperse in that crash. That old Honda lasted >30 years and wasn't a great example when I bought it 10 years ago. I only did maintenance and some suspension work, I never had to touch the engine or transmission. That seems plenty reliable enough for me, even paying a shop it probably would have cost 3k for the 10 years I drove that car.

zrobotics 2y ago

Edit: rereading this, it comes off slightly accusatory or hostile. That's not my intention, I'm genuinely curious why there's this perception that modern cars are underpowered. Under-powdered? I'll definitely agree with you on hating everything being pushed to a crappy iPad mounted in the dash, but what period of cars are you comparing to where today's cars are underpowered? If anything, I think it's the opposite, even a basic econobox has HP numbers that are above what an older performance vehicle used to have. KA24E (1990 240SX), 134HP [0] FA24D (current Toyota GR86 & Subaru Brz), 228–234 hp [1] The corolla has a ton of different engine options, the base US model (that car and driver complains about being sleepy) has 169HP [2] So a older 240, which was a performance car and is still a ton of fun to drive, is 35HP down from the base-spec current gen corolla. The corolla just doesn't feel like it has any power, but it has no issues getting up to speed on a freeway entrance ramp. Whereas an economy car of the same vintage as that 240 will definitely struggle to do so. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_KA_engine#KA24E https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_KA_engine#KA24E [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subaru_FA_engine#FA24D https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subaru_FA_engine#FA24D [2] https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/corolla/specs/2024/toyota_corolla_toyota-corolla-sedan_2024/442320 https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/corolla/specs/2024/toyot...

fragmede 2y ago
and the econobox does that while having 4 doors, air conditioning, emissions controls, crumple zones and a stereo system, and being reliable as all hell, vs an old oil burner from back in the day
- zrobotics 2y ago
  I guess? I mean the econobox I was thinking of was an early 90s accord, my last one I retired 3 years ago since it was starting to get to the point of too much rust. Still had 4 doors, AC, crumple zones, and a stereo that was perfectly acceptable, just needed to add a $25 Bluetooth reciever. A modern corolla is safer than a 91 accord, but the accord isn't exactly a 1960s deathtrap. Definitely better airbags though, the accord just had a driver and I think that was an option. However, I replaced the accord with a SUV since that's basically all that's available anymore, so I don't feel that much safer in my 2023 Ford since the if I end up in a ditch I'm way more likely to roll and being heavier there's way more energy to disperse in that crash. That old Honda lasted >30 years and wasn't a great example when I bought it 10 years ago. I only did maintenance and some suspension work, I never had to touch the engine or transmission. That seems plenty reliable enough for me, even paying a shop it probably would have cost 3k for the 10 years I drove that car.