[HN Gopher] Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
___________________________________________________________________
Ask HN: Best cars without too much digitalization?
As we all know, there is a trend in the automotive industry towards
ever more digital "features" in cars. Many of these software
systems pose privacy risks; many others simply don't work as
intended, leading to frustration and trips to the dealership. For
those of us who are "old-school" and prefer their cars without
fancy digital gimmicks, which cars would you recommend?
Author : gautamcgoel
Score : 147 points
Date : 2021-11-19 19:12 UTC (3 hours ago)
| auslegung wrote:
| I've recently decided I want a classic muscle car. 30 years old
| or older, in good condition, depending on make, model, and miles
| can be had easily for under $10k
| H1Supreme wrote:
| That's a pipe dream. Even the least desirable muscle cars are
| fetching $25-30k for "good" condition. Anything remotely
| desirable is going for far more than that.
|
| You could probably get an 80's Camaro or something, but that's
| not really a "muscle car". That term is generally applied to
| models from the 60's and 70's.
| sokoloff wrote:
| I have a '65 Mustang coupe and '66 Mustang convertible and
| daily drove each of them for a while. The sad truth is: they
| are beautiful and fun, but aren't actually very good cars by
| modern car standards.
|
| I remedied some of that by adding a modern 5-speed, hydraulic
| clutch actuator, front disc brakes, dual circuit brakes,
| relocated upper control arms, traction bars, limited slip diff,
| a modern alternator, and modern H4 headlights to the
| convertible (which I bought already non-original). But it's
| still a flexible, leaf-sprung, solid rear axle car with poor
| sealing and weak environmentals.
|
| $10K isn't going to happen and was unlikely 5 years ago, but
| way off the market for even a good driver-quality car today.
| (Odometer reading is not a major driver of pricing in the low
| [driver] end of the market. Many of the cars have a 5-digit
| odometer of questionable reliability anyway, so a car reading
| 25000 miles could have 25K, 125K, 225K, or 47K miles. It's
| condition-based way more than miles-based.)
| glial wrote:
| I got a 2011 Toyota Camry for just this reason. It was the last
| year before touch screens were introduced. (edit: still has a ton
| of air bags)
| mountainofdeath wrote:
| Late 90s Camrys, Corollas, Accords and similar. The most advanced
| electronics are the entertainment system, anti-lock brakes and
| ignition system. Not a CAN bus in sight.
| 9wzYQbTYsAIc wrote:
| Toyota Camry and Honda Civic from 2006 to 2011 are a very nice
| sweet spot.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| A lot of Toyota cars still have physical controls for many
| things.
| GDC7 wrote:
| The best design I have seen in years is the Polestar 1.
|
| I wish they'd ditch the EV thing, put a 300hp motor in the front
| and find a price point around 40k.
|
| They'd sell a whole lot of them
| bluesupergiant wrote:
| Base model sporty cars I think would be a great fit here if
| you're looking for new. The manufacturer understands that those
| looking for performance typically shy away from expensive
| gadgets. For example my 2018 brand new ford focus st had a 4"
| display for the backup cam and that was literally it. Manual
| transmission, full suite of buttons for controls etc etc
|
| Base model mustang ecoboost is similar, you have to pay more to
| get the larger infotainment option but otherwise everything is
| manual including the hvac:
| https://www.ford.com/cars/mustang/models/ecoboost-fastback/ I
| assume the same would be true for the Camaro and Challenger
|
| I would stay away from anything luxury. Family Haulers and Base
| model trucks are typically low-tech as well.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| Annoyingly, I want an electric car without "digitilization". No
| distracting central touch screen, no "autopilot" nonsense, proper
| gauges and indicators, tactile feel. A focus on the driving and
| safety and ergonomics, not on "we don't need an instrument
| cluster because iPads are cool, people like their phones and
| buttons are expensive and break"...
|
| A Saab 900 with an electric motor. Please make it.
| worldmerge wrote:
| Saab 900 with a Mach E crate motor swap.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| Wouldn't work well, that crate motor is made for transverse
| mounting, the 900 is famous for its longitudinal & backwards
| motor (and perfectly balanced to avoid torque steer).
|
| A good candidate for a Tesla drive unit transplant, probably.
| Too bad I don't have the mechanical skills to do it myself (I
| have a non-running 1984 900 SPG in my garage)
| jsight wrote:
| Isn't the Tesla drive unit also mounted transverse? Or do
| you mean that there are more aftermarket solutions to
| resolve this for Tesla drive units?
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| It is mounted transverse it's kind of set out in a way I
| can see it fitting in the 900 chassis ok. I haven't
| physically measured it, but I think it could drop in from
| eyeballing it.
|
| But the big reason is that the Tesla units include the
| gear reduction to directly attach to the short axles. The
| 900 has a funny arrangement where the engine is part of a
| whole transaxle unit which sits on top of the
| transmission and oil pan, drives the transmission by a
| chain, and then the axles hang out the side of the unit.
| I _think_ the Tesla units could drop right in there, just
| need new axles.
|
| There's a couple Model S rear drive units hanging around
| in local classifieds. I've been tempted but I don't think
| I can justify spending $$ on yet another project I'd
| never finish.
| FlyingSnake wrote:
| I drive an VW e-up! which has none of the fancy digital gimmics
| you mentioned. It is a perfect distraction free city car that
| doesn't spy on you.
| reedciccio wrote:
| I believe Citroen makes one, but I'm not sure it can be
| bought... Initially they said they'd sell it in supermarkets
| https://electrek.co/2021/05/04/citroen-ami-small-electric-ca...
| zemvpferreira wrote:
| And they do! You can buy it at FNAC stores in malls.
| api wrote:
| The Nissan Leaf has _some_ of that but has physical buttons and
| such and drives much like a classical car. The 62kwh version
| has 200+ miles of range. Price is very competitive too.
| madengr wrote:
| I have a 2015 base model Leaf; tactile controls and no nav
| system or touch screen BS. The fanciest thing it has is a USB
| port that lets you connect an iPod to play through the
| stereo, and an iPhone plays through it just fine.
| R0b0t1 wrote:
| The infotainment is usually a separate system, rip it out,
| and/or provide your own ECU. Not what you want, I know, but
| more immediately viable.
| atweiden wrote:
| Tommykaira
|
| Imagine if your tesla's interior looked like this:
| https://youtu.be/oPAvyt9ZNrg?t=221
|
| https://smallblogv8.blogspot.com/2020/10/oh-yeah-tommykaira-...
| baybal2 wrote:
| I believe Wuling MiniEV is exactly that.
|
| Current MiniEV ships with a display for instrument cluster,
| earlier ones had dials.
| djxfade wrote:
| The MG ZS EV. It has analog gauges and tactile buttons. It does
| have a touch screen, but that is just for the radio. Everything
| else has a physical button or switch
| [deleted]
| jkodumal wrote:
| Not quite a Saab 900, but perhaps the Bollinger B-1?
| https://bollingermotors.com/bollinger-b1/
| jack_jennings wrote:
| If only the Bollinger offerings weren't 100k+ MSRP :(
| codingdave wrote:
| DIY conversions are quite possible. Go find an old car, rip out
| the old engine, put in the electric engine. It clearly is more
| complex than that, as there is wiring involved and you need to
| match it up to the transmission, but if you really want an old
| car with an electric motor, it is an achievable goal.
| TYPE_FASTER wrote:
| The only tech in our 2016 base model Jetta is CarPlay, which can
| be useful for maps. All the other controls are physical. It does
| have electric assisted steering, which I'm hoping will be more
| reliable than the traditional hydraulic power steering which
| usually requires a replacement at some point. It also gets really
| good mileage.
| ramesh31 wrote:
| The sweet spot for great cars that can still be worked on is
| 1998-2005 model years. They had everything that makes modern cars
| great (ECUs, ABS, airbags, OBD2) without all the insane
| computerization that is standard today.
| kgwxd wrote:
| I'm driving my 2011 Nissan Versa until I die. When my kids reach
| driving age, they'll get the trashy new car and I'll keep the old
| one.
| FlyingSnake wrote:
| I recently bought Volkswagen e-up! which meets my criteria for a
| city car:
|
| - Zero* pollution.
|
| - Big rebate from the government (6k + 3k)
|
| - No fancy digital gimmics like touchscreen or digital
| distractions. I have to plug in my phone to listen to music and
| the knobs and physical buttons are much more ergonomic to me.
|
| - Small and compact build for grocey runs and dropping kids to
| school
|
| - 1/3 cost of charging compared to gasoline.
|
| - Free parkings all over the city with chargers.
|
| - Simple but superior technology. Driving an ICE is a chore for
| me now with so much vibrations and noise.
|
| - Low maintenance, no engine oils to change and spark
| plugs/carburetors to tweak.
|
| * I am aware that we offset the pollution to power plants, but I
| still feel this is better compared to ICE pollution.
|
| P.S. I live in Berlin, Germany and we have top notch public
| transport here.
| dharmab wrote:
| I bought a car from the early to mid 2000s and retrofit the the
| head unit and speakers. You can find everything from simple
| bluetooth/aux cable units with segmented lcd displays to full
| modern android auto/apple carplay touchscreens.
|
| I would recommend a Toyota, Honda or Lincoln Town Car from that
| era. They're reliable, cheap to maintain/repair/modify, lots of
| parts availability. Crutchfield.com has excellent guides on
| retrofitting modern audio systems into these vehicles.
|
| The major caveat is safety. While you do get ABS brakes, airbags
| and seatbelts in this era the crash protection is dismal compared
| to a modern SUV. You must always drive attentively and
| defensively- I _never_ text or call using my car audio while
| driving for this reason.
| arielweisberg wrote:
| Porsche's whole lineup before the latest set of refreshes was
| nicely physical and traditional.
|
| For example the 718 Cayman/Boxster supports Carplay so you get
| all the good aspects of digital, but climate control, drive
| modes, and everything else is physical. There are plenty of cars
| that are/were in this in between state like Mazda's lineup.
| cbdumas wrote:
| I'm surprised by the tone of the responses here so far. As much
| as we might or might not like the new digital user interfaces in
| modern cars, the value of the safety features like automatic
| braking and collision avoidance is pretty much beyond contest at
| this point[0]. Before you buy a car without these features,
| consider that you are probably not as good of a driver as you
| think you are.
|
| [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7037779/
| baybal2 wrote:
| Most drivers today in the West don't realise just how much they
| are reliant on non-disableable electronic stability control on
| most FWD cars, which quietly entered cars along with ABS.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| The problem is that a lot of safety features came into the
| market along with a lot of really terrible cabin UI choices
| and wiz-bang display electronics that I _do not want_.
| godDLL wrote:
| It's not about what it does but how it does it.
|
| It does it frustratingly annoyingly intrusively and so on.
| desktopninja wrote:
| Mazda seems to be heading the right direction:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200335
| karaterobot wrote:
| The right direction, true. Touch screens are cheaper to design
| and build for, compared to physical controls, but do they
| benefit the safety or convenience of the driver? I don't think
| so.
|
| However, apart from the touch screen being optional, I think
| Mazda has a fairly driver-hostile user experience with their
| controls.
|
| I have a 2020 CX-5, and it's still very opinionated about how I
| should be driving. For example, it will grumble at you if you
| touch a white or yellow line, or if it thinks you're too close
| to the car in front of you and not braking hard enough. I'm
| generally a fairly safe driver: close to thirty years with a
| license, all but two years of that being city driving, and
| never had an accident. You wouldn't know it from the way my car
| yells at me every time I drive it though.
|
| Oh, and it asks me to agree to a legal disclaimer every time I
| start it up! Love being treated like that.
| spookthesunset wrote:
| You just ignore those disclaimers and they go away. Blame the
| sue happy society we live in for that... it is pure CYA.
| speedgoose wrote:
| They make a very shitty EV though.
| mszcz wrote:
| Do you mean the range? If that's the case then I agree, I
| don't know what they were thinking.
|
| If not then I guess it's a lot different from the 2019 Mazda
| 6 I own. It's been great. Not what the parent is looking for
| probably but it has no gimmicks - I find every convenience
| usable. The adaptive lights, the active cruise, lane assist,
| automatic transmission, keyless system, seat memory, HUD, 360
| cam. Yes, I know these are kind of basics now but still, I
| come from Mitsubishi Lancer 2010 land - all the gimmicks that
| car had was ABS ;)
|
| Only knit pick I have is you can't turn off the radio, you
| can only mute it. Had the same feeling when I bought my first
| iPod and discovered that sleep was it's natural state... Got
| used to it somehow ;)
| a-dub wrote:
| i think they'll come. flew on a brand new airliner recently, all
| electronics were removed from the seatback. now it's just a tray
| and clip for your own phone or tablet, a usb charging port and a
| 110v ac plug at each seat (along with a media server accessible
| by wifi)
|
| a nice future for all heavy equipment (cars included) would be an
| open standard for interfacing the heavy equipment with your own
| control technology, so you can replace and choose the tech
| yourself, and if the manufacturer stops supporting the software,
| the hardware remains usable for the remainder of its usually much
| longer life. i suspect though that this would have to be done via
| legislation, both to make the carmakers do it and to absolve them
| of liability in the event that a connected device causes an
| accident. (the future of machines will involve blameless teams
| and blameful software with trusted attribution of blame,
| methinks)
| thruflo wrote:
| I have an entry level 2019 Skoda Citigo. It is just a car, zero
| driver assist / digital gimmicks. The only digital features are a
| Bluetooth stereo and a CarPlay screen -- but even they have
| physical buttons.
| runjake wrote:
| They don't make them for the US anymore.
|
| The best you can do is buy a "fleet model" truck or something,
| but its still going to have a host of electronics and probably a
| GPS and cellular radio inside. Fleet models are designed to last,
| as not to anger large-scale fleet customers.
|
| Yeah, you can find cars with more knobs and less touch screens,
| but in most cases, those analog-appearing knobs are just digital
| input devices to an (eg for Honda since at least 2018) low-end,
| cheaply-made Android device.
|
| If you're sincere, your best bet is to buy a year and model with
| something that still has plenty of spare parts available (eg.
| 2000 era Honda, Toyota trucks, etc)
| silisili wrote:
| Right on. I have a 2019 work truck. It has electric
| locks/windows/mirrors, Bluetooth, and cellular modem/onstar.
|
| It's definitely not bare bones, but I like that the screen
| isn't really needed for anything, and has knobs for every
| control.
| kgermino wrote:
| I'm pretty sure my 2019 Honda's HVAC knobs are physically
| connected to the flaps they control. You can feel/hear the
| dampers moving with the knobs.
| yuppie_scum wrote:
| Dodge or Nissan would be my vote.
| brickmort wrote:
| For a reliable pickup truck in the US, Nissan Frontiers have been
| very trustworthy. Up until this past year, they were known for
| having a very "old" looking dashboard because the interior had
| not been updated since the early 2010s. Despite that, it
| continues to be one of Nissan's most popular vehicles and some
| would consider it to be the best in their lineup.
| ntoeunteohu wrote:
| What you want is a "driver's car". They typically have fewer
| bells and whistles and provide a more connected driving
| experience. You're expected to expend effort to pilot the car.
|
| There are actually quite a few these days, but I'm partial to
| Japanese cars, myself.
|
| 1) Mazda MX-5 Miata I own one. It's awesome to drive. Has few
| features and a simple dash. It's quite economical to operate
| (inexpensive to insure, gets over 35 mpg, very popular so lots of
| parts availability and lots of aftermarket parts, Mazda
| reliability and maintenance costs).
|
| 2) Subaru BRZ / Toyota 86 Also awesome to drive. This car is a
| bit more practical than the Miata because of its roof and trunk
| space. Less economical to operate: it's less fuel efficient and
| people speed in them so insurance is more expensive. The boxer
| engine gives it inherently better handling than most vehicles.
|
| 3) Honda Civic Type R This is my dream car.
|
| 4) Subaru WRX If you need all-wheel drive, this is pretty much
| it.
|
| 5) Nissan 370Z Nissans aren't my cup of tea but they go fast.
|
| As for trucks, the only truck that interests me is the Toyota
| Tacoma, since it still comes with a manual transmission. I wish I
| could purchase a Toyota Hilux in the US. I also wish I could
| purchase a Suzuki Jimny here, alas. I'm not at all interested in
| SUVs, so I can't help you there.
| sodality2 wrote:
| > For those of us who are "old-school" and prefer their cars
| without fancy digital gimmicks, which cars would you recommend?
|
| Old cars. The problem is the lack of modern safety features which
| really makes me do a double take before considering them. I wish
| cannibalizing a new car and ripping out all of the useless
| electronics was common enough for there to be tutorials for some
| brands
| bluedino wrote:
| Problem is, up here in the north, cars start rusting away
| before they are otherwise unusable.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| I would honestly pay 5k for a one-time rust prevention fix if
| it were a long term solution. I have a wonderful Toyota
| 4Runner in great condition - except for the terrible rust. It
| will definitely die a rusty death.
| fy20 wrote:
| If you are into DIY (it's easier with a truck than a car,
| as you can get under without lifting it) look into the
| treatments people use for Land Rovers and other 4x4s that
| they regularly drive off road. It's not just a one-off
| thing though, you should reapply it every few years - this
| is why cars still rust that have the undercoating the
| dealer upsells you.
| thrower123 wrote:
| Getting the undercarriage sprayed with a lanolin-based
| spray before winter can do wonders for cutting back the
| damage from road salt.
|
| Otherwise the rocker panels just rot out so quickly, and
| they are wicked expensive to get replaced. I was quoted
| almost $4000 to fix mine on my last vehicle (only 100k
| miles, otherwise near perfect condition), so I could get an
| inspection sticker. So I traded it and put that money down
| on a new one instead...
| yabones wrote:
| Yep, I absolutely feel that. I have a very nice and boring
| '06 Toyota in great shape, except for a big rust spot on
| top of the windshield, I give it only a winter or two
| before it starts leaking. At that point it's not worth
| fixing a 16-17 year old car anymore. Which is a shame,
| because it's got a great drivetrain, rides smooth, and
| doesn't have a thousand little computers one bitflip away
| from driving you into a concrete pillar.
| porkloin wrote:
| That's certainly true, but I do feel like there's a sweet spot
| in the 2005-2010 area where most "critical" safety features
| (improved airbags, traction control, ABS brakes) are almost
| certainly present, but none of the modern safety features that
| fall more into the "augmented sensory" category
| (merge/blindspot detection, early braking), which I'm happy to
| compromise on. I drive a 2007 SUV which does everything I need
| it to do and I'll probably continue to drive similar vintage
| vehicles until I finally switch to an EV when the charging
| infrastructure in my area has finally gotten off the ground.
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| Panther platform, extremely safe still is a very solid
| choice. Though most people don't particularly enjoy driving
| land yachts - a grand marquee is a fantastic choice.
|
| Late 90's saab 9000's have TCS, ABS, Dual Air Bag, so your
| standard set of 2000's features, and are also very safe.
|
| Unfortunately there seems to be a lack of good crash test
| data publically on older (older than 2004) cars.
| xbar wrote:
| This, too. Those big Mercurys are just lovely to tool
| around in. I wish I had space for one.
| dharmab wrote:
| If I didn't need a performance oriented car there would be
| a Lincoln Town Car in my driveway for sure. The mercury and
| lincoln are the sweet spots since many are available from
| older, responsible owners.
| xbar wrote:
| This.
|
| I drive a 2007 base model Porsche 911. No GPS, manual
| transmission, built to crash with ABS, traction, airbags,
| cage.
| noduerme wrote:
| Right on. My gf is on her second 2008 Lexus and feels exactly
| the same way. It's a luxury ride but it doesn't try to take
| over for you.
| tern wrote:
| Love my 2005 IS300
| javajosh wrote:
| I drive a 2007 SUV too for just this reason, and plan to move
| to an EV for the same reason. And there's another commenter
| in this thread who also has a 2007. Coincidence? I think not!
| madcaptenor wrote:
| My wife drives a 2007 Ford Escape, still going strong at
| 194k miles, and I'm just praying it doesn't fall apart on
| us.
| jreese wrote:
| Biggest concern is that many cars of this era spectacularly
| fail on the front overlap and small front overlap tests,
| resulting in trapping, pinning, or worse. Older cars don't do
| any better, mind you, but the switch to unibody construction
| without the structural rigidity of the latest models can
| result in _you_ becoming part of the crumple zones.
| zhdc1 wrote:
| It depends on what you want. Cars in a lot of countries are
| required to have some digital features, such as a backup camera.
|
| Since you're in the states, you could consider something basic,
| like a Mazda 2 series or an MX-5. I also imagine that some lower
| trim Ford, Kia, Hyundai, Toyota, or Chevy models (Chevy Spark?)
| could be a good option.
|
| It get's easier outside of the US. The VW Up is about as analog
| as you can get - the digital infotainment system is a smart phone
| app.
| barbarbar wrote:
| A very good question. I have been asking myself the same. Was
| thinking af maybe an older Subaru.
| deeblering4 wrote:
| How about a 10 year old Acura or Lexus? Cheap-ish by now
| (although the used market is inflated currently), comfy and fun
| to drive, reliable and most of all no huge iPad in the dashboard.
| Groxx wrote:
| What kind of digital gimmicks are you looking to avoid? Touch
| screens and fancy UI (e.g. vs physical buttons and dials), lane-
| keeping and dynamic cruise control, automatic emergency braking,
| drive-by-wire, backup cameras, tire pressure monitors, parking
| proximity sensors, voice-activated AAA roadside assistance with
| automatic last-30-second built-in-dashcam upload, etc? Or is it
| critical that it has a completely physical carburetor and
| physical connection between wheels and steering or something?
|
| Personally I like physical UI controls (touch screens are hard to
| hit precisely, and don't give feedback when you're not looking)
| and definitely not baked-in AAA junk, but the rest I'm fine with.
| Lane-keeping often sucks so I disable it, but... it's disable-
| able, so meh. I almost never use the main UI for anything (my
| phone is infinitely more capable), so I don't particularly care
| how many features it has as long as I _don 't have to use it at
| all_ for most trips. My phone auto-connects, I hit play on
| Spotify and maybe start a navigation app, and I'm good. I'd
| probably deeply hate something that required button taps to start
| the car or shift out of park or something.
| naoru wrote:
| Got a 2016 Kia Rio QB hatchback with a 1.6L G4FC engine this
| spring as my first car. It had a bit more than 30k km on it, very
| slightly dinged (I already had bonked it twice though).
|
| Reliable as a brick. Drives like one too. But boy is it stupidly
| simple -- no bluetooth even, chucked in a USB receiver and called
| it a day. No touchscreens, no fancy driver assist, no cameras, no
| nothing. Just an AC and motorized windows.
|
| Paid around $10k for it. Worth every rouble.
|
| Korean cars are very popular here in Moscow. Basically every taxi
| is either Kia or Hyundai, Toyotas are less common. Outside of
| major cities Renault (Dacia) and Ladas are prevalent because
| they're even cheaper.
|
| Want a dumb car? Come to Russia. We have some.
| lordnacho wrote:
| Build yourself a Caterham. I did this at one point, you'll learn
| a few things and the thing is totally analogue.
| garyfirestorm wrote:
| please tell us more about this? which one did you build, how
| much did it cost? what did you use it for? how was your
| experience? maintenance?
| lordnacho wrote:
| Can't quite remember the cost of it, maybe $25k at the time?
| It was the classic Caterham 7 that is maybe the most common
| kit car, green with a yellow stripe down the middle.
|
| Reasonably easy build, but you need a bunch of torque
| wrenches and a dolly (Is that what they call is? Thing that
| can lift an engine?). The tools aren't hard to get, but you
| want to rent the dolly for a day. Nobody can lift the engine
| block.
|
| It's not really that hard to do, just quite time consuming.
| There's a heck of a lot of parts to put together. Of course
| you will need a locked garage to put it in, it can't just be
| thrown together over the course of a weekend. Took maybe a
| few weekends for three busy people with jobs.
|
| Use it for? My colleague bought it and drove around in it.
| It's quite a basic car by modern standards. Feels like you
| are touching the road when you're driving it. Also the clutch
| is unforgiving. Tiny bit too fast and the thing dies, and
| you're sitting in a busy junction with people laughing at
| you. Also it's really a fairweather car. There's leather
| panels that will stop it being flooded but in rain it's quite
| uncomfortable.
|
| It's also not a car that a lot went wrong with. What is there
| to break on such a thing? But to be fair it also wasn't
| driven much.
| thrower123 wrote:
| My 2019 F150 XLT is still mostly analog. It has a screen, because
| it has to, due to the back-up camera mandate, but there are still
| physical dials and buttons for all of the radio and climate
| controls, and it still has the same setup for the shifter and
| wipers and blinker that have been standard in Ford pickups for
| two or three decades now.
|
| Even so, I had to get FORScan to disable the autolocking feature
| (very frustrating when you are just going around the yard and it
| automatically locks the tailgate on you) and tweak a couple other
| things
| conductr wrote:
| Seconding. Ford F-150 and anything that fleets/contractors buy
| come in very basic feature sets with add one available. This
| would include sprinter, etc. Most manufacturers have a special
| section of their site for commercial vehicles.
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| First tell us your beef with the status-quo. How do you determine
| what is a digital feature and what is a digital gimmick? What are
| you trying to avoid exactly?
|
| Are remote diagnostics a gimmick? Is the 20 year old CAN bus a
| gimmick? Automatic headlights? TPMS? ABS? All of this technology
| contains properties that identify your vehicle from similar
| vehicles WHILE making the roads safer.
| b215826 wrote:
| > All of this technology contains properties that identify your
| vehicle from similar vehicles WHILE making the roads safer.
|
| This is simply not true. Things like touchscreens are cheap
| gimmicks and the roads do not get any safer by using them in a
| car [1]. Mazda recently announced its decision [2,3] to replace
| touchscreens with analog controls as they provide more tactile
| feedback and I hope more manufacturers follow.
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26277965
|
| [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200335
|
| [3] https://www.autoblog.com/2020/08/25/2021-mazda-
| cx-5-updates/
| kelnos wrote:
| Parent didn't say anything about touchscreens adding to
| safety, though. I think you're attacking something unsaid.
| 0des wrote:
| Excuse the rant, but this comment tickled a sore spot for me.
|
| If I want to sing or shout the entire way home without it being
| stored in 'the cloud' that is my right. If I want to change my
| own oil or tires, nothing should stop me. So much of this crap
| is jacking up the price of a basic conveyance and it just adds
| more headache, more proprietary parts, and more stuff to go
| wrong. God dammit I just want to ride to the store and back,
| stop pestering me like I'm some kind of incompetent child
| asking for unrealistic things. I swear to fucking christ
| almighty if I have to make a ticket for the Ford Genius Bar to
| get some basic shit fixed, I might just snap on the nearest
| nerd.
|
| OnStar was a mistake, it all went downhill from there. Fuel
| Injection bros, you can come get some too.
| googlryas wrote:
| You probably need to buy a used car. Or, buy a new car and remove
| the fuse for the infotainment system.
| HuShifang wrote:
| Good question. A follow-up: What's the best
| low(er)-digitalization EV (ideally BEV, but alternatively PHEV)?
| Something with more tactile/analog UI and a minimum of
| "entertainment" accessories?
| inyorgroove wrote:
| Another option would be the base model VW e-Golf, has
| traditional gauges but does have a bit more infotainment
| things. A lot of the controls still remain separate from the
| touchscreen, climate control for example does not require
| touchscreen.
|
| The problem with VW's lower market EVs will be the range
| though, not even half the range of a model 3. The ID.4/3 has
| better range but they ruin it IMO with screens for everything.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| PHEV means "Plug-in-hybrid Electric Vehicle" if anyone else was
| similarly confused.
| wffurr wrote:
| My 2017 Chevy Bolt still has some knobs and dials for things.
| There's also a big touchscreen with a bunch of A/C system
| controls on it, which is annoying. They're also persistent in
| that space on the screen, which makes me wonder why even bother
| having it be on the screen...
| haunter wrote:
| Volkswagen e-UP/Skoda Citigo
|
| Basically the same cars, analog dashboard with knobs, just
| simple radio w/bluetooth and optional phone connection
|
| https://www.autocar.co.uk/sites/autocar.co.uk/files/8-vw-e-u...
|
| https://villanyautosok.hu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/2019-11...
| trcarney wrote:
| I'm not sure what your use case is but I think the Electra
| Meccanica Solo could be a good option if you don't need to
| carry passengers or much stuff. It does have a back-up camera,
| digital instruments, and keyless entry but no driver assist
| features.
|
| I'm intrigued by this because I think it would be pretty fun to
| drive a single seat car on the road, but maybe thats just me.
|
| https://www.electrameccanica.com/solo/
| gambiting wrote:
| Volkswagen e-Up(or its equivalent Skoda Citigo/Seat Mii) - it's
| a full EV that still has a fully analog dash, minimal radio and
| instead of "infotainment" provides a holder for your phone.
| That's as minimum as it gets.
| darkr wrote:
| Low tech/practicality cars on my personal "want" list:
|
| * Caterham 7 super sprint
|
| * TVR Griffith (or Chimaera)
|
| * Ariel Nomad
| passer_byer wrote:
| A Volvo 240 DL, model years 2000 to about 2010. Completely
| reliable daily driver, safe, comfortable sedan that can goo
| 500,000 miles with reasonable care. I had three of them over the
| years. Today, my daily driver is a 2017 Toyota 4Runner after I
| put 250,000k miles on a 2008 Toyota Highlander. These can go
| 500,000 miles with reasonable maintenance. I also buy used so
| others take the depreciation hit.
| paulgerhardt wrote:
| To combat some of the anti-curious stances in this thread are
| there any new cars with too much digitization?
|
| I would love something like a Tesla with a repl that I can
| program to do donuts; dynamically adjust the ride height from my
| Apple Watch, or just make the headlights flash in time to my
| music. Booting Urbit on the infotainment device is a bonus.
|
| Basically a modern car for a hacker that still loves technology.
| Absolutely loved the Rally Motors concept as a kid. The Grenadier
| looks promising too. But I'm not aware of anything that's
| computers + Hoonigan. The more digitization the better.
| t-writescode wrote:
| Teslas have way too much digitalization.
|
| Anything where you can't flip a lever somewhere on the car to
| turn on your windshield wipers is a bad taste, to me.
|
| (edit: added this sentence) Another area, and I have no idea if
| Tesla, or any car company, does this:
|
| Anything that constantly phones home my speed or braking
| dynamics or gps or any other telemetry to *anywhere* - or even
| stores it for more than like an hour - is too much
| digitalization, to me.
|
| I probably lean more toward the "less digitalization" crowd,
| but I think those are things that can be seen as "too much" by
| most people.
| 2trill2spill wrote:
| I love my 2017 Ford Focus RS! It has a touch screen but besides
| for that there's no lane assist, automatic breaking, or any other
| driver assists. I also love that it is a manual, however some
| people may not like that. Also they only made it from 2016 - 2018
| and used ones are expensive. But check it out if you want a
| modern, fast, manual car with minimal digital none sense.
| officeplant wrote:
| I currently drive a 2021 Nissan NV200 Compact Cargovan. It's
| about as basic of a vehicle you can get. I'm slowly turning it
| into a miniRV because I like to go camping at times. Works great
| as a place to sleep when I visit friends and when conventions get
| back into full swing and I don't want to spend $300+ on a weekend
| hotel room. Bonus points for the van being actually smaller than
| my previous 2015 VW Passat when it comes to finding parking
| spaces. I do miss getting 46mpg, but the van has been averaging
| 31-33mpg on long interstate trips.
|
| There are some downsides. Like the creepiness factor of owning a
| panel van as a large bearded guy, but most people warm up to it
| once I explain things. Also the commercial 7% interest on my
| financing plan. I'm used to financing around 1-3% interest on any
| car I've bought new, but at least in my state commercial vehicles
| carry a locked in interest rate.
|
| Commercial trucks/vans also have shit for sound insulation so be
| prepared to do that yourself or pay a local stereo shop to quiet
| things down.
|
| Other than that its hard to even find consumer cars with a manual
| transmission in my area, let alone a lack of electronic non-
| sense.
| csours wrote:
| Hard to beat a Chevy Express Van when it comes to low tech.
|
| In general, look for vehicles that have a really old platform
| or really old 'redesign'. Eg: Look at model history here:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Express
|
| I'm not sure of any way to look this up across brands and
| models? Perhaps a good opportunity for a microsite?
|
| In general companies boast about how new their tech is, not how
| old.
|
| Disclosure: I work for GM, this is solely my own opinion.
|
| If you don't want OnStar or Satellite Radio, there are ways to
| disable it pretty easily.
| yumraj wrote:
| > If you don't want OnStar or Satellite Radio, there are ways
| to disable it pretty easily.
|
| How? Any pointers?
| jacquesm wrote:
| Nothing new. Buy something a decade and a half old or even two,
| have it rebuilt to spec and enjoy a computer free and reliable
| ride that if you pick the right car will likely appreciate in
| value for a while.
| gambiting wrote:
| VW Up and its Skoda/Seat equivalents. It literally doesn't have a
| digital dash at all, instead it provides a place to mount your
| phone if you wish and a very basic radio.
| ablyveiled wrote:
| https://bollingermotors.com/ If you have some serious money to
| burn...
| [deleted]
| giantg2 wrote:
| Trucks in a basic work truck trim are pretty sparse.
|
| Kind of wish I kept my 89 Caprice when the transmission seal went
| bad about 5 years ago.
| blamestross wrote:
| Low end Nissan Frontier. Mine doesn't even have power locks or
| windows!
| oneorangeday wrote:
| I guess it depends on what you mean by "digital" features.
|
| I purchased a 2021 vehicle, its a GM vehicle. Its my first GM
| product, my last was a Toyota but very basic model, no tech. This
| has everything and while I enjoyed it at first, a few things
| started to happen in the vehicle that made me realize that I
| don't want this vehicle anymore. Primarily the OnStar "feature",
| I get an ad like chime every so often, asking if I would like to
| sign up or that this vehicle has OnStar and I should activate it.
|
| I get the world we live in and I get that everything has a
| subscription service attached to it but when that OnStar kicks in
| while I am talking to someone in the car it creeps me out. Its
| like when Siri asks how can I help you when you didn't ask for
| help yet its feels a bit more awkward. Can't explain why except I
| will be selling the vehicle very soon, just not sure what I will
| be getting next. Older, like 2000's, low miles and base model.
|
| Its why I have not purchased an EV, while they don't all have
| subscriptions its started to feel like they are all going in that
| direction. I love tech but it has become a bit overwhelming in
| vehicles. If I paid for the car I really don't want to have ads
| while driving the vehicle (old school thinking I guess).
| jccalhoun wrote:
| Like many industries, the automobile industry is going through
| production shortages. So it is a terrible time to buy a car and
| certainly a terrible time to buy a lower end car because, from
| what I've heard, automobile makers are dealing with the shortage
| by only making their more expensive models because there is more
| profit in them.
| screye wrote:
| I would recommend Mazda vehicles.
|
| Their entire lineup offers a small set of effective and minimally
| intrusive digital/smart features. But, outside of that, they keep
| it simple.
|
| The no-touchscreen is a much safer way to interact with the
| vehicle, and afaik they have stuck to the traditional 'car'
| formula. Most of their cars can be purchased in manual and have
| pretty good driving mechanics for a honda/toyota competitor.
|
| The Mazda 3 Hatch, is IMO the best deal in cars right now.
| ics wrote:
| Owner of a more recent Mazda3 hatchback here. For the last few
| years I've driven many different makes and models either for
| work or as rentals on vacation and would agree that they're one
| of the best if you're looking for a new car.
|
| Looks great, feels great, and all of the tech seems carefully
| considered and balanced. The closest thing to a complaint would
| be that I do prefer an analogue gauge cluster, but the digital
| display is tasteful and after driving I rarely even notice that
| it's on a screen.
|
| Before purchasing, I was really looking for a hybrid or PHEV
| but nothing came close to feeling right in the same way. If
| Mazda offered exactly the same car that wasn't ICE, I would
| probably sell and buy again in an instant.
| joshu wrote:
| it is also an extremely nice looking car. and mazda reliability
| seems to be going upward.
| prirun wrote:
| I bought a 2018 Acura RDX instead of a new one. Way fewer
| electronic gadgets and touch screens, and it cost $26K w/33K
| miles vs $46K new. Even with a 2018, I only made it halfway
| through the HUGE manual and still don't understand why the doors
| sometimes lock themselves and other times don't.
|
| I agree: cars have way too many features. I loved my 2003 Honda
| Accord, but some dumbass totaled it when she rear-ended me at an
| intersection because she wasn't paying attention - probably on
| her phone. Most people I talk to don't know how to use their
| car's features.
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| Alfa Romeo Giulietta. They stopped making it in 2000 and it was
| not sold in US for much longer.
|
| But there are lots of them in perfect state in Europe.
| zhdc1 wrote:
| They stopped making the Giulietta last December. It's being
| replaced by a small SUV.
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| Typo, yep. Last produced in 2020.
| throw8932894 wrote:
| Lada Niva 4x4. Old school soviet, but modernized car. With
| airconditioning and some modern gimmicks. Very easy to fix and
| maintain. Good fuel economy, some versions even pass Euro 5
| emission limits.
|
| I liked WW2 jeeps and their simplicity, this seems like modern
| equivalent.
| semi-extrinsic wrote:
| Or the base model Dacia Duster.
| elorant wrote:
| Ah, my dad owned one of these. Rudimentary reliable car that
| can go anywhere. He used it mainly in back roads with no tarmac
| whatsoever. The damn thing worked like a clock. You can find
| parts everywhere and they're cheap, any mechanic can work on
| the car, and it's build like a tank. It's not fast, or
| particularly comfortable, but it's the epitome of reliability
| and dependency.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| Lada? O_o
|
| Isn't that the brand of car I usually see shatter like glass in
| a crash in dashcam videos from Russia?
| PeterisP wrote:
| In Lada, you are the crumple zone.
| OneLeggedCat wrote:
| I am discovering so many neat cars in this thread.
| haunter wrote:
| +1 for Lada Niva but not sure where OP is. Hard to get one
| outside Russia and Europe.
|
| Dashboard is still the same analog as in the 80s
| https://static.lada.ru/images/press-releases/vaz_catalogue_n...
|
| https://www.lada.ru/en/cars/niva-legend
|
| There seems to be a UK dealer https://lada4x4.co.uk/
| kaladin-jasnah wrote:
| For the US and Canada:
|
| It would be impossible new without buying them for crash
| tests and I think maybe modifying the engine, and it gets
| very expensive (I'm not 100% sure but it's a tedious and very
| difficult and expensive process from what I remember). That's
| unless they're 25 years old in the US or 15 years old in
| Canada (eg. buy a really old model).
| ramesh31 wrote:
| I would kill to be able to purchase a brand new 4x4 manual
| transmission light SUV in the US. Sadly it no longer exists.
| betwixthewires wrote:
| Buy any sort of car built before 1996 (the year OBDII became
| required) that you like, and spend some money fixing it up.
| You'll spend way less than on a new or recently made used car,
| and it will have virtually no electronics in it. At best, it will
| have a controller for fuel injectors.
|
| Between 1996 and ~mid 00s, you had some of that stuff but really
| not that much. If you're willing to tolerate an ECM and some
| jankiness with factory radios controlling the security alarm and
| nonsense like that then you can avoid all the modern garbage.
|
| Unfortunately governments are beginning to mandate some of those
| gimmicks. Even if a car company wanted to make a car that is just
| a car, without a rear camera or stop assist it likely wouldn't be
| able to be imported to anywhere in Europe or anglophone north
| america.
| dave4270 wrote:
| We have no plans to ever sell the two cars we have. I highly
| recommend copies if you can find them. My wife has a 2007
| 4Runner. 150K on the odo and all I've ever needed to change was
| an alternator and brakes. If you do your own work, nothing on the
| planet is better for a mechanic than a Toyota. Ours is also the
| V8 (unicorn-ish) but I don't recommend that unless you need to
| tow something significant. Mine is a 2014 Subaru BRZ with three
| pedals. IMHO, it's the best car ever made. Like a shifter kart
| with airbags.
| ska wrote:
| The BRZ/86 is definitely a good fit for right level of tech
| without a lot of digitization, but not exactly a practical all-
| rounder for a lot of families. Dollars per unit fun is insanely
| high though.
| tehnub wrote:
| Have at look at Subaru's from like ~2014 or older. IIRC, the
| safety and reliability are quite good, and I believe they're
| pretty barebones as far as digitalization goes.
| kevindeasis wrote:
| What would you use them for, and how much are you willing to
| spend? Classic cars and italian sport cars don't have digital
| gimmicks, as well as american muscle. If you really want
| something without digital gimmicks get a motorcycle. People who
| really don't want to be tracked have a motorcycle.
|
| To answer your question, it depends on what you plan to do with
| the car and how much you want to spend. Toyota, Honda, Jeep,
| Porsche, Ford, Ferrari, Chevy.
|
| I think you will always need a trip to the dealership and it
| won't even always be an issue with your infotainment. The
| exception is if you know how a lot about cars.
|
| Also, people don't need your car technology to track you. I know
| people who lost 10k of camera equipment in their car because they
| were targeted using other attack vectors.
|
| I have tesla at the moment and it has a lot of digital gimmicks.
| I am thinking of going into porsche or c8 in the next few months.
|
| You brought up a really good question about privacy. I'm seeking
| some wisdom about that too. I know that my location,
| supercharging, and trips are tracked. Prob even sentry might be
| watched by a content moderator at tesla.
|
| Now, let's say i switch to a porsche or a c8. Wouldn't i still
| have privacy risks? The risks are, my cellphone, wifi, bluetooth,
| credit cards, data brokers, cookies, in-store purchases,
| transactions, or even more sophisticated attack like using people
| i know as another vector.
|
| You can even track people on the blockchain. I think the
| exception would be something like monero.
|
| So, I guess can someone more knowledgable share info about the
| issues privacy issues with tech gadgets in cars. How big of an
| issue is it if you are already completely integrated in modern
| tech society?
| selykg wrote:
| Good luck getting a C8. The wait list is long.
| kevindeasis wrote:
| Thanks man, yeah I spoke with a dealer. It seems somewhat
| easier now since people are waiting for the z06. But, still
| the dealership charging way over the msrp is still a big
| issue
| sushsjsuauahab wrote:
| My algorithm is like this:
|
| Pick the body style you like/can afford.
|
| Remove the engine and all electronics and sell them.
|
| Install crate engine and aftermarket electronics to taste.
| barbarbar wrote:
| Woosh - this is for pros only. But great for those who can do
| it.
| carabiner wrote:
| Pre-2015 Tacoma. Doesn't even have climate control. Has the
| Entune touchscreen stereo, but you can ignore that if you don't
| listen to music. Everything else is knobs and buttons. But also,
| keep in mind this is generational. A 2003 Honda Accord has an
| astonishing amount of digitization relative to a 1980s car. It
| used to be common for fathers and sons to work on their cars at
| home for repairs. Not just maintenance, actually fixing things
| that went wrong.
|
| I think behind most nostalgia is a longing for youth.
| csomar wrote:
| I have a third-generation Mazda 3 and their tech is solid. It's
| the basics (Music, Radio, Calls, Messages and a modest GPS). It's
| solid because it's not buggy, responsive and quite simple. I'm
| yet to have any issues with Bluetooth (which was a hassle on
| Renault/Fiesta cars). It also has no other privacy invading crap.
| edpichler wrote:
| This reminds me some years ago looking for a good high resolution
| TV without these "embedded OS and smart apps". My plan was to use
| my Apple TV and regular tv cables. I could not find it, it does
| not exist.
| asdff wrote:
| The answer is buy any tv and never connect it to the internet.
| I have a "smart" tv. it functions exactly the same as my old
| dumb tv. The only buttons I use on the remote are power, input,
| left and right to select the xbox or computer, and volume. Same
| story as it was in the dumb tv era. the smart tv experience is
| entirely optional.
| beervirus wrote:
| Alternatively, what's a good modern car that's easy to lobotomize
| by removing/disabling the cellular modem?
| ssijak wrote:
| Zastava 101 - Stojadin
| jefflombardjr wrote:
| Suzuki Jimny or Toyota Tacoma/Hilux Work Trim
| [deleted]
| jmnicolas wrote:
| Mercedes EQS! Just kidding ;)
|
| Nowadays you won't find anything new that isn't full of
| electronics unless they sell Lada Niva in the US (might be a bit
| too bare for you though).
| speedgoose wrote:
| Between privacy risks and road safety, I made my choice very
| easily. I can understand the nostalgia of old cars with very
| little electronics, a carburator, a starter with a battery, a
| mechanical dashboard,... But on a daily basis they are dangerous,
| smelly, expensive, and not that reliable.
| postalrat wrote:
| Whats the newest car you can buy with a carburator?
| mindcrime wrote:
| Probably something built in the 1980's, if not the 1970's.
| Fuel-injection was pretty near ubiquitous by around the mid
| 80's as best as I can remember. I doubt very many, if any,
| cars were built new with carburetors anytime from 1990 on...
|
| Edit: the above refers to the US specifically. As other
| commentators have pointed out, the situation is different in
| other regions.
| olyjohn wrote:
| Depends on where you live. In the US, there are definitely
| no more carbureted cars. But overseas is a whole different
| story. I wanna say like 2017 there was Proton or something
| like that with a carb on it.
|
| From some quick Googling... The Ford Ka in Europe was
| carbureted (and pushrod!) up until 2000.
|
| I believe the VW CitiGolf was carb'd until 2008.
|
| Lada's maybe had carbs up until 2014.
|
| I think Proton even had one until the mid 2010's also.
|
| Interestingly. I thought that here in the US, we got rid of
| all carb'd motorcycles as well. But Honda is releasing the
| 2022 Navi, and it's carbureted! Especially weird since they
| have other 110cc engines that have fuel injection.
| wiredfool wrote:
| My 88 Chevy beater truck was the last year of carburetors,
| as it had an old small block v8 in it.
| fhd2 wrote:
| Well, I believe there's something in-between what the author
| asks for, and what you describe. I certainly don't want to have
| a "move fast and break things", "post privacy" kind of car. I
| prefer solid engineering and quality control, as well as
| simplicity (over convenience / flashiness). I don't have
| anything against electronics and algorithms running in my car
| at all.
| olyjohn wrote:
| I don't think he's talking about going to a carbureted car
| though. Just something with a simple EFI system, and not a
| bunch of proprietary, in-car electronics. Definitely like a
| post above mentioned, the late 90's to 2000's cars have most
| modern safety features, good reliable fuel injection, but no
| integrated LTE modems, or crappy infotainment systems that are
| horribly out of date like newer cars.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| Automotive EE here:
|
| Personally I'd recommend 2014 mid tier vehicles. Jeep, RAM, and
| GM trucks.
|
| 2014 is a good start for many body styles. 2018 saw regulatory
| changes and a lot of new body styles. A 2000-2010 is 11-21 years
| old now and they just don't last that long.
|
| I can tell you there was a massive change in quality right around
| the time 4G/LTE/WIFI access points were added. It meant we could
| finish software after shipping in many cases. I'm not sure
| anything but high-end had OTA in 2014-2016.
|
| You aren't going to get away from CAN busses unless you go back
| to 2005 or earlier. So get the ones that actually worked pretty
| well. There was a bell curve of shitty to good to overloaded and
| shitty again.
|
| I'm provided vehicles by my work. But man, if I had to buy one...
| I'd be in the same boat man.
|
| EDIT: Another poster had a good point. The commercial vans are
| really decontented. I only know Promasters and Sprinters, but
| yes, those actually do have less electronics. Iirc a recent
| Promaster city only has one or two data busses, instead of the
| typical 7-9.
| madengr wrote:
| >>>A 2000-2010 is 11-21 years old now and they just don't last
| that long.
|
| Ha ha, well of course if it's a Jeep, RAM, or GM. A Toyota
| truck is just being broke in.
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| There's going to come a time in the near future where analogish
| features are going to be seen as luxury components.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Buttons and dials, sure. But no sane person is longing to buy a
| car without reverse cameras or collision avoidance.
| olyjohn wrote:
| I must be insane. But I could care less about either of those
| things.
| AdamN wrote:
| reverse camera is mandatory by law in the US
| oneorangeday wrote:
| I could do with out all the beeping from the "collision
| avoidance"
| bunfunton wrote:
| 2019 and below Nissan Frontier. Outstanding trucks. They changed
| it in 2020 and 2021 I would give it another 15 years to iron out
| the bugs.
| kgermino wrote:
| They don't sell them in the US anymore, but I drive a 2019 Honda
| Fit and it's great. Very versatile (holds four adults, 8ft
| lumber, 36" doors, etc). The base trim is very tech-lite:
| bluetooth radio but nothing fancier than that, physically
| controlled hvac and chair controls, traditional key, basic LTMS
| (no dedicated chips in the tires, just a calculation based on
| different angular velocity across the wheels), etc. It's about as
| tech-lite as a modern car can be.
|
| If you want a new car, instead of a used one, I'd try that same
| pattern: low end, low trim. Honda almost certainly sells a Civic
| without too many digital gimmicks, other automakers probably have
| the same.
|
| It's a dying breed though, complicated "driver assist" systems
| are becoming standard or even mandated :(.
| abalaji wrote:
| Anytime I see people talking about the Honda Fit in the wild, I
| think back to this hilarious Community episode.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x65yvRtSejs
| rsoto wrote:
| Honda Fit owner here as well, the car is great, but
| unfortunately it's being discontinued in a lot of places. I
| think only Japan will still have them, and they even have an EV
| option.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| My Fit has been absolutely great.
|
| I've learned a lot by working on it, but I do have the say
| that the plastic engine protector is a travesty. Clips were
| originally broken during a commercial oil change. Ever since,
| I've just been using self tapping screws to reattach it.
| rootsudo wrote:
| Wow, you shouldn't have self tapping screws anywhere near
| an engine bay. But since you know what they are, I guess
| their danger is minimized.
|
| It is quite OK to run w/o an engine cover, it is a
| worthless piece of plastic.
| selykg wrote:
| They can actually be worse, trapping heat in.
|
| But yea, completely non-functional. Remove it if the
| clips are broken. You aren't missing anything.
| officeplant wrote:
| I assume they are talking about the splash guard /
| aeroplate underneath the engine which helps with MPGs to
| some extent. The plastic engine cover doesn't even need
| to be touched during an oil change.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| Correct. Only talking about splash guard.
| chiph wrote:
| Look up the plastic clip part numbers on a Honda parts
| site, then cross-reference them via eBay or Amazon to get
| a significantly cheaper knock-off. I've been able to get
| a bag of 20 for the price of 1 bought from the dealer
| parts counter. If they don't last, well you have plenty
| of spares now.
| fletchowns wrote:
| > It's a dying breed though, complicated "driver assist"
| systems are becoming standard or even mandated :(.
|
| I'm on the opposite side of this. All the new safety & driver
| assist features are the best part about getting a new car. I
| wouldn't buy a new daily driver that doesn't have blind spot
| monitoring, collision avoidance, lane keep assist, etc. Once
| you have these features and you are accustomed to how they
| work, you can't go back.
|
| I drive a 2019 XC40 and these safety features are my favorite
| part about it. Being able to turn on Pilot Assist on the
| highway makes driving so much more comfortable, it's like
| having two people driving at the same time! I don't let my
| guard down completely of course, but it definitely takes the
| edge off. I don't find these features getting in my way.
| kelnos wrote:
| Yeah, I'm feeling the same. I have an older car (2004 Honda
| Accord), and I'm looking for a new one. I like the new safety
| features, but I want to avoid the privacy-invasive data
| collection garbage.
| worik wrote:
| I agree that is all good (blind spot monitoring, collision
| avoidance, lane keep assist, etc).
|
| The collection of driver behaviour, and GPS, data is not
| fshbbdssbbgdd wrote:
| Do these driver assist systems stop working without an
| internet connection or something? Seems like you should be
| able to disable any radios that bother you, unless they
| intentionally nerfed it.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| Do you mean "you can physically destroy the radios if
| that bothers you"? Because it's not a toggle in a UI.
| fshbbdssbbgdd wrote:
| I'm trying to figure out what the connection is between
| the driver assist features and the phoning home behavior.
| Are they just two systems that new cars are likely to
| have, or are they actually integrated?
| singlow wrote:
| Some driver assist features probably need to have map
| data that has to stay up to date, but probably don't need
| to send any data back to the manufacturer in order to
| function.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| In Teslas, my understanding is that the driver assist
| features also judge your driving quality in real time and
| send them back to Tesla as a score. And, of course, they
| use the same sensors and processing hardware. So they are
| related in that it tends to be the same cars using the
| same hardware powering both.
| asdff wrote:
| these base model cars, your hubcap clad toyota yaris et al,
| do not have gps much less a data connection
| HWR_14 wrote:
| > I wouldn't buy a new daily driver that doesn't have blind
| spot monitoring, collision avoidance, lane keep assist, etc.
| Once you have these features and you are accustomed to how
| they work, you can't go back.
|
| And I don't like them. But only one of us has the government
| taking away our choice by making them mandatory.
|
| I wouldn't mind them if it wasn't for the fact that they
| universally seem to be points of failure that shorten the
| lifespan of the car.
| alphabettsy wrote:
| How does a defeat-able non-essential feature shorten a
| vehicle's lifespan?
| HWR_14 wrote:
| If it's a feature required by the government to be road
| legal, it's likely not run and/or pass emissions testing
| if it's not working. And it's a point of failure written
| by people who are bad at software.
|
| Alternatively, computer control of real world systems
| (e.g. acceleration and braking) can lead to actual
| accidents, totaling the vehicle. There was that lady who
| claims her Tesla's software caused a crash, and, without
| commenting on if that is true, it's _plausible_.
| stefan_ wrote:
| Here is a thing that happens: many countries have more or
| less comprehensive regular vehicle inspections. If your
| car is showing a warning light or reports an error on the
| standardized interface, that can cause you to fail the
| inspection. What a warning light is shown for is at the
| discretion of the manufacturer though.
|
| One example is Anti-lock braking (ABS), which they made
| mandatory in 2004. If you bought a car without it in 2003
| and have it inspected in 2013, no problem. If you bought
| a car with ABS in 2004 and the controller for it breaks
| in 2008, you will fail the inspection - even though your
| braking is no worse than the 2003 car (ABS was wisely
| designed to fail safe..).
| aunty_helen wrote:
| The point of abs isn't to improve your braking system.
| It's to stop you from panicking in an accident situation,
| locking up the front wheels and losing the ability to
| steer.
|
| Abs actually very slightly reduces the stopping potential
| of your brake system. But being able to steer and control
| your car is a bigger benefit under these circumstances.
| stefan_ wrote:
| Now think it through. What happens if a wheel locks up?
| Right, it loses all stopping power.
|
| I certainly agree that you want ABS, it's just to
| illustrate the pitfalls it creates when you have these
| additional systems. You can tell much the same story
| around emissions controls; newer cars pass stricter
| emissions standards and require extra parts and
| technology to achieve them.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > And I don't like them.
|
| They're not there for you to like - they're there for the
| people you might kill with your car.
|
| > the government taking away our choice...
|
| ...to plough into people with your car.
| [deleted]
| willis936 wrote:
| They're not there for you to like them. They're there so
| you don't kill someone and someone else doesn't kill you.
| Society collectively fails to give a single ass of a rat
| about how people feel about their ubiquitous 2-ton death
| machine.
| necovek wrote:
| As I explained in my another comment on this thread,
| sometimes they can behave unpredictably -- eg. car brakes
| without a need -- causing someone else to crash into you
| (these are most common crashes I see in the city
| streets). Perhaps they are not useful for me because I am
| a very attentive driver (eg. I prefer not to talk on the
| phone even with the BT hands-free system while driving
| because it takes my attention away from the road), but
| they are far away from being all positives.
|
| And how many more cars are going to be produced and
| bought because of "planned obsolescence" when electronic
| systems in modern cars start to give up (eg. electric
| cars and their engines should be able to last for a
| really long time)? Are they going to keep getting
| security updates for 20, 30 years? Or will we start
| seeing people doing something to fool their sensors so
| they crash?
|
| While I like all the technology, it's short-sighted to
| think that the alternative is desired simply because
| people don't care about potentially hurting someone with
| their cars. Like everything else in life, this issue is
| multifaceted too.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > I am a very attentive driver
|
| Everyone thinks they're a great driver.
| necovek wrote:
| I did not say I am a great driver, but an attentive one.
| That means that when I drive, I focus on driving. I am
| sure there are people who can notice the same things I do
| while paying less attention on the road: that would make
| them "better" drivers.
| willis936 wrote:
| The most attentive driver in the world cannot prevent an
| inattentive driver from T-boning them. Automatic braking
| can.
| necovek wrote:
| I drive a 2019 Volvo as well (bought in 2020), and the
| "safety" features have activated for me maybe a hundred
| times! Out of those, safety system was helpful once
| (arguably) in that it reacted and activated the brakes the
| same time I pressed them (so it still wasn't really needed,
| but I can see how it would have helped when I was less
| attentive due to eg planning to switch lanes and looking at
| side mirrors).
|
| All the other times, it's causing me frustration and pain. It
| signals a collision as I am avoiding potholes in a tight one-
| way street and cars parked on both sides of the road (yep, I
| am going to slam into that parked car for sure -- at least it
| did not forcibly brake which would definitely cause cars
| behind me to slam into me).
|
| It brakes when I am backing out of a parking spot into a
| street and vehicles appear from the other direction (a lane I
| was not getting into) -- this happens so frequently that I am
| tempted to turn it off.
|
| Pilot Assist on the highway seems to wait too long to slow
| down as I approach a car in front of me and then it abruptly
| slows down, yet it requires me to use the turn signal way too
| early if I want to overtake someone I caught up with: my
| drive was much more fluid with a simple stay-at-this-speed
| cruise control of my previous car.
|
| I keep all of the "helpers" on (those that can be turned off)
| just in case I lose focus and because crashing once might be
| once too many, but I worry how much unpredictable behaviour
| is going to mess with other drivers causing them to make
| mistakes instead and crash into me.
|
| Perhaps it works well for US roads, but European old-town
| driving is way too complex for safety features to keep up
| (esp as Volvo is considered to be among the best
| manufacturers for safety features, including these new-
| fangled ones).
|
| Edit: and blind spot monitoring -- the sales guy was so high
| on it, yet I don't see the purpose: it's right there flashing
| on your side mirrors so you have to look at them, yet side
| mirrors are large enough and concave (like on all modern
| cars) that if you set them up properly, there's really no
| blind spot a car or bike can fit in. And I still prefer to
| look over my shoulder to top it off.
| jccalhoun wrote:
| I got hit in an accident this summer and my 2009 Fit got
| totaled. I'm ok but I miss that car. If they brought it back I
| would ditch the car I bought in a heartbeat for one.
| judge2020 wrote:
| > It's a dying breed though, complicated "driver assist"
| systems are becoming standard or even mandated :(.
|
| It saves lives, even if the systems are not 100% effective.
| ospzfmbbzr wrote:
| What a pile. Blind spot detection system malfunction a lot to
| the point of being useless. Front collision detection is just
| annoying. I have driven for 40 years and have never rear-
| ended anyone or run over a pedestrian. These 'safety'
| 'features' are only useful to terrible drivers. Decent
| drivers are just annoyed by the car fighting you. I guess
| they need to have some way to keep adding features so the
| price points never drop. You are being sold things based on
| the deliberate cultivation of irrational fears in your own
| mind (as usual).
| artimaeis wrote:
| What a pile. Your anecdata are not in and of themselves
| data.
|
| Regardless of your skill, or the
| skill/expertise/attentiveness of any individual driver,
| drivers as a collective remain dangerous to themselves and
| pedestrians. How did I come to this conclusion? I reviewed
| data, here's a couple of sources:
|
| https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/2020-fatality-data-
| show...
|
| https://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
|
| By all means, if you have data that shows people are
| inherently becoming better drivers, or that there's a
| method to improve _all_ drivers systemically -- let's talk
| about it.
| ospzfmbbzr wrote:
| Generally requests in comments to cite sources or provide
| data are in fact simply disingenuous attempts to confuse
| the issue.
|
| Regardless, your datas mean nothing -- They are only
| guaranteed to be incorrect for each individual case.
|
| You say collectively drivers are dangerous, but the
| implication is that we would apply the same rule to all
| in the interest of 'fairness' or some other such
| subjective nonsense.
|
| So it's 'Drag everyone down to the same low level?' Is
| that the solution?
|
| NO.
|
| You are allowed to make mistakes in a free country and
| pay the price. Saying you are not free to hurt others
| implies you would do so -- even in the face of a lifetime
| of safe driving and non-criminal behavior.
|
| Those bodies compiling the statistic you quote exist for
| the sole purpose of bureaucratic enrichment through the
| creation of rules -- whether they are ever really needed
| is irrelevant to them.
|
| I'll end with a quote from a man much wiser than any of
| us on this board.
|
| "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the
| good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would
| be better to live under robber barons than under
| omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty
| may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be
| satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will
| torment us without end for they do so with the approval
| of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to
| Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of
| earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult.
| To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states
| which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a
| level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason
| or those who never will; to be classed with infants,
| imbeciles, and domestic animals."
|
| -- C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology
| (Making of Modern Theology)
| ghostpepper wrote:
| As an aside I think you might enjoy this book
|
| http://www.matthewbcrawford.com/why-we-drive
| artimaeis wrote:
| If my attempt to cite a source is a veiled attempt to
| confuse the issue, then what is your citation of
| anecdata? And what is your context of this very argument,
| if not a meta-argument?
|
| Regardless, it seems like you prefer the idea of anarchy
| to order on the roads. Especially since order can only
| come from groups which exist for enrichment through
| creation and enforcement of rules. I'm sure your decades
| of experience have proved to you that a road without laws
| and bureaucracy is best for all. After all, tyranny is
| super bad, so less tyranny is always more good!
|
| I'll sign off with my own C.S. Lewis quote.
|
| "One of the most cowardly things ordinary people do is to
| shut their eyes to facts."
|
| -- C. S. Lewis (2010). "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader"
| ospzfmbbzr wrote:
| I believe in people wanting to not die generally.
|
| Well at least you used a CS Lewis quote. That made me
| smile.
| Misdicorl wrote:
| Given that cars are by far the most common cause of violent
| injury and death, I think it's kind of silly to call it an
| irrational fear.
|
| You are not exceptional. You are maaaaybe in the top
| quintile of driver competence. Very likely not if you've
| been driving for forty years- your reaction times are trash
| compared to a twenty year old. These driver assist features
| would help you be a safer driver.
| ospzfmbbzr wrote:
| > Given that cars are by far the most common cause of
| violent injury and death
|
| Actually that is Governments. Most in the 20th century at
| least for sure. Probably all time.
| Misdicorl wrote:
| Fair point.
| itsoktocry wrote:
| > _What a pile. Blind spot detection system malfunction a
| lot to the point of being useless. Front collision
| detection is just annoying._
|
| Been driving cars with blind spot detection and front
| collision for years. Never had a "malfunction". I live in
| Canada. When it's snowy, the system turns off (and the
| driving experience is worse).
|
| Seems downright crazy to not want these features. If you
| think "real drivers" don't want these things you don't
| spend enough time on the road. Commuting is not about "the
| driving experience". Most accidents are caused by people
| not paying attention, which is what these features solve.
| ospzfmbbzr wrote:
| > I live in Canada
|
| So do I -- and I drove all the worst highways for years
| in winter without these useless intrusions. Often in the
| middle of the night to get to a ski hill in some part of
| BC for the next day.
| johnea wrote:
| You know, actually paying attention to driving saves lives
| too. But apparently that is not an option.
|
| Driving is just too big of a distraction from playing with
| instagram...
| [deleted]
| olyjohn wrote:
| Instagram is one distraction, so is navigating through a
| bunch of touch screen menus to turn up the heat or turn
| down volume.
| dntrkv wrote:
| You do realize, you can be distracted unintentionally,
| right?
|
| Child crying in the backseat, car malfunctioning, animal
| crossing the road, object hitting your windshield, a car
| accident occurring next to you, being fired from your job
| and your wife divorcing you when you find out you have
| cancer, a meteor hitting the earth, a big sneeze, I could
| keep going.
| kgermino wrote:
| I don't disagree, but it makes the car much more complicated
| and expensive which are valid negatives.
|
| Small cars with low hoods and good visibility don't need
| those systems nearly as much as large SUV's with dangerous
| hood designs and poor side/rear visibility. I think we should
| focus on the total safety of the vehicle instead of pushing
| everything to be bigger and more expensive which makes car
| ownership hard for poorer people.
| sovnade wrote:
| New features always show up in higher end cars first.
| Economies of scale eventually work out and it trickles down
| to even the lowest trim. I don't have the numbers but it
| seems like more cars than not nowadays have things like
| backup cameras, blind spot indicators, etc - and those
| basically didn't exist from the factory 15 years ago.
|
| edit: talking about non-highline models. hondas, fords,
| hyundais, dodge, etc.
| awwstn wrote:
| Buy a Toyota from 2000-2010. They run practically forever,
| they're low maintenance, and they achieve everything you're
| asking for here regarding modern electronics. My daily driver is
| a 2000 4Runner, and I love everything about it.
| pc86 wrote:
| But don't buy one right now, because the market is nuts.
|
| 1-2 year old cars with 5-8k miles are selling for the same
| price or even _more_ than brand new models because of a
| confluence of the chip shortage and CPO warranties extending
| the total warranty length.
| joeyh wrote:
| I have an 19 year old one, and my mechanic offered to buy it
| yesterday (after fixing a suspension torn up by essentially
| offroading in it, third repair it's ever needed in 180k
| miles), because he needed a car with good gas mileage.
| rpmisms wrote:
| Probably the best option is any car with a manual transmission.
| These generally don't have any cruise control beyond the basic
| speed-keeping, no lane-keep assist, and generally are base models
| with less infotainment tech.
|
| The fun factor should not be discounted, either.
| [deleted]
| fnord77 wrote:
| I think lower-end cars with the base level infotainment option
| have the least amount of telematics.
|
| Surprised car makers haven't started trying to get ad revenue
| from displaying ads on cars' touchscreens
| judge2020 wrote:
| > Surprised car makers haven't started trying to get ad revenue
| from displaying ads on cars' touchscreens
|
| That's that XM is for
| chakerb wrote:
| Don't put the idea into their heads!!!
|
| Kidding aside, I think customers can argue that such ads can be
| distracting to the driver.
| fnord77 wrote:
| Waze does it constantly. "There's a ShitMart just off the
| next exit, want to stop?"
| TYPE_FASTER wrote:
| This Porsche 962C isn't new, but it probably doesn't have too
| many privacy invasive features: https://vimeo.com/50473835
| alphabettsy wrote:
| Base to mid model Subarus from the 2010s would seem to fit. They
| don't have many gadgets and have great safety ratings.
| eschneider wrote:
| Subaru Crosstrek: If you get it with the (quite nice) 6 speed
| manual, all the annoying driver aid stuff is deleted. Does come
| with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, so if you like fancy radio,
| you can have that. But the drivetrain is pleasantly stick-and-
| rudder.
| trcarney wrote:
| Agreed and even if you get the one with Eyesight, Subaru's
| driver assist platform, it is easy to turn it off. My
| girlfriend has one and we turn off lane keep assistance on long
| trips because it is annoying on some roads.
|
| This might be a good option if you want to improve potential
| resale value.
| CapitalistCartr wrote:
| Ask the dealer if Internet connection is an option, if so, can it
| be added later, can it be turned on remotely? In many cars today,
| the answer to all three is yes.
| can16358p wrote:
| Just out of curiosity: how can Internet connection be turned on
| remotely, if the car is, well, not connected to the Internet in
| the first place?
| sneak wrote:
| I am going to guess that you know the answer to this already.
| everly wrote:
| Because it actually _is_ connected through an OnStar or
| similar system. You just don't get the benefit unless you
| start paying the subscription cost.
| gnopgnip wrote:
| You basically can't buy a new car in the US like this. They will
| all have a backup camera and an infotainment screen with controls
| for the car integrated, and they use the same parts from the rest
| of the cars in their lineup and collect all the data they can.
|
| You could buy an older car like a crown victoria or similar
| models that were used as fleet vehicles from the same time
| period. The police models don't have TPMS, cruise control is
| disabled by default, no LCD screens, no bluetooth, no cellular
| connectivity, no voice controls, no ignition interlock, no
| cameras for lane keeping or early crash warning. HVAC is has
| dedicated controls. It still has an engine computer that controls
| the timing and fuel air mixture, cooling, turn signals, throttle
| by wire(after 04), and ABS. To really avoid anything digital you
| would need a car from the mid 80s or older for one with a
| solenoid for the turn signals, carburetor for fuel/air. And going
| back to the 50s to avoid an electronic fuel pump and ignition
| coils. An air cooled vw beetle for instance.
|
| For new cars, a mazda 3 can be a good option. It doesn't use a
| touch screen and has a wheel/knob instead. The controls are more
| simplified, few to none of those electronic driving aids on the
| base models. Volvos stand out as having great physical controls
| as well, but they will come with all of the electronics. An f150,
| dodge challenger, grand caravan can be pretty light on the
| electronics for the lowest trim levels compared to the
| competition. And all of these are used as fleet vehicles by
| rental car cos and similar, so there are lots of parts out there
| dmead wrote:
| I have a 2004 buick park ave and i couldn't be happier with it.
| zubiaur wrote:
| 3.8 series II. That thing will live forever!!
|
| For grad school, I got a cousin of it, a 2002 olds. These w
| body, V6 GMs are so smooth!! So pleasant on the highway! And
| get 30 mpg? I can't bring myself to get rid of the thing. In
| fact I'm a bit obsessive about keeping it nice. It's so
| inexpensive to manton and run, and it is a good, spacious,
| smooth car.
|
| Not luxurious, but still quiet and smooth. Not sporty, yet it
| passes anything on the highway with ease. Not flashy, but
| neither am I. Not new, yet still, somehow, reliable. Not
| techie, yet wit a cellphone mount and a Bluetooth (wired)
| adapter, I can do just about every thing I want.
|
| Like you, I couldn't be happier with my old boat.
| gkanai wrote:
| Toyota Land Cruiser (the older ones.) Look for one that has
| airbags and ABS and nothing else computer-controlled.
| nowherebeen wrote:
| I have been looking at the Ineos Grenedier that is coming out
| early next year. The owner of Ineos wanted a better version of
| the LandRover Defender before their redesign. No digital
| features, all buttons. I think they are pricing it around 40-50k.
|
| Check out the interior here. https://youtu.be/3wrPT9buKkc?t=575
| outworlder wrote:
| > and prefer their cars without fancy digital gimmicks
|
| What's a 'digital gimmick'? Is stability control a gimmick? ABS?
| What about cruise control? Lane assist? Auto-breaking to avoid
| collisions?
|
| If you are talking about things like touch screens to control
| basic functions, then it's understandable. Or maybe you want a
| car without GPS.
|
| In general though, moving functions away from hardware makes
| things more reliable, not less. When was the last time you had to
| adjust your engine timing? Or disassemble a carburator to figure
| out issues, rather than plugging in a scanner and having the
| onboard computer tell you what's wrong.
| adamrezich wrote:
| for at least my whole life until 2019, my dad would trade in
| his truck for a brand-new one every few years. he's the kind of
| guy who's excited by bells and whistles just for the sake of
| them, and he appreciated the new doodads with each new model...
| until 2019. the new truck that year was _full_ of crap he has
| zero use for, like a 3G wifi hotspot. every few days after his
| purchase he went back to the dealership with some new problem
| with some part of the truck. typically this would only happen
| once every few years or months, but it happened several times
| in rapid succession over the course of a couple weeks. maybe my
| dad just got a fantastically unlucky lemon of a truck, but it
| 's undeniable that feature creep increases points of failure.
| reyjrar wrote:
| I'm driving a 2017 Jeep Wrangler (JK) with a manual transmission.
| I don't drive much (less than 4k miles/yr).
|
| I can't drive automatic transmissions without losing my mind. My
| guess is if you can find a car with a standard transmission, you
| can get it without "smart" features. If you can't drive stick,
| that's fine. I couldn't drive stick when I bought my first manual
| transmission. If I can learn, you can learn.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-19 23:01 UTC)