[HN Gopher] China's $4k electric cars tap huge market Tesla can'...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       China's $4k electric cars tap huge market Tesla can't reach
        
       Author : pseudolus
       Score  : 102 points
       Date   : 2021-03-11 11:15 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bloomberg.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bloomberg.com)
        
       | weddpros wrote:
       | only 5 full page reloads before I could finally accept that f*ing
       | cookie dialog... gg bloomberg and europe
        
         | pkulak wrote:
         | Firefox, plus the reader button, my friend.
        
         | phatfish wrote:
         | I did it in no extra page loads.
        
         | Black101 wrote:
         | There's hopefully an addon to block all stupid cookie dialogs
        
       | spiritplumber wrote:
       | My mom who lives in Milan has had something similar for more than
       | ten years and it works great. Cost a bit more than $4000 at the
       | time, but not much more, and it's saved a lot of money in gas and
       | taxes.
        
       | sunstone wrote:
       | I wonder how it does in the government safety ratings?
        
         | nowherebeen wrote:
         | It probably has the same safety rating as a scooter. These cars
         | aren't meant for highways, but are great for urban commutes
         | within a few kilometers. The perfect use case is if you need it
         | just to get groceries.
        
           | i_have_an_idea wrote:
           | I don't dispute the use case for urban commuters and short
           | distances, however, these things should absolutely have
           | airbags. You can be the safest and most responsible driver,
           | but some crazy a*hole can still slam into you head on with a
           | SUV. Airbags should not be a cost cutting option.
        
         | imhoguy wrote:
         | And battery safety.
        
           | jbay808 wrote:
           | They're almost certainly using LiFePO4 chemistry, which tends
           | to be pretty good for safety.
        
             | topspin wrote:
             | LiFePO4 gives up some energy density. Where have you
             | learned what is typically used for batteries in these?
             | LiFePO4 certainly is a safe choice.
        
       | _ph_ wrote:
       | Tesla certainly isn't in the market of $4k cars, but it is an
       | interesting thought that with their new casting process, they
       | could basically cast the backbone of a small car in one piece,
       | lowering the assembly costs drastically. So if they ever decide
       | to make a super-affordable mini car (perhaps for the Indian
       | market?), it could be astonishingly cheap.
        
       | onetimemanytime wrote:
       | Yeah and Tesla can't tap the Boeing or Bugatti market.
       | 
       | Different cars for different markets and budget. $4k car is great
       | for driving a few miles or once a week. Or within city limits.
       | Generally, you get what you pay for so a $4k can't offer what a
       | $80K car does. Common sense.
        
       | anti-shill wrote:
       | the Straits Times has this same article, but without the paywall,
       | just google the article title
        
       | omarforgotpwd wrote:
       | in February Tesla outsold this $4000 car (the Wuling HongGuang
       | MiniEV)
       | 
       | definitely a completely different market though. This car doesn't
       | even have air bags
        
       | llarsson wrote:
       | I love the idea of a city-only electric car that is speed-capped
       | at something reasonable.
       | 
       | They would be the easiest to automate fully (lower risk of
       | damaging pedestrians or others on the road) and do not pollute
       | inside densely populated areas.
       | 
       | Your average speed in a city center is pretty low anyway, so if
       | it could be automated to avoid slow starts when lights turn green
       | (I have to imagine that automated cars could simultaneously
       | start, rather than having to make sure the car in front of you
       | had committed to driving before you do) would actually improve
       | the experience and average speed immensely.
        
       | aksss wrote:
       | An electric car that is charged from coal-generated power is
       | basically a coal car.
        
         | trixie_ wrote:
         | Did you know that not all power comes from burning coal?
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > An electric car that is charged from coal-generated power is
         | basically a coal car.
         | 
         | It's a "coal car" that's much easier to upgrade, _en masse_
         | with millions like it, to end-to-end cleaner technology than a
         | cat with an onboard fossil fuel engine.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | dmurray wrote:
         | 58% of Chinese electricity comes from fossil fuels [0], and
         | that's dropping fast (65% in 2019). Also, the worst thing about
         | a coal-fired car would be particulate pollution in the city
         | where you drive it, so generating that electricity far away
         | from the city helps a lot there.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_China
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | zozin wrote:
       | Flame bait article. Tesla is a high-end/luxury brand trying to
       | dabble in more affordable, but still luxurious vehicles. Those
       | products are lower volume, but have higher margins. Imagine
       | reading an article titled: China's Go-Kart is a Huge Market
       | Volkswagen can't Reach. Ridiculous.
        
       | ilamont wrote:
       | A few years ago I drove one of these cars, which fell somewhere
       | between a Yugo and a golf cart in terms of appearance, speed,
       | passenger room, and (most importantly) safety.
        
       | s1k3s wrote:
       | Love the Musk army in this thread, eager to destroy any sort of
       | competitor this brand has. You know you guys are the ones that
       | benefit from this kind of market competition, right?
        
         | Justin_K wrote:
         | To be fair, these companies are selling to completely different
         | customers and market segments. It's kind of silly to compare
         | them.
        
       | Reventlov wrote:
       | Reminds me of the Citroen Ami for some reason:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBD0Q9p4bR4
        
       | rasz wrote:
       | in case anyone is wondering - $4500-5500 13.0kW motor 9-13kWh
       | battery mobility scooter dressed in car shaped shell with a
       | "quality somewhere between economy car and a public bathroom".
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11ExTYIEJm0
       | 
       | tldr: great alternative to a scooter.
        
         | foepys wrote:
         | We have even smaller vehicles currently powered by 50ccm ICE in
         | Germany. You only need a scooter license for them and they are
         | being driven mostly by elderly or disabled people that either
         | cannot get or don't want to pay about 1.500EUR for a full
         | drivers license for cars. There aren't many of them on the
         | road, I'd say less than 0.1%, but they do exist and I see one
         | at least once a week.
         | 
         | Another advantage is that they don't need to get inspected
         | every other year by the authorities (TUV) and due to the
         | standard 50ccm two-stroke scooter motor they are really cheap
         | to maintain.
        
           | aww_dang wrote:
           | What are the brand and model names?
        
             | foepys wrote:
             | Aixam is one manufacturer and based in France as I'm now
             | finding out. The models are relatively expensive, though,
             | because they are not produced in high numbers.
             | 
             | https://www.aixam.com/
        
           | riffraff wrote:
           | > driven mostly by elderly or disabled people
           | 
           | how odd, in Italy small ICE vehicles in this category (which
           | I believe is called "Light quadricycles" or L6e) seem to be
           | marketed mostly to kids from affluent families. .
        
             | llarsson wrote:
             | That demographic makes for a more positive marketing
             | campaign.
             | 
             | Look at ads for fashion that actually targets older people.
             | It will also feature people in their early thirties, at
             | most. Everybody still knows exactly what the intention is.
        
               | riffraff wrote:
               | I know what you mean, but I meant that it's mostly young
               | kids who "buy" them, it's become almost a stereotype.
        
           | CydeWeys wrote:
           | > Another advantage is that they don't need to get inspected
           | every other year by the authorities (TUV) and due to the
           | standard 50ccm two-stroke scooter motor they are really cheap
           | to maintain.
           | 
           | Ouch, these vehicles must be wrecking hell on local air
           | quality.
        
             | baybal2 wrote:
             | 50cc all use two stroke engines
        
           | rsj_hn wrote:
           | I wonder how much horsepower you can get out of 50cc if you
           | max it out with all the *chargers. Sounds like a cool
           | opportunity for regulatory arbitrage.
        
             | mpol wrote:
             | In the times of 50cc road races you could get 10hp out of
             | it, at maybe 17.000 rpm :) No idea how fast these cars
             | would go with such an engine, they are not made to go
             | 150km/h :) The way you tune a 2-stroke is by polishing the
             | ports of the cylinder to have an almost perfect airflow. In
             | the Netherlands this happened a lot in the sixties and
             | seventies to ride at illegal speeds with your moped, it was
             | considered a craft. In the eighties people just bought a
             | replacement cylinder to go at illegal speeds.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_cc_Grand_Prix_motorcycle_r
             | a...
        
               | mpol wrote:
               | So yes, ofcourse I ended up at youtube, if only for my
               | own curiosity :)
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1KXL1vjTX4
        
               | swimfar wrote:
               | 10hp from a 50c two-stroke is easy. Road racers were
               | getting 17+ with 70's technology. Those engines also had
               | about a 100 rpm powerband, though. So you'd see 50cc
               | bikes with as many as 14 gears.
        
             | gene_kreemers wrote:
             | Unfortunately you can't turbocharge or supercharge a two-
             | stroke. There's a material amount of time during the cycle
             | where both intake and exhaust port are open at the same
             | time. If you use any type of forced induction it would blow
             | the fuel/air mixture straight out the cylinder before it
             | could be ignited. You can however use a tuned pipe to cause
             | a pressure wave to reflect back up the pipe and compress
             | the mixture, but that's usually limited to a pretty narrow
             | powerband
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | rsj_hn wrote:
               | Ahh, so the special regs only apply to 2 strokes? I
               | thought they were based on displacement
        
               | foepys wrote:
               | They're also valid for 4 strokes but generally speaking
               | 4-strokes have lower torque at high rpm and since it's
               | hard to get much power out of 50ccm anyways, they tend to
               | be 2-stroke.
        
               | numpad0 wrote:
               | I think he's talking inherent technical limitations, not
               | regulations. I wonder if it still applies if there was a
               | pre-burning occurring in the middle of intake manifolds
        
               | swimfar wrote:
               | You can have forced induction with two-strokes if you use
               | direct injection. It ends up being pretty efficient
               | because you can blow all the exhaust out of the cylinders
               | and have clean air for the next cycle. You also don't
               | need to add oil to the fuel because you don't use the
               | crankcase to pressurize the air/fuel charge. This type of
               | engine is really common in construction equipment and
               | (older) big trucks, semis, buses, etc. Some were even
               | supercharged and turbocharged.
        
               | seryoiupfurds wrote:
               | In fact, I believe the supercharger is necessary for them
               | to function.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-stroke_diesel_engine
        
           | cmckn wrote:
           | 1,500 for a drivers license?? I had no idea. It cost me about
           | $30 USD to get my first license in Alabama. Washington state
           | does taxation differently so I think it was about $120. You
           | learn something new every day!
        
             | ptr wrote:
             | If you include driving lessons, the full package can easily
             | go for 3-4000 EUR in Sweden.
        
               | cmckn wrote:
               | Woah! I guess having a drivers license is more necessary
               | in most of the US, so they're more easily obtained?
               | That's wild.
        
               | sgt wrote:
               | Having driven in both the US and Europe, I think it's
               | also worth pointing out that it's easier to drive and
               | understand the road system in the US. In Europe they
               | occasionally have some bizarre rules and tourists just
               | end up going slowly straight through and hoping for the
               | best. In the US, pretty much any moron can get on the
               | interstate or even drive around Atlanta or a big city
               | like that.
        
               | stefan_ wrote:
               | "so" as in implies? No, someone made an explicit choice
               | to compromise the education in favor of accessibility and
               | it has caused tons of issues.
        
               | resonantjacket5 wrote:
               | I mean if you don't have a drivers license in usa you
               | practically can't buy groceries nor have a job unlike in
               | most other countries.
        
               | distances wrote:
               | The licenses are absolutely required in the more sparsely
               | populated areas in Europe, going without license is only
               | possible in major metropolitan areas.
               | 
               | Europe just places a relatively high bar for driving
               | skills. You do see the outcome in road safety and much
               | more orderly driving behaviour (with the usual caveat
               | that Europe is diverse and this applies more to some
               | regions than some others yadda yadda).
        
               | angry_octet wrote:
               | Omg this is just a ridiculous statement. Germany !=
               | Europe.
               | 
               | I've driven in many countries and Italy had more than an
               | equal share of near death experiences.
        
               | distances wrote:
               | I was hoping my caveat would cover exactly this. The
               | parent comments were talking about Germany and Sweden,
               | and I can promise they are not the only countries with
               | decent driving.
        
               | IkmoIkmo wrote:
               | Different ideas about safety mostly. The US has 2x the
               | death rate per km driven compared to Sweden.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffi
               | c-r...
        
               | golemiprague wrote:
               | You can't compare a country the size of the US to Sweden.
               | There are too many variations within the US, it is more
               | like the whole of Europe and we all know driving in
               | Sweden is not like driving in Italy. There are so many
               | factors that can contribute, type of population,
               | topography, weather, congestion, amount of driving in
               | general and many others one could think about. "Ideas
               | about safety", if they exist, is only one factor.
        
               | ekianjo wrote:
               | The US has much larger cars so this drives fatalities up
               | in accidents too.
        
               | jefftk wrote:
               | Really? An accident between two large cars is generally
               | safer than one between two small cars.
        
               | bobthepanda wrote:
               | It may make collision between cars safer, but it makes
               | collision with non-cars deadlier for the people outside
               | the car.
               | 
               | The general trend for pedestrian and cycling deaths is up
               | in the US, because increasingly popular SUVs and
               | crossovers strike a person higher on the body, and also
               | are more likely to push a person under the car towards
               | the wheels or forward where they'll be run over again,
               | rather than over the hood.
               | 
               | https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-
               | todays-s...
        
               | jefftk wrote:
               | Source: https://www.iihs.org/topics/vehicle-size-and-
               | weight
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | vladvasiliu wrote:
             | > It cost me about $30 USD to get my first license in
             | Alabama. Washington state does taxation differently so I
             | think it was about $120.
             | 
             | What does that actually cover? Just the administrative
             | things you do at the DMV or driving school / exams / etc?
             | 
             | Germany is probably like France, which means that the 1500
             | covers driving school + exam + actual licence.
             | 
             | You need to have a certain number of driving school hours
             | (22 I think?) to be able to sit the practical exam.
        
               | cmckn wrote:
               | Driving school wasn't required, though you can take a
               | "driver's ed" class in high school to skip the exams at
               | the DMV (you take them as part of the class). The exams
               | are free (IIRC), you just have to pay to get the license
               | when you pass. You only have to pass a written exam to
               | get your "permit" (limited license). You need a certain
               | amount of hours of driving to get a full license; but
               | these aren't really tracked. You just need a guardian (if
               | you're under 18) or a license holder to sign an affidavit
               | saying you drove the hours. I definitely hadn't actually
               | driven the number of required hours when I turned 16 and
               | my mom signed off on it.
               | 
               | It varies widely by state, of course; I started driving
               | in Alabama when I was 15. I just recently had to pay WA
               | to transfer my license from Colorado, I guess that was
               | just administrative fees.
        
               | nicoburns wrote:
               | > Driving school wasn't required
               | 
               | I think the difference might be in the difficulty of the
               | test. Here in the UK driving lessons aren't required, but
               | most people wouldn't pass the test without them (and most
               | drivers wouldn't pass the test now if they had to sit it
               | again).
        
               | seniorivn wrote:
               | which basically means those tests are not required to be
               | sufficient at safe driving, since most drivers drive
               | safely(enough) without being able to pass those tests.
               | 
               | Additionally, i would love to compare car accidents stats
               | for countries with strict rules/very liberal rules and no
               | rules at all(like most third world countries with high
               | level of corruption)
        
               | ctdonath wrote:
               | AFAIK, a German drivers' license requires 5 substantial
               | tests (4 seasons plus bad weather) ... while one in USA
               | is little more than 10 minutes of "can you not crash into
               | things at low speed".
        
               | Gene_Parmesan wrote:
               | When I sat for mine going on two decades ago, by far the
               | scariest part was parallel parking. Which really says
               | something - if you base it off of what is emphasized on
               | the test, apparently we care more about "are you going to
               | ding someone's car when parking" than "can you handle a
               | motor vehicle at speed in dangerous conditions."
        
               | crooked-v wrote:
               | In the US, it's extremely common for driving lessons to
               | be provided by secondary schools.
               | 
               | As somebody who missed out on that, I ended up paying
               | around $400 as an adult for 6 hours of private lessons
               | (yes, that was it), plus a $60 fee for the driver's
               | license and a $9 fee for the driving test.
        
               | throwawayboise wrote:
               | Is it? Where I went to High School they stopped offering
               | drivers education in the 1980s, for budget reasons.
               | Everyone now takes private drivers training courses, or
               | just learns from their parents.
        
               | the_only_law wrote:
               | > As somebody who missed out on that, I ended up paying
               | around $400 as an adult for 6 hours of private lessons
               | (yes, that was it), plus a $60 fee for the driver's
               | license and a $9 fee for the driving test.
               | 
               | Never happened for me either. A few years ago I payed a
               | similar amount for a handful of very short courses that
               | didn't leave me confident enough to take the test. The
               | consequences are big degradation of QoL. Now looking at
               | probably 1 or 2 grand for significantly longer courses
               | which I'm not even sure will be enough, along with the
               | fact that these sort of places are not compatible with a
               | working adults schedule.
        
             | krrrh wrote:
             | Mandatory driving school and a much harder exam.
             | 
             | When I lived there I was able to swap my home country
             | drivers license for a German one and bypass the whole
             | system. I will say that German's drive very well, and the
             | training and gatekeeping go a long way to explaining how
             | the Autobahn's unlimited speed limits function so well.
        
         | 7_my_mind wrote:
         | if hypothetically one could ban cars from cities and only allow
         | such low powered transport, it would be quite an efficient safe
         | and clean form of transport
        
           | Leherenn wrote:
           | I don't know, I'm not sure they are really solving something.
           | Local residents can probably rely on public
           | transports/walking/cycling to move within the city. People
           | from outside probably need a car to reach the city itself,
           | but if you can't use those low powered cars on high speed
           | roads then there's no point in having one. Better a "full"
           | car that gets you to a public transports node on the edge of
           | the city and then you switch.
        
         | willvarfar wrote:
         | "Moped cars" are a big thing in Sweden too, as 15yos can drive
         | them just like they can drive a scooter. They are typically
         | small diesels and currently cost about EUR16k+ new, though, so
         | are in an entirely different price class (if not tech class).
         | 
         | There are some cheaper and some electric alternatives starting
         | to arrive on the market. Right now, the electric alternatives
         | don't have much range.
        
         | TLightful wrote:
         | There are some decent $5-$10k small EV's in China that will mop
         | up customers who can't reach Tesla levels of affordability.
         | 
         | And with the advent of Hyundai Ioniq 5 and other cars coming on
         | stream in the premium space, Tesla can suck a fat one.
        
         | sudosysgen wrote:
         | 13kW is way beyond scooter territory and more like entry level
         | motorcycle territory.
         | 
         | It's a good alternative to a smart car, it has uses cases much
         | beyond that of a scooter by nature of having, say, a roof.
        
           | Retric wrote:
           | 13kW or 17.4 hp is anemic for a motorcycle and your moving a
           | larger vehicle. It's a golf cart which often use 12HP engines
           | that's slightly boosted to handle a windshield.
        
             | simfree wrote:
             | The driving experience of an ICE engine versus an electric
             | motor of the same horsepower is not similar. They have much
             | different acceleration curves and driving experiences.
        
             | cco wrote:
             | I will thank you kindly to not speak about the Honda Rebel
             | that I owned like that! She could hit 81 while going
             | slightly downhill if you were in a tuck.
             | 
             | I believe from the factory the Rebel has like 15 or 16 hp,
             | mine that was 12 years old at the time must have had one or
             | two less, and it was exciting to ride around town.
             | 
             | I'll grant that 17 hp in a car would not be "exciting", but
             | I bet from 0-30mph which is where this car would live would
             | feel plenty zippy.
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | The lowest HP Honda Rebel right now the 300 goes for 4.5k
               | and even that has 27HP new from factory. Back in 1985,
               | the Rebel 250 started at 16.1 HP but that's been
               | discounted for a while.
               | 
               | IMO, anything that can't maintain highway speed up a hill
               | is anemic by modern standards. I get that HP has become a
               | largely meaningless metric for daily driving, but that
               | seems like a useful baseline.
        
             | sudosysgen wrote:
             | 17hp is reasonable for a small motorcycle. You only need
             | more power if you are going on highways, and this vehicle
             | doesn't. For comparison, it's about twice as much as the
             | Honda Grom, which is certainly beyond a scooter.
             | 
             | It's as much power as a Honda Rebel 250, a CBF250, an
             | MT125, a Yamaha Vixion, an ST250, etc..., and those are gas
             | engines that will generally only provide like 50-70% of
             | their power.
             | 
             | Electric golf carts generally use 3-5hp engines. That's
             | because for small engines, the electric advantage of always
             | delivering the same amount of power is a huge deal.
             | 
             | 18hp was enough for many cars. It is fine for city driving.
             | It goes up to 100km/h, it's fine.
             | 
             | Also, the peak power of the motor is actually 20kW, 13kW is
             | the sustained power, which again is more than enough for
             | city driving.
        
               | sgt wrote:
               | It's certainly a new way of thinking about minimum viable
               | cars. Nowadays you sort of expect 200hp from a normal
               | family car, most often closer to 300hp. My car has a 4L
               | that produces 286hp, and it's guzzling fuel. Most of the
               | time is spent in towns and cities going slowly. I could
               | easily move to electric, but sometimes I also need range
               | and cruising speeds of 70-90 mph.
        
               | sitkack wrote:
               | You are arguing past each other, hp has little bearing on
               | the performance of a vehicle in the regimes we are
               | talking about. Torque is what should be measured for in
               | town performance and that is relative to weight. It only
               | takes 10-30hp to maintain a vehicle at highway speeds.
        
               | sgt wrote:
               | That's true. And how much hp/torque did the Model T have?
               | Probably not much, and I am sure it could do a
               | respectable 30 mph.
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | The Model T had 20 hp and did 45mph on level ground.
        
         | beaunative wrote:
         | That shell is all most might need, to go shopping or run any
         | errand in the city. It's much safer than a scooter and carries
         | much more. Obviously you probably shouldn't be driving it in
         | the highway, but how often does that happen?
        
           | franklampard wrote:
           | And bad whether and stuff. Would you ride a scooter in rainy
           | days or in this?
        
         | betwixthewires wrote:
         | Lol watching the video and the guy says "there isn't even a
         | park! You get reverse, neutral and drive, that's it! Your park
         | is the hand brake! I didn't even know that was possible!"
         | Someone who's never even seen a standard transmission car has
         | no business reviewing cars.
        
           | culopatin wrote:
           | It's fine if they haven't driven one, but at least read a
           | little.
        
           | cameronh90 wrote:
           | Of course manual gearboxes have park. It's known as 1 or R
           | depending on which way you're facing... ;)
        
             | spullara wrote:
             | For sure, can't risk handbrake failure.
        
               | jozvolskyef wrote:
               | It is not wise to rely on handbrakes. Firstly handbrakes
               | aren't designed to hold any significant load. Just search
               | for an image of a handbrake cable. It is good enough most
               | of the time, but it will bite you once you have a fully
               | loaded car at a steep slope. Secondly it is a good habit
               | to never leave the car on neutral unless you have a good
               | reason because this habit will save you in the event of
               | forgetting to pull the handbrake.
        
             | ben_w wrote:
             | Not something I was taught to do for my UK license in '09,
             | IIRC.
        
               | cameronh90 wrote:
               | It's one of those things I picked up from when older
               | people taught me how to drive. Presumably from when hand
               | brakes were more likely to fail than on modern cars.
               | Maybe if someone crashes into the car while it's parked.
               | 
               | Either way I still do it. And turn my wheels towards/away
               | from the kerb on a hill as appropriate. Probably useless
               | but if you have a fail-safe, may as well apply it.
        
               | jozvolskyef wrote:
               | Forgetting the handbrake is a common cause of minor
               | accidents. Half the automotive 'fail' videos on the
               | internet are people forgetting the handbrake. The habit
               | of never leaving the engine on neutral greatly reduces
               | the probability of this kind of an accident.
        
               | somethingwitty1 wrote:
               | And sometimes even non-minor. Wasn't Anton Yelchin (the
               | Star Trek actor) killed when he got out of his car to
               | open his security gate and was crushed?
        
             | quintushoratius wrote:
             | It depends on the car, really. My 2000 Saab required you to
             | shift to reverse in order to remove the key, regardless of
             | the incline.
        
         | BossingAround wrote:
         | Interesting. The lack of security is probably why I don't see
         | them in the EU (would be surprised if they were legal to sell
         | as cars).
         | 
         | That said, I personally don't own a car for ethical reasons,
         | and I'd love this small one for shopping or just small trips on
         | the weekends.
        
           | christkv wrote:
           | The French have this car https://youtu.be/uUEKtOGmpVI
        
             | tibbydudeza wrote:
             | It would be perfect for us now just running the usual
             | errands as since WFH we rarely travel outside our city
             | borders on the national highways.
        
           | TheDong wrote:
           | I'm curious to hear about the ethical reasons you have for
           | avoiding car ownership. What are they?
        
             | foepys wrote:
             | A typical car is standing around 90% of the day, if not
             | more. It's a waste of space that could be used for trees,
             | walkways, cycle lanes, etc. If we pooled our resources
             | together and made renting cars easy and accessible, we'd
             | have more space in cities for the people living there.
        
               | wolfretcrap wrote:
               | I often wonder without having a pickup truck and a car,
               | how do Europeans haul heavy hardware stuff like MDF
               | boards, 3x4 wood plank, steel pipes to their place.
               | 
               | When I was in US I drove to nearest big box store, loaded
               | my pickup and drove to my place. Easy, unfortunately no
               | other country I've found such convenience and this makes
               | me wanna go back to US.
        
               | u678u wrote:
               | > how do Europeans haul heavy hardware stuff like MDF
               | boards, 3x4 wood plank, steel pipes to their place.
               | 
               | You do this like once every 10 years? I wouldn't choose a
               | car on this.
        
               | ivanche wrote:
               | Depending on the country, but some hardware stores offer
               | transport or you can rent a van for $30 or so.
               | 
               | OTOH, in 41 years I had exactly 0 times needed large MDF
               | boards or wood planks or steel pipes...
        
               | sgt wrote:
               | Clock is ticking, buddy. Best order some MDF boards
               | tonight.
        
               | jfk13 wrote:
               | Most things I need from the hardware/DIY store, I can
               | bring home in my car. With the seats folded down, 8-foot
               | lengths of timber aren't much of a problem.
               | 
               | For the rare occasions when that wouldn't be feasible,
               | they'll deliver for a moderate charge. It would make no
               | sense to pay all the costs of keeping an extra vehicle
               | (or a much larger one than I generally need) just to
               | avoid a couple of deliveries per year.
        
               | HarryHirsch wrote:
               | Station wagons are popular, as are hatchback cars where
               | you can fold down the rear seat. That will fit a fridge
               | or bicycle. If you really need the space you just rent a
               | van for the day. Gas is expensive on the old continent,
               | so people really do not like to drive huge cars.
        
               | Theodores wrote:
               | Pickups trucks are an American phenomenon due to the
               | Chicken Tax and how that sector of manufacturing is
               | protected. European and Japanese manufacturers that
               | trounce the big three in every other sector are forbidden
               | to compete fairly in the land of the free when it comes
               | to these bizarre pickup trucks that make little sense in
               | normal countries.
               | 
               | In the UK we have the Ford Transit van and people that
               | can do things for you. You get stuff delivered or
               | collected. The guy with the Transit van gets a high level
               | of utilisation out of it. People can therefore have
               | normal cars and SUVs. Or a bicycle.
               | 
               | We don't have those man size trucks with dual tyres in
               | the UK and certainly not at US prices. You can buy Ranger
               | and Hilux size trucks and those are a bit too large for
               | UK roads. In the US these would be toys, not man size at
               | all.
               | 
               | In the UK you can play a game watching cars and counting
               | how many have more than one person in them. In the US you
               | can count how many trucks are hauling stuff. They ain't.
        
               | handelaar wrote:
               | People who need it for work have _vans_ , which are an
               | amazing invention with rooves and doors and which can
               | carry pallets. Some have a trailer instead.
               | 
               | People who need it barely once or twice a year for home
               | take an estate car, rent one for a taxi, borrow a trailer
               | off a friend, or get the store to deliver - because
               | owning your own van or pickup just for that reason would
               | be considered _completely insane_.
        
               | vidarh wrote:
               | Why would I ever haul anything to my place? It's far
               | easier to have it delivered.
               | 
               | A couple of years ago I did maintenance to my garden. I
               | ordered planks and bags of cement from Amazon for next
               | day delivery because I couldn't even be bothered to order
               | from a specialist store.
               | 
               | But if I _wanted to_ , there's a store with bulk
               | construction supplies literally at the bottom of my road,
               | and a more retail oriented one 20 minutes away.
               | 
               | But I don't even have a drivers license. Never felt worth
               | the time.
        
               | rapsey wrote:
               | The thing is that during those 10% most or at least a lot
               | of them are on the road.
        
               | foepys wrote:
               | Commuting nowadays is broken. People commuting by car are
               | hauling around 4 or more empty seats at 30 km/h along a
               | highway full of other people doing the same, going into
               | the same cities often into the same office districs. We
               | could get rid of a lot of cars if we didn't drive around
               | 4 empty seats and filled just one.
               | 
               | Or if we lived closer to where we worked but that's seems
               | like a more complex problem.
        
               | imtringued wrote:
               | > Commuting nowadays is broken. People commuting by car
               | are hauling around 4 or more empty seats at 30 km/h along
               | a highway full of other people doing the same, going into
               | the same cities often into the same office districs. We
               | could get rid of a lot of cars if we didn't drive around
               | 4 empty seats and filled just one.
               | 
               | Unfortunately, highways require a certain minimum vehicle
               | size. The best you could possibly do is have a short
               | coupe with 2 seats. It wouldn't significantly influence
               | the size of the vehicle but waste more resources for the
               | few times where you need a 3-4 person vehicle. The
               | savings to be had are way too slim. However, driving a
               | pick up truck for your commute is absolutely a waste of
               | resources because there are smaller and more aerodynamic
               | cars that are commute worthy.
               | 
               | >Or if we lived closer to where we worked but that's
               | seems like a more complex problem.
               | 
               | It's the only solution. Building a von Neuman
               | architecture style city is absolutely stupid for society
               | since the world is inherently parallel. There is no
               | logical reason to have massive central work place
               | districts. Each office building is a cpu core and each
               | residential building is a memory chip in its own right.
               | We don't need to put all the cpu cores next to each other
               | and put the memory somewhere else. A distributed
               | development pattern is significantly more efficient since
               | data and computation are next to each other.
        
               | ctdonath wrote:
               | _A typical car is standing around 90% of the day, if not
               | more. It 's a waste of space_
               | 
               | [looks at personally-owned half-acre of forest] [looks at
               | car]
               | 
               | I own a car so I CAN own & preserve substantial
               | undeveloped natural land. You get more city space by me
               | not being there at all.
        
             | knuthsat wrote:
             | Environmental issues. Same reasons I guess why Bitcoin is
             | disliked. But most Bitcoin dislikers still drive a car, are
             | careless with heating and cooling and eat steak at least
             | once a day.
        
               | imtringued wrote:
               | That energy could have been used to produce more steaks,
               | cars and heating. It might be careless but at least there
               | is a logical reason for why these activities are highly
               | energy intensive. Bitcoin is energy intensive for a fixed
               | gain. It's like a war where people are fighting for a
               | farm plot. The amount of food you can farm from that plot
               | doesn't change just because you had a bigger war. Bitcoin
               | will only process 7 transactions per second and every
               | holder of Bitcoin is against changing that.
        
               | knuthsat wrote:
               | A nice comparison. So for Bitcoin we acknowledge the
               | fixed gain but for our planet the gain is limitless,
               | steaks, cars, and heating.
        
             | megablast wrote:
             | Ha. Are you kidding?
             | 
             | A million people are killed directly every year by cars.
             | Many more are seriously injured and disabled. Another
             | million indirectly due to air pollution. They are also the
             | number one cause of micro plastics around waterways.
             | Billions are spent on hospitals, doctors, nurses,
             | ambulances, police to support all this death.
             | 
             | Much more is spent covering our countryside on roads, that
             | kill millions of animals every year.
             | 
             | And encouraging urban sprawl means cities take up more
             | space, destroying wild life habitat.
             | 
             | This is just some of the awful things cars have bought to
             | our world, not mentioned are wars, major spills, toppled
             | governments, bribery, etc...
        
               | azinman2 wrote:
               | Yet you seem to own a computer and presumably are ok with
               | that?
        
               | imtringued wrote:
               | He also has the audacity to exist, how dare he live!
               | Let's throw stones at him for consuming any form of
               | resource!, no matter how insignificant!
        
               | teddyh wrote:
               | "Yet you participate in society! Curious."
               | 
               | -- Mister Gotcha (https://thenib.com/mister-gotcha/)
        
               | tshaddox wrote:
               | Pretty appropriate response to "cars are unethical" as
               | well. For a huge number of people, especially in the
               | United States, not having a car makes it essentially
               | impossible to have a job.
        
               | mpol wrote:
               | "cars are unethical"
               | 
               | That was not what he said. He was quite clear in making a
               | personal decision. There was no force on anyone to make
               | that same decision. That you are reading that into it
               | might say more about the way you think :)
        
               | tshaddox wrote:
               | On the topic of reading too much into things, note that I
               | didn't say anything about force or it not being a
               | personal decision either.
        
               | Jonnax wrote:
               | If someone feels like making what they see as a positive
               | impact by making a lifestyle choice.
               | 
               | What's the point in saying: "But you do some unrelated
               | thing???"
               | 
               | Is the argument that there's no point in making a small
               | difference, it's only worth it if you're 100%
               | ideologically pure?
               | 
               | Because I don't see where road deaths and microplastics
               | in local rivers come into owning a computer.
        
               | azinman2 wrote:
               | Computers themselves are a hodgepodge of resources
               | extracted often horrendously from all over the world.
               | Child labor for cobalt, various other rare earth products
               | violently extracted with extreme acids scalding lands and
               | polluting water sources, consuming vast quantities of oil
               | to ship all these raw materials to then be assembled in
               | massive factories with poorly paid workers, using
               | terrible chemicals that can poison the workers and harm
               | their babies...
               | 
               | The reality is almost all of modern technology,
               | materials, tools, and life have huge externalities. Us
               | being alive consuming resources and emitting green house
               | gases further pushes us towards terrible climate changes,
               | while taking away space from nature before us.
               | 
               | It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car
               | ownership but maintain the benefits of all other
               | externalities. Perhaps the OP also has many other resists
               | to modern life under ethical guise. The computer is the
               | one known exception here.
        
               | Jonnax wrote:
               | It isn't a gotcha to say they own a computer.
               | 
               | Making a choice not to buy a car makes a measurable
               | impact.
               | 
               | It's not a gotcha to say that they partake in society.
               | 
               | By your logic, it'd be arbitrary to safely dispose of
               | motor oil instead of conveniently dumping it into the
               | local park's pond.
        
               | bildung wrote:
               | _> It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car
               | ownership but maintain the benefits of all other
               | externalities._
               | 
               | It stops feeling like that once you replace assumptions
               | with numbers.
        
               | imtringued wrote:
               | >It just feels very arbitrary to stop at personal car
               | ownership but maintain the benefits of all other
               | externalities.
               | 
               | Yes, it's incredibly arbitrary because cars don't suffer
               | from low density development patterns. They don't cause
               | pollution. They also don't cost a significant amount of
               | money and this also doesn't force less well off people to
               | get expensive leases because everyone buys low end cars.
               | The tax burden of suburbia is absolutely insignificant.
               | The fact that you have more roads per resident decreases
               | the tax burden significantly. Their only fatal flaw is
               | that new developments aren't funded by the federal
               | government and private developers. Thanks to cars and
               | suburbia municipalities are swimming in cash and never
               | have to worry about their finances.
               | 
               | We should ban bicycles and pedestrian paths. Everyone
               | should drive, even children. This is the future.
        
               | brabel wrote:
               | Also, making a new car, even an electric one, takes a
               | huge amount of resources.
               | 
               | "Producing a medium-sized new car costing PS24,000 may
               | generate more than 17 tonnes of CO2e - almost as much as
               | three years' worth of gas and electricity in the typical
               | UK home."[0]
               | 
               | [0] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-
               | blog/20...
        
               | TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
               | Electric cars are even worse: they typically don't
               | achieve carbon parity with same-class ICE until about
               | 70,000km.
               | 
               | This was discussed recently here on HN, I'll try to find
               | the conversation.
               | 
               | Edit: here's the conversation, with link to source:
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24716921
               | 
               | It's about 50,000 to 112,00km depending on the source of
               | electricity used to charge the electric car.
        
               | aoeusnth1 wrote:
               | Can you explain what makes you say that figure is worse?
        
               | SECProto wrote:
               | You say "even worse", I say "much better". Reaching
               | carbon parity means any car driven more than that creates
               | less carbon emissions. People I know run their cars until
               | 300,000km and our power is >90% nuclear and hydro.
        
               | house9-2 wrote:
               | This is a pretty good article on ICE vs EV
               | 
               | https://www.motorbiscuit.com/are-electric-cars-worse-for-
               | the...
               | 
               | > ... compared to most gasoline-powered cars, an electric
               | car should become carbon neutral in less than 3 years of
               | driving.
        
               | midasuni wrote:
               | Us average car mileage for new cars is on the order of
               | 15-20,000 a year. So 3 years would be 80,000km which
               | checks out.
        
             | tomp wrote:
             | There are no ethical reasons. Everyone who says this is
             | just virtue signalling, by outsourcing the "car" to others
             | (delivery drivers, grocery stores, police, hospitals, ...).
             | 
             | Rejecting the car for ethical reasons should be accompanied
             | by rejecting most of the modern society & infrastructure as
             | well.
        
               | swimfar wrote:
               | How does not owning a car imply outsourcing those things?
               | That's only true if you hiring a cab everywhere you go
               | and order all your groceries to be delivered. If I bike
               | everywhere I go, including the grocery store I'm not
               | outsourcing cars. All the miles I would normally put on
               | my car I put on my bike, or public transportation.
        
               | tomp wrote:
               | The grocery store uses cars to transport goods from
               | farmer to the store. The whole supply chain uses cars
               | (petrol, resources, poisoning air, causing accidents,
               | ...), you're outsourcing to them.
        
               | betwixthewires wrote:
               | You know, if you think about it for 5 minutes, your point
               | makes absolutely no sense at all.
               | 
               | "Outsourcing" would be if his decision not to drive a car
               | required him to pay people to drive cars on his behalf.
               | That's the definition of the word "outsourcing". But
               | you're talking about transportation _that occurs whether
               | he drives a car or not._ The groceries _you_ get at the
               | store are driven there also. Him choosing not to drive a
               | car literally has 0 impact on the transportation
               | infrastructure of the supply chain. That is not
               | outsourcing.
        
               | freeflight wrote:
               | The grocery store uses trucks to transport goods because
               | doing it by bicycle/foot simply does not scale.
               | 
               | But just because that part of the logistic chain involves
               | ICE vehicles does not mean that _every_ part _has_ to
               | involve ICE vehicles nor does it mean that people not
               | using a car to do their shopping are  "outsourcing"
               | anything: The large-scale logistics happen regardless of
               | how people get to the grocer, people getting there by
               | foot/bicycle/public transport have literally zero
               | influence on that end of the logistics.
        
       | xiphias2 wrote:
       | We'll see after self driving is working and scaling. Tesla's plan
       | is to have less car owners and more service users.
        
         | Daho0n wrote:
         | Tesla's plan is also to have self driving cars, but they don't
         | (and won't have for years to come).
        
           | xiphias2 wrote:
           | Yes, that's the most likely way to scale up electric car use.
           | It would take 30 more years to get rid of gas cars.
           | 
           | Why do you think Tesla won't have self driving cars in the
           | next 5 years?
        
       | xirbeosbwo1234 wrote:
       | Who cares? Tesla's dead in the water anyway. How does it compete
       | with the real players?
        
       | finikytou wrote:
       | renault dacia is about to go out in europe. it is a 12kEur (after
       | tax rebate) car. Id say its a real huge market tesla can't reach.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VHstY5pKhw&ab_channel=YOUCA...
        
         | sgt wrote:
         | That's incredibly good value. Although I do like big cars and
         | trucks, it would make sense to have one of those puppies in the
         | garage too, for shopping and short errands.
        
       | alisonatwork wrote:
       | There was a decent discussion on these a few weeks ago:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26232760
       | 
       | And a few months before that:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24601479
        
       | neonate wrote:
       | https://archive.is/KsHYA
        
       | 02020202 wrote:
       | Amsterdam https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9ly7JjqEb0
        
       | partingshots wrote:
       | $4k death traps more like. There's no way you would ever get
       | those approved in the US for sale.
        
         | montzark wrote:
         | Death traps because rest of the vehicles are way heavier and
         | more dangerous (also to pedestrians).
         | 
         | If all cars were like that it would be fine.
        
           | Lucasoato wrote:
           | No, they would still be death traps since cars may also hit
           | other hard obstacles like walls and rocks.
        
             | jessaustin wrote:
             | They're going slower so it will be ok.
        
               | icedistilled wrote:
               | 20mph to a wall is going to leave a mark without crumple
               | zones
        
         | saiya-jin wrote:
         | If they would be used for city speeds only, the risks aren't
         | much bigger compared to scooters, in contrary.
         | 
         | But I have 0 doubt that being priced so aggressively, US and
         | Europe would slap such a huge tariff to protect local markets,
         | they would be very uncompetitive.
        
           | aww_dang wrote:
           | It wouldn't be suitable for US highways. It would make sense
           | if regulators would allow another class of vehicle for city
           | cars.
        
           | kube-system wrote:
           | The price likely wouldn't be very competitive if the
           | manufacturer adds all of the design features required to sell
           | that vehicle in the US.
        
         | rtx wrote:
         | Better than scooters they are supposed to replace.
        
           | f6v wrote:
           | I wonder what's worse: being squashed inside this car or just
           | become airborne when scooter hits something. At least you're
           | required to wear a helmet when on a scooter. But as someone
           | said here, if we only had those cars on the road(and a 30
           | km/h speed limit), it'd be much safer.
        
             | bobthepanda wrote:
             | Seatbelts saved a bunch of lives by preventing occupants
             | from getting flung out the car, so I'd imagine that being
             | in the car is safer.
             | 
             | Current road death trends in the US indicate that people
             | inside cars are dying less, but people _outside_ of them
             | are dying more, notably cyclists and pedestrians.
        
               | tener wrote:
               | And this car has just one seatbelt (for the driver). The
               | other passengers can go take a flight .
        
         | kube-system wrote:
         | The US auto market requires a lot of specific safety features
         | even compared to other developed countries.
         | 
         | There are plenty of new cars from leading global auto
         | manufacturers that aren't legal for sale in the US.
        
           | kolinko wrote:
           | Some of the regulations are pretty weird though - the mirrors
           | in US cars are far worse, and so are lights.
        
             | kube-system wrote:
             | For sure. Red rear turn signals and not requiring better
             | headlight glare mitigation come to mind.. and are some of
             | my pet peeves.
             | 
             | But when it comes to expensive systems like crash
             | structures, active and passive safety systems, the US
             | requires a lot.
        
               | Daho0n wrote:
               | EuroNCAP ratings are harsher, so not really. It's mostly
               | that the US system is based on SUVs and other behemoths.
               | Look at the new small Toyota Yaris. That's what is
               | required to get a good rating these days. Most newish
               | SUVs doesn't even have the same amount of safety systems
               | (like airbags between driver and front passenger seat).
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | I was speaking solely about regulatory requirements (i.e
               | FMVSS) for selling a vehicle, not the NCAP programs. It
               | is generally legal to sell vehicles with bad NCAP scores.
               | For instance: the 2018 Fiat Panda met EU regulations to
               | be sold but scored 0 stars on EuroNCAP.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | riffraff wrote:
           | I think it's not that the US is odd as much as each market is
           | odd in a different way.
           | 
           | I remember one of the points of the failed trans-atlantic
           | trade treaty was about handling where the stop lights should
           | be on cars, because "safety" regulations differ.
        
             | kube-system wrote:
             | Yes, the EU has high standards and differs from the US
             | mainly on minor details.
             | 
             | Standards (or lack thereof) in much of
             | Asia/Africa/S.America are on a whole different planet.
             | 
             | I guess my point is, not being approved for sale in the US
             | doesn't mean the car is shockingly different than many
             | other cars in the rest of the world. You can find unsafe
             | cars that would be illegal to sell in the US that say
             | "Nissan" or "VW" on them just over the border in Mexico.
             | 
             | Every manufacturer builds cars to meet the specific
             | requirements and needs for a market. In many countries, the
             | requirements are low and the #1 priority is cheap.
        
         | anti-shill wrote:
         | back in the 1980s americans were able to buy cars cheaper
         | because the manufacturers were not required to install all the
         | added safety features that we have today...back then the gas
         | mileage was better too because the cars were lighter...then
         | some corporate lobbies got congress to force manufacturers to
         | add safety features...the prices of cars went up...the weight
         | of cars went up, and the gas mileage went down...
         | 
         | what corporate lobby did that? Oil companies, perhaps....and as
         | a result americans are forced to spend more on cars and more on
         | gas than citizens of free nations...
         | 
         | some might say we are lucky to have the government looking out
         | for us....but I would not say that...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | throwaway4good wrote:
       | China's strategic planning around electric cars is really a thing
       | of beauty.
       | 
       | Imagine a massive growing middle class buying gas-powered foreign
       | produced cars instead. What would that do the Chinese economy and
       | security with all oil imported?
       | 
       | The strategy of welcoming of firms such as Tesla builds up a huge
       | ecosystem of suppliers creating possibilities for China's own car
       | companies. Whether they target a highend international market
       | such as with the Volvo Polestar or the small electric car market.
       | 
       | The small car market basically doesn't exist in the west. We
       | don't find these cars safe or desireble enough. But safety and
       | desirability of this category of cars will improve rapidly over
       | time and ultimately they will become attractive enough to be sold
       | in the west.
        
         | cavisne wrote:
         | These small cars are illegal in big cities in China (just not
         | enforced) so it's not strategic
        
         | silvestrov wrote:
         | Fixed: The small car market basically doesn't exist _in the
         | USA_.
         | 
         | There are a lot of small cars in European big cities as it is
         | difficult to find parking space for an "american sized" car.
         | 
         | The sedans which Americans thinks of as "small car", we think
         | of "too big car for the city".
        
           | dragonelite wrote:
           | For a small road trip to Chicago my family member rent a 8
           | person fan a huge car and off course I offered to be the
           | driver.
           | 
           | Once we arrived in Chicago I kind of started to sweat because
           | I'm used to European city parking spots. How many times will
           | have to retry to park this huge car, but to my surprise the
           | parking spaces are also huge.
        
           | tibbydudeza wrote:
           | Yep they don't sell the VW Polo (my daily driver) in the US.
           | It seem compact hatchbacks/cars (a.k.a B segment) has no
           | market.
        
           | throwaway4good wrote:
           | Yes, agreed.
           | 
           | The US has a strange obsession with massive cars.
           | 
           | However it was not the european style small cars I ment when
           | I referred to small cars but rather the 4000 USD electric
           | cars, the article is refering to. Those you do not see in
           | Europe at present.
           | 
           | In fact, the only Chinese EVs I have seen are the MG ZS EV
           | and Volvo Polestar - both big cars.
           | 
           | The small electrics are things like the VW Up electric and
           | the Fiat 500 electric, both European.
        
             | kop316 wrote:
             | American here: to offer a counter perspective, I am not at
             | all opposed to a small car. However the last time I went
             | shopping and looked at a smaller car, they were more
             | expensive and more gas hungry then the car I ended up
             | getting. (This was ~8 years ago? Maybe it has changed since
             | then). I was actually surprised to see that.
        
               | TLightful wrote:
               | Citation or that's bullsh!t.
               | 
               | If the car you ended up getting was large, as implied,
               | I'd be interested in looking at how sh!te the small car
               | must have been.
        
             | mikewarot wrote:
             | >The US has a strange obsession with massive cars.
             | 
             | It's not strange... it's survival (plus federal regulations
             | about crash safety, bumper height) require the size
             | vehicles I'm used to here. (The SUV thing is just crazy,
             | though)
             | 
             | It is not unusual in the USA on a road trip (vacation) to
             | drive 1000 km/day (or more) at 120+ kph.
             | 
             | How is something smaller than a 1999 Honda Civic (1100kg)
             | going to safely share the road with 40000 kg Tractor-
             | Trailer rigs?
             | 
             | Here's the smallest car I ever owned... it was silver, with
             | a hatchback... I loved that car, and miss it. https://en.wi
             | kipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Civic_(sixth_generation)
        
               | UncleMeat wrote:
               | If you are comparing to Tractor Trailers, why would car
               | size matter? Even a really chunky SUV won't do anything
               | against a sixteen wheeler.
        
               | mikewarot wrote:
               | If you hit a Semi Trailer from behind, it would matter...
               | a small vehicle might go UNDER the trailer, decapitating
               | the occupants.
        
               | alisonatwork wrote:
               | There are plenty of trucks in Europe. There's even a
               | whole computer game series based around it.[0] Lots of
               | Europeans go on driving holidays. They even take caravans
               | ("travel trailers"). Caravans are so common that they're
               | a running joke on popular car shows like Top Gear.[1]
               | 
               | It is true that generally people don't tend to drive as
               | long distances in Europe as they do in the US, but it's
               | not unheard of to drive 1000km on holiday. It's not as if
               | everyone in Europe spends their lives pootling around
               | cobble-stoned towns in Fiat 500s with a crusty baguette
               | sticking out the window. There are large highways and
               | plenty of heavy traffic.
               | 
               | I think the difference is that people in Europe tend not
               | use their oversized vehicles as daily drivers. Many
               | people don't even own a large car at all, preferring to
               | rent or borrow one for specifically when they do go on
               | holiday. Driving a large car seems like less of a status
               | symbol in Europe. I don't buy that it's a safety thing
               | for Americans, when most Americans are just driving their
               | SUVs to the shops or to work every day.
               | 
               | [0] https://eurotrucksimulator2.com/
               | 
               | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNTnrpL1Uw0
        
               | mikewarot wrote:
               | Ok, what do you mean by _large car_? In the US, a car is
               | specifically NOT an SUV, nor a Truck.
               | 
               | In my mind, that conjures up a 1972 Buick Electra Station
               | Wagon. They are 2320 Kg, more than 2 of the 1999 Honda
               | Civic.
               | 
               | https://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/buick/full-
               | size_buic...
        
               | alisonatwork wrote:
               | I understand the term "car" to mean pretty much any
               | personal/family vehicle with an engine and four wheels. I
               | don't think that's an unusual understanding of the word.
               | The (American) Car and Driver magazine features stories
               | on SUVs and pickup trucks too. Most "car" dealerships in
               | the US sell all of these vehicle types.
        
               | mikewarot wrote:
               | This misunderstanding is because _I 'm old_ and when I
               | grew up there were cars, pickup trucks, and Trucks. The
               | language has mutated and I didn't notice.
               | 
               | SUVs in the US are out of hand, I totally agree with
               | that. I thought you were saying that our Sedans are huge.
        
               | alisonatwork wrote:
               | I'm also old (ish), and I do admit that the "American
               | cars are bigger" argument has gotten less convincing as
               | time has gone on. Even if we just look at cars, it seems
               | the small/compact end has been getting larger, in Europe
               | as well[0].
               | 
               | It would be interesting to see if the move toward larger
               | cars in general has been offset by the increase of "sub-
               | car" vehicles like electric tuk-tuks, e-bikes and so on.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-
               | news/features/investigation-wh...
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | Less commonly with a pickup truck but plenty of people
               | will refer to their SUV, especially if it's a crossover
               | as most are these days, as their "car." I suppose a large
               | car, in the strict sense of the word, these days would be
               | something like a Lincoln Town Car.
        
             | benlumen wrote:
             | Don't ever change the massive car obsession.
             | 
             | To Europeans used to small, cramped spaces - the great open
             | roads and huge comfy cars of America are much appreciated.
             | 
             | I actively avoid driving in the UK. I adore driving in the
             | US.
             | 
             | edit: Downvoting an outside perspective, how very Reddit!
        
           | billfruit wrote:
           | And why is that. Small cars should be as practical in the USA
           | as in rest of the world, and it seems it is only the
           | mentality of the American consumer that seems to avoid them,
           | perhaps?
        
             | gvd wrote:
             | A small car would disappear in the Bay area pot holes
             | unfortunately
        
             | ryan93 wrote:
             | It would be scary to drive european sized small cars on
             | back roads with big SUVs and trucks whizzing by.
        
             | dheera wrote:
             | I live in the USA (California) and it's almost impossible
             | to get anywhere without getting onto a highway.
             | 
             | The only local roads are littered with stop signs or red
             | lights at every goddamn intersection and then some speed
             | bumps. It's either the highway or the obstacle course.
             | 
             | I do have a electric scooter (max 40 km/h, so can only
             | stick to local roads) which I use for <5km trips and and I
             | can definitely say those stop signs cut my battery range by
             | a factor of 2 or 3.
        
             | nicoburns wrote:
             | There's a lot more space in the US. Roads are bigger.
             | Parking spaces are more numerous, etc. Small cars are
             | practical in the US, but big cars are not practical in
             | Europe.
        
             | nowherebeen wrote:
             | Americans have this weird fascination of bigger is better
             | mentality to the point that practicality goes out the
             | window. The hummer is a prime example: burns a ton of
             | gasoline with little benefit to the owner or others.
        
               | an_opabinia wrote:
               | Bigger cars are almost always safer, which isn't a weird
               | fascination at all.
        
               | TLightful wrote:
               | But it is a dumb fascination when the logical conclusion
               | is everyone riding around in tanks.
        
               | Etheryte wrote:
               | This used to be true back in the 80s and such, but with
               | modern safety standards, you have to take extreme ends of
               | big and small to get anywhere close to a statistically
               | significant difference. How you drive, what kind of
               | airbags your car has, what the general traffic culture is
               | in your country etc are all considerably more important
               | factors than your car size. To put it another way, you're
               | way more likely to walk away from a crash in a modern
               | small car than in an older large car. For all intents and
               | purposes, size being safety is an urban myth today.
        
               | CincinnatiMan wrote:
               | Are you sure? In a Consumer Reports article [0] from
               | 2013, they mention in head-on crashes involving a car and
               | SUV, the car driver was 7.6 times more likely to die than
               | the SUV driver.
               | 
               | So in a world where there are SUVs driving around, buying
               | an SUV for yourself instead of a car is a safer move.
               | 
               | Just think about getting t-boned in an intersection.
               | Would you rather be in a light, low vehicle or in a
               | heavy, tall vehicle? I'd pick the latter, especially if
               | the vehicle t-boning me is tall and its bumper at the
               | height of my head if I were in a small car.
               | 
               | [0]:
               | https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2013/05/suvs-
               | are-sa...
        
               | freeflight wrote:
               | _> So in a world where there are SUVs driving around,
               | buying an SUV for yourself instead of a car is a safer
               | move._
               | 
               | That sounds like the same kind of circular reasoning
               | that's often cited to oppose any gun regulation: "When
               | everybody has a gun, you also need a gun to stay safe!".
        
               | NickNameNick wrote:
               | Thats because the SUV is too big, not because the car is
               | too small.
               | 
               | If you lived somewhere where all the cars were small,
               | both vehicles would be better off, because there would be
               | much less energy in the collision.
               | 
               | SUV's aren't safer, they're more dangerous to other
               | people. and that shouldn't be OK.
        
             | babesh wrote:
             | Low gas prices in the US.
             | 
             | Small cars became very popular in the late 70's and early
             | 80's in the US due to gas shortages. They gradually died
             | out as gas prices came back down.
             | 
             | Go look at car sizes in the 1950's and 1960's in the US.
             | Compare that to car sizes in Europe as it recovered from
             | WW2. Think Cadillac boat like cars vs the Mini.
             | 
             | Also, cars are essential transportation in parts of the US
             | and raising gas prices would/have result(ed) in a lot of
             | protesting. In fact, high gas prices would be seen as
             | regressive.
        
             | sitkack wrote:
             | We have more space, so US auto manufacturers used the space
             | differential to change the dynamics of the market. Small
             | cars have been removed from the situation by the SUV Wars.
             | They were able to shift the Overton Window so they are no
             | longer a valid answer.
             | 
             | Volkswagen and the Japanese auto companies filled this role
             | in the 60s, 70s and 80s. In the 90s foreign vehicles
             | started on the same obesity trajectory, 2nd born generation
             | regresses to the mean.
        
       | numpad0 wrote:
       | Oh interesting, I was just googling about it to see if I can make
       | a 3D model of it, just for novelty.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-03-13 23:03 UTC)