3 ms·
Modern cars break down less than older cars -- they are more reliable, not less. They generate more power, with better emissions. They have a wealth of creatu
by loeg 10mo ago
Modern cars break down less than older cars -- they are more reliable, not less. They generate more power, with better emissions. They have a wealth of creature comforts and features beyond what 1980s cars had.
- testing22321 10mo agoThey’re also vastly safer
- jijijijij 10mo ago* For the driver. Large cars/SUVs are vastly more dangerous for everyone else. Visibility in modern cars is also much worse, regardless of size.
- speedgoose 10mo agoSorry to go against the C15 French circle jerk, but a good modern SUV is safer for everyone despite being heavier, and a SUV. First, a good SUV is an electric SUV. Whoever had the experience to be behind a C15 without HEPA filters, something you can find in a good SUV, knows that the C15 will kill you with its air pollution. It’s worse if you are doing sport on a bike or running. And trail running may not save you from those C15, as they are pretty capable off road vehicles and are used by hunters and farmers. Also, the C15 has no ABS and ESP. Pierre is a lot less likely to crash into you with a modern SUV than a C15. Finally, the C15 has no active security. It will drive full speed into toddlers playing on the road while a good modern SUV will stop automatically. Same for cyclists and other vehicles. Visibility is indeed worse because the industry decided that a solid A pilar was more important.
- nosianu 10mo agoI'm not sure how useful it is to argue based on comparisons of that ancient car and new ones. Yes yes I know that's how it started, but I think it is obvious that a useful discussion is about looking at the principles behind that old car, and then to apply "what if" to modern ones. I'm making this assumption based on how utterly useless it is to try to have a serious discussion that's really about that old car vs. a new one. I mean, would anyone even think about producing those same old cars with their old technology? Obviously not. I think, in my discussions, not just this one, it would help us all A LOT if we didn't try to win an argument and limit ourselves to interpret the other people's comments in the most restricting way. Let's assume we are here to learn something other than finding ways to be "technically correct".
- speedgoose 10mo agoSorry, the statement that a shitty C15 is safer than a modern SUV is too hard to ignore. Overall, my statement isn't to take very seriously though.
- kelnos 10mo agoNot quite. The statement was that the C15 is safer for people outside of the car than the modern SUV. If I had to get hit by a car, I'd much rather it be the C15 than the modern SUV. I'm much less likely to survive the SUV hitting me. Now you can make the argument that other modern safety features make it less likely that the modern SUV would even hit you in the first place (given automatic emergency braking, etc.), and I suspect you might even be right, but I think that requires some data to back it up.
- speedgoose 10mo agoWhen I wrote everyone, I meant people inside and outside. The statement wasn’t specific to collisions but you are free to prefer being hit by a C15. As for myself as a pedestrian, I am not sure. The modern SUV is bigger but modern cars have improve safety for pedestrians. Mostly much softer and taller bumpers. It’s not perfect but from the ncap YouTube videos, I may prefer the modern SUV. If we go with empirical data, I suggest test crashing all those C15.
- testing22321 10mo agoABS, traction control, lane assist, crumple zones and many more things benefit everyone on the road. Of course the emissions from that old diesel are a major health hazard. I’d rather not have that drive past my yard where my toddler is playing.
- loeg 10mo agoDriver and passengers. Some of the modern sensor stuff benefits everyone else, too.
- Hnrobert42 10mo agoBoth are true. New vehicles are more reliable and safer. New vehicles are vastly harder to maintain by a home auto mechanic. I don't know enough to say whether realizability requires lower DIYability.
- Paianni 10mo agoModern engines are generally more reliable, yes. And galvanised steel and aluminium has helped chassis' and bodies last longer too. I think the 'sweet spot' has passed for most car categories though, the last being city cars when they got mandatory infotainment systems towards the end of the 2010s.
- ghurtado 10mo agoThe reliability of a vehicle isn't just the frequency of breakdowns. It's the frequency of breakdowns times how fucked you are when it does break down. So the actual math also depends on your means and where you live.
- Aurornis 10mo agoDeclining service revenue has been a problem for car dealerships for a long time. EVs are only making it even harder as their maintenance needs are reduced further. This is another topic where people look back on the past with rose colored glasses. At the risk of downvotes, this happens a lot on HN like in threads where people speak about their pre-SSD era computers as being faster and snappier than modern machines. I recently found my old laptop in storage and booted it up. I remember loving how fast it was at the time and being glad I spent extra for the fastest model at the time, but oh boy was it slow relative to anything I use today.
- torginus 10mo agoEVs are not more reliable in general, at least not according to the stats. And a lot of them haven't been on the road for long enough to know how their running costs will look like when they are a decade or two old. There's just been an article here on HN, that BMW installed a crash safety fuse that triggered on a minor fender-bender and killed the battery. It was WELDED in, and even after getting to it with a torch and installing a new one, the ICU needed to be hacked to accept the new part. They're also full of proprietary parts, basically you have entire car functions integrated to the same PCB, which are essentially unrepairable. I hope I'm wrong, but I guess there'll be a major disillusionment with EVs once these cars get to 10-15 years and people find out in mass, that it's no longer economical to fix them. I'm not an EV hater, I'm more of a pessimist - when it comes to manufacturers, I'm kinda 'pricing in' the worst behavior.
- Aurornis 10mo agoEVs aren't immune to design problem or recalls. However they don't have as much routine maintenance overhead as ICE engines. No oil changes, regenerative braking reduces brake pad and rotor wear, etc
- torginus 10mo agoIn practice however, most manufacturers mandate a yearly inspection when the car is in warranty, and after it's not, usually the state requires you to do one at least every other year. During these the mechanic will do the routine maintenance. I'm a casual driver, I drove like 100k km in 6 years, and my first set of brake pads still haven't worn down.
- everdrive 10mo ago> They have a wealth of creature comforts and features beyond what 1980s cars had. I don't want these, I don't want to pay for them. They raise the cost and they're unavoidable. This is a NEGATIVE, not a positive.
- kelnos 10mo agoFor you. Everyone's tastes are different. I remember riding around in cars in the 80s, and I much prefer the comfort of my current modern car, enough to make some trade offs around the annoying computerization of it. I suspect that there are more people around with my tastes than yours, and that's a driver of sales.
- bean469 10mo ago> Modern cars break down less than older cars Could be a coincidence, but I seem to hear the opposite from almost every single car mechanic I have ever talked to
- loeg 10mo agoShould we trust real data, or anecdotes from the people who work almost exclusively with the cars that have broken down? I'm happy sticking with real data, personally.