They just want their goons to be able to break their victims windows out easier
Pay them enough bribe money and they will do just that (aka: lobbyist money), no joke. 😕
I’m sure others in the thread are having a tough time embracing that they agree with Crus a little on this.
Stop shoving shot down our throats. That’s what I want to say to car companies.
ZERO computers!
I want MANUAL WINDOWS!
Manual locks.
ZERO SCREENS!!
I drive the last car mass produced with manual windows and manual locks.
It has 150k miles. Runs great.
There is zero tracking agents on it.
It’s just a car.
I was thinking about this the other day. I don’t need a car that goes over 40mph. I could get to work and get home. A literal Model T would do.
We need to look backwards for common sense.
Except that bloat is not what the republicans are targeting. From the article:
“However, it isn’t the infotainment bloatware, wireless key-fobs, power seats, or over-the-air subscription services they’re blasting, but safety systems that the NHTSA says have saved 860,000 lives since 1968.”As if USA republicans would ever consider taking away your mandatory infotainment system with opt-out ads, that’s now what their donors are paying them for.
I think you mean their mandatory surveillance systems?
I think that you didn’t read the article before chosing to back Cruz.
We all know he is a weasel. But honestly — if they open the door on making cars more simply, I’m in favor.
What do you have against electric windows and locks?
When they were first introduced, they we optional and choosing them cost extra. Over the years they were integrated into all models and everyone had to suddenly pay extra. Zero choice.
To be fair, that’s exactly how economies of scale and market demand works. Given the preferences of most customers, it probably costs more to make it manual than electric today.
We have entire generations demanding liberty to have things their own way… while allowing corporations to make all their choices regarding computing and transportation. Resist.
Slate EV defaulted to manual windows and locks, so it is cheaper. But consumers demanded electric windows.
We’ll see if anyone actually buys them.
I’m reserved. Did you reserve?
Instead of patching over the rising costs, maybe we can move to living in communities that aren’t so dependent on such a costly, depreciating asset for every home?
How dare you suggest we consider living more efficiently as a society. Straight to jail.
This is the only excuse for the massive inflation of new car prices vs. rate of wage increases over the decades. I will give auto engineers props for this accomplishment; cars are so much safer now than 30 years ago.
Everything is a special model these days which makes the price higher. You don’t see mid range, average cars anymore.
Don’t forget CAFE abuse. It incentivizes the boom of CUVs and SUVs we have now, and makes it challenging to have a good coupe/sedan platform. Pretty much killed the 3-door/5-door wagon, imo the superior car.
Dont sleep on either “many new cars are electric” or “cars last a fuckton longer”.
Per-capira “total cost of ownership” for a car from purchase to retirement hasnt increased nearly as much as first-sale price would suggest. (Though the “financing cost” of the one-or-more transactions is a separate matter.)
Electric cars are still kinda expensive because they are new, and not yet the majority. But wow they are going to be so much cheaper in the long run. Fewer parts and easier maintenance. It’s surprising how much longer something lasts when it doesn’t need to contain numerous miniature explosions per second.
Never buy new. Let someone else deal with the frequent hassle of getting all the problems fixed “under warranty” while the lemons get sent to salvage. Give me the vehicles that survive. Case in point, I bought my first car for $500, drove it for 24 years, and the biggest age-related expense was rebuilding the front end for $600. I sold the car in 2011 for $1000. I bought my current SUV in 2009 and the biggest mechanical failures have been replacing the power steering pump and the 4WD short axles.
I had a friend who insisted he needed to spend all his money buying new cars. He tried to tell me how much money he was saving because the dealership was fixing all the problems for free. I pointed out that he had barely even driven his new car because it was spending more time at the dealership every week or two and he was constantly wasting his own time taking it back for yet another problem.
Good advice, though not really germane to the topic.
Somebody has to buy the new cars for there to be used cars for you to buy, and the price you offer has to be more valuable to them than the car they’re selling.
FWIW, A good argument for buying new isn’t “look what the dealer’s fixing”, but rather “I don’t want hidden surprises”. Private party sales can very much be caveat emptor, and even getting a dealership to stand by their claims can be unprofitable.
That’s what rich people are for – to suffer for the benefit of the working class.
For the high end. Sure.
And poor, financially illiterate people buy up the low end.
But who buys the middle?
Imo that the sweet spot for leases. People who want modern safety/reliability/warranty, and resigned themselves to the fact that they’ll always have a car payment if they prioritize these things.
What year was that? I don’t believe a $500 car would last 24 more years. These days you can’t even buy a 24 year old car for $500
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
The cheapest car I ever owned was listed on Craigslist for $1,000 but I managed to talk it down because it had a broken fuel gauge, only lasted me about a year. It was a 1993 Dodge Dakota, so we’re in OBD1 era here. I’m currently driving a late 90s Honda with almost 300,000 miles, it burns oil but it’s still drives fine. I’m going to drive it until it dies and then hopefully I’ll have enough money to buy something on Craigslist. In my experience $500 would only buy you a mechanic’s special. I first got my driver’s license in the 2010s and I live on the west coast, if that makes any difference
It was a '74 Pontiac LeMansthat I bought in 1987. And sorry, I did forget about one thing… I had to replace the transmission a couple times, but back then you could get them from a junkyard for cheap, and it only took a couple hours to replace. Probably would have lasted a lot longer if I’d taken the time to rebuild the clutches though. Of course it’s not like you can drive any vehicle forever, there was the maintenance as things like bushings and alternators wore out. For this discussion though I don’t count things that you have to do on any vehicle with 300k miles on it. Everything wears out eventually, and yeah even the motor was starting to smoke by that time.
Yeah kinda burying the lede on this. Cars built in the 70s had a much more simple, serviceable construction.
By the time you let it go, it was also probably grandfathered in to emissions requirements because it’s a classic car.
Anything from the 90s- 2010 will not hold up like that one did.
My secondhand 1999 Crown Victoria went 284000 miles over 19 years. I had to put some work into it, but when I traded the car in, everything still worked, minus the trunk lock (super glued by frat boys) and the driver door handle (snapped off in my hand, twice, replaced with channel locks clamped onto the remaining nub).
I mean, my SUV is a 2004 and seems to be holding up pretty well. I give it full synthetic oil and take it off-road occasionally, so it gets a wide range of treatment. Maybe I’m just not as bothered as other people are by the occasional bit of maintenance. I just replaced the thermostat this Fall, which was certainly a lot harder than on the old car because this one is buried down along the side of the engine, but it was still a pretty simple job.
Definitely Not The Onion material. Heck, you could almost convince me that this is The Onion.
The Onion ate the GOP.
Jesus fuck! What the fuck is it with these fuckers!?!? really? Cars are too safe!??! WTF?
I am guessing they want to deregulate the safety laws so that they can take the money that they spend on it and stick it into their pockets and still keep the price of cars the same!
Buy motorcycles. Problem solved.
Motorcycles now all have TFT screens and a variety of computer-controlled riding aids.
“All” of them most certainly do not. You can still go buy a brand new XR650L right now that not only does not have any electronic rider aids whatsoever, it has no electronics other than its spark ignition system. Never mind a TFT dash. It still has a mechanical speedometer, driven by a rotary cable.
Electronic features on bikes are becoming more available, for sure, but if you really want to they’re dead easy to avoid.
Anyway, I was thinking of the safety aspect. If Republicans say the want cheap and less safe vehicles, motorcycles already fit the bill.
Republicans wake up in the morning trying to write down that idea in their dream where they hurt people and made money.
Tbh, it would be kind of nice if sensors weren’t put in easily damaged areas of cars. They’re part of why bumpers and tailgates are so much more expensive. I wonder if cars could have all the safety features using a couple little LIDAR and camera packages instead of chips on every piece of plastic.
Yep I’ve recently learned that a crushed bumper can total a car, there’s thousands of dollars of electronics in there somehow, it’s insane. I miss that car.
that’s totaling from an insurance perspective, not from a repairability perspective. if somehow your bumper cost more than like 70% of the car’s value then you had a decently old car which would have required very specific parts to fix.
My question is, why does the sensor cost so much? 🤔
Well you take a 30¢ sensor and put a GM part number on it and magically poof it costs $300.
Just had a bit of a realization on this one. The point of this is for them to do nothing, isn’t it? Specifically blame it one something people will push back on (safety features), so they can throw up their hands and say, “we tried, but they won’t let us bring down the cost of cars!”
Maybe if American “cars” were actually car sized, they would need a lot less material to be made, and require a less powerful cheaper motor to move all that metal around.
If we took every conservative on the planet and put them on an island together, how long do you think it would take before the cannibalism and incest kicked in?
Holy moly this has literally become reddit… fuckin hell.
Because of anti-right wing rhetoric?
Are you aware that Lemmy was originally built by people who wanted a more open and free alternative to Reddit so they could discuss Marxist-Lennism and communism and stuff? Lol
That’s my understanding, at least
You are partially right. But the world does not revolve around left wing and communist beliefs unfortunately. It was purely to have an decentralized social network. Just happens that the likes of the left have much more free time and want to make every single thing about politics for some reason.
It’s almost like your on a thread about right wingers wanting to deregulate safety features. I can’t believe the lefties are complaining about that! How stupid I was to make a thread with “REPUBLICANS” political!
Not making it political, acting superior from a safe space… Do you honestly think republicans would become canibals on an island? Because if you do. Your world view has gotten so dettached from reality that it’s scary… thinking of other people as sub human.
Nothing you said makes sense, retype your comment and try once more. I know it’s tough bud.
Yeah sorry hard to communicate to you in my secondary language well enough I’ll make it a list ao it makes it easier to convey…
- All of you act like you know it all
- You seem to love making any person that has remotely different views as less than human.
- You overuse words like fascist, racist and bigot to a point that it does not even mean what you think it does.
- If the canibals thing made you confused read the original comment…
Anything else I need to shed light on?
Lol you’re assuming they aren’t doing that now?
It would start before they got dropped off.
The mandatory safety features are required because the mandatory fuel economy features mean more aero dynamic cars with worse visibility. We have mandatory fuel economy on cars so dumb big ass trucks can just guzzle gas like there’s no tomorrow. We can’t have regular sized trucks that get decent fuel economy for some reason that has to do with chickens.
The safety requirements have gone up because the average size of the vehicles in the US has gone up. Has nothing to do with aero, and everything to do with rollover protection. Hell, even the dreaded “giant iPad” era of interior design is due to the requirement for backup cams on all cars, due to the reduced visibility, due to the increased size of structural pillars, due to higher strength to pass rollover tests due to increased weight of the vehicle duetolargertrucksandsuvsduetotheautomakerstargetingthemostprofitablevehiclesizesduetothechickentaxonimportedtrucks.
Exactly.
I don’t know, the Crolloa, RAV4, and CR-V are among the most common cars have good fuel economy without sacrificing visibility.
If you want not so big trucks, there’s the Maverick, Ridgeline, and Santa Cruz that can all get decent fuel economy.
None of those have nearly the visibility of their older versions. Lower slanting roofs, chunky pillars, less visibility.
All those trucks are small for modern times but not small. All modern trucks also sacrifice bed size for cab size because most people aren’t using them for truck stuff anymore. They just want a truck.
Qhy are cars more expensive?
I mean last I checked they fall under the category of “everything”.
