[HN Gopher] New cars make me want to Saab (2020)
___________________________________________________________________
New cars make me want to Saab (2020)
Author : freediver
Score : 95 points
Date : 2022-03-10 15:44 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (theoutline.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (theoutline.com)
| Melatonic wrote:
| I always wanted a Saab-Aru - best of all worlds! 9-2X
| jeffbee wrote:
| Yeah the world's least-reliable powerplant and you have to get
| it serviced at a Chevy dealer. Truly the perfect combination.
| shever73 wrote:
| I've owned and loved Saabs. The 900 was absolutely bulletproof.
| The 9-3 I owned less so. The innovative mechanism that also
| locked the gear stick when the ignition key was removed was
| genius!
|
| Maybe it's just me, but this article seemed to end a bit
| abruptly. As a die-hard Saab fan, I was left wanting a bit more.
| sdoering wrote:
| I remember that feature. My uncle owned a Saab and always
| parked the back of the car against a wall because the gear
| locked in reverse and only then the key could be removed.
|
| I was 14 or so and he allowed me to park it. I was blown away
| by the idea of ensuring a safety feature against thieves that
| was so "easy".
|
| Edit: typo
| omosubi wrote:
| I totally agree with the point about all new cars looking
| completely ridiculous. I have never understood why there isn't a
| low cost automaker that has only the bare minimum - the style
| barely ever changes and looks decent, manual everything, bare
| minimum heat/ac, minimum radio that can easily be replaced, as
| cheap as possible - is the only reason this doesn't exist because
| of ever increasing regulations?
| ciceryadam wrote:
| In EU/UK you can buy Dacias, you can check out Dacia Sandero,
| or Dacia Duster.
| hpkuarg wrote:
| Good news!
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| >is the only reason this doesn't exist because of ever
| increasing regulations?
|
| Pretty much. They preclude that car from actually being cheap
| enough that people would buy it over a nicer used car and as
| the new car market skews higher and higher end the used car
| market skews likewise making the competition stiffer.
|
| >about all new cars looking completely ridiculous.
|
| The front body work is bounded by pedestrian safety
| requirements in the EU and aerodynamics. The rooflines and
| beltlines are bounded by US safety requirements. It's no
| surprise that the designs all converge.
| Aloha wrote:
| You're not wrong.
|
| Airbags, active suspension systems, ABS, backup cameras, etc
| all increase the cost of cars. Though I dont know how much of
| that is tied to increasing price of used cars - that seems to
| have more to do with Cash for Clunkers taking a huge amount
| of used cars out of the used car market, while it put a bunch
| of people in new cars, it also skewed the pricing for used
| cars higher - it took an entire generation of used cars out
| of the market - which continues to effect pricing today.
| themitigating wrote:
| Active air suspension is a performance part and not in most
| cars
| Aloha wrote:
| I didn't say anything about air - active suspensions
| (electronic stability control) has been required in all
| US vehicles from 2012.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_stability_contro
| l#T...
| kllrnohj wrote:
| Electronic stability control is not active suspension,
| those are very different things. ESC isn't really even
| part of the suspension setup at all, it modulates the
| brakes in response to steering angle input & a yaw
| sensor.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| More recently, with the semiconductor shortage the
| carmakers shoved what parts they had into expensive
| products that would make more money.
| jonasdegendt wrote:
| Dacia does this in Europe, their lowest priced car that has
| exactly zero features comes in at 9999EUR with an optional
| spare wheel for an additional 150EUR.
|
| If you want AC and a radio you're looking at about 12k EUR,
| which definitely isn't terrible. It's a Renault subsidiary and
| you see a fair amount of them driving around.
|
| So yeah, it's not like offering an affordable bare-bone car
| isn't possible in mature markets, it's more likely that
| Americans just don't have an appetite for them.
|
| The affordable car is definitely being tested though. Renault
| discontinued the Twingo last year, which was their smallest
| car. Audi discontinued the A1, claiming there's just no money
| to be made in their lowest segment.
|
| It's looking pretty bleak for the utilitarians among us, as
| electrification happens and safety features such as lane assist
| and emergency stop systems become mandatory, base prices will
| consistently be higher. You can only drive down the price of
| components so much.
| Hamuko wrote:
| Dacia is so cheap that they even omit features that you might
| not think of as "features".
|
| The base model Dacia Duster doesn't come with height
| adjustment on the driver's seat or with a glovebox light, you
| need to upgrade to the Comfort package for those. It does
| interestingly come with a radio these days, back in the day
| that used to require one of the upgrade packages.
| s0rce wrote:
| I don't think my Suzuki SX4 has driver seat height
| adjustment, at least I've never used it if it does...
| [deleted]
| Ancapistani wrote:
| I drove an older (2000) Jeep Wrangler for much this reason.
| It came from the factory with no A/C and a bottom-tier
| AM/FM radio. The seat slides front to back and reclines -
| manually - but that's about it. It has a heater, but didn't
| work when I bought it in ~2010 and I've never bothered to
| fix it; I almost never used the rear windows when I had
| them, and I've since replaced the vinyl top with a much
| simpler one that doesn't even have provision for them, so
| why bother?
|
| It's has a manual transmission and an inline 4-cylinder
| with very low output compared to most vehicles.
| Paradoxically, that combination makes it fun to drive.
|
| It also holds its value very well. I've owned it for twelve
| of the 23 years of its life so far, and I could sell it
| today for more than I paid for it. At the same time, it's
| extremely cheap to fix, because the design hasn't changed
| often over the years and the powertrain is shared between
| many popular vehicles of its time.
|
| My wife's vehicle has far more "creature comforts". She
| drives a 2015 Kia Sorento that we bought new. We're
| considering upgrading hers to a new Kia Telluride in the
| near future, especially considering recent trends in used
| car prices.
|
| There's definitely still a place out there for mechanically
| simple vehicles. It's a shame that the new Jeep Wranglers -
| say, the JK and newer - have gotten so much larger, more
| complex, and expensive to maintain.
|
| If I had my druthers, I'd be driving something like a
| modern Kubelwagen, VW Thing, or perhaps something with a
| bit more cargo space like a Pinzgauer. It's a shame no one
| seems interested in making them.
| forty wrote:
| Renault still have the Twizy, which is smaller than a Twingo.
| runnerup wrote:
| The Audi A1 was over $30,000. That's not "testing the
| affordable car"! Honda HR-V and Honda Civics are selling like
| crazy (<$25,000). Ford Maverick at $20,000 sold out a YEAR
| before the vehicles had even been manufactured. America has a
| completely insatiable demand for <$20,000 vehicles but no one
| makes them.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| I might love my Honda Fit, but no one else did (apparently)
| as it's been discontinued.
| truffdog wrote:
| They seem pretty popular on the road
| kube-system wrote:
| What you see on the road, on average, is what was selling
| well 12 years ago. Small cars tend to be more popular
| during long periods of bad economic times or high fuel
| prices. SUVs sell like hot cakes every time the US has a
| decade of good economic times and cheap gas.
|
| The Fit started selling really well around the time of
| the 08 crash (and fuel more than doubled in price that
| decade):
|
| https://www.autoblog.com/2008/06/23/honda-boosting-fit-
| produ...
|
| > Like most other manufacturers doing business in the
| U.S., Honda has been caught by surprise by the sudden
| shift in demand to smaller cars.
| s0rce wrote:
| I want one, sad they got discontinued. They seemed to
| constantly get great reviews.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| There are some nice functional design elements (for
| instance, the back seats are truly fold flat which
| provides a surprising amount of storage). That said, I am
| honestly tempted by going up market to a GTI for a little
| more fun in a similar package.
| Bayart wrote:
| The good thing about Dacia is that since they're made from
| high volume Renault parts, repairs are cheap as well.
| DougMellon wrote:
| I feel as if this describes the Chevy Spark.
| WaitWaitWha wrote:
| > So yeah, it's not like offering an affordable bare-bone car
| isn't possible in mature markets, it's more likely that
| Americans just don't have an appetite for them.
|
| I do not think it is that simple. I think regulations also
| restrict how simple a car can be. Top of my head, breaks,
| lights, light colors, emissions, transmission (go figure),
| fuel storage, fueling features, and so on. All these add to
| the cost.
|
| No one _wants to_ drive a car that has no or minimal creature
| comforts.
| gbalint wrote:
| The problem with Dacia is that it is not just simple but also
| a cheap car. I would be happy to buy a simple good quality
| car, but Dacia saves money on plastic quality, noise
| insulation, engine power and seat comfort too (among others).
| lamontcg wrote:
| > safety features such as lane assist and emergency stop
| systems become mandatory
|
| I've got a cheap $0 lane assist and emergency stop system
| called "paying attention and not tailgating" that came stock
| in my 2003 Ford Ranger. I've been using it consistently for
| 35 years now on different makes and models of vehicles and it
| hasn't failed once.
| mkr-hn wrote:
| Meanwhile, there are millions of wrecks every year in the
| US alone. I'm sure a large portion of those drivers said
| the same until they got hit. You need only browse
| /r/IdiotsInCars for a few minutes to witness the full range
| of ways people with the best of intentions can get in
| wrecks because someone else acted like a fool, and how many
| could have been prevented with lane keeping and emergency
| stop features.
|
| The roads are a highly regulated public space where safe,
| smooth motion depends on everyone working together, and
| where one little error can throw it into chaos. _Everyone_
| will mess up if they live long enough. You can make some
| philosophical argument against mandatory safety features if
| you like, but I hate driving as it is and welcome any
| feature that reduces the odds or severity of the inevitable
| results of the limits of human perception and reaction
| time.
| aquaticsunset wrote:
| In my opinion, the real solution to this isn't to stuff
| as much driver assistance safety tech into all cars. It's
| to shift our society to not need cars for basic life
| necessities.
|
| There are plenty of people who absolutely are not skilled
| at driving. They never will be. But they have to own a
| car to live in our society - thus, here we are.
| bartread wrote:
| > but I hate driving as it is and welcome any feature
| that reduces the odds or severity of the inevitable
| results of the limits of human perception and reaction
| time.
|
| None of this will change the fact that, you, as the
| driver bear primary responsibility for your own safety,
| and that of your passengers, when in control of a
| vehicle. Driver aids are helpful but are not a substitute
| for attentive and defensive driving.
| mkr-hn wrote:
| Your post reads like you're disagreeing with something I
| said, but the sentence you quoted isn't in disagreement
| when considered in context. Maybe you need to re-read the
| whole thing.
| [deleted]
| holoduke wrote:
| I find the cause for many issues in the US mainly in bad
| road design. Compare that with France, Germany or The
| Netherlands. So much better there. lane control hardly
| needed.
| mkr-hn wrote:
| A large part of startup pitches boil down to "what if
| [thing already done well for decades in Asia and/or
| Europe], but worse, and expensive?" Ugly patches over the
| existing horror show might be the only option until
| there's a major cultural shift.
| greedo wrote:
| Our town has been replacing stoplight intersections with
| roundabouts, and you would think we were trying to
| castrate all the adult males. How people have any
| difficulty navigating a roundabout eludes me, but every
| day I see more drivers just act like they are faced with
| an alien when they come upon a roundabout.
| LAC-Tech wrote:
| Roundabouts are ubiquitous here in New Zealand, and have
| been for decades.
|
| People still don't know how to use them.
| Spivak wrote:
| I feel like in a forum of programmers there would at least
| be some recognition that "get gud" doesn't scale while lane
| assist and emergency stop work for everyone all of the time
| regardless of how tired or distracted the driver is.
|
| You're the next iteration of the person complaining about
| anti-lock breaks because you can just learn to drive better
| on ice.
| [deleted]
| kcb wrote:
| Mitsubishi Mirage
|
| https://www.mitsubishicars.com/cars-and-suvs/mirage
|
| One problem with this class of cars is that they do not compete
| favorably with used cars.
| s0rce wrote:
| until COVID supply chain issues and chip shortages. Could
| compete if they didn't need so many chips to run everything.
| crispyambulance wrote:
| They do exist, just not in the American market.
| mgkimsal wrote:
| A few years ago (2013/2014?) there was a bare bones Toyota
| Yaris I looked at. Cheapest 'new' car on the lot, decent mpg,
| etc. But... no power windows or power locks, no automatically
| adjustable seat. And... it was, IIRC, around $15k. For $15-16k
| I could get something else used with more amenities, and
| similar mpg/economy. Or possibly even something else new at
| that time with better amenities. For something with so few
| amenities, I would have preferred at least a 20% discount
| compared to other options.
| lnanek2 wrote:
| I bought a Yaris as my first car to go as cheap as possible.
| Even electrics were more expensive despite the tax breaks. My
| Dad felt like a new one would break down less than a used one
| too which is why we avoided used.
|
| Yaris worked well in general. I'm not surprised it's popular
| with college kids. It was pretty bothersome, though, how at
| the lowest trim level they even disabled things like cruise
| control. I'm three times older than any college kid and it
| made my ankle ache on long drives.
| LAC-Tech wrote:
| I've never in my life driven a car with cruise control.
| Including rentals.
|
| I'm not even 100% sure how they work...
| mgkimsal wrote:
| One of my first cars was a geo metro hatchback - probably
| an equivalent. It was $6500 - a fortune (for me) at the
| time. But I did get around 50mpg. I took a long road trip
| across the country and averaged 64mpg.
| CobaltFire wrote:
| I purchased a Yaris iA (a Mazda2 in Toyota drag) for $12.5K
| new in CA in 2016 because it was a white manual transmission.
| Dealer didn't even have a salesperson who could drive it.
|
| Deals exist on unwanted vehicles for sure. The iA always sold
| cheaper than the actual Toyota Yaris in my experience despite
| being a far superior car.
| hindsightbias wrote:
| Asked the director of a community college automotive program
| which car was the most reliable: Yaris.
|
| You're probably getting more than 20% in
| reliability/maintenance.
| zwayhowder wrote:
| GoGet.com.au have thousands of cars in their fleet and many
| of them are the Yaris. For a car share company that does a
| lot of servicing themselves out of a van it's a simple
| economical vehicle that is cheap to run and own. It also
| holds its value reasonably when they part with it after 2-3
| years or 50,000km.
| aardvarkr wrote:
| Because there isn't any money in designing a no-frills car.
| Designing a brand new car and starting a brand new brand is
| crazy expensive so it makes sense to target the luxury market
| since sales will be limited.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Not to mention, when most people look at a car with manual
| everything and realize for $10/month more they can have power
| everything... they go for the car with power everything. So,
| dealers order their inventory accordingly.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| Ability to resell low trim models is also terrible. Nobody
| wants to buy a base model car when for a couple hundred
| bucks or maybe a grand more they can get the nicer stuff.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| If you want a bare-bones sedan, look no further than the Chevy
| Malibu Fleet, $23k of rental-car awfulness:
| https://www.gmfleet.com/cars/chevrolet-malibu
|
| In general, if you want the most basic, low-opex car you can
| find, just look at what rental car companies are buying (though
| rental companies have been desperate for anything, so this
| currently doesn't apply.)
|
| Regulations and fuel economy standards absolutely influence
| design. The reason most euro cars/SUVs have a sloping hood
| (compared to the "RAWR I AM AGGRESSIVE" square front on most
| American SUVs) is to meet pedestrian Euro-NCAP standards. High
| door sills are to provide better side impact protection,
| smaller windows are to lower heat/AC load for fuel economy.
|
| "All cars" are not "looking completely ridiculous." He cites
| some of the most infamously ugly cars (Toyota Camry and Prius)
| while ignoring, oh, the entire rest of the market. There are
| loads of conservatively styled cars out there. Toyota
| intentionally dramatically changes their styling almost every
| year because underneath those changing body panels and
| tail/head lights is the stuff that's actually expensive to
| change. They're intentionally garish because they want the
| design to look exciting now, and like aged dogshit in 3 years.
| They also want to push their more conservative buyers into
| Lexuses.
|
| Lots of decent looking cars out there.
|
| VW's current "narrow line" design language looks like ass, but
| go back one or two model years and I think they're pretty
| fantastically well-styled cars.
|
| The Audi A6 hasn't been an ugly looking car in at least ten
| years. Current model:
| https://www.topgear.com/sites/default/files/cars-car/image/2...
|
| Want something more "fashion forward"? Volvo's S90 is a work of
| art inside and out:
| https://www.media.volvocars.com/image/low/171020/2_2/1
|
| If you want a sporty sedan that looks like sex on wheels and
| have a big wallet, the Alfa Giulia: https://media.ed.edmunds-
| media.com/alfa-romeo/giulia/2022/oe...
|
| Want something a bit more conservative but sporty looking? BMW
| 3 series https://media.ed.edmunds-
| media.com/bmw/3-series/2021/oem/202...
|
| I don't get what the author is on about with the current F150.
| It feels like Ford is really in stride; usually they're a
| shitshow of fugly, awkward curves and proportions, but they
| seem to be making designs that not only look good in the
| present, but are holding up longer.
| airstrike wrote:
| Your current link to the S90 is just a Volvo logo, FYI
| omosubi wrote:
| If you look at cars from their inception until about the 80s,
| most cars, even lower end models were aesthetically very
| pleasing. That's not true of most cars today. The ones you've
| cited are all luxury sedans and are rare to see on the road
| (at least where I live). Also, the cheapest is $40k. That's
| not practical for most people, and that's not even including
| operating expenses.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > If you look at cars from their inception until about the
| 80s, most cars, even lower end models were aesthetically
| very pleasing. That's not true of most cars today.
|
| I disagree, and most people living when those cars were new
| would, I suspect, disagree. I would guess this is either a
| nostalgia-driven (positive for older designs) or
| overexposure-driven (negative for newer common designs)
| aesthetic preference.
| vannevar wrote:
| Yeah, I feel like most of the overdesigned cars in the past
| decade or so have come from Japan. Notably Toyota, which in
| my opinion has produced some of the worst car designs of the
| past twenty years. The pinched grill that started with their
| Lexus line and is now on Toyotas as well is a matter of taste
| I guess, but it's always reminded me of the alien's mouth in
| Predator, which in turn is reminiscent of an anus. I think
| some of the most recent Lexi pull it off, but throughout most
| of its history, I think that grill has been pretty awful.
| Honda lost its design mojo a long time ago, and its most
| recent Accord is ok only because it resembles a BMW. The past
| 20 years has been a series of mostly very forgettable Honda
| designs. Nissan has also produced a lot of atrocities the
| past couple of decades since the genuinely striking tail
| treatment on the 2002 Altima. The Maxima has been
| particularly bad. Then there's Hyundai, which has been hit or
| miss but who went through a very organic look for awhile that
| made all their cars look like they were grown in pods. They
| were beautiful in their own way, but like a lot of their
| Japanese siblings, just overdone in my opinion.
| s0rce wrote:
| 10 years ago a base model Suzuki SX4 sedan was pretty much this
| in the USA. Not sure about more modern stuff.
| qbasic_forever wrote:
| Most of the cost of producing a car is in the design,
| sheetmetal tooling, dies, employee training, etc.--i.e. it's
| not all from just some circuit boards, knobs, and servo motors
| that drive all the fancy accessories. So a brand new designed
| and built from scratch hyper minimal car with no accessories
| would still cost $15k+ and be extremely hard to sell to the
| public.
|
| In reality someone shopping for a car on a budget is just going
| to buy a few years used instead of cutting out all the
| accessories in an attempt to scrimp. So the unfortunate truth
| is that there is no market and no profitability for a
| purposefully minimal car.
|
| The closest you will find are rental market and commercial
| fleet vehicles like basic sedans (Chevy Malibu), pickup trucks,
| and vans where the automakers know there is such high demand
| and guaranteed income that they don't need to pad them with
| extra frills.
| cjrp wrote:
| Sounds like Dacia. Or Lada, although they might be a bit tricky
| to export at the moment...
| ycuser2 wrote:
| > I have never understood why there isn't a low cost automaker
| that has only the bare minimum
|
| In Europe we have Dacia which is exactly that.
| InCityDreams wrote:
| Dacia is next on my list (currently have a 17yo ford that's
| beginning to get too expensive). several of my colleagues
| have them. Having just filled a Diesel tank that went from
| EUR60 (last fill c600km ago) to EUR80 (today), 1.4l engine,
| my bicyle is looking even more low cost.
|
| *will still get a Dacia for necessity, though.
| [deleted]
| throw10920 wrote:
| Probably because, like software, everyone has a different idea
| of what the "bare minimum" looks like. For instance, I don't
| think that a radio is necessary in my "bare minimum" car - but
| I do want a battery charge indicator, which you didn't mention.
|
| So, an automaker can either include neither of those two
| features (and neither of us will want that car), both of them
| (which makes it more expensive, and if you adopt the policy of
| "take the union of all of the bare minimums" then you have a
| normal car), or just a subset. You lose every way.
| eternityforest wrote:
| Minimalism it tech is pretty pointless. Every simple
| specialty thing seems to invariably cost way more than a
| common complicated thing, and usually doesn't have much
| better reliability.
|
| It's philosophy pretending to be engineering. Real engineer
| requires deep analysis, not just assuming that simple is more
| reliable.
| sz4kerto wrote:
| Teslas are very minimalistic I think. That's also why I don't
| find them interesting, e.g. a BMW iX is much more controversial
| (maybe uglier?).
| bobthepanda wrote:
| I would hardly classify Tesla as "as cheap as possible", at
| least not in terms of the sticker price. Certainly not
| "manual everything" with all the touch interfaces.
| eternityforest wrote:
| It's cool how Tesla and his companies in general seem to
| really understand the idea that things should be computers
| first, and not have anything that could have been software.
|
| Sadly a lot of the other stuff is less awesome.
| m463 wrote:
| Outside, I think the teslas are very interesting with respect
| to minmalism.
|
| Nothing sticks out, they are completely smooth
| aerodynamically.
|
| (I do think the aero model 3 wheels may be functional but are
| not attractive)
|
| Inside the car, I think tesla's minimalism has gone too far.
|
| The telsa model 3 without a dashboard in front of the driver
| is cheap, not minimal. They also reduced the stalks and
| overloaded the controls.
|
| Then the recent model S/X changes went further to outright
| dangerous. There are no stalks at all on the steering column,
| and turn signals, horn and high beams are touch buttons in
| the middle of steering wheel. When you move, the car guesses
| which direction you want to go, there is no gearshift stalk.
| There are gearshift buttons at the bottom of the console, but
| no dedicated buttons for other critical functions like
| defrost. sigh.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Tesla has elevated cost-cutting-as-a-virtue to the highest
| art form. I'm impressed. But they're also making a run at the
| "only evolve, never redesign" mantra for their cars. This may
| change with time as more competition enters the EV market.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| Teslas are _aesthetically_ minimalist, but they ship with
| hardware to cover an eventuality that the car might not last
| long enough to utilize. That 's the opposite of minimalist
| from a product perspective.
| sofixa wrote:
| Because brands like that suffer from poor reputation ( poor
| people's car), so people prefer buying second hand - it was the
| case for Dacia in Europe for years, and is among the reasons
| the Tata Nano flopped.
| randerson wrote:
| This video goes into some reasons about why cheap cars are
| disappearing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYBR0tlPA8
|
| One reason I don't see mentioned here is the perverse
| incentives to manufacturers to make larger cars due to CO2
| emissions regulations differing depending on the size of the
| car. So instead of making more efficient engines to hit the
| targets (no doubt the intent of the regulations), they just
| stop making small cars.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| Talk about unintended consequences.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| If they had intended to reduce CO2 emissions consumption,
| they would have just increased taxes on things that cause
| CO2 emissions (e.g. a tax based on distance driven in a car
| that emits CO2). Or even easier, increasing taxes on fossil
| fuels.
|
| However, the intent was to say they (politicians, society)
| did something about CO2 emissions without actually giving
| up anything. Which was accomplished.
| jsz0 wrote:
| I would argue stuff like electric adjustable mirrors, seats,
| good AC, parking sensors, rear view cameras, even automatic
| transmissions are essential safety features these days. If you
| put a modern person in a car lacking modern features they're
| going to be a hazard on the road.
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| It doesn't exist because nobody goes out to buy a car and says
| "I'll take the first one that has the fewest useful features."
| golemiprague wrote:
| I don't think manual everything is really practical these days,
| automatic gear box and windows is something most people would
| want even in a basic car. Even in Europe these days people move
| to automatic gears. But something like mid 2000 corolla or
| civic would be a good and reliable basic car, the question is
| how much it will cost to manufacture such car, if it will be
| around the 10k mark it will be a viable option.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Surely the computer is better than us at shifting by now
| anyway, right?
| spockz wrote:
| Until it gets confused like an DSG with broken
| mechatronics. That might just break the gearbox itself.
|
| After that happened I drove a Toyota Corolla hybrid with a
| CVT and it was awesome. High mileage, tranquil, no gaps in
| acceleration. The only downside was that it is smaller than
| a Passat (GTE).
| MisterTea wrote:
| Yup. I have a 2002 Chevy Express 3500 cargo van who's only
| luxury is AC. The radio was an AM/FM I replaced with a mechless
| unit that died so there is no radio. The windows are hand
| cranked. I honestly miss nothing from a modern vehicle when I
| drive it save for less noise.
|
| I also have been shopping for a new car and the selection out
| there is miserable what with all the stupid option games,
| horrible butt-ugly design, and everyone insisting that cars
| need more microchips than CERN for whatever reason. When I find
| something interesting I always run into some gotcha that turns
| me off.
|
| My latest disappointment was Ford's bait and switch manual
| transmission Bronco (I love driving manuals)- it's only
| available paired with the anemic turbo I4 instead of the more
| powerful V6. No one is buying a 5000 pound vehicle with an I4
| in it. I read an article which stated that a ford rep explained
| this is because manuals are unpopular so they didn't pair it
| with the more powerful engine option - the engine option that
| people like me who spec manuals want to order. Of course the
| manual wont sell if its paired with garbage you idiots.
| chadash wrote:
| Let's say you make a "bare minimum" car and after all of your
| design costs, you can get the MSRP down to say $13,000. The
| problem is that once I'm already paying 13k for a "bare bones"
| car, I'll probably think, well, why not just pay $15,000 to get
| a car with sound/speakers, adjustable seats, air conditioning,
| automatic windows, etc. Behold, that's basically what a Chevy
| Spark costs (before supply chain crunch). If I'm really trying
| to save money beyond that, I'll just buy a used car.
|
| What would be nice though is a car that doesn't get redesigned
| every few years. If I know that redesigns will only happen
| every 10 years, then that means cheap parts will be abundant
| and maintaining the car will be much cheaper.
| bushbaba wrote:
| Personally it's more the used car market offers a greater
| value than a cheap new car.
| holoduke wrote:
| I always drive old cars from 10,15 years old. For example
| driving an Infinity FX35 from 2003 for about 7 years now.
| Never had a single issue. Bought the car for 8k.
| djbusby wrote:
| This is how both Hundai and Kia started (in USA) Then both
| moved up-market. And Ford and GMC can't figure how to step
| back.
|
| Edit: my first truck (1986 Toyota) was $6k. Manual everything
| and didn't even come with a radio. Most of the stuff was
| fixable at home (if you're handy). Didn't even have EFI. I feel
| like Honda used to have some of these simpler models - not just
| cause it was the 70/80s but also because that was a longer
| lasting/simpler product.
|
| We've replaced longevity with bells/whistles as the key-
| feature.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| You used to be able to shop for a "work truck" or van from
| Ford or GM which would be bare-bones. Manual transmission,
| manual windows, no AC, no carpet, simple vinyl floor and
| upholstery.
|
| Similar features _may_ be available in an SUV or sedan but I
| 've never seen one; would probably be a special order or
| maybe only available to fleet purchasers.
|
| I haven't bought a brand new car in over 20 years so I don't
| know if you can still get cars like this. Rear cameras are
| now mandatory, so all new cars will have a screen. And if
| they have a screen anyway, adding more features to it is
| likely to happen.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| You can still buy a work truck, yes. Heck, even my F250 XLT
| has a vinyl floor (and I like it!). But even so, they're
| 30K.
|
| > Rear cameras are now mandatory, so all new cars will have
| a screen.
|
| Nah, the cheap ones just put a tiny little screen in the
| rear view camera. Nice because it requires no other changes
| to the dash, and is universal across models.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Just re-read what I wrote. Had camera on the mind, meant
| to say 'rear view mirror'. How anyone could upvote my
| nonsensical comment, I'll never know. ;-)
| nspattak wrote:
| because the servicing costs are determined by
| workshops/companies who charge ridiculous amounts of money at
| will and inevitably make older cars not worth repairing.
| personal example: for the same repair in my home country (EU
| country) would normally cost 350-450e but i was asked from
| 1000e to 1500e in the EU country i currently live
| srmarm wrote:
| Do you earn more money in your current EU country vs the home
| one? Certainly in the UK a lot of cars get purchased for
| scrap value taken to a cheaper country for repair (or just
| used for spares)
| cluoma wrote:
| I really like a lot of stylings in modern cars. It's nice to see
| some harder angles. Never was a fan of the overly smooth, almost
| bubbly, look of cars from the 90's and 00's.
| darkwater wrote:
| Unpopular opinion in a post about Saab lovers: Saab (and Volvo)
| are/were fugly as hell, I'm pretty happy that those '80s designs
| disappeared.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| I read in a book about fluid simulation that the boxy shape of
| the Volvo 240 was the result of a bug in the wind tunnel
| simulator they used, causing it to report less drag for the the
| boxy shape.
|
| Maybe urban myth, but keeps popping up when I see them around
| town.
| Hamuko wrote:
| The Volvo V90 looks sharp as hell, especially for a wagon.
| goostavos wrote:
| Ditto. They look super cool to my eye. I'm thinking about
| pulling the trigger on the smaller 40 model (if I can
| overcome my complete terror of spending money on things). The
| only thing that sucks is their all touch infotainment system.
| It is unintuitive, clunky, and so laggy (and ugly!). Just
| getting a phone paired took my gf and I a few minutes of
| awkwardly stabbing at the screen trying to figure out which
| swipe would lead us down the right path. It's pretty much
| impossible to use while driving. Most of the stuff I've test
| driven the last few weeks follows the same all-touch or
| mostly-touch setup. So, it kinda seems like something you
| just have to put up with these days
| johnisgood wrote:
| Yeah, looks good IMO.
| code_runner wrote:
| You're right... but as soon as you drive one of those saabs you
| realize just how wrong you actually are. Its the most beautiful
| ugly car I've ever had.
| Gravityloss wrote:
| If you're in Finland, you can order a Saab cab:
| http://www.retrotaksi.fi/en/index.html
| sklargh wrote:
| Saabs were great cars because they did practicality with a little
| bit of zest and elan, pure IYKYK. The death of physical buttons
| and simple interfaces in car interiors is an enormous safety
| issue. I suspect this serious issue is widely disregarded by
| industry because it costs less to produce and modify a software
| interface than a hardware interface.
|
| I hope that cars reach a point where self-driving is real but we
| aren't there yet, and interfaces that require people to take
| their eyes off the road to navigate to basic functions are not
| appropriate for cars.
|
| Don't get me started on touchscreens in planes during
| turbulence...and yes I am a brown station wagon with a manual
| kind of person.
| natch wrote:
| >interfaces that require people to take their eyes off the road
| to navigate to basic functions
|
| For some cars with touch screens (like Tesla) this is an
| imagined problem that does not exist in reality.
|
| >The death of physical buttons and simple interfaces in car
| interiors
|
| A lot of people also falsely imagine this issue exists as well,
| when it doesn't. There are plenty of buttons in cars with touch
| screens.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| Here is how you turn on the defrosters in a Tesla Model 3:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vAqolyemqE&t=8s
|
| For those that don't want to watch the video, the answer is
| "press the correct spot on the far corner of a touch screen
| exactly the right number of times, or look at it to see what
| color it has turned". This is a function that occasionally
| needs to be done in an urgent situation, potentially also one
| where the "autopilot" has given up (low visibility).
| lnanek2 wrote:
| I used to feel that way, then noticed my friend driving a
| Tesla. He had this neat use for the LCD that showed a map of
| where all the cars around him was as output from the sensors.
| Yes, theoretically, on a traditional car you can adjust the
| mirrors so you have no blind spot and check them all
| religiously before lane changes and the like - but I still felt
| he had more awareness of who was in what lane than someone in a
| traditional car would have.
| sklargh wrote:
| I'm not hating on ADAS or even screens, FWIW I will not
| purchase a car without radar-based adaptive cruise control,
| it's a game changer and I know it's better than I am at
| maintaining attention over a long period of time. Nor would I
| begrudge anyone satellite navigation or a simple music
| interface.
|
| What I am talking about is the habit burying all simple
| functions in menus or on touchscreens. Temperature control,
| vent direction, volume, fwd, back on music, basic menu
| navigation. Inevitably these cumulative seconds of searching
| add up to enhanced risk for pedestrians, cyclists and other
| motorists.
| nradov wrote:
| I don't think radar is strictly necessary. The camera based
| adaptive cruise control in Subarus generally works pretty
| well except in heavy rain.
| archi42 wrote:
| I personally wouldn't trust optical systems, but to be
| fair I've never driven a recent Subaru. The radar on my
| 2014 Volvo is extremely reliable, even in heavy rain and
| I make heavy use of it in nearly all traffic situations.
| It only ever failed me once, and I can't blame it, since
| that was during the worst cloud burst I ever witnessed.
| The Autobahn went from "nice day with medium traffic" to
| "<2m visibility" in less than a minute, and literally
| _everyone_ pulled over to sit that one out.
| juancn wrote:
| Crash safety puts lots of constraints on car body design.
| Specially at the front.
| krnlpnc wrote:
| I'm hoping for a resurgence of wagons in the US, and ideally
| manual transmissions.
|
| It's really a shame that the most popular "cars" are trucks and
| SUVs, it's quite expensive and wasteful.
| r_klancer wrote:
| Me too.
|
| On Sunday I happened to park right behind exactly the car I
| would try to find and buy used if my occasional-use Volvo XC70
| had to be replaced: a red VW Golf Alltrack wagon with tan
| leather and the big sunroof and 6-speed manual. (2020 was the
| last model year.)
|
| I fantasized a bit about whether I could buy one and keep it
| long enough for my 9yo to learn to drive stick, but of course
| that would be a determinedly quirky and antiquarian skill to
| learn by then, like writing with a quill pen or using a coal
| furnace. (https://www.npr.org/2019/03/03/699325560/for-the-few-
| who-hea...) Also the used prices have gone _up_ since I last
| checked a year ago!
|
| (What will finally put the nail in the coffin of the manual is
| the electric car. And--yeah, I guess I obsess about this--
| electric wagons from Volvo and Volkswagen will be coming to the
| US in the next few years, though for various marketing reasons
| they both shy away from the word "wagon":
| https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39263104/new-volvo-evs-wa...
| and https://www.reddit.com/user/HDiess/comments/soje69/hi_reddi
| t...)
| [deleted]
| jnwatson wrote:
| I completely agree. I'd buy a luxury wagon in a heartbeat. BMW
| makes several models, but don't ship them to the US.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| Mercedes Benz makes an E-Class wagon that sells in the US (I
| even saw one the other day with an AMG logo on it if that's
| your thing), and the Volvo V90 is at least a bit upscale...
| pcurve wrote:
| I never understood America's irrational hate against wagons. It
| actually goes back decades too.
|
| Luckily, hatchback is still somewhat available in the U.S., so
| that's what I drive, plus manual tranny. But they're now
| unicorn.
|
| So I'm going to hold onto my baby for a long time.
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| I'm not sure how you could return to manual transmissions. I
| feel like once the skill of using it is widely gone its not
| coming back. It would have to have a huge education campaign
| with it
| brtkdotse wrote:
| Or transmissions at all. The future is electric and electric
| motors don't need gear boxes, they have uniform torque over
| the entire RPM span.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| To get real nitpicky here, a number of EVs still have a
| multi-gear transmission. It's just 2 gears instead of 6+
| though. You don't have to worry about staying in an
| efficient RPM for electric motors, but the torque
| multiplication factor of gears is still useful & can be
| necessary.
| masklinn wrote:
| > To get real nitpicky here, a number of EVs still have a
| multi-gear transmission.
|
| The number is like 2 or so innit? Audi and Porsche have a
| low gear for increased torque. Rimac's Concept One had a
| two-speed gearbox, but Nevera (formerly C2) dropped it.
| Formula E cars do have 5 or 6 gears.
| massysett wrote:
| Now that a CVT gets better mileage than a stick shift, it's
| impossible to make the case for a stick. Plus, EVs don't even
| have transmissions, at least not ones that need shifting.
| Ancapistani wrote:
| > Now that a CVT gets better mileage than a stick shift,
| it's impossible to make the case for a stick
|
| A manual transmission is _far_ easier to rebuild than a CVT
| or other automatic. They also tend to be more durable,
| though I expect that is an advantage that has diminished or
| even reversed.
|
| > Plus, EVs don't even have transmissions, at least not
| ones that need shifting.
|
| Most don't, but some do. It depends on the voltage range;
| more precisely, it depends on the RPM range, which is
| directly correlated to input voltage.
|
| In addition, almost all of the "classic" EV conversions
| I've seen maintain either the original transmission or an
| upgraded replacement with similar functionality. See:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOx5uCufB2Q
| r_klancer wrote:
| Sure you can make the case! Manuals are more fun. But
| they've been dying a slow death in the US and are already
| down to ~1% of new car sales here.
|
| Performance can be handled by an automated manual, economy
| by a CVT, and the future is EVs. And apparently fun and 1%
| of the market is not enough to convince automakers to
| commit to the extra $$ needed for the extra tooling, supply
| chain complexity, and emissions certification required to
| offer them as an option.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| I mean it takes a couple of hours of practice to learn it,
| and maybe a week or so to really get comfortable with it.
| It's not _that_ hard. Millions of people drove manual cars in
| the past.
| [deleted]
| naoqj wrote:
| Or in the present... I have yet to see an automatic in
| Europe (granted I haven't been paying that much attention)
| archi42 wrote:
| What part of Europe? When I got my license 15 years ago
| they were a minority, but already not that uncommon in
| Germany. E.g. a friend from school drove an old Merc with
| the 4(?) gear automatic. On the other end of the scale
| [at least to a pupil] the new BMW 645ci owned by another
| friend's parents also had an automatic (Google says it
| was a 6 gear automatic, nothing special; I only know it
| had paddles for manual shifting, but the details are lost
| on me because for some reason his parents never let us
| drive the V8). They only became more common since then.
| These days I mostly associate them with cheaper cars
| (which isn't a bad thing, just economics) and expect them
| to vanish into obscurity within the next decade.
| topspin wrote:
| I drove an automatic Renault lent to me by an employer
| around Lyon, France for several weeks in 2005. Manuals
| are common in Europe, but automatics certainly exist
| there as well. One of the cars I routinely drive in the
| US today is a 5 speed manual. I do like manuals. They're
| a hassle if you need to operate a cell phone while
| driving, but that's just a bad idea in any case. One
| wonders if there were more manuals on the road if there
| would be fewer t-bone wrecks caused by people texting
| through red lights.
| dangus wrote:
| This video here does a better job of discussing what was so
| special about Saab during its best years, much more than just the
| look of the car or the aerodynamics:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY-xA2w7JHQ
|
| Saab was once a huge source of technological innovation.
|
| That said, I think some modern cars both look cool and unique and
| offer a lot of great features and properties. The driving
| dynamics of even the most bare and basic economy cars and SUVs
| drive today is absurdly good when compared against some of the
| best cars on the road 20 years ago.
| pantulis wrote:
| As for unique and distinctive cars models, I bring you the 1976
| Renault 14:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_14
|
| An unremarkable car in every other aspect, you could not but look
| to it the first time you saw it.
| zwieback wrote:
| I remember when that thing came out. There was a certain
| population in Germany that would buy French cars in that era,
| against better judgment.
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| Yes, the only way to get a less reliable car was to buy a
| Fiat (which I did).
| tiahura wrote:
| My friend's French dad's Renault Fuego would like a chance
| to speak.
| zwieback wrote:
| I should add that, while growing up in Germany, my dad had
| a Fiat 850, Triumph Spitfire, Alfa Spider (3, with the ugly
| spoiler) and another Spider (the ugly 1996 spaceship
| looking one) which my mom still drives.
|
| The Spitfire was an especially weird piece of crap but I
| inherited that and drove it for a few years and sold it for
| a pretty penny.
| lambic wrote:
| I started reading the article then got distracted by the pretty
| squiggly links, nice little touch.
| zwieback wrote:
| Yes, modern cars are ugly but Saabs were ugly when other cars
| looked good, sorry to say.
| erwincoumans wrote:
| Nice article but I'm not much into Saab styling but I wouldn't
| mind renting a classic MG-A or MG-B for a summer trip. For a
| daily driver, I like my Tesla Model 3, styling and its
| performance and control are great in my opinion.
| hrudham wrote:
| I have a 1977 MGB and a 2005 MG TF. I still prefer the MGB; its
| easy to drive, cheap to maintain (relative to buying any new
| car today), and you have the added benefit of being able to fix
| things yourself (if you're so inclined) with part availability
| still reasonably good after all these years (and I am by no
| means an actual mechanic).
|
| I've already encountered issues with the MG TF regarding the
| electronics, and the difficulty in fixing things there due to
| proprietary lock-in (and it's 17 years old). Simply creating a
| spare key is a nightmare. It makes me wonder what the future of
| repairability on newer cars with deeply embedded but
| proprietary software will be like.
| [deleted]
| erwincoumans wrote:
| Ah, an MG-F was my first car, loved the style of that mid-
| engine roadster.
| aliswe wrote:
| > And part of the reason that cars are ugly now, and that they
| have so many curves, is because they are more fuel-efficient; the
| aerodynamics of a "teardrop" design help reduce the impact of
| wind on the open road (ironically a design staple of Saab in the
| 1980s).
|
| Fuel consumption maybe better on an engine level, but the
| resulting total it seems to be more or less the same as 80 years
| ago:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29321519#29322389
| frereubu wrote:
| I used to have a Saturday job repairing and restoring classic
| Saabs, mostly 93s, 95s and 96s. (Which are different from the
| 9-3s and 9-5s, which were almost 40 years later). They were
| handsome cars in a lumpy kind of way, and there were plenty of
| people willing to stump up the cash to have them carefully
| restored. (For all that the article talks about lack of
| aerodynamics in the 900, the 96 was a pretty aerodynamic car,
| perhaps rooted in Saab's genesis as an aerospace company,
| although I'm glad things have moved on - I hate to think how much
| lead and carbon monoxide I inhaled). The first turbocharged car I
| was driven in was a 900, and boy was that exciting - I can still
| remember the whine of the turbo. Have to say though, much as I
| love the Saabs (particularly the 96) if I had the money to get
| into classic cars, I'd be eyeing up a Citroen SM, rust issues
| notwithstanding.
| [deleted]
| quartz wrote:
| For the Saab lovers I present The Saab Suite:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwpzhiNurI0
|
| I personally grew up with Volvo 240's (1 GL and 2 Turbos) and
| bought a Saab 9000 for college. I thought Saabs were one of the
| best used cars at the time because they lost their value so
| quickly off the lot and that value just continued to plummet
| every year.
|
| Not sure I'd personally point to Saab when it comes to design so
| much as cult appeal. I've definitely noticed the old Swedish cars
| are starting to surge in price as they become nostalia items
| though.
| dan-jackson wrote:
| found a 1991 saab 900 turbo for you:
|
| https://driverbase.com/vehicle/9330472/1991-saab-900-in-hins...
| josefresco wrote:
| There's a lot of diversity in automobile design if you look
| outside of the top selling segments. We don't need Saab, we need
| a model that allows large auto manufacturers to make smaller runs
| of more unique cars without massive "retooling".
| tmountain wrote:
| I wonder if the "roller skate" platform for up and coming
| electric vehicles will allow a more modular manufacturing
| pipeline and open the door to a wider variety of "shells" for
| new cars. Ford did a concept recently where they retrofitted a
| vintage pickup with an electric drive train to advertise their
| new electric crate motors (https://ford.to/3J2B5WW).
|
| Personally, I'd love to see more of this, as it really opens
| the door for a lot of creativity regarding the body styles of
| what's available.
| camtarn wrote:
| I'm reminded of Honda Motorcycle and its habit of making odd
| small-run bikes, such as the Valkyrie Rune or the NM4 Vultus.
| Both of those are in the premium segment of an already premium
| market (at least in the US/UK/etc) but it's great seeing a
| major manufacturer do something cool and weird. A bit like a
| rolling concept vehicle.
|
| I'd love to see more of that in the car market, and I'm curious
| what prevents it. Safety standards might be a big part of that
| - of course motorbikes have very little in the way of safety
| systems or crash test requirements, which probably massively
| reduces the investment required for small-run vehicles.
|
| Maintainability might also be part of it: there's just more
| _stuff_ in a car which might have to be located and packaged
| differently for a different body shape, which affects anybody
| who has to work on it, requires a bunch of service manuals to
| be written, might even require spare parts to be stocked for
| decades, etc.
| MontgomeryPy wrote:
| I may be the only commenter here with a Saab as my daily driver
| (9-5 model). The appeal for me is partly design, as this article
| notes, but many other factors as well: it's fun to drive the
| manual turbo, a sedan with great cargo capacity (e.g. the skis
| easily fit in the trunk with pass-thru to back seat), known
| safety record, durability (yes things need to be fixed but they
| are generally not terminal issues), tows the trailer/boat fine
| with 3500# tow ability, good in snow (not AWD but gets the job
| done), etc. It's a labor of love but I think next step for me is
| a small utility pickup which won't be anywhere near as fun to
| drive.
| zyberzero wrote:
| You're not the only one. I still drive a 2005 Saab 9-5, but the
| station wagon. It is really comfortable to drive compared to
| other cars (I've driven mostly new Volvos, especially V40 and
| XC40 and I prefer the Saab any time).
|
| I'm Swedish though, and my mom used to work at Saab back in the
| day when I grew up (as most of the people in that town did
| then).
| tow21 wrote:
| Chiming in here from Finland as another 9-5 owner, 2001
| model. Also a station wagon (or "farmari" as the Finns like
| to call it).
|
| Definitely a much-loved model, I get appreciative comments
| regularly from middle-aged men whose formative years were
| clearly spent in Saabs. When I went to the Mercedes car
| dealership last weekend (thinking about upgrading to an
| electric vehicle), the salesman was in such raptures over my
| Saab he nearly forgot to try and sell me a new car.
| lnanek2 wrote:
| I kind of like how my BMW X3 looks like a spaceship, personally.
| Especially all the lights at night like in the door handles.
| Maybe someday we'll have the fairings of all cars 3D printed at
| the factory and customizable to taste when ordering, though, so
| we can make simpler looking ones too!
| kart23 wrote:
| same, the door handles lighting up is such a nice touch. plus
| all the ambient lighting on the interior in modern cars.
|
| I do have a preference for cloth seats and more buttons in
| interiors though. Leather invariably ends up cracking and
| looking like crap, and buttons provide a much more tactile
| experience.
| smoyer wrote:
| I've had three Saabs that were my daily drivers (a 99, 900 and
| 9000) and I'm now restoring a 1971 Saab Sonnett III [0]. All very
| innovative cars!
|
| AMA
|
| 0. http://saabworld.net/wp/1970-saab-sonett-iii-heritage-
| collec...
| pcurve wrote:
| how worried should I be about Saab 900 ('78-'94) and its manual
| transmission reliability? I adore this car (and its lovely
| seats) so much I'm tempted to buy one but I hear its manual
| tranny is fragile.
| agumonkey wrote:
| A hifi head guy showed me an old SAAB part, unless he's
| misguided they used pneumatic actuated user panels long ago.
| Felt insanely overengineered .. but pretty sexy at the same
| time.
| Aloha wrote:
| For what its worth, up until 1970-71, vacuum operated things
| in cars (locks and and I think windows) were not uncommon,
| even beyond that, up until basically the start of the current
| era (2010), vacuum operated air conditioning systems (to
| change the flow of air) were the norm too (I suspect they
| still are on ICE cars). In addition, most cars with concealed
| headlights used vacuum motors to open and close them.
|
| Furthermore, windshield wipers were not infrequently powered
| by the power steering system, rather than electrically
| driven. High torque electric motors in a small enough package
| and affordable enough didn't exist until the late 60's.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| I'm pretty sure my 1982 SAAB 900 Turbo (bought used in 1988
| with about 94k miles on it from original owner) had pneumatic
| actuation for the dials...but it's long gone and i can't
| check now.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| > pneumatic actuated user panels
|
| What does that mean?
| agumonkey wrote:
| the buttons would control other parts of the car through
| air pressure, it was bidirectional too IIRC
|
| not sure, he only had half of a device in his shop
| frontierkodiak wrote:
| Not a mass-market product, but another fantastic anomaly in
| automotive engineering is the hydraulic system used to power
| the accessory systems in the Mercedes 600; the classic
| chariot of late-20th century despots and celebs.
|
| It ran on mineral oil at a nominal pressure of IIRC 3200 psi.
| Could cleanly slice a finger off if poorly maintained & it
| sprung a leak in an inopportune corner of the system. All
| this to ensure that the auto's accessories operated with all
| the smoothness and silence that befitted a head of state.
| smoyer wrote:
| Yeah ... and some (like my 99) had alterations made at the
| U.S. point-of-entry. The added A/C system was so cold it
| would freeze your body parts. Since the air-ducts were routed
| through the glove box (who doesn't want heated gloves in the
| winter), this also resulted in having ice-cold Cokes in the
| summer :)
| robin_reala wrote:
| The Saab Sonnets are beautiful little things, especially in
| orange.
| smoyer wrote:
| The one I'm working on was originally somewhere between lime
| and avocado green and was wrecked with about 70K miles on it
| in 1975. It's been in a garage ever since. The downside of a
| fiberglass body is that it shatters in ways a metal body
| wouldn't. The upside is that repairs can be as smooth and as
| strong as the original.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| My father told me a story from the late 60s or early 70s.
|
| He went to a Saab car dealership (USA). The salesman was so
| excited to show off the car's indestructivness, that he opened a
| car door, stood on top of it, and jumped up and down.
|
| I guess Saab and Volvo at the time marketed themselves as "tanks"
| on the road in terms of safety.
|
| My father bought a Volvo 144.
| shever73 wrote:
| I have an old photo somewhere of 8 of us standing on the
| girder-like front bumper of a 1970s Saab 900. They were solid!
| alophawen wrote:
| Volvo 240 aka traktorn
| tmountain wrote:
| I had a 240. My mechanic called it the "Swedish brick". Aptly
| named. Amazing car that I drove for 10+ years and then sold
| for the same price I bought it for.
| sklargh wrote:
| A regular thought (not plan) would be to reproduce the 240
| SL using lightweight materials on an appropriate EV
| skateboard with modern ADAS systems and not many other
| changes.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| slim wrote:
| I would go for a Maserati quattroporte 1999
| kkfx wrote:
| Well... Honestly I _dream_ a simple car, not full of crappy sw
| and hw that 's are by themselves an issue, as probably many,
| many, many others but that's not where carmakers push: they push
| toward cars-as-a-service model, so they need completely different
| cars and they know there is essentially no more room for small
| carmakers we have had decades ago in most developed countries, so
| they can steer the market not fearing any new player.
|
| Golf-cart-style e.v. will probably be the future city-car and
| beside that, behind the super-expensive hypercar probably only
| some still expensive and still crappy models probably will exists
| so... It's an era that for next half a century at least it's
| simply gone...
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| My dad had a couple of SAABs that I fell in love with as a young
| adult. After working for a few years, my car died and I was
| excited to get my own SAAB. I switched to BMW after my SAAB was
| written off by a distracted driver and SAAB was no longer in
| business.
|
| BMW has a lot of similar design objectives and delights, but it
| was still missing a couple of characteristics that made SAAB
| unique. Then I went to Volvo, who hired many of the SAAB
| engineers and brought over some of SAAB's character, such as the
| center console mounted ignition (which SAABs had as an homage to
| their fighter jet history).
|
| Volvo is doing a good job at their mission of safety and style,
| but they still haven't captured that same feeling that SAAB did
| (nor do I think they intend to). I feel like BMW is the closest
| experience I've had to a SAAB. I wish their quality was better,
| and/or they were priced similar to SAAB, but their engineers seem
| to want to delight their buyers in the same ways that SAAB did:
| thoughtful design, nice materials, and fun. FUN! Most people buy
| cars to get from point A to B -- it's a "tool". That's fine, but
| it's hard to find "tools" that are also fun; yet, it's magic when
| you do.
|
| That's SAAB.
| tiahura wrote:
| Volvo is now Chinese junk. My wife's xc60 needed new motor
| mounts at 40k and a ring job at 50.
| code_runner wrote:
| the 2001 saab 9-3 turbo I got around 2007 was and is still my
| favorite car I've ever owned.
|
| What is night mode and why did I use it all the time?
|
| What is this CD? a tour of my own car... hosted by a jet fighter
| pilot and random disembodied female voice?
|
| Where do I put the key? Oh, next to the gear box... like mid
| thigh. (the cd will tell you this is to avoid injuring your knee
| in an accident)
|
| Wait, how do I remove the key? Shift to reverse? Well it won't go
| in reverse... oh pull up on gearbox skirt and THEN shift into
| reverse.
|
| The windows rolled up and down unnecessarily fast. Faster than
| you're thinking.
|
| I had little wipers on the headlights (so european!)
|
| Its turbo suddenly died, taking the engine with it... but I would
| LOVE to own that car again.
| danesparza wrote:
| I'm sorry -- the writer of the article lost me at the subtitle.
| "Optimus Prime"? Really? Optimus Prime is a semi truck. Almost no
| cars look like semi trucks.
| code_runner wrote:
| I'm not sure how canonically-correct the author is trying to
| be.... as much as they're just drawing comparison to
| transformers in general.
| throwaway581294 wrote:
| While the article was a nice read and I do love some older cars
| from the 80s/90s, those cars are gone. Cars look the way they do
| now and days because of the increased safety standards and
| airbags everywhere. I would much rather be driving a car today
| than from the 80s if I wanted safety.
|
| That being said, there are still plenty of cars that are unique
| looking now, Miata, Supra, GR86, BRZ, CT5-V, CT4-V, Stinger,
| Taycan, and plenty more!
| chermanowicz wrote:
| I don't get the Saab obsession. I can't speak to anything
| mechanical about them, but I've seen plenty and they look like
| many others on the road at that time. Like, what exactly is so
| aesthetically interesting? a different grille design? You could
| make the argument about many older cars - like the Nissan
| Fairlady/Z - but not really the Saab.
| gotaquestion wrote:
| Guilty. I've owned three Saabs in my life (1982 99, 1987
| 900S, 1997 900T). It's a completely irrational aesthetic
| addiction. I'll admit it. But as an industrial designer, I
| admire good design, and Saab has that in a way BMW and
| Mercedes do not, although Volkswagen is of the same ilk.
|
| I'll try to answer specifically. For me it is the body shape
| of the 99/900. It feels organic and part of the road, the
| mushroomed shape makes me feel like I'm part of a natural
| outgrowth of entire automotive ecosystem: map + city + road +
| car + driver + civil engineering. The interior is also
| minimal and of the school of Bauhaus or Dieter Rams. The late
| 900's and 9-3 lost this charm and became more conventional.
|
| There's no logic behind it, it is simply shape and form that
| appeals to certain people. I know people who are nuts over
| early BMWs, or 1950's VWs, everyone has their thing.
| pcurve wrote:
| Have you sat in one? (at least ones from the 90s) Their seats
| make you go "Aaaaaahhhhhhhhh"
| acomjean wrote:
| I don't get it either. But they are unique looking and
| hatchbacks. You know a SAAB when you see one. Although cars
| were a lot more unique back in the day.
|
| I drove one, it was fine.. (Un-remarkable, but at the time I
| had a 1989 GTI, that was pretty fun...)
|
| I remember having trouble removing the key from one (Its next
| to the shifter... And it needed to be in reverse or
| something.).
| tomc1985 wrote:
| I don't know what my parents liked about Saab but they swear
| up and down about Volvos' safety ratings. My dad is a swedish
| car nut nut and his Saab always seems to be in a state of
| repair.
|
| Then he had the nerve to criticize for buying a Corolla,
| after teenage me got sick of dealing with auto shit after
| going through no less than three old, cheap Volvos that
| seemed to constantly need work of some kind. (Two of which
| had a habit of stalling at the most inopportune moments, like
| driving 60+ MPH on the freeway. It took years to feel safe
| driving again!)
| qbasic_forever wrote:
| People fell in love with the marketing. The car and its looks
| were irrelevant (as any good marketer would attest).
| city41 wrote:
| The article seemed to be lashing out at "overly" designed card
| such as most modern Toyotas (and I would lump the Supra in
| there myself). But there are still plenty of clean,
| conservative, visually simple cars out there. Sadly they pretty
| much only come from luxury brands: BMW 2, 3 and 5 series, most
| Audis, Volvo S60, S90 and their wagon counterparts, several
| Genesis models, Golf GTI and R, etc.
| cottager2 wrote:
| The quest for better fuel mileages also makes a big difference.
| Cars looks like jellybeans for aerodynamics. It's also
| difficult to get a 6 cylinder engine compared to the past.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| > It's also difficult to get a 6 cylinder engine compared to
| the past.
|
| Most of the V6's of the past were also garbage, so no loss
| there.
|
| But there are still quite a few 6 cylinders out there, they
| just aren't necessarily cheap. Mercedes has a 3.0L V6 they
| love to stick in all their "midrange" AMGs for example (C43,
| GLC43, etc..), BMW still likes their I6 in for example the
| M3, Z4, and Toyota Supra. And of course Porsche still loves
| that flat 6 in the 911. There's also still a V6 for the Camry
| and a V6 Camaro among a few others.
|
| What did mostly die is the "V6" as a generic "more power"
| upgrade for things like the Accord or most other midrange,
| midsize sedans. But the modern turbo I4s are so much better
| than those were, so it's not really a loss. And there's
| plenty of affordable V8s that are just fantastic as well.
| bborud wrote:
| I heartily agree modern cars look horrible. My daily driver looks
| horrible and it is by many considered to be "great design" (an
| Alfa Giulietta QV).
|
| However, I grew up with SAABs. I hated the things. :-)
|
| When I was a kid it was the only thing that made me car-sick, and
| when I started driving I couldn't stand the horrible front end
| feel. It felt like driving an old man's boxer shorts.
|
| I love old cars though. Especially old Alfa Romeos. I currently
| have a homologation special from 1987 (The 75 Evo) and I've owned
| several 75s and a GTV from 1982. Yeah, old Alfas aren't reliable.
| And stuff just stops working for no good reason. In fact the dash
| of my Evo has a reset button. It is worn. Every time I brake hard
| the warning lights go into 1970s disco mode. You know what? I
| don't mind. Because it smells like a car, sounds like it means
| business, looks like a car, handles like a car, and it doesn't
| have opinions on how it is supposed to be driven. (Well, the Evo
| tries to kill you with its crazy 80s turbo boost, explosive
| horsepower delivery and no toys to rein it in, but hey, it makes
| you feel alive!)
| nextos wrote:
| The problem is that most cars have lost their distinct
| personality due to brands consolidating into large
| conglomerates, and subsequently developing platforms to reduce
| costs.
|
| I love old brands with models that stood out, and it's a shame
| that originality in engineering has been mostly replaced by
| assembling components together plus some minor aesthetic
| tweaks. I guess the situation is fairly similar to programming,
| where SICP has been replaced by gluing libraries together in
| Python. Perhaps it's a sign of maturity, but I miss some stuff
| from the past.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| How about the cutting edge of Serbo-Croatian technology?
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1LxlZ8pTRg
| sgt wrote:
| Yeah...Our family changed from Saabs to BMW at some point (back
| when BMW was still cool and not something literally everyone
| owns), and I started getting less carsick.
|
| The Saab was pretty cool but they really didn't need to do
| everything different only to be different. Some things were
| just plain weird.
| vanviegen wrote:
| Literally everyone owns a BMW? That's quite a bubble you're
| living in!
| technothrasher wrote:
| They do in certain parts. Here in the greater Boston area,
| the roads are littered with leased BMW and Audi SUVs.
| brimble wrote:
| "The Census ACS 1-year survey reports that the median
| household income for the Boston-Cambridge-Quincy
| Massachusetts metro area was $94,430 in 2019, the latest
| figures available. Boston median household income is
| $8,587 higher than the median Massachusetts household
| income and $28,718 greater than the US median household
| income."
| CobaltFire wrote:
| Where I grew up (in the 90s) they were known as "Basic
| Marin Wheels" so there are places where it's almost the
| default.
| ethbr0 wrote:
| Can confirm there's a lot of cities it's true of. I bought
| a Hyundai/Genesis simply because I didn't want to be a BMW
| person.
| SahAssar wrote:
| I'm not a car guy at all, but to me the Alfa Giulietta QV looks
| like a veyron mated with a renault and the child got the worst
| of both.
| technothrasher wrote:
| > it is by many considered to be "great design" (an Alfa
| Giulietta QV).
|
| Is it? Lol, they're about the only new cars selling for under
| MSRP around here these days.
|
| I was drooling over a beautiful white 1967 Duetto spider the
| other day though. What a pretty old thing that is, and sounds
| so nice too.
| BobbyJo wrote:
| Alfa's are probably selling under MSRP because of
| reliability, not looks. They are definitely pretty cars, they
| are just also very Italian.
| yelling_cat wrote:
| I like fast sedans and find the Giulia to be one of the few
| really attractive cars sold these days, so when the high-
| end Quadrifoglio version came to the States I put my
| misgivings about Alfas aside long enough to strongly
| consider one as my last ICE car. I came to my senses after
| at least two of the prominent reviews at release described
| going through multiple vehicles as their initial review
| cars died. Car and Driver's 40,000-Mile Wrap-Up of their
| experience with the car
| (https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a23145269/alfa-romeo-
| gi...) said the QF "broke their heart" and lists a litany
| of issues, with the car out of commission for 80 days out
| of the 14 months they spent with it. They did say the car's
| an absolute blast to drive when it actually works, at
| least.
| rkangel wrote:
| Part of the issue is that cars can't really differentiate on
| shape, and therefore go overboard to differentiate on styling.
|
| Europe has strict rules about pedestrian safety - placing
| requirements on the shape of the front of the car to minimise
| damage to pedestrians on impact. Between that and the desire for
| low drag (for efficiency) there aren't really that many
| solutions. This means that most cars in Europe look fundamentally
| quite similar in overall shape, particularly bonnet curve at the
| front.
| warpech wrote:
| This article reminded me of a wonderful Saab Suite Ballet ad from
| 1987: https://youtu.be/yzyxGJDIUzA
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-10 23:00 UTC)