"While the all-aluminum body of the LLV has resisted corrosion exceptionally well over the years, the main powertrain components have been replaced multiple times and now must be sourced through aftermarket manufacturing. This has significantly increased repair costs while reducing performance and reliability.

In fact, the Postal Service had to contract an alternative supplier to reverse engineer and manufacture the chassis frame to keep the LLV operational. As a result, the average annual maintenance cost exceeds $5,000, with 7% of LLVs exceeding $10,000 annually. Additionally, they are less fuel-efficient and unsuitable for future delivery needs given projected changes in market demand, mail mix, and increasing delivery points.

The LLVs also lack modern safety features such as airbags, anti-lock brakes, air conditioning, back-up cameras, blind-spot warning systems, daytime running lights, and seatbelt reminders." https://uspsngdveis.com/documents/USPS+NGDV+FEIS_Dec+2021.pd...

Sort of a Ship of Theseus vehicle. Yes, some have lasted over 40 years, but that's with potentially multiple drivetrain replacements, at an annual maintenance cost of $5,000 - $10,000. That feels high, given how simple those vehicles are.

▲

varikin 7 months ago | parent | next [-]

I believe the LLV line was only suppose to be in service for 20 years, but the government gonna government and not find a replacement till it's almost too late. So yes it was a lot of scrounging and probably a lot of USPS mechanics needing to be creative, but the LLV lasted twice as long as it was designed for. I expect this same conversation will happen again in another 40 years.

▲

not_kurt_godel 7 months ago | parent [-]

> the government gonna government and not find a replacement till it's almost too late

Actually they were going to convert to EVs back in 2006 when Bush stepped in to prevent that and punish them on behalf of his oil buddies with the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. The problem isn't government, it's politicians voted in to destroy it in favor of corporate interests.

▲

throwworhtthrow 7 months ago | parent | next [-]

According to Wikipedia:

> Passed the House on December 8, 2006 (voice vote)

> Passed the Senate on December 9, 2006 (unanimous consent)

Can't pin it all on Bush Jr.

	▲	not_kurt_godel 7 months ago \| parent [-]
		> According to Tom Davis, the Bush administration threatened to veto the legislation unless they added the provision regarding funding the employee benefits in advance with the objective of using that money to reduce the federal deficit. Bush was responsible for the provision that kneecapped USPS to prevent them from ever funding their EV ambitions (until Biden funded NGDV in 2022)

▲

varikin 7 months ago | parent | prev [-]

I wasn't aware Bush was not part of the government in 2006. Thank you for the correction.

	▲	not_kurt_godel 7 months ago \| parent [-]
		Any snarkiness aside, the point is that "the government" isn't a monolithic entity that operates inevitably or deterministically. There can be significantly different outcomes depending on who is elected to run it (and you might even have an outsized say in who that is, depending on the state you live in and whether you vote).

▲

AdamJacobMuller 7 months ago | parent | prev [-]

> manufacture the chassis frame

Ship of Theseus notwithstanding, at that point, isn't it a new car if you're replacing the chassis?

	▲	folmar 7 months ago \| parent [-]
		Some manufacturers have a way of "officially" replacing the chassis, as in getting the chassis as a replacement part and procedure to replace it. For example see BMW part number 51 71 7 409 410, chassis for F16 https://www.online-teile.com/bmw-ersatzteile/51717409410_Bod... The law might look this or other way depending on where you are.