| ▲ | Fiveplus a day ago |
| That would be the absolute dream engineering brief. If I actually sit down and design that vehicle, it would have something like this. List, off the top of my head. 1. You keep the modern metallurgy and the crumple zones. You keep ABS and basic traction control because they are solved problems that save lives without needing cloud connectivity. 2. Instead of a 2000 USD proprietary touchscreen that will be obsolete in 3 years, the dashboard could be just a double DIN slot and a heavy-duty, universal tablet mount with a 100W USB-C PD port. The car provides the power and the speakers and my phone provides the maps and music. When the tech improves, you upgrade your phone, not your dashboard. 3. Nobs and buttons instead of touchscreens like VW has done recently, if my memory serves me right. The tragedy is that regulations in the EU and North America make this incredibly difficult to sell. The sane environmental stuff you mentioned has morphed into a requirement for deeply integrated electronic oversight. But I genuinely believe there is a massive, silent majority of drivers waiting for a car that promises nothing other than to start every morning and never ask for a software update. |
|
| ▲ | helsinkiandrew a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| > The sane environmental stuff you mentioned has morphed into a requirement for deeply integrated electronic oversight Decent catalytic converters require an array of sensors, ECU, and ability to fine control the engine inputs to work - without them most large cities would become smog ridden hells. |
| |
| ▲ | Nextgrid a day ago | parent | next [-] | | There's no reason technology has to be user-hostile. You can still have an ECU and screens and everything. When it breaks the screen can be used to tell you exactly which sensor input is out of range. There's no reason parts need to be serialized and learning a new part can only be done once. You can build a modern vehicle that's still repairable. | | |
| ▲ | Braxton1980 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Modules need to be programmed for your vehicle specs and country because there are different laws and functions. For example rear taillights are different in Europe vs the US. Another is that higher trims of my car have a rear climate zone which has a different fan and actuators for air flow that the module needs to know exist. | | |
| ▲ | MrGilbert 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Modules need to be programmed for your vehicle specs and country because there are different laws and functions. So are different intervalls of oil change between Australia and Europe - and yet, even in the 90s, people were able to keep that in mind. We got taught to be helpless by the industry, so they can help us out. If that mindset would have existed in the 60s, 70s, then there would not be a "true to OEM" aftermarket available for car parts. We need to get back to that. | | |
| ▲ | notatoad 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | We got taught to be helpless by the industry, so they can help us out. industry is pretty damn good at figuring out what customers actually want, instead of just what customer say they want and then don't actually buy. cars are the way they are because that's what the overwhelming majority of car buyers actually want. The average driver doesn't want their car spitting out error codes, they want a check engine light to tell them to take it to a mechanic, and any information beyond that is confusing. | | |
| ▲ | alextingle 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Are you sure that's what customers want, or maybe it's what dealers want? The check engine light tells you nothing. It tells your local mechanic nothing. Do you can't get the problem fixed easily or cheaply. What it does, is force you to take the car to a dealer, who has the specialist, proprietary equipment needed to interpret the fault. And these gatekeepers will charge you a fat premium for that. So no. I don't think this design choices are driven by a desire to serve the customer. | | |
| ▲ | notatoad 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | the check engine light tells you there's an OBD code available to be read. you can buy a reader for $20 on amazon, or your local hardware store, or i've even seen them at gas stations. you don't need "specialist proprietary equipment" that "gatekeepers charge a fat premium" for. this isn't magic. most people take it to a mechanic instead, because that's what they'd rather do. | | |
| ▲ | MrGilbert 19 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Even if I get the DTC codes out of the OBD - and then? Without the manufacturers service manual, I'm lost at interpreting the codes. For older cars, these manuals are somehow "obtainable" through "sources", but do not expect the manufacturer to help you out if, in fact, you are interested in fixing your own car. So yes - it’s the industry that got us screwed. | |
| ▲ | Nextgrid 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Not entirely correct. OBD only mandates emissions information to be made available in a standardized way. There are plenty of proprietary codes that might set a malfunction light and not show up on an OBD reader, or not be interpreted by it. (there are tools that reverse-engineer the proprietary protocols that can show those codes, but they aren't $20 - more like $200 and up) I really don't see why you're defending hiding information. Even for someone who doesn't want to mess around and would just take it to a dealer, making the information available without the need for a code reader will not hurt in any way. |
|
| |
| ▲ | esseph 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Ah, there is a distinction between new car buyers, and used car buyers. New car buyers are 10-15% of the annual car market (US). The other 85-90% of people are stuck with whatever the other people bought. |
|
| |
| ▲ | bri3d 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sure, but the reasons programming requires proprietary software accessible only to the dealer via some kind of online access are depressing: laziness, greed, and crime. Making software that's usable by independent shops and consumers costs money, eliminates business lock-in to dealers, and boosts the gray/black market for broken or stolen parts, so the only reason manufacturers do it at all is when they are required to by regulation. | | |
| ▲ | tmerc an hour ago | parent [-] | | Calling bs. It takes more effort to implement proprietary protocols and codes in addition to the globally mandated obd2 protocol. You can extend obd2 with additional codes that could be read by a simple device. It costs money to run servers that check your license to read those proprietary codes. It's not laziness. The black market on stolen parts isn't affected by this. Catalytic converter are stolen and resold all the time and swapping one doesn't require anything more complex than a socket set and a new gasket (assuming the thief didn't use a cutting tool, but then you just weld). Cats also get sold for scrap, so not sure what the software lock is gonna do for that. Hellcat engines get swapped all the time. ECUs get flashed by the black market regardless of the software locks. But what we see this proprietary software get used for is blocking the ability to swap brake pads and block heated seats. So it's not crime, but I'll agree on greed. | | |
| ▲ | bri3d an hour ago | parent [-] | | Did you miss the > Making software that's usable by independent shops and consumers costs money sentence before “calling BS”? > The black market on stolen parts isn't affected by this. Cars have more parts than a catalyst, and the used parts market is absolutely, 100% affected by software adaptation locks. You can watch the price of used engine control modules, instrument clusters, and infotainment modules rise as soon as aftermarket tools come out which bypass protections, and the tools to do so are worth a significant sum of money. > Hellcat engines get swapped all the time Yes, all protections are eventually bypassed, especially weak Stellantis ones, but that doesn’t mean that the goal wasn’t anti-theft, just that the goals were badly achieved. Anyway, I think we broadly agree that vehicle diagnostics should be more open, but discounting crime and “security” as objectives doesn’t work, because they’re the main arguments used against regulatory efforts to improve the situation. EDIT: I read again and I suppose you are arguing that diagnostic tools don’t or shouldn’t cost manufacturers money to make; I simply can’t agree with this argument, any software has a support and maintenance cost which scales with the type and number of users. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Nextgrid 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | So the screen can ask for the programming data to be entered or loaded from a USB stick given to you when you buy the vehicle. There’s no reason this can only be done with a proprietary tool you often can’t get legally at all and have to resort to piracy or reverse-engineered aftermarket options. There’s also no reason this can only be done once and then the module is junk. Hardware differences can be autodetected in some cases. | |
| ▲ | otikik 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That’s just a bunch of “if”s. And they are already programmed. But instead of coming directly built in on the vehicle you need to purchase a very expensive tool that hooks on the port and then tells you what the vehicle should tell you in the first place. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ninalanyon a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The solution to city air pollution is a different vehicle with a different drive train: an EV. The C15 is a workhorse for farmers and craftsmen not for shopping trips and driving the family to visit granny on the other side of town. | | |
| ▲ | writebetterc a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > The solution to city air pollution is a different vehicle with a different drive train: an EV. Priority list should basically be: 0. Bicycles
1. Metro
2. Buses
3. EVs (not counting emergency and service vehicles) | | |
| ▲ | kergonath 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > 0. Bicycles 1. Metro 2. Buses 3. EVs -1. Feet | |
| ▲ | fwipsy a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | oakesm9 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | We do have bicycle ambulance which carry a defibrillator [0] The 40 paramedics attend over 17,000 calls a year and the average response time is 6 minutes. [0] https://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/calling-us/who-will-treat... | |
| ▲ | wongarsu a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | More bicycles, metros and buses leaves more space on the street for emergency vehicles | |
| ▲ | writebetterc a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | > (not counting emergency and service vehicles) Just gotta read the last line too :P | | |
| ▲ | scott_w a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Cut him some slack, he might have been having a heart attack at the time and in need of one of those ambulances! | |
| ▲ | Supernaut a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | What do you mean, at a practical level, when you set out your "priority list" above? Are you referring to the use of congestion charges to discourage private motor vehicle use? | | |
| ▲ | tsimionescu a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Not OP, but I don't think congestion charges are the most important part here. It's more about what type of infrastructure to prioritize resources and work for. Basically, the idea is that the town or city should not spend money on building parking, for example, and instead spend it on bike lanes, or two more busses, or some extension to the metro line. | |
| ▲ | scott_w a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | It’s entirely dependent on the situation. Some areas, additional charges work best. In others, it’s possible/necessary to redesign road and street layouts to prioritise higher-density modes of transport and physically discourage low-density modes like cars. This might be priority lights for public transport, lowering speed limits and narrowing streets. In some contexts, it’s necessary to completely disallow cars with things like bus lanes, bike/pedestrian-only areas. Separated tram/metro lines, too. Most of this infrastructure, in practice, also aids emergency vehicle use as they can usually fit down bike lanes and are obviously able to fit in bus lanes. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | fpoling a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | EVs are still heavier than ICE vehicles and will for the next 10-20 years unless one is OK with a tiny battery. And heavy weight means more pollution from wheels that produce particles that ends up in lungs. Note brakes also pollutes with asbestos but EVs typically have regenerative braking so I think brakes pollutes roughly the same in a heavier EV as in ICE car. | | |
| ▲ | rickydroll a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I compared the weights of EVs versus ICE, and they were surprisingly close. Most of time, the differences were in the 15% range, and then you find exceptions like the Hummer, which is 30% heavier. I'm sure it comes as no surprise That the heavier the vehicle, the bigger the difference in ICE versus EV weight. While I think lighter weight vehicles of all types would be a big win, I fear that ship has sailed. I think we have an opportunity to reset vehicle size both from a desire for cheaper and simpler vehicles. Look at cost and weight of the BYD EVs and the new pickup trucks from Slate and Telos. Overall, I find the slightly increased weight for an EV to be an acceptable trade-off. Brakes last longer, tires, depending on make, are about 10% shorter life at most and overall maintenance is much less. Since I keep my cars until the body goes toes up, I have a much lower carbon footprint. than the 3yr lease route | | |
| ▲ | bee_rider 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If you give the difference in weight as a percentage, it is sort of surprising that the percentage is higher for heavier vehicles, right? Or at least I don’t get it. I’d expect the EV to be a constant factor heavier, a total weight of combustion_vehicle*1.1 or something. | | |
| ▲ | kelnos 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | I wonder if it's sorta like the rocket equation. A heavier vehicle requires larger batteries to move the extra weight with a comparable range as a smaller vehicle, but the batteries are heavy too, so you need even more battery to move the heavier batteries. | | |
| ▲ | 20after4 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's exactly that. Battery = heavy, heavy vehicle = short range. I wonder if ICE vehicle weight is calculated with a full fuel tank? Gas / Diesel is also pretty heavy and large vehicles have large empty spaces to be filled with fuel. |
|
| |
| ▲ | b40d-48b2-979e 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I had a 2010s Civic and moved to a Model 3. The curb weight difference was only ~3-400 lbs (about 10%), but the larger battery capacity, large SUV offerings are significantly heavier than ICE options (the F150 Lightning is about 2,000 pounds heavier than an ICE F150, for example, 5,000 -> 7,000 lbs.). |
| |
| ▲ | avidiax a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The tire pollution is true, but the brakes hardly get used on an EV. They are almost for emergency use only. Mine has a special mode to disable regeneration for a while so you can use the brake pads to clean the rotors. | |
| ▲ | nl 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Modern car brakes don't have asbestos. The difference in tyre wear is so marginal it's probably unmeasurable - less than the difference between running at the correct pressure and forgetting to check your tyre pressure. ICE vehicles also have exhaust pipes which pollute some too... | |
| ▲ | vincnetas a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | My EV is lighter than your ICE. Volkswagen eUP. 1183kg. 250km range in summer conditions. | | |
| ▲ | torginus a day ago | parent [-] | | I love the idea of these tiny EVs. Apparently the EU's making some legislation for them so that they can go without much of the expensive 'safety' equipment such as driver tracking. Parking cars in cities not designed for them is a nightmare, but getting around with a car is so much faster than public transport, even if your city's is fairly decent. | | |
| ▲ | smaudet 21 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Hybrids are even better, super tiny batteries with an ICE on standby. If you scale size as well (like a motorcycle but e.g. as a tricycle for safety), you can realize some major efficiency improvements (doubling or tripling energy efficiency). Which is why, bicycles should be the focus of transportation improvement. | |
| ▲ | immibis a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | tangential: people also underestimate the convenience of public transport being a one-way trip, meaning you can go from A>B>C>D>A and never have to go back to a previous spot to pick up a part of your luggage that you left behind. | | |
| ▲ | torginus 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Personally, when not being a tourist, almost all my trips are home to some place and back again. Public transport is great, but if you're going to a less good part of the city, or even just a place that's unfamiliar, and less frequented, it might be a bit more difficult to get around. And public transport travel distances can be patchy based on where the stops are, especially if you're going to the outskirts of your city. Also when having to be present in the office, that extra 15-25 mins (x2) it takes to get to and from the office adds up quickly. |
| |
| ▲ | peregrinus1 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | 20after4 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | Replying to the entirely wrong thread? I'm not sure how this ended up here. | | |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | maxerickson a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | For gasoline engines, electronic fuel injection is far better than a carburetor, it isn't just the emissions systems. Sure, it's harder to work on. The trade off there is that you don't have to work on it. | | | |
| ▲ | Animats 20 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Engine control alone can be self-contained. The Ford EEC IV of the 1980s had its program permanently etched into the Intel 8061 CPU, and was designed to last 30 years. It did. I finally sold off my 40 year old Ford Bronco, which was still running on the original engine and CPU. | |
| ▲ | pantalaimon a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If you have an electric vehicle you need none of that | | |
| ▲ | everdrive a day ago | parent | next [-] | | And if people would make one that wasn't an iPad on wheels I'd be in line to buy. | | |
| ▲ | wrigby a day ago | parent [-] | | This is my exact same sentiment. I’m cautiously excited about the upcoming Slate Pickup[1] - I can see it being my go-to if I leave NYC, but it still won’t hit like the XJ Cherokee I drove before I gave up cars for the city. 1: https://www.slate.auto/ | | |
| ▲ | klum a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Looks interesting, I wonder to what extent they really want to make cars DIY-able again (as they state). On the one hand, they mention servicing is "easy" — just turn to their partner repair shop chain! On the other hand, there's Slate University and mention of repairability. I haven't followed development of this at all, so I'm genuinely curious. Hope it's not just "you can swap in and out our proprietary modules". | |
| ▲ | hypercube33 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I really want to like the slate but their speakers and tablet holder concept actually are awful. Just a super basic off the shelf din rail hole and aux in and slap the most basic touch screen with physical control stereo you can find in there that does air play and car play works for me. also stereo speakers in the glove box is...what | | |
| ▲ | idiotsecant a day ago | parent [-] | | Who cares. Literally every discussion of vehicles someone has to bring up infotainment systems. You know that getting your dopamine drip is not what a vehicle is for, right? | | |
| ▲ | esseph 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | If I have to drive 2 hours or more every day or 12+ hours for work a few times a month (not in a long time anymore for either), it better be fucking enjoyable. |
|
| |
| ▲ | soared a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I like the idea of a slate but the truck bed just makes no sense at that size. I don’t understand why it’s not defaulted to another row of seats or hatchback, with the option to convert to truck. 5 ft bed without extension is kind of pointless as a bed, but huge as a trunk. | | |
| ▲ | everdrive a day ago | parent [-] | | That's effectively what it is, but reverse. You buy it as a truck, and can buy seats & cap and turn it into an SUV. I see it as the closest thing you can get to a kei truck in the US without importing. Relatively cheap, good payload capacity, (better than a lot of trucks out there) effectively unable to tow, 5-foot bed, which is the same or larger than most mid-size trucks, and a tiny form factor. It's certainly a niche vehicle, but it looks exciting if it can fill you niche. |
| |
| ▲ | peatmoss a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I worry about the Slate truck being DOA with expiration of incentives for EVs. Someone please tell me I'm wrong, because if they do deliver as promised, I'll be excited to buy one. For me, I'm hoping it fills the mid-90s Isuzu Pup sized hole in my heart. |
|
| |
| ▲ | nottorp a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | For the price of that C15 (adjusted for inflation it seems) you may be able to buy a battery for an EV. Maybe. |
| |
| ▲ | ramesh31 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is why late 90s cars are objectively the greatest ever built. You had ECUs, cats, ABS, disc brakes, airbags, power steering, and conventional automatic transmissions. Everything that makes a modern car safe and reliable, but none of the high tech digital BS that has infused things nowadays. | | |
| ▲ | dgacmu a day ago | parent | next [-] | | ESC (electronic stability control) didn't become common until about 2010 to 2015. It makes a really big difference for safety -- EU estimates are that it's saved more than 15,000 lives. Let's backport that one too. :) | | |
| ▲ | wrigby a day ago | parent | next [-] | | My 2004 RX-8 had decently solid ESC, but it was a “high-end” vehicle at the time. It’s definitely something we want to keep in our idealized vehicle (but let’s also keep the “disable ESC so I can have fun” button) | | |
| ▲ | 20after4 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | I was going to make this exact comment. The RX-8 had excellent stability control. Saved my ass at least once going too fast around a 90 degree corner. It also behaved really well on icy roads. It was pretty incredible for a rear wheel drive sports car, especially impressive at the time compared to every other car on the road back then. |
| |
| ▲ | dizhn a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I bought my first real wheel drive car in 2014. Still have it. It's not a race car. About 170hp. It struggles at the smallest curves. Good thing it has traction control and esp. Except all the front wheel cars I had before, one even slightly more powerful and smaller, never needed any of that. Never ever buying a rwd again. (Enthusiast forums of the brand tell me I don't know how to drive RWD. Skill issue. :D) | | |
| ▲ | MobiusHorizons a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Rwd is definitely sketchier in certain circumstances, especially going uphill in low traction. Also pretty bad in the snow generally. but I’ve only had issues going around corners when it was very wet and I was driving faster that the speed limit. If you are running into traction issues driving normally (ie not flooring it) I would recommend having your tires and alignment checked, even with RWD that should not be happening in my experience. | |
| ▲ | jonasdegendt a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | You should look into different tires perhaps. | | |
| ▲ | dizhn 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | I will grant that there might be a match issue but I don't think Michelin Pilot Sports are bad tires. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Glawen a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | It was available already on late 90s vehicles.
That was the fix to solve Mercedes Class A failing Elk test: put ESP on all trims |
| |
| ▲ | formerly_proven a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | In reality many 90s cars are phenomenal rust buckets due to issues in the adoption of water-based paints, cars which actually still have tangible amounts of steel in their panels are basically golden samples. |
| |
| ▲ | ambicapter a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | What do the sensors do? There's not much you can change in the catalytic converter so I assume it's just reading temperature? So I assume it's changing the fuel/air combustion ratio according to the cat's temperature? | | |
| ▲ | immibis a day ago | parent [-] | | Not a motorhead but IIRC a combustion with too little oxygen produces soot (pollution) and one with too much oxygen produces NOx pollution, with a sweet spot in the middle. The exhaust oxygen sensor allows the ECU to adjust the air/fuel mix to hit the minimum pollution spot, instead of estimating it. There might also be a catalyst temperature sensor or something. It's not a "whole bunch" of sensors, it's a few sensors and it's not some inscrutable magic, it's somethijg someone could replicate in open-source if they had equipment and time. We really need to get away from the mindset that proprietary stuff contains inscrutable magic. It's often worse quality than the open thing. However, it does have the right connections to be allowed to be put in a car that drives on the road. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | schmuckonwheels a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >the dashboard could be just a double DIN slot and a heavy-duty, universal tablet mount with a 100W USB-C PD port. The car provides the power and the speakers and my phone provides the maps and music. Legally mandated backup cameras make your idea DOA. In fact, nearly everything terrible about cars in the last decade can be traced to regulations in some way. Wondering why transmissions are insanely complicated and unreliable now? Manufacturers were forced to eek out an extra couple MPG due to continually tightening environmental regulations. Something has to give. |
| |
| ▲ | MobiusHorizons a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > In fact, nearly everything terrible about cars in the last decade can be traced to regulations in some way. I think the reason we even need backup cameras now is that visibility is so poor on modern vehicles. I think that in turn is due to increasing the height of the bottom of the windows for better airbags. I’m sure it’s great in a crash, but visibility is also a safety concern. Not all of it is regulations though, but lot of common complaints. | |
| ▲ | kalleboo 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >Legally mandated backup cameras make your idea DOA. Cheap cars without fancy entertainment systems put the backup camera screen in the rear-view mirror. You can get these kits for like $20 on aliexpress. |
|
|
| ▲ | sokoloff 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| My understanding is that ABS in cars has surprisingly little effect on fatalities. It is a huge lifesaver when deployed to motorcycles, and a benefit to reducing non-fatal crashes, but not much for fatals in cars. (I agree it's a well-solved problem and the reduction in non-fatal crashes makes it worthwhile from a convenience standpoint alone.) |
|
| ▲ | ornornor a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Instead of a 2000 USD proprietary touchscreen that will be obsolete in 3 years, the dashboard could be just a double DIN slot and a heavy-duty, universal tablet mount with a 100W USB-C PD port. The car provides the power and the speakers and my phone provides the maps and music. When the tech improves, you upgrade your phone, not your dashboard. Dacia does that. The base sandero comes with speakers and Bluetooth. The rest is up to you, there is no screen no radio. |
| |
| ▲ | kergonath 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | I am happy with Car Play as a decent middle ground. It’s nice to have a large screen, and everything is still done on the phone and not on a shite computer whose components were cost-cut to an inch of their lives. |
|
|
| ▲ | hypercube33 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| We already had basically the solution you suggested with airplay/car play - USB charger with audio out that just is a display. when a phone isn't plugged in it shows super basic radio features like station and song name for AM and FM. |
| |
| ▲ | 20after4 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | Had it and now most manufacturers are abandoning that for some proprietary crap that's much worse and requires a subscription for navigation and music streaming. |
|
|
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | roland35 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You should look into the slate truck! This is exactly what they are trying to do |
| |
|
| ▲ | HPsquared a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Maybe Framework could get into the car business. |
|
| ▲ | 4MOAisgoodenuf 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Please allow me to introduce you to the second gen Toyota Yaris |
|
| ▲ | jfengel a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Incidentally, you're describing my 2020 Subaru Impreza. Under $20k for my dealer demo. I do wish it supported a later version of Android Auto so that I could run that via Bluetooth. (It does have regular Bluetooth but that's just audio.) |
| |
| ▲ | crazysim a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Wireless Android Auto or Carplay generally use BT to setup but WiFi to send the bulk of the graphical data over. That said, there are adapters to make an existing Android Auto Wireless if you want it. I think some are sold on Amazon too so you could probably try and maybe return. I don't have any experience with them since I'm very happy with my car's built in wired Android Auto and the reliability of cabling but it is something you can try. | | |
| ▲ | jfengel a day ago | parent [-] | | Thanks for the tip. I'll look into it. | | |
| ▲ | devilbunny 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I have one for my wife's car that has wired-only CarPlay. The dongle can do Android Auto as well. It has a bit of lag compared to wired or built-in wireless CarPlay (have used that in rentals) but it's not really an issue for usability. It was maybe $30. |
|
| |
| ▲ | cuu508 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Were they sold with an option to have have no OEM infotainment? Just speakers and a phone mount? | | |
| ▲ | jfengel a day ago | parent [-] | | I don't think it has any OEM infotainment. I think there is some kind of software in there but I've never looked at it. It's not intrusive. | | |
| ▲ | cuu508 a day ago | parent [-] | | Looking at image search for "2020 impreza dash" there's a screen above climate controls in all images. I was asking if there was an option to have no sceen. | | |
| ▲ | acheron a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Backup cameras are required by regulation since the late 2010s. You can’t sell a car with no screen. | | | |
| ▲ | jfengel 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Oh, I see. I don't know. I doubt it. That wasn't something I was interested in; I use navigation very often. But it's my navigation tool, not theirs. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | klum a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I have a theory that these environmental regulations at least to some degree defeat themselves. They make engines more complicated, so more fragile and harder for an amateur (edit: or any professional who isn't their own brand repair shops) to service. They encourage smaller-block engines with turbos and compressors which makes the engine more short-lived. They produce stuff like throttle-hang and gear selection recommendations optimized for driving economy, not engine longevity (or driving experience, for that matter). On the whole, they seem to be contributing to this movement of taking power away from the end consumer and making your product more and more like a subscription (this goes further than the car industry, of course). I do realize that it's important to cut down on pollution! And maybe this kind of stuff has been studied... although I imagine it would be very hard to do accurately. Imagine if a car manufacturer would provide service guides, easily-accessible part diagrams and competitively priced spare parts. Imagine if they optimized for longevity and if the handbook that came with the car had more technical details than it had warnings about how doing any kind of maintenance yourself will result in a) your death and b) a voided warranty. That would be pretty nice. |
| |
| ▲ | nandomrumber a day ago | parent [-] | | Did I hear right that some new vehicles are claiming 20,000km service intervals? I know I’ve seen 15,000 service intervals. This is the minimum to maintain the warranty for the first 3 / 5 / 7 seven years whatever. If you change the oil at every 5000k and never turn off a cold engine - all petrol engines have fuel wash down at ignition cut, but much worse when the engine is come - you should expect 500,000+ plus kilometres out of an engine barring any metallurgical problems or manufacturing defects. Petrol makes a poor lubricant for engines, and fucks engine oil. The less of it in engine oil the better. Modern engines and fully synthetic oils are way better than the their counterparts from my youth, but 15,000+ kilometres service intervals are less about what engines need and more about what the folks over in marketing need. Edit: I did see a second hand commercial diesel van recently that had met all service requirements for the warranty period, x number of years or 90,000 kilometres. This meant it had logged exactly two oil changes since new, and the third had just been done at 90,000. 90,000k on two oil changes. Wild. |
|
|
| ▲ | everdrive a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| How about an option just to have one of those old Ford radios with the huge buttons you can push with gloves on? And maybe an aux-in? |
| |
| ▲ | nandomrumber a day ago | parent [-] | | So long as it also plays cassettes. My first car had the mechanical radio buttons and cassette player, I think you even had to turn the cassette over when one side ended. |
|
|
| ▲ | Braxton1980 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I can unlock my doors with my phone and monitor the cars location with my phone with cloud connectivity. This isn't required and was offered as a 5 year free plan with optional paid extensions after How is this bad? |
| |
