[HN Gopher] A few things to know before stealing my 914 (2022)
___________________________________________________________________
A few things to know before stealing my 914 (2022)
Author : colinprince
Score : 348 points
Date : 2023-07-18 02:32 UTC (20 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.hagerty.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.hagerty.com)
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| This was my first car, back in the 1990s!
|
| The synchros in the transmission were worn down to almost
| nothing, shifting truly was a dark art, like closing one's eyes
| and feeling their way through a drawer of silverware.
|
| Otherwise in better condition but I guess I had twenty years less
| wear on it!
|
| (my current car dream is to find another 914 and do an electric
| conversion... not a car where it behooves one to keep the
| original _anything_ )
| rbanffy wrote:
| > (my current car dream is to find another 914 and do an
| electric conversion... not a car where it behooves one to keep
| the original anything)
|
| Same here, but ones with the wheel on the right side are even
| harder to find. :-(
|
| Well... I guess that, for a conversion job, I won't need a
| working engine, or transmission.
| samtho wrote:
| I did an electric conversion with an old Vespa, it was
| literally just a shell I got for about $300, packed it with a
| beefy BLDC motor and a driver (from a standup electric
| scooter) that let me change the speed based on the thumb
| throttle. I wanted to use the original throttle on the Vespa
| but that got kind of messy at the time. The LiFePO4 batteries
| were the most expensive thing here and I regret not getting
| larger capacity ones.
|
| The neat thing about an electric motor vs an ICE, that you
| pointed out, is the torque curve is linear so no need for a
| transmission.
|
| For 4-wheelers, I really want to see electric conversion kits
| get more popular, specifically ones where the electric motor
| mounts to the transmission spot - either transverse and have
| attachment points for two half shafts or conventional where
| it points to the rear. Then we can use the engine bay as a
| additional storage, assuming we put the batteries where the
| gas tank is. I really want to do this conversion with a
| older, rear-engine VW bug. I hate ripping out original parts
| but I can find so many shells now where they've taken the
| engine out.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Did you do a write-up on that project? I'd love to read
| about it!
| angst_ridden wrote:
| I had a 1973 2.0 for much of the 90s. It was definitely the
| most fun car I've owned. I foolishly let it go and "upgraded"
| to a Boxster, which may have been faster and more comfortable
| (stuff like A/C was a cool innovation for me then), but was a
| lot less fun.
|
| The 914 cornered like it had talons with which to grip the
| road. You could be going up curvy roads like Las Flores Canyon
| in Malibu, cornering at a speed where any other car would let
| go, crank the wheel over, and the 914 would just happily go
| exactly where you pointed it.
|
| It wasn't nearly as fast as the Boxster that replaced it, but
| it _felt_ faster. That rattling acceleration off the line,
| especially being so low to the ground, that smell of hot oil,
| the sound of the engine right behind you ... I miss that car.
|
| Yeah, it was in the shop a lot. So was the Boxster. The
| difference was, of course, that you'd buy your replacement
| parts from the VW parts catalog rather than the Porsche parts
| catalog and save yourself 600-800%. I still remember getting a
| replacement VW window crank for $2 when the Porsche dealer
| quoted me $75.
|
| I got old and "responsible." I eventually ditched the Boxster
| for a reliable, truck-like Subaru. And I now live in a city
| where transit and bike infrastructure is great - I don't even
| own a car. I don't miss it much. But there's one day a year,
| when the weather reminds me of that first springtime ride up
| Angeles Crest Highway in the 914 with the top down, and then
| I'll admit to some small regret.
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| "talons" yes! That's exactly what it felt like!
|
| My curvy roads were the canyons from Salt Lake City to Park
| City and up Wasatch mountains to the ski resorts.
| aeroevan wrote:
| I went '67 MGB to boxster and while air conditioning and
| having a working radio is nice (and it was just a much more
| practical car all around... which isn't saying much), there's
| something about classic cars that is just fun
| ant6n wrote:
| [flagged]
| inconceivable wrote:
| > Porsche seems to be the only vehicle manufacturer who
| doesnt believe in the electric car
|
| i think you just completely made this up out of thin air
| because you hate sports cars. they're one of the first
| manufacturers to sell an electric sports car, and their work
| on performance hybrid drivetrains is probably the best in the
| industry.
|
| they also race in formula E and are working on synthetic fuel
| replacements for their classic cars.
| ant6n wrote:
| https://www.carscoops.com/2023/03/porsche-ferrari-behind-
| e-f...
| inconceivable wrote:
| good. banning ICE by 2035 is insanely stupid.
| [deleted]
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| Porsche sells fully electric Taycan.
| jsight wrote:
| It is a great EV too.
| inconceivable wrote:
| they're also innovating on synthetic fuel.
| ant6n wrote:
| That's the story the FDP is trying to sell - we should be
| ,,open" on technology, because synthetic fuels will
| supposedly be just as environmentally friendly as EV
| cars. Never mind that well-to-wheel, they'd use 5x the
| energy of EVs and still have most of the other issues of
| ICE cars, like noise and local pollution (e.g. nox).
|
| In reality, it's about keeping fossil fuels and ICE cars
| around as long as possible.
| inconceivable wrote:
| > it's about keeping fossil fuels and ICE cars around as
| long as possible
|
| yeah, what tipped you off, the fact that they're trying
| to keep them fueled at great cost? i'm glad a real
| sherlock holmes like you is on the case.
| sspiff wrote:
| While I myself am partial to noisy vibration generators, it
| should be noted that vintage Porsches are the most common
| form of classic car EV conversions.
| oceanplexian wrote:
| The calls for an ICE ban don't sound reasonable at all. It's
| not the 1% of the population that are car enthusiasts that
| are causing climate change.
| ant6n wrote:
| No, it's the whole automotive industry that needs to get
| out of fossil fuels, and is not able to maintain and evolve
| multiple drive technologies at once. But also, the e-fuel
| debate is a Backdoor to keep fossil fuels around much
| longer. Getting rid of ICE cars isn't a matter of
| reasonableness, it's a necessity.
| phone8675309 wrote:
| Let's talk about limits on private jet aviation before we
| even begin to talk about banning ICE vehicles for normal
| people.
| constantly wrote:
| I seriously considered the all electric Porsche Taycan as my
| next car before eventually relenting got a Tesla Model S
| Plaid. The Taycan was arguably higher quality and a funner
| drive though and I would have been very happy with it.
| clsec wrote:
| As someone who lives along a very busy thoroughfare in San
| Francisco (where there are a lot of Porches & other
| supercars) I can say that they are the quietest of all the
| gas powered supercars.
| carabiner wrote:
| HN continues to track millennial life progression! We are at the
| mid-life crisis.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36391971
| photonerd wrote:
| It's been like this for a decade. It's nothing to do with
| millennials, everything to do with the type of audience HN has
| HankB99 wrote:
| Were Webers ever on the car from the factory? I thought they were
| all fuel injected.
|
| Disclaimer: Back when we were mechanics (and before we became
| technicians) I earned a living working on these, but I seldom had
| the opportunity (?) to work on one this old.
|
| They were interesting beasts - actually more Porsche then the
| later 924. Except for the /6 which had a real Porsche engine, the
| engine was the flat four adapted from the Type 2 (bus) and Type
| 4. Suspension, transmission, electrics and so on were all
| Porsche. (For better or worse.) The 924 had a lot of parts that
| would have been comfortable on a Rabbit/Golf.
| everybodyknows wrote:
| I owned a 914/4, and at one fully overhauled its engine and so
| had a close look at its transmission and drivetrain.
|
| A small correction on point of fact: On all the 4s the entirety
| of the drivetrain was VW, down to the CV joints and lug bolts.
| You can see this in photos, with 4s having a four-bolt pattern.
| 914/6s OTOH had five bolts, as on the contemporaneous Porsche
| 911s.
|
| There was a further wrinkle with some six-bangers being badged
| as "914/6" and others as "916" -- but I was regrettably never
| in the market for either of those, so have forgotten details.
| jacquesm wrote:
| The /6 is super rare. I don't need yet another car but if I
| came across a reasonably priced /6 I'd probably fall for it.
| shever73 wrote:
| No, they came factory fitted with an electronic fuel injection
| system from VW, but these were almost impossible to repair or
| diagnose.
| rozap wrote:
| I actually think the reputation of early Bosch FI systems
| being horrible is pretty overblown. I haven't had a hard time
| diagnosing L-jet issues (I haven't touched D-jet). It's
| pretty simple and while you can't plug a scan tool in, you
| can use an oscilloscope to see what's going wrong. Also it's
| so simple, there are really only a handful of things to
| check. Some friends and I do endurance racing in a Fiat with
| the original L-jet system and it has been reliable.
|
| I can understand a shop not wanting to touch them because
| you'll likely lose money tracking down issues as opposed to
| plugging in a scan tool, but for a hobbyist it's really not
| that hard.
| jacquesm wrote:
| It's also a matter of who integrated it. In the Volvo's
| they are rock solid because of the way the wiring is routed
| (and the quality of the wiring), in the DS they are nothing
| but trouble and you're better off assuming it's all gone
| and completely rewiring and re-calibrating it than to try
| to fix it as is because that will almost always be a very
| temporary job.
| nixass wrote:
| While talking about Hagerty.. Does anyone else find their videos
| obnoxiously annoying and catered for high schoolers? Boring and
| repeating cut scenes, slow-mo shots every few seconds..
| velosol wrote:
| I haven't watched beyond Jason Cammisa's videos but they feel
| as though they wink back to Top Gear with the May, Clarkson,
| Hammond lineup: a show meant to be a little crazy, something
| Michael Bay would approve of and easy to take what you want out
| of them.
|
| In both cases though the presenting personality is key as they
| have interesting knowledge that they share in an engaging way;
| it might be childish but their excitement is infectious.
| parpfish wrote:
| cammisa's vids are top-notch
| knekt wrote:
| Have you tried turning it off and then on again to fix the
| issues?
| hoppla wrote:
| A bartender told me that he had connected the fuel pump to a
| switch hidden. He lived in a rough neighborhood and his car was
| an easy target for thieves. More than once he had found his car a
| hundred or so meters down the road.
| deltarholamda wrote:
| Adam Carolla likes to talk about how he did this with his truck
| way back in the day. You could drive as far as whatever gas was
| in the carburetor and fuel line.
|
| He also painted his radio brown like the interior of the truck.
| It was so ugly nobody ever stole the one thing that had any
| value in the truck.
| speedgoose wrote:
| In Norway, this car would be very unlikely to pass the mandatory
| roadworthiness test.
|
| You would be forced to fix the car, or sell it to someone who
| will fix it, or remove the plates and deregister it, or scrap it.
| If you don't do anything the police will remove the plates.
|
| I would advice fixing the car or selling it to someone who will
| fix it because it has some value.
|
| https://www.vegvesen.no/en/vehicles/own-and-maintain/eu-mand...
|
| https://www.vegvesen.no/en/vehicles/own-and-maintain/eu-mand...
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| It sounds like the author is perfectly capable of maintaining
| the car and takes pride in it. I doubt you could really "fix"
| it so that it runs like a 2014 Corolla unless you build it from
| the ground up
| jacquesm wrote:
| Even then you'd still have to lubricate some bits more
| frequently and re-adjust the valves.
| speedgoose wrote:
| I haven't driven this old Porsche but I assume the brakes
| were working better than what is described in the article
| before.
| bityard wrote:
| Good thing the author isn't in Norway, I guess. Otherwise, he
| wouldn't be able to keep his car which clearly has a lot of
| sentimental value to him.
|
| Also, Norway should consider dropping mandatory passenger
| vehicle inspections as mechanical malfunctions are a tiny
| percentage of accident causes (and might be lower than
| officially reported by police) and it has been shown that they
| do nothing to increase actual on-the-road safety:
|
| https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=...
|
| https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...
|
| https://www.theamericanconsumer.org/2019/06/do-mandatory-veh...
| jacquesm wrote:
| They make the car industry a ton of money though so I don't
| expect them to go away any time soon.
| speedgoose wrote:
| Your data says about 2% of the crashes. Seems very much worth
| it.
|
| And the test also checks the pollution or reduces the
| annoyances to other drivers (such as too high headlights,
| broken light indicators, smelly vehicles,...).
| [deleted]
| robmusial wrote:
| The 914 in the picture looks like a 1970 or 1971 so since it's
| over 50 years old it looks like it wouldn't be inspected
| anymore. [0]
|
| A lot of states in the US also require safety inspections
| (including North Carolina where the author teaches) but often
| make exceptions for antique cars.
|
| [0] https://www.vegvesen.no/en/vehicles/own-and-maintain/eu-
| mand...
| pantalaimon wrote:
| In Germany you absolutely have to have your car inspected
| regularly if you want to drive it on public roads, no matter
| the age.
|
| Even if it's a 130 year old Benz Victoria:
|
| https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/braunschweig_ha.
| ..
| speedgoose wrote:
| Interesting. It seems to be possible to skip the check for
| vehicles worthy of preservation. It requires the vehicle to
| not be modified (original design), which seems to be the case
| there, but also the safety equipment must function
| satisfactorily, which may be up for debate there.
|
| > are in virtually original design
|
| > Devices/equipment that are important for safety must
| function satisfactorily
|
| > Must only be used - on special occasions such as motor
| history gatherings and races - otherwise occasionally when
| the use does not cause undue danger or inconvenience to other
| traffic.
|
| So I would fix the brakes.
|
| https://lovdata.no/forskrift/1994-10-04-918/SS1-9 (translated
| with DeepL)
| anjc wrote:
| > You would be forced to fix the car, or sell it to someone
| who will fix it, or remove the plates and deregister it, or
| scrap it. If you don't do anything the police will remove
| the plates.
|
| > I would advice fixing the car or selling it to someone
| who will fix it because it has some value.
|
| Your comments were quite confident when you weren't
| actually familiar with the basics of the topic. Most
| countries have relaxed road worthiness tests or complete
| exemptions for classic cars, and I think this stands to
| reason.
| dboreham wrote:
| > Most countries have relaxed road worthiness tests or
| complete exemptions for classic cars
|
| I doubt the exception extends to having non-functional
| brakes. The exception is from things like inspections and
| compliance with modern standards, but you still have a
| duty to maintain your vehicle to its original level of
| safety.
| speedgoose wrote:
| Indeed I as wrong as I wasn't aware about the exception
| for old worth preserving vehicles. If I was the king I
| wouldn't allow old death traps to drive on open roads but
| I guess it makes sense to some.
| jacquesm wrote:
| As opposed to new death traps?
|
| Plenty of new vehicles are a danger to others, and quite
| possibly far more so than an old 914. The driver of a 914
| is probably going to be pretty careful about damaging it
| and will drive it prudently as a result, it also weighs
| (much) less than a modern vehicle and as a consequence
| will do less damage. Lack of built in safety and mid
| engine (so no engine between you and your partner in a
| collision, coupled with a nice hammer behind you that
| will use the other car in that accident you're in as the
| anvil and you as the workpiece) will be yet another
| reason why an owner will be careful about the situations
| they put themselves in. They'll likely do fewer km per
| year in than they would in a modern car.
|
| As a cyclist I'd rather encounter someone in their
| classic 914 than the local lawn service jockey in his
| Dodge RAM flooring it at every corner.
| oceanplexian wrote:
| Especially new "Eco Friendly" cars like the 7,000lb
| Rivian which, if it hits another car, is going to
| completely obliterate it and kill any occupants inside.
| ourmandave wrote:
| In the U.S. you get insurance discounts for having safety
| equipment (e.g. day time running lights, etc.).
|
| I assume under the speedgoose monarchy the rates would be
| prohibitively expensive.
| [deleted]
| sgt wrote:
| People with vintage cars like that generally take care of
| them, so it's a very low risk.
|
| Same with motorcycles (also doesn't need regular
| inspections in Norway) - the riders generally have a very
| good reason to keep them safe for their own wellbeing.
| alvah wrote:
| Also annual miles / kms tend to be very low, so the
| overall risk is usually quite contained as you say.
| dwater wrote:
| As someone who owns a 1970 car and several motorcycles
| from the 70's, I would say that this is not true in the
| US. If you're imagining a wealthy guy with a spotless
| garage that pays top dollar to keep his antiques
| maintained in excellent condition, then you're thinking
| of the minority of antique vehicle owners. I bought my
| car for $14k and it would cost more than that to restore
| it (which I don't have). I do my best to keep it in
| acceptable roadworthy condition, but I also frequently
| test drive it around the neighborhood knowing full well
| something isn't working properly.
|
| In my state, vehicles registered as antiques are not
| required to have the annual safety inspection performed,
| and it is the owner's responsibility to keep the vehicle
| in safe operating condition, which is never checked by
| anyone.
| jacquesm wrote:
| > I also frequently test drive it around the neighborhood
| knowing full well something isn't working properly.
|
| That's wildly irresponsible of you. How will you look
| yourself in the eye if you cause an accident like that?
| If you can't afford to keep a car maintained you can't
| afford it, period.
| networkchad wrote:
| [dead]
| dwater wrote:
| Right now the thing that isn't working properly is the
| oxygen sensor, so the engine struggles to rev past
| 3000rpm. I don't worry much about the potential danger
| that puts others in.
| jacquesm wrote:
| That's an important bit of context I think :)
|
| Air mass sensor failure can often be determined by
| unplugging the thing completely, O2 sensor failure could
| be the cause of your problem but if it only starts to
| fail at very high revs I'd check the fuel system first to
| make sure that there is enough flow.
|
| Those can get clogged up pretty badly, especially in
| vehicles that have been standing for a while with ethanol
| based fuel in them, it takes forever before that gunk
| clears out without some work, if at all.
|
| If it really is the O2 sensor (of which you usually have
| two) then I'd suspect the pre-cat one first, it runs in a
| much hotter environment and is more critical to the
| engine working properly.
|
| Another option is the crank sensor, they may not give
| enough signal at a high number of revs so you start to
| miss if enough pulses fail (one or two in an otherwise
| consistent signal isn't going to cause the PLL to lose
| lock but if it is more erratic then it will and then revs
| would drop back to a regime where the sensor is still
| working reliably).
|
| Good luck fixing that.
| sgt wrote:
| I think if you read it like that, sure it may sound
| irresponsible.
|
| But in reality it'll look a lot more innocent than that,
| and I am sure that OP does it carefully enough.
|
| You just gotta make sure the brakes work and that you
| don't do any silly things. Doing test rides and listening
| for sounds etc is _key_ to figuring out what 's wrong and
| what to improve next.
| more_corn wrote:
| In California there are about five different classic car
| rallies. Fifty to a hundred people in pre 1975 cars get
| out on curvy roads and drive around for a few days. No
| inspections, no smog tests. No shiny paint. Cars are for
| driving so drive them. There are mechanical problems and
| there's joy in that, breaking down and fixing things,
| stopping to help/heckle.
|
| The cars could be more safe, but we're all mechanics by
| necessity. Failure also reminds us that these are all
| human made systems. Each can fail. Each can be fixed. In
| some ways being aware of the systems that make a car go
| (and stop) and being aware of the failure modes makes the
| classic car drivers more safe than their counterparts in
| driving appliances.
| thomashabets2 wrote:
| My first car came with instructions kinda like that, by the time
| i sold it.
| punnerud wrote:
| This is the kind of guy/girl that should buy the rotating house,
| if he/she have the money: https://youtu.be/gisdyTBMNyQ
| dang wrote:
| Discussed at the time:
|
| _A few things to know before stealing my 914_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30878489 - April 2022 (417
| comments)
| plq wrote:
| ... and hugged to death
|
| https://archive.li/yl7z2
| Titan2189 wrote:
| Classic. Love it.
| waynecochran wrote:
| I swear i read this article years ago but i cant find the
| history...
| Ayesh wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30878489
| dmvdoug wrote:
| Honestly, I'm not a car person _at all_ but it had me laughing
| all the way through. Then I read the comments here and it just
| made me sad.
|
| It's a joke, fellas! Lighten up.
| DeathArrow wrote:
| Sounds like a tough job, maybe he should pay someone to steal it.
| zirgs wrote:
| That car would be illegal to operate on public roads in the EU.
| You can't pass the annual inspection without working brakes. The
| inspector will also ask you to wait outside while he checks the
| brakes, suspension and other stuff under the car. If he can't
| start the engine himself - the inspection will be over.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| While you're correct about the brakes, the rest is made-up
| nonsense; the inspector is going to be a mechanic that knows
| these cars, not an ignorant clipboard warrior going down a
| ticklist. They'd fail it on the brakes, but starting it is a
| matter of asking or familiarity with the car / model.
|
| And you wouldn't take your oldtimer to any random mechanic,
| you'd take it to a specialist.
| zirgs wrote:
| The inspector actually is a "clipboard warrior" who is
| employed by the state.
| tim333 wrote:
| In the UK cars are exempt from inspection if over 40 years old,
| which was true when we were in the EU. I think it varies by
| country.
|
| Couldn't do stuff like this otherwise
| https://rove.me/to/england/london-to-brighton-veteran-car-ru...
| zirgs wrote:
| Here only cars that were manufactured before 1945 are exempt.
| Cars from the early 1980s don't feel "historic" enough.
| philipwhiuk wrote:
| They still need to be insured and have working brakes.
| delgaudm wrote:
| (2022)
| skot9000 wrote:
| Don't worry buddy, nobody is going to try and steal it. They will
| just back into it with a SUV in every parking lot you dare to
| enter.
| helb wrote:
| Site seems dead, archived link: https://archive.is/yl7z2
| ot1138 wrote:
| I just got the dual webers running on my VW beetle. I'll have to
| try that pedal pumping routine, because it sure as hell won't
| start without at least one pump, even if it's 110 degrees
| outside.
| ashton314 wrote:
| I think there are some Emacs or Vim users who could describe
| their setup just like this. Heck, I'm probably one of them.
|
| "A few things to know before stealing my laptop and/or using my
| editor config."
| globular-toast wrote:
| My whole computer is like this. I use sway/i3. On my home
| computer I don't use a login manager so you have to type "sway"
| to get something graphical. At that point you probably don't
| know the key combos to open a shell, much less a web browser.
| And, yes, I do use emacs...
|
| My girlfriend simply calls my computer "broken".
|
| One time my brother was in my study and I needed to shut down
| my computer. After bashing on the keyboard for ten seconds or
| so he commented "THAT is how you shut down your computer?!" It
| honestly hadn't even occurred to me it might seem weird from
| the outside.
|
| I wouldn't have it any other way, though. Sure it's nice if a
| machine "just works", but machines don't just work. They are
| layers upon layers of complexity and if I have to understand
| them then I might as well interact with those layers directly.
| worksonmine wrote:
| I'm similar, but `startx` to get to GUI, and dwm instead of
| i3/sway. My girlfriend is somewhat used to it, I've added
| some convenience scripts for her in rofi to switch keyboard
| layout and setup the screens. She still asks me to remind her
| how to access her menu though.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Mod1+enter poweroff does not seem particularly arcane.
| KMnO4 wrote:
| > After bashing on the keyboard for ten seconds or so he
| commented "THAT is how you shut down your computer?!"
|
| This is exactly why I love to use my Linux machine. When I
| have a thought, I simply command it to the computer in
| written language and it immediately obeys.
|
| I don't have to figure out where Johnny Ive hid the toggle
| switch in an attempt to make things more minimal. In fact, I
| don't have to figure out where anything is hidden at all
| because everything is right there at my fingertips. I
| shutdown the computer by saying "shutdown". I lock it by
| saying "lock". I open firefox by simply typing "firefox".
| It's a simple system, but I love it.
| MSFT_Edging wrote:
| These posts are really funny because its people like us who
| love contraptions, and people going "wow linux doesn't work
| huh"
|
| yet I typically run weird systems(xmonad, arch) and they're
| infinitely more reliable after the initial couple hours of
| setup than my windows install.
|
| My thinkpad with a 7 year old Antergos install and i3wm "just
| works", but without a hint of irony. Literally the only issue
| with the laptop happens equally in windows and linux, and
| that's the USB ports going to sleep and never waking up until
| reboot.
|
| The big thing about playing around deeper in the system, is
| you can fix it relatively easy. It's like a 90s honda civic
| where you can step into the engine bay vs doing any kind of
| maintenance on a modern audi or bmw. Sure you can see the
| guts but if a bolt loosens on both, which one would you
| rather have to fix?
| cpfohl wrote:
| Strongly disagree here on the "machines don't just work." 99%
| of the machines in my life just work for 99% of the tasks I
| throw at them. I spend an inordinate amount of time
| fixing/working-around the 1%, but directly interacting with
| the lowest layers is a massive waste of my very limited time.
|
| My primary reason for _not_ using Linux for my desktop is
| that when I connect a bluetooth device, headphones, a
| monitor, a keyboard or a mouse, when I want to run a GPU
| intensive application, or when I need to connect to a VPN and
| have my DNS requests correctly routed through the VPN it just
| works on Windows or MacOS.
|
| I don't have the time or energy to work out those issues in a
| community supported environment where half the time the
| community support treats you like a half-witted imbecile for
| needing support and where the environment itself uses a CLI
| tool that my wife or kids can't use to manage the settings.
|
| Ease of Use, Dev Tooling, or Cheap. Pick two. Linux is
| consistently harder to use. With WSL-2 I've found windows
| eases the dev tooling pain that existed a few years ago. A
| Mac is _not_ cheap.
| globular-toast wrote:
| I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. I work with
| Linux which, you admit, does not "just work". Your
| Windows/Mac systems just work because you pay someone to
| make it work for you (you don't skip the latest
| bug/security fixes do you?) That's the same as taking your
| car to the garage. I take my car to the garage too. But
| with Linux, I _am_ the garage.
| stuaxo wrote:
| A few things before using my Linux laptop with amdgraphics...
| If you want to shut the lid, or otherwise use sleep make sure
| it is powered off USB, if it is powered by the battery or the
| barrel jack it will wake up, but the screen won't - be prepared
| to his Alt-PrintScreen REISUB.
|
| Get used to doing that multiple times a day, or it may be time
| to setup USB debugging and try and add some info to the bug
| report at...
| tnecniv wrote:
| I haven't used Linux on an AMD laptop in like 10 years. Is
| that still a bug? That used to drive me crazy.
| post-it wrote:
| It was on my 2015 Intel MacBook Pro when I last used it
| with Linux a couple years ago. I ended up disabling all lid
| triggers and just manually hibernating it when needed.
| quijoteuniv wrote:
| I believe linux 5.x kernel fixed a lot of these, or maybe
| it was something else, definetely something when i moved
| the mac air to ubuntu 20. Sleeps works like a charm.
| nobleach wrote:
| I'm on the latest kernel (Arch btw) and I still have to
| manually "sleep" my Dell XPS 9500. To add insult to
| injury, it's not even "real" S3 sleep. It's Microsoft,
| "we want access to your machine 24/7" S1 sleep.
|
| To be fair, I haven't spent much time in the last year
| messing with any of that. I do miss the days when I could
| shut the lid on my old Thinkpad, it'd sleep, and I'd open
| it a day later to an i3lock screen, and it would have
| only drained a percentage point.
| shiomiru wrote:
| You might want to double check whether the second drive is
| properly connected, or the display manager will refuse to
| start. In this case typing `exit' in the console should still
| let you log in, unless it locks up for some reason. (Then you
| will have to reboot.)
|
| Now that you are logged in, a few things to note:
|
| * The mouse buttons do not work. Pinch the touchpad to click.
|
| * The keyboard layout is a mixture of the US English, Japanese,
| and Teletype 33 keyboards. By the way, its key labels are
| German.
|
| * If you need a modifier key, try sequentially going through
| tab, caps, control, alt, super. Maybe you will find it.
|
| * The only text editor on the computer is nvi. No, that's not
| `nvim'.
|
| * Firefox works, but has scripting disabled, routes everything
| through Tor and clears cookies on exit. Also, each new tab is
| opened in a separate temporary container that routes through a
| different Tor circuit. As an alternative, we have w3m too.
|
| * There is no file browser, just bash in xterm.
|
| Enjoy your new computer!
| eschneider wrote:
| Add ed editor and I think I'd be happy with this config.
| kurtoid wrote:
| Relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1806/
| mock-possum wrote:
| Spot on. "My life is a constant barrage of belligerently
| fielding foolish questions and foolish answers from comically
| ignorant children." I wish I didn't know quite so many guys for
| whom this is their main shtick.
| imgabe wrote:
| I swap Ctrl and Caps Lock on every computer I use and it never
| fails to vex IT when I return it at work.
| pantulis wrote:
| Or the casual colleague asking to take control of my computer
| to quickly help me finish a slide deck. "What is happening to
| this keyboard?"
| marssaxman wrote:
| My keyboard layout is Dvorak; it's always funny when a
| coworker thinks they're going to use my computer for a
| minute.
| worksonmine wrote:
| I was this colleague to my first CTO, was amusing back then
| and I didn't get it. Today I do the same and my pinky loves
| me. I also use a US layout on Scandinavian keyboard, it's
| fun watching people scratch their heads.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| A few things to know before stealing the laptop my work gave me
| that I still keep around on the off chance I need to check
| something on an old, near unusable machine - if there is
| something preventing it from working there is a little hole on
| the bottom of the laptop that you can cause a hard reset and
| restart by sticking a safety pin or toothpick inside.
|
| Good luck with this thing.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| Ah ... and I was thinking about giving linux on my laptop a
| try again. Thanks for a update on current reality.
| dfox wrote:
| This has nothing to do with Linux, but with quality of
| firmware in embedded controllers combined with laptops with
| internal non-removeable battery.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| So ... would I have the same problem with windows then?
|
| (also the parent post was edited by now and the linux
| references I was refering to removed)
| bee_rider wrote:
| They just have quirky hardware, weird configurations, and
| are exaggerating for comedic effect. Lots of laptops work
| totally fine with Linux nowadays.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| Including reliable stand by, hibernation and long battery
| life?
|
| Please link one, I want to buy it.
| bee_rider wrote:
| I've got a Zenbook flip 13 OLED. I don't worry about any
| of that suspend/hibernate stuff. It turns off the screen
| and, I'm pretty sure, the wireless interface when I close
| the lid. I think this is mostly Ubuntu default behavior,
| although I did some customization when I first got it.
|
| Sitting idle, I get an estimate of ~12 hours of battery
| left right now (starting with 80%). This is why I don't
| worry about hibernate; idle power consumption is low
| enough on modern hardware.
|
| When I actually start working, it depends on what I'm
| doing; actively using wifi seems to bring me down to more
| like 5 hours remaining. I'm sure I could burn through the
| battery by cranking up the CPU, but the, it isn't like
| Windows will somehow make the CPU consume less power in
| C0.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| When I am travelling, I have limited charging
| capabilities and want to continue working wherever I left
| - even if I did not open the laptop for 2 days. That only
| leaves hibernation. I had a linux laptop that could do
| that reliable, but for whatever reasons, the newer models
| of different brands I tried always had hickups and this
| is unaccaptable for me. I want to work with my laptop,
| not work on my laptop.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Suspend seemed to work out-of-the-box. I'm not sure how
| long the battery would last in suspend; the 12 hours
| estimate was with the screen on and wifi on, just not
| actively in use.
|
| I just set up hibernate; since I don't care about
| hibernate, I didn't set up my swap partition large
| enough. Using a swapfile instead is slightly trickier but
| still pretty trivial. The steps listed here worked fine:
| https://askubuntu.com/a/1367244
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| I don't think I had any linux references - the parent to
| mine had emacs and vim maybe that's what you were
| thinking of - at any rate being a crappy work computer it
| of course runs Windows. It's a Lenovo.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| Then I misread somehow ..
| zdw wrote:
| I run an ergodox split keyboard and a thumb trackball.
|
| Half the Keys have no labels, unless it's the one with the
| clear caps, which has no labels at all.
|
| Right shift is mapped to Escape (for vim, of course)
|
| There is no Caps-lock, only Control.
|
| Nobody messes with my stuff. :)
| HKH2 wrote:
| Somehow vertical mice are also good for keeping people away.
| astrospective wrote:
| Same, few more labels and a more stock mapping but I've seen
| people give up after seconds of attempting it.
| [deleted]
| helf wrote:
| [dead]
| seventhson wrote:
| Switch to a Dvorak layout (with blank keycaps!) and you will
| have all the bases covered.
| sterlind wrote:
| My old team used to buy donuts on computers that were left
| unattended and logged in, as a game to get people to lock
| their screens. Dvorak alone saved me a couple of times!
| __mharrison__ wrote:
| (Cool. I've moved on from ergodox to lily58 and have a cst
| trackball.)
|
| This last weekend I pulled out my 12 year old Thinkpad
| running custom qtile window manager to transfer old DV movies
| to mp4s. Sadly my muscle memory was mostly gone and I had to
| revert to gnome... (Hanging my head in shame.)
| zoky wrote:
| I'm shining a laser pointer into a fiber cable to write
| this comment, come at me
| etothet wrote:
| I wonder how many car thieves would be stopped by a manual
| transmissiom nowadays!
| NotYourLawyer wrote:
| My friend had a car that would have needed a guide like this to
| steal. At one point someone jammed the wrong key into the
| ignition and messed up the mechanism. He ended up bypassing that
| and wiring a pushbutton switch into the circuit instead to power
| the starter motor.
| specialp wrote:
| [1] Reminds me of this video where a guy humorously simulates
| someone coming in to steal his military "Deuce and a half" 6x6.
| These things have no locks on them because the military doesn't
| want people to be locked out. But getting one moving is not
| easy...
|
| 1 https://youtu.be/57gBrGfboMM?t=208
| scrame wrote:
| did someone steal his car or is he just going on about his hobby?
|
| I thought car thiefs were going for kias and camrys.
| theandrewbailey wrote:
| Yes:
|
| > The last guy who stole my 914 used this very spot and it was
| rather convenient for all concerned parties.
| tycho-newman wrote:
| If you hate your 914 so much, just give it to me. I'll fix the
| windows at least.
| User23 wrote:
| It's just a tickle at the back of the article, but for anyone who
| wants a first sportscar that is fairly affordable and rewarding
| to drive an older Miata is a wonderful starter vehicle.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| I'd love to have a cheap sporty car, the Miata is great, but
| I'd add the MX-5 as well. It doesn't even have to be that fast
| or anything.
| cbartlett wrote:
| The MX-5 and the Miata are just different names for the same
| car. Miata is used in America, whilst MX-5 is used in most
| other countries.
| mauvehaus wrote:
| I may be missing something here, but isn't the Miata the MX-5
| in some parts of the world and vice-versa?
| linsomniac wrote:
| I could swear I read this a decade or three ago... But every link
| I find in google seems to be 2022.
| tristor wrote:
| I remembered the same. I am pretty sure this was originally an
| article in either Motor Trend or Car and Driver which was
| posted on their website.
| linsomniac wrote:
| That sounds about right from my memory.
| pengaru wrote:
| > you will only find Reverse waiting there to mock you with a
| shriek of high-speed gear teeth machining themselves into round
| cylinders
|
| Am I alone in twitching at this fallacy?
|
| These have constant-mesh gearboxes. You're grinding castellated
| faces AKA dogs/dog-teeth/dog-clutches [0], not the gear teeth.
|
| If you're going to write something in such a condescending
| smarty-pants tone, at least be freaking accurate.
|
| [0]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_mesh_gearbox#Dog_clut...
| blastro wrote:
| Obligatory 914 comment:
|
| In high school, my friends and I managed to resuscitate a 914
| that had been stowed away in a garage for over a decade. We towed
| it to the top of a hill with a pickup truck and attempted a
| clutch start after we'd picked up some speed. None of us
| (especially me in the driver's seat) expected this to work, but
| amazingly it fired right up. One of my friends managed to jog
| alongside and jump into the car as I tried to keep it puttering
| along, and we ripped a few laps around the neighborhood.
| Soonafter, we stopped the engine and were never able to get it
| started again. Thanks for bringing up this memory. Cool article.
| WillAdams wrote:
| When I was much younger, I had a '76 MGB, which I only gassed
| up at a certain local gas station --- because the pumps
| overlooked a slope which was just tall/steep enough to start it
| thus if the starter wasn't cooperative --- it was all good
| except for the one time I didn't notice once of my shoe laces
| was untied. Exciting times.
| selimthegrim wrote:
| We're on tenterhooks, what happened when you noticed the
| shoelace?
| WillAdams wrote:
| I tripped, almost lost my grip on the door, was dragged
| along for a few feet, managed to haul myself up, and
| eventually jump into my seat and managed to push the clutch
| in, drop it into gear, and release the clutch, and it was
| purring like a kitten at the bottom of the hill.
| parpfish wrote:
| i'm disappointed by the amount of concern trolling in the replies
| here. i'm not sure whether it's people can't tell that this is
| humorous/exaggerated or that they are just dismissive of people
| with hobbies/interests different from their own.
| palijer wrote:
| The tone of this article is always a bit off to me and I can
| never figure it out. This seems like some sort of bragging,
| boasting and I don't understand why that is appropriate. I'm not
| a car person, I don't have the same draw to then as a lot of
| folks, I've lived in Toronto for the past decade and don't know
| anyone who owns a car...
|
| With that said, I'm trying to understand why this article isn't
| met with a response like "it is extremely unethical to operate a
| vehicle in this condition. The drastically increased cognitive
| load, poor stopping performance, and lack of modern safety
| features makes this vehicle a lot more likely to hurt strangers
| when you hit them"
|
| I never understood old car culture, let alone old and broken car
| culture displayed here. Surely a vehicle operator would have
| reduced response time with the increased cognitive load to any
| divergent situation and be placing other's lives at risk by not
| having their equipment maintained to an expected performance
| standard.
|
| Not to mention the lack of braking, and lack of things like
| crumple zones etc, plus feeling light headed from engine fumes
| and poor ventilation.
|
| I understand being into old technology, I've been involved in
| restoring old tape machines and vinyl cutting lathes, broadcast
| audio consoles etc, but I don't understand ignoring the fact that
| you are exposing unconsenting members of the public to an
| increased risk of injury or death because of your interest in old
| technology. I don't understand accepting the freedom of that
| choice when it exposes unconsenting others to more risk just for
| your own personal interest.
|
| I can't help but harshly judge the author for their reckless
| decisions because the car isn't restricted to a closed course and
| can severely impact others lives simply because they enjoy the
| thrill of it.
| inconceivable wrote:
| i'm a car guy and i also think it's dumb. he should fix his
| car.
| technothrasher wrote:
| If you're on old car guy, you'll know he's purposely
| exaggerating for effect and pulling many issues across the
| car's time and placing them all together. Many of us have
| faced the issues he's describing at different times with
| older cars and so we can relate and nod our heads. The fact
| that he's a professor of automotive engineering, and has
| pictures of the drivetrain out of the car and a welder in
| hand doing bodywork shows that he doesn't actually drive a
| neglected 914 like a foolish teenager.
|
| I've bought many an abused old car, including a 951 a couple
| years ago that had many similar issues. So I know what he's
| talking about. That doesn't mean I didn't fix the car and
| have it running smoothly now.
| inconceivable wrote:
| i'm old enough to need GI exams, and yeah cool flex, i
| understood that reference, i'm also a watercooled porsche
| guy, except this nostalgia about broken cars is not
| something i participate in. never have, never will. i don't
| get wishy washy over when i was so broke i couldn't fix
| everything (cars, house, computers, etc.) as soon as they
| developed issues. those weren't the good old days. the good
| old days were when i first started making enough money to
| make sure all of the stuff i owned was always in excellent
| condition and not a danger to myself and everyone else.
| darkclouds wrote:
| > "it is extremely unethical to operate a vehicle in this
| condition.
|
| Maybe you have point, but its not quite sharp enough, because
| condition is but part of the problem. You see here in the UK we
| something called MOT tests which vehicles have to pass every
| year once a vehicle reaches its 3rd or 4th year.
|
| A minimum standard of braking force has to be achieved by each
| wheel, irrespective of road conditions or whether the vehicle
| has ABS to avoid it skidding, increasing the odds of an out of
| control crash. Sure the minimum braking force is a blunt
| instrument, but its a starting point before we get into the
| finer peculiarities of how to stop a vehicle in different
| situations, like on ice, something I understand Canada has
| plenty off!
|
| So are you telling me, that all the combined wit and intellect
| of the Canadian govt and people results in a failure to have a
| mandated annual road worthiness tests for the vehicles on their
| road?
|
| And then when you go on about the lack of crumple zones,
| braking performance and fume emissions, maybe you have a point
| here, but then we only have to look at the logging equipment to
| fell the Canadian forests are hardly helping the greenhouse gas
| problem of the planet.
|
| Crumple zones, do Canadians wrap their buildings and street
| furniture with pillows to ensure they have crumple zones for
| cyclists, or is this just stealth victimisation of someone who
| cant afford the more popular 911 let alone retromod it like a
| million dollar 964 Singer Porsche?
|
| I dont understand accepting the freedom of the choice of people
| like you when it exposes unconsenting others to more half baked
| ideas and illegitimate govts for their own dislike of an
| internet article.
|
| I will still commend you on your dadaism, but sadly I fear I
| might just be able to out dada even more prominent adherents to
| the movement like salvador dali himself or the majority of the
| LLM AI's on display today.
| scrlk wrote:
| FWIW, the author's 914 would be exempt from the MOT
| requirement, as it's over 40 years old (and assuming that no
| "substantial changes" have been made in the last 30 years).
|
| https://www.gov.uk/historic-vehicles
| Symbiote wrote:
| You still need to keep the car roadworthy (next page from
| your link), and this car would fail two of the main three
| points.
|
| I only checked one historic vehicle insurance provider, but
| it's also a condition for insurance.
| strogonoff wrote:
| Tech we use is us (see: EMT and embodied cognition), and so we
| care about it like we care about ourselves. Phone is our memory
| and communicative capabilities, bicycle or car is our feet, and
| both are visible to other people.
|
| Car culture will be a problem for as long as cities are built
| for them and people feel the need to regularly morph into car-
| persons (plus a couple of generations after), because a car is
| literally part of its driver.
|
| Good public transport and getting rid of private cars in the
| midst of us will help, but it will be a slow road to get there,
| especially in countries that place premium on freedom of
| movement (they don't want to be beholden to government-run
| public transit in case government goes rogue).
|
| Meanwhile cities will continue to intersperse walkable areas
| with private vehicle accessible roads. Proximity of private
| cars to people means people are always in danger, and the
| desire to show off, like others show off nice attire or haircut
| and geeks show off custom mechanical keyboards (as well as to
| satisfy own childhood examples, if parents drive) by driving
| expensive or weird cars sadly increases bad outcomes (because
| such cars are generally fast, large, or broken).
|
| That all said, the guide to stealing Porsche 914 was an
| entertaining read.
| spookie wrote:
| > Good public transport and getting rid of private cars in
| the midst of us will help, but it will be a slow road to get
| there, especially in countries that place premium on freedom
| of movement (they don't want to be beholden to government-run
| public transit in case government goes rogue).
|
| Honestly, I don't think cars are going anywhere. Granted, I
| understand your sentiment if we're talking about the city.
|
| I live in a rural area, in Europe. Its mountainous, and
| generally only a 4x4 works when going somewhere close to the
| rivers. Even more so for people with olive trees or vineyards
| doing agricultural work. And that's ok, but these people also
| need to be able to go back to the city/town, where they live.
|
| Hell, I need to use a donkey to get to some places :)
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| > ... by driving expensive or weird cars sadly increases bad
| outcomes
|
| Just saying: of all the brands in the US the one that has the
| least average accident by brand ownership is... Porsche.
|
| At this point, seen the sheer car hate all around, I don't
| drive a Porsche because I care about what other people think.
| I drive a Porsche because I don't give a fuck what they think
| (and I know they wrongly think it's a car creating lots of
| accidents, when it's actually the brand driven by the safest
| drivers out there).
| strogonoff wrote:
| It's true that a driver who cares about their car may be
| using it better and safer, consistent with my argument
| above, so perhaps I am incorrect, who knows. (Although I
| believe larger SUVs and trucks are more deadly if they run
| into people.)
|
| On the other hand, I know for a fact that there is so much
| more noise specifically from showoff cars (and motorcycles,
| but mostly cars). Not all showoff cars do it, but almost
| all cars that do it are showoff cars. Not sure about their
| brands, because I just hear the noise which you can't
| really escape from. As someone sound-sensitive, this caused
| me countless anxiety waves, which I reckon is consequential
| for health.
|
| Also, I have seen many examples where drivers of more
| expensive cars force pedestrians (and other drivers) to
| yield, bending rules in ambiguous situations, but I am not
| prepared to say whether I have perceptual bias on this (and
| in which direction).
| kortilla wrote:
| Perhaps your reactionary pearl clutching is severely misplaced.
| The author didn't say he drove it anywhere busy or that he
| really drove it much at all.
|
| I can't help but judge you harshly for actually thinking the
| author is careening down a street at any speed with the windows
| up "light headed on fumes".
| globular-toast wrote:
| I'd much rather have enthusiasts with a strong mechanical
| sympathy driving clapped out 60 year old sports cars than angry
| idiots in SUVs with twice the weight and power and controls
| that feel like a video game.
|
| As for the pride aspect, it's cool to be able to understand how
| a vehicle works from top to bottom. You can't do that with
| modern cars. You certainly can't use your knowledge to coax a
| modern car into working in the same way. The author truly owns
| and is the master of his vehicle. Could you say the same for
| any of your machines?
| throwawaaarrgh wrote:
| I could argue that stupid people are a larger danger to society
| than this old car, and harshly judge anyone who doesn't support
| eugenics. But it turns out that having an extreme opinion
| backed by a meager rationale with no evidence isn't a great way
| to go through life.
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| I really hate this condescending tone, but taking your comment
| at face value, I have one very serious rebuttal:
|
| I've driven brand new cars, and this exact same car. It is
| quite easy for one's attention to wander in a "perfect" car.
|
| An old car requires one to _pay attention to their driving_.
|
| imo it's all been downhill since the advent of power steering.
| andrewaylett wrote:
| Just because a thief would find themselves driving the car on
| public roads in the state described doesn't mean that the owner
| would actually do the same.
|
| It's amusing that the car is lacking in security features, but
| that doesn't make it easy to steal. It's funny that it's hard
| enough to drive that a previous thief gave up and (essentially)
| gave it back.
|
| The biggest hint is in a caption: "I'll make sure the
| drivetrain is in the car, by the way." He's obviously working
| on the car to try to make it better, and there's _no way_ he 's
| _actually_ going to put the drivetrain back in the car just in
| case someone wants to try stealing it.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| I don't understand why you (and others in these comments) are
| so judgmental; it's an old-timer, it's a hobby.
|
| Nobody has these replies when it comes to older computers,
| electronics or software. I mean the equivalent in more usual HN
| posts is how to exit vim or do anything in emacs, but people
| get super excited about it even though the software is as old
| and complicated to use as this car is.
|
| Let people have and enjoy things.
| namdnay wrote:
| I don't think anyone would mind if the vehicle was being
| driven on private roads
| messe wrote:
| > Nobody has these replies when it comes to older computers,
| electronics or software
|
| Because they're not putting others in danger when used?
| detourdog wrote:
| many have the replies with new self driving cars. Public
| roadway vs. private basement activities.
|
| I grew up in a family of car enthusiasts and basically I
| lost interest in driving them once kids arrived. I still
| love the machinery and Donald Healy's 100-4 is my all time
| favorite vehicle and designer.
|
| The rawness of early development and the intuitive bonds of
| the machine is very similar to 8 bit computing. The whole
| thing is Knowable.
|
| My 78 year old uncle still races 49 MG TC he took a 50 year
| break after High school. He loves old car problems.
| technothrasher wrote:
| > Donald Healy's 100-4
|
| Ack! You call yourself a British car fan and you misspell
| Healey? May Lucas, the Prince of Darkness, haunt you. ;)
| detourdog wrote:
| There are drivers and there are spellers. Was I wrong
| about the 100-4 or 100-s?
| dotancohen wrote:
| > Not to mention the lack of braking, and lack of things like
| crumple > zones etc, plus feeling light headed from
| engine fumes and poor ventilation.
|
| Actually, the 914 did have crumble zones. The car was very
| advanced for its time, with a mid-engine layout and even fuel
| injection in the late 1960s. I won't excuse the author's
| refusal to fix his brakes, windows, rust holes, or clutch
| linkage, but the car itself could be brought to a relatively
| safe standard for cars of that period.
| dreamcompiler wrote:
| This particular car does not have fuel injection. The author
| talks about "dual Webers."
| dotancohen wrote:
| No, only the four cylinder models did, but the point being
| was that the technology in the VwPorche was very advanced
| for its day and general criticisms of typical cars of the
| period (no crumple zones) do not apply.
| jmkd wrote:
| The tone of the article is wry, such things are worth tuning in
| to.
| mock-possum wrote:
| Yeah no I'm with you, the attitude is offputting.
| mistercheph wrote:
| Don't conceal your hatred behind a mask of a desire to
| understand something novel, you just don't like it. Consider
| being more open to viewpoints that differ from yours, instead
| of setting up ad-hoc verbal jousting games that make actual
| communication impossible like, "Oh my, I simply do not
| understand why somebody would want do such a thing!". Imagine
| if someone said that to you about something you liked, would
| you make a sincere attempt to explain why someone might do such
| a thing?
|
| In my own foolishness, I will say something sincere to your
| insincerity. Risk-aversion varies wildly among people, and
| everything you choose to do exposes unconsenting members of the
| public to risks that could have been avoided. For example,
| getting in an 8000-lb NPC mobile that is designed to numb you
| from the outside world with 25" touchscreen infotainment
| centers might (in some ways) be more hazardous to the health of
| pedestrians and other vehicles that a 2000-lb car that was
| designed, engineered, and is now driven for the sole purpose of
| engagement between driver, machine, and road.
|
| And with respect to the matter of maintenance, the only cars of
| vintage that are in perfect condition are those that are never
| driven. These machines are incredibly complex, and as they age,
| they take on many problems that have varying degrees of
| seriousness, any owner that can afford to will take reasonable
| steps to bring the car into a drivable state, but there are
| many quirks, odds, and ends of operation that the machine will
| exhibit that are either too mysterious at present or too
| expensive to fix, and so the operator does exactly what any
| rational person faced with using a legacy system that is
| complex and undocumented, they make an attempt at patching the
| problem imperfectly and dealing with some technical debt in the
| future instead of rewriting from scratch today.
| palijer wrote:
| I'm not concealing my hatred of this, sorry if I somehow gave
| that impression. Let me say this clearly then;
|
| I hate when people make selfish and reckless decisions that
| can severely impact the lives of others without their
| consent. It's unfair and should not be allowed, and I think
| they should be judged harshly for it.
|
| I always try to maintain an open mind however, so stating
| that I don't understand the appeal of making such decisions
| isn't some game I'm playing. I legitimately don't understand
| the appeal and am open to hearing arguments for those
| decisions.
| mistercheph wrote:
| I have mentioned some of the reasons in an edit to my above
| reply, but to partially restate: All actions have
| unintended consequences on unconsenting passersby. To some,
| it is inconceivable to, if it can be avoided, get behind
| the wheel of an automobile when doing so actively increases
| the danger and probability of collision and injury. You are
| blind if you do not see this in your own life, or if you
| fail to see that the privileged life that you do enjoy is
| only possible because of the tragic conditions of life and
| strenuous labor that the rest of the world endures for your
| pleasure.
|
| Owners of older cars work hard or spend a great deal of
| money to maintain their vehicles in good operating
| condition, but the machines have quirks, some of which are
| impossible or not worth solving. That does not make them
| unsafe. That does not make them oblivious endangerers of
| the unconsenting co-users of the roadway. You have one
| notion of what it means to be a safe driver, others have
| different ones. Should people be allowed to drive 5000lb
| luxury barges, an unregulated and unpermissioned doubling
| of the amount of force at play in any collision that has
| been forced upon pedestrians and cyclists and drivers by
| motorists' unquenchable thirst for increasingly sedate,
| massive, and insulated driving experiences, where
| visibility is almost 0, and drivers are completely
| dependent on the onboard sensors and warning lights to
| indicate to them whether or not switching lanes will end
| someone else's life
| kortilla wrote:
| You're talking past the conclusion because your own hatred
| is making you blind to your own assumptions.
|
| List specifically what you think the driver of this car
| does with this car that is more dangerous than a typical
| driver distracted by a cell phone, or even an Uber driver
| staring at the app instead of the road.
|
| Your false premise is that the author is doing anything at
| all here that is more dangerous than "drive a modern SUV in
| a normal way".
| ryandrake wrote:
| With a car as tiny as the 914, the risk is nearly entirely
| shouldered by the driver and his (presumably consenting)
| passengers. I had a 944 Turbo for a long time that had a
| number of similar... let's say eccentricities. Those unique
| qualities did not make it a danger to anyone else on the
| road--quite the opposite. When you sit in a car that old
| and bring it up just to highway speeds, it is abundantly
| clear that you are taking your life into your own hands.
|
| Think about people who ride motorcycles, or small single-
| engine airplanes, or skydive. These are risky hobbies, and
| there usually isn't a practical reason for doing them. If
| something goes wrong, yes, passersby can potentially be
| harmed. Should we judge them harshly for these hobbies?
| philipwhiuk wrote:
| Only in America is a 914 considered small.
| yipbub wrote:
| > Norman Garrett was the Concept Engineer for the original
| Miata back in his days at Mazda's Southern California
| Design Studio. He currently teaches automotive engineering
| classes at UNC-C's Motorsports Engineering Department in
| Charlotte, North Carolina and curates his small collection
| of dysfunctional automobiles and motorcycles.
|
| He probably knows a thing or two about car safety and risk.
| All the issues he described are around starting the thin
| and parking.. It probably drives safely.
| dragonmost wrote:
| Much like going 5 or 10 over speed limit, it's a risk he's
| willing to make. I much prefer someone driving a sketchy
| car because he's having fun than someone who doesn't really
| know how to drive safely in a modern SUV. Turns out they
| both are dangerous but one of them is aware of the dangers
| and how to mitigate them.
| chrisfosterelli wrote:
| This is a false dichotomy. The commenter above would
| probably also prefer to not have someone who doesn't know
| how to safely operate their modern SUV on the road either
| (and would similarly suggest it's not a thing to brag
| about).
| dragonmost wrote:
| My point is this car is not much more dangerous than a
| lot of regular drivers out there. Can't speak for
| everywhere obviously but in my area some age groups
| didn't have to go to any class to get there licence (and
| not just old people here). We don't all need to be race
| car pilots but some behaviors I see regularly should not
| be acceptable on the road. That machine is not something
| I would be concern about.
| lelanthran wrote:
| Your just projecting your own narrative on this situation.
|
| After all, percentage wise, sports cars kill fewer people
| than any other category of car, so this reckless decision
| is a lot less reckless than you think it is.
| Tronno wrote:
| > Imagine if someone said that to you about something you
| liked, would you make a sincere attempt to explain why
| someone might do such a thing?
|
| "I like my hobby because X, Y, and Z. It poses no danger to
| anyone".
|
| Seems a bit rude to accuse OP of concealing anything. The
| owner of the Porsche is proud of the shoddy state of his
| vehicle, and this rubs him the wrong way. It's not hard to
| see why.
|
| Car culture forces us into daily contact with folks who are
| also proud of their vehicles, and their blinding lights,
| their lifted suspension, protruding rims, tinted windows,
| overpowered engines, etc. I am reminded of this vehicle [0]
| and its owner. Running "beaters" is one facet of that same
| culture.
|
| It's a very public hobby, which puts the public at real risk.
| That makes it fair game for criticism.
|
| [0] https://www.motor1.com/news/597254/1300-hp-mercury-comet-
| bra...
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| No parking brake is the one that gets me. How do you do a hill
| start? I guess you need to use the actual brake, clutch and
| accelerator at the same time?
|
| How hard to fix the gearbox and retrofit a choke too?
| dharmab wrote:
| I have a modern-ish manual (Acura RSX) and never need the
| parking brake on a hill. Left foot on clutch, right toe on
| brake, release brake, add gas and clutch together, roll up.
| kortilla wrote:
| Using a parking brake to hill start is not the right way to
| do it anyway. You can push more than one pedal with one foot.
| dharmab wrote:
| Whoever downvoted you have never heard of heel toe
| dontlaugh wrote:
| Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's a good idea.
| The hand brake method is much harder to get wrong, hence
| why it's what drivers get taught.
| sokoloff wrote:
| That's how it's taught _initially_ , but everyone I know
| who drives a manual thinks of it as a crutch to be
| discarded as soon as you learn how to drive it.
|
| Same way we stop crawling as soon as we learn how to
| actually walk.
| dontlaugh wrote:
| Almost everyone drives a manual car, except for a few
| countries. The vast majority of hill starts I've
| witnessed as a passenger have been with the handbrake.
| technothrasher wrote:
| We're probably talking the difference here between
| enthusiasts and non-enthusiast drivers. I learned stick
| so I could drive sports cars, and I've never felt the
| need for the handbrake for hill starts because I can just
| heel/toe. But my wife who knows how to drive stick but
| only learned because that's what her family had when she
| learned to drive and doesn't really care about it, always
| uses the handbrake.
| dontlaugh wrote:
| Right, the latter represents the vast majority of drivers
| on earth. Handbrake hill starts are the better default.
| balfirevic wrote:
| I've been driving manual for 20 years and never heard of
| hand brake method being considered a crutch. Although I
| use it only on the steepest hills, I can usually time the
| clutch/brake/gas pedal to not need it.
|
| I also don't use heel-toe - don't know what I'd use that
| for. I only heard about it on the internet several years
| ago.
| sokoloff wrote:
| Most people use the parking brake for hill starts only for
| the first couple hours of learning to drive manual. Once you
| know how to do it, you don't need it (especially with modern
| engine management which makes the car less prone to stalling
| than old carbs, but even on old carbs, it's relatively easy).
| fragmede wrote:
| When pointed uphill, lift your foot off the brake and gas it
| while at the same time working the clutch. If you're precise
| with the clutch, you'll move forwards without sliding
| backwards too much. If you're not, you'll fall backwards,
| into the car behind you. If you're not very skilled with the
| clutch, you can cheat and use the handbrake, but you'll get
| judged for that.
| avhon1 wrote:
| I have a manual-transmission sports coupe (1988 Ford
| Thunderbird) and the parking brake is useless for hill
| starts. It's a ratcheting pedal to the left of the clutch
| pedal. Releasing the parking brake requires leaning forward
| and pulling a release lever on the left side of the foot
| well. I do hill starts by taking my foot off the brake and
| pressing the gas , and balancing on the clutch.
| dotancohen wrote:
| '88 TurboCoupe? I put a 351W from a '69 Mustang into one
| once. I loved that car!
|
| Next oil change, throw in an extra drop and tell the car I
| said hi!
| SilverBirch wrote:
| This logic is always funny. Fun fact: Motorcycles don't have
| a reverse gear, and lots of motorcycles are extremely heavy.
| So if you end up facing down hill and something is blocking
| your way? You're stuffed. You can't even get off and walk
| away because the bike is liable to roll forward off it's
| stand.
|
| Do you know how motorcycles solve this problem? Don't do it!
| Just don't get into that situation. How do you do a hill
| start? You don't. If you're really forced, you can try, it'll
| be difficult but often it's just easier to avoid the
| situation.
| blutack wrote:
| Just in case this puts anyone off motorcycles:
|
| - Uphill starts are easy compared to a manual car as you
| operate the rear brake and accelerator using different
| parts of the body
|
| - Stopping facing down a slope requires the use of the
| brakes and a supporting foot, same as a bicycle
|
| - Getting off a bike facing down a slope typically is done
| by leaving it in gear which keeps the back wheel locked
|
| - OP is correct that some forethought is required on very
| steep or highly cambered surfaces when leaving a bike to
| ensure it is stable on the side stand
| sgarland wrote:
| You get good at very rapidly transitioning state, or heel and
| toeing. Both are useful skills.
| detourdog wrote:
| I have driven manual until mu EV and I don't understand the
| hill start problem/question.
|
| leave it in gear and it might not roll turn wheels so it
| wedges against the curb.
|
| The rest can be done with footwork a d sensitivity. My
| uncle always wanted the emergency brake working for when
| the brakes would fail.
|
| That was driving until the mid to late 70's.
| fragmede wrote:
| Hillstart problem is when you're pointed uphill, stopped,
| and need to start going. Without the handbrake, the car
| will fall backwards when you lift off the brake. So
| you'll need to be good at working the clutch, or use your
| heel and toe on the gas and brake at the same time, or
| risk going backwards into the car behind you.
| UncleEntity wrote:
| > How do you do a hill start?
|
| I never use the parking break for hill starts and I've been
| driving manuals since I got my license in the 1989. Not that
| I particularly want to but whenever I'm looking for a car
| that's all I can seem to find in my price range.
|
| Back in the day I used to have to parallel park my old Bug on
| a hill and the parking brake didn't even work -- it's just
| something you get good at after a few times.
|
| Though... my current car does have a "hill assist" mode that
| automatically applies the brake on hills to help out which is
| kind of nice.
| duck wrote:
| Most trucks don't have a parking break that is useful for
| hill starts either (i.e. it is another peddle), so yeah, you
| just get good at heel-toe.
| speed_spread wrote:
| Admittedly, their is some masochism there, maybe due to some
| unresolved childhood trauma.
|
| But it's also about taking something that once had good value
| but is now old and decrepit and deciding to live with it as it
| is for what's left of it. The challenge is not fixing it but
| rather changing ones perception, expectations and behaviours
| around it, making it a proxy for the real world and also for
| your own body which will let you down eventually. You could
| call it a form of stoicism?
|
| It's about a car but it could be about a blender or software
| with which you have a love/hate relationship and yet decided to
| keep using as a test of your own emotional, physical and mental
| resilience.
| lelanthran wrote:
| You're being unnecessarily judgemental.
|
| The things you do for fun almost certainly has an externality
| as well.
|
| I feel that, these days, it isalmost fashionable to be anticar
| to a ludicrous degree.
| yodelshady wrote:
| Unfortunately, the internet hasn't rewarded nuanced argument
| very well.
| xcxcx wrote:
| TBH I blame Toronto
| RC_ITR wrote:
| > The things you do for fun almost certainly has an
| externality as well.
|
| About 45k people died in car accidents in the US in 2022,
| which if treated as it's own category outside of accidents
| would be just outside the top 10 in causes of death. 2x more
| death than firearms.
|
| Lots of things have externalities, very few things have as
| severe externalities as cars.
|
| Said differently, go to a sporting event of 30k people.
| Statistically, five of them will die in a car accident this
| year (45k/300mn =0.015% or about 1 in 6500).
|
| Edit: I guess it's not fashionable to cite statistics on
| here. I get it, the drivers won the debate a long time ago,
| but at least articulate why your disagreement with words.
| ot1138 wrote:
| [flagged]
| darkclouds wrote:
| [flagged]
| kortilla wrote:
| It's not fashionable to cite irrelevant statistics. How
| many of those car crashes you cited were due to 60 year old
| cars?
| graton wrote:
| Probably most people have about a 1 in 80 chance of dying
| each year on average over the course of their life.
|
| The US death rate is 1.04% per year. So in that sporting
| event example, statistically 313 of them will die within a
| year's time.
|
| Also if the sporting event was today then only around 2.5
| people would die in a car accident "this year" as currently
| we are already in July ;)
|
| Anyway that is my bunch of nonsense statistics :)
| RC_ITR wrote:
| >The US death rate is 1.04% per year. So in that sporting
| event example, statistically 313 of them will die within
| a year's time.
|
| Yeah but only _some_ of those deaths are randomly
| distributed across the population and not correlated with
| age. Car accidents being a major example of that (unless
| there 's a bunch of 70+ year olds at Yankees games that
| I'm not seeing).
| graton wrote:
| Could also say the same thing about car accidents. The
| death rates for car accidents is different based on
| gender. What is the gender ratio at those Yankees games?
| :)
|
| I'm willing to hand-wave over a lot of this stuff as
| otherwise it gets way too overcome with pedantry which
| likely doesn't matter...
| thworp wrote:
| I half agree with you, but if we're only talking about
| death and accident prevention it would be worth it to look
| at other highly developed countries that have much lower
| accident rates (there are quite a few that have much lower
| numbers, both per capita and per mile).
|
| Of course, copying these countries will take time,
| especially because half the problem is the terrible drivers
| education and lax enforcement which precludes quite a few
| measures.
|
| Things that could be done right now are:
|
| * designing roads to calm traffic (bends and such): highly
| effective at reducing pedestrian/cyclist accidents
|
| * building proper separated bike paths
|
| * mandatory inspections in all states. a non-negligible %
| of accidents are caused by defective vehicles
|
| * mandating and actually enforcing minimum following
| distance on highways
|
| * banning modifications like steel plate grills (basically
| a human-crushing ram)
|
| * scrapping the entire tax and regulation scheme that lead
| to the size wars in trucks and SUVs
|
| Then there are things like replacing more STOP signs with
| YIELD, roundabouts, giving bike paths green lights together
| with turning traffic (requires drivers to look in their
| blindspot and yield) and lane discipline. Those broadly
| reduce frustration and fatigue which helps people stay
| calm.
| RC_ITR wrote:
| > half agree with you, but if we're only talking about
| death and accident prevention it would be worth it to
| look at other highly developed countries that have much
| lower accident rates (there are quite a few that have
| much lower numbers, both per capita and per mile).
|
| We live in an interesting time where it's an instinct to
| say 'Sure 45k people die each year from this, but how
| does that _benchmark_? '
|
| Even if Germany had a 40x higher/lower rate than the US,
| why does it matter when people are still needlessly
| dying?
| thworp wrote:
| First, I meant that as a suggestion to look at comparable
| countries and look at what they're doing because it has
| been proven it will work. That is as opposed to different
| measure which _might_ work but have side effects.
|
| That leads me to the heart of your comment. Sure you
| could institute some kind of dystopian dictatorship that
| makes sure nobody dies of the causes we deem preventable
| now. But it would be a cure that kills the patient (free
| society).
|
| So, there are always trade offs. What I was saying is
| that looking at other countries and what they've done you
| can see the trade offs in advance and decide if they're
| worth it.
| lelanthran wrote:
| > About 45k people died in car accidents in the US in 2022,
| which if treated as it's own category outside of accidents
| would be just outside the top 10 in causes of death. 2x
| more death than firearms.
|
| > Lots of things have externalities, very few things have
| as severe externalities as cars.
|
| > Said differently, go to a sporting event of 30k people.
| Statistically, five of them will die in a car accident this
| year (45k/300mn =0.015% or about 1 in 6500).
|
| > Edit: I guess it's not fashionable to cite statistics on
| here. I get it, the drivers won the debate a long time ago,
| but at least articulate why your disagreement with words.
|
| You're being downvoted because you are attempting to
| mislead with statistics.
|
| The numbers for 2017 (prior to the pandemic, which skews
| the numbers) are from
| https://www.healthline.com/health/leading-causes-of-
| death#he.... They don't separate out vehicle accidents, so
| I'll use your 45k number.
|
| 1. _The_ leading cause of deaths is heart disease, more
| common amongst people who smoke (very few) and obese people
| (very many) = 635k people, or about _14x more people die
| due to heart disease than motor vehicle accidents_.
|
| 2. Accidental deaths = 161k. IOW, you're 3.5x more likely
| to die from a non-vehicle accident than from a vehicle
| accident.
|
| You know which type of deaths match the numbers for auto
| accidents? Suicides!
|
| All-in-all, that 45k number you give is _almost_
| statistical noise: vehicles account for a mere 1.8% of
| deaths in the US.
| RC_ITR wrote:
| >You're being downvoted because you are attempting to
| mislead with statistics.
|
| How?[0]
|
| Your implication is that 100% of deaths are preventable
| and the 2% of those deaths that are car accidents are
| therefore unimportant? It's inherently misleading to look
| at deaths as a % vs. absolute figures (since we all die
| eventually).
|
| People _have_ to die from disease, it 's the human
| condition. People _do not_ have to die in car accidents
| (or suicides, we should prevent those too, but that 's
| not really a hobby/activity).
|
| The other way in which equating heart disease death with
| car accident death (or suicide death!) is _extremely_
| misleading is that the heart disease victim age chart
| _does not_ look like this [1] even remotely. People lose
| a lot of years of life to car crashes.
|
| [0]https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/traffic-crash-
| death-est....
|
| [1] https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/historical-
| fatalit...
| networkchad wrote:
| [flagged]
| robmusial wrote:
| > The tone of this article is always a bit off to me and I can
| never figure it out. This seems like some sort of bragging,
| boasting and I don't understand why that is appropriate...
|
| ...
|
| > With that said, I'm trying to understand why this article
| isn't met with a response like "it is extremely unethical to
| operate a vehicle in this condition..."
|
| Because it's not bragging or boasting. I don't even think it's
| meant to be taken literally. Especially seeing that the author
| is an engineer and professor. It's like a car guy pastiche of
| folk tale/tall tale. Just like I wouldn't respond to a story of
| Paul Bunyan to criticize him for eating 50 pancakes a minute I
| don't feel the need to point out that this car sounds unsafe.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| Just the fact that it sounds like it maxes out at 35mph it
| sounds intensely safer than your average heavy and fast
| SUV/pickup/EV
| DeathArrow wrote:
| You are not a car person, you don't know someone who owns a
| car, you don't understand the car culture and yet you are
| commenting on it.
| ant6n wrote:
| I am not a car person, but I have to deal with cars and
| drivers 99.9% of the time I am outside.
|
| I would rather not, but they don't allow me that choice, and
| they will also fight to the last man and beyond 4C warming
| for their ,,right" to endanger me and my kin, as well as
| accelerate the rapid destruction of the only known habitat.
| mauvehaus wrote:
| Having driven my share of vehicles that I would describe as
| "having character" and my wife would describe as "a shitbox" I
| can answer.
|
| All the quirks eventually become part of your muscle memory for
| driving that car. At first while you're figuring out the quirks
| maybe it takes your mind off of traffic a bit.
|
| After a while though, you know that you have to hesitate and
| wiggle the gear lever just so to get 2nd, and do it without
| thought.
|
| Conpare it to using vi or emacs. At first it's a lot of thought
| to just move the cursor around. With practice, it's fluid and
| second nature.
| THENATHE wrote:
| I used to feel the same way about a stick shift: "why would we
| encourage people to take one hand off the steering wheel and
| spend and extra second or two fucking with a knob while also
| feathering two pedals at once to move the car when instead you
| can just press the gas and go"
|
| It just ain't that simple. Maybe when I'm 70 and shouldn't be
| driving a lot of these assists that are in cars nowadays will
| help me. But I was driving my aunt's car recently and it
| thought it saw someone in the lane I was going to merge to and
| literally jerked the steering wheel back to stop me from
| hitting nothing. I almost got in a wreck because that stupid
| fucking car thought it knew more than me. I now drive a 98
| Nissan Frontier 5-speed and couldn't be happier with it. When
| and if it breaks down, I'm buying a 94-2008 Nissan Frontier
| 5-speed, a 94-2000 Ford Ranger with a 5-speed or a 76-85 square
| body with (hopefully) a 5-speed.
|
| Do I really care about the old car? No. Do I just not want all
| of the new garbage? Yes. If they remade my truck EXACTLY as it
| is but with a better, newer engine, better, newer airbags, more
| durable modern suspension, etc, and sold it for 60k I would
| take out a loan fucking right this instant. But modern cars
| fucking suck. They're all shitty and people have been
| disillusioned into thinking a giant 3000lb hunk of metal made
| in 2023 hitting someone going fast is going to hurt the someone
| more than a giant 3000lb hunk of metal made in 1973 going fast
| is severely disillusioned about what makes a 3000lb hunk of
| fast moving metal dangerous.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > They're all shitty and people have been disillusioned into
| thinking a giant 3000lb hunk of metal made in 2023 hitting
| someone going fast is going to hurt the someone more than a
| giant 3000lb hunk of metal made in 1973 going fast is
| severely disillusioned about what makes a 3000lb hunk of fast
| moving metal dangerous.
|
| That's the thing with crash resistance progress - two cars
| colliding into what would have been a fatal crash in 1973
| have pretty good chances of everyone leaving alive with
| barely more than a concussion trauma.
| THENATHE wrote:
| My argument was not that cars are more safe for the driver
| (they aren't), but OP said that by me driving a 70s truck,
| others are less safe... a pedestrian getting hit by a 3000
| pound object going 40 is going to die regardless of the
| crumple zones, and a sedan getting plowed into by a truck,
| modern and huge, or old and huge, is still just getting
| plowed into by a truck. By driving an old car, the only
| person I am endangering more is myself and my passengers.
| stevenwliao wrote:
| Driving an old vehicle makes others less safe. The risk
| of collision decreases with safety features like ABS. The
| 70s truck doesn't have these safety features.
| Gud wrote:
| There is a big difference between driving a vehicle that
| requires manual gear change and a vehicle that is in
| disrepair.
| ot1138 wrote:
| Right on. Though the safety features built in to modern cars
| these days are light years ahead of what they were back then.
| The primary safety feature of my 1960 MGA is a foam padded
| bar for the passenger to bounce their head off of during a
| front end collision. Whereas my 2013 G Wagen has front and
| side air bags, crumple zones, anti-lock brakes, collision
| avoidance and so on.
|
| Relevant - Mercedes missed out on a $250k G Wagen sale
| because they build so much electronic crap into the new
| models that I personally cannot stand (like you!). I don't
| need a distracting touch screen or Alexa built into my car,
| thanks.
| THENATHE wrote:
| Exactly. And to be clear, my argument is for the other
| people: my car hitting them will do arguably the same
| amount of damage if it's a half ton pickup from the 70s vs
| today, it's just about how safe I am in a crash, so the
| only person that gets to determine that and weigh the odds
| is me.
| tiberious726 wrote:
| These systems don't pull the wheel when they detect something
| in another lane. They do pull the wheel if you try to change
| lanes and fail to signal.
| THENATHE wrote:
| If there is no one there, why do I need to signal? I don't
| want the cat touching the steering at all.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Automatic transmissions are now good enough that we can just
| conceptually bundle all that stuff up in the "let the car
| deal with it" box. (For normal drivers at least).
|
| These driver assist tools they interfere with your steering
| evidently aren't as flawless. And anyway, in general the
| "steering" task will be primarily in human hands for the
| foreseeable future, mixing ownership of the task seems like a
| bad move.
|
| I don't think all changes that put the car in charge of more
| of the driving process are bad. They just need to be careful
| about what they transfer over, the car needs to take the
| whole task and do it perfectly.
| allenrb wrote:
| Your concerns are not entirely unreasonable, and I say this as
| a car enthusiast temporarily in remission (parent of young
| children). Some of the things you mention do indeed make the
| vehicle less safe to those around it. However:
|
| Where I believe you are missing a critical point is in assuming
| that the overall situation with a modern and "safe" vehicle is
| better. You've got entertainment systems, touch screens, driver
| aids (reducing the need for concentration), quite possibly
| child-sourced distractions (even when they are not screaming,
| they can be plenty distracting).
|
| Now add to that the weight of a modern vehicle and the owner's
| relative lack of concern/awareness/love for it, and to assume
| that someone driving around in a somewhat ragged antique is
| necessarily the bigger hazard could... potentially be open to
| debate.
| squokko wrote:
| My guess is that operators of cars like this kill far fewer
| people per hundred million miles traveled than soccer moms in
| their SUVs texting with their Frappuccinos but I'm willing to
| be proven wrong with data.
| XorNot wrote:
| And yet if your failing brakes are the reason any particular
| pedestrian dies, that'll mean nothing to the person you kill.
|
| "Nothing's happened yet" is _not_ how safety works.
| yipbub wrote:
| > Norman Garrett was the Concept Engineer for the original
| Miata back in his days at Mazda's Southern California
| Design Studio. He currently teaches automotive engineering
| classes at UNC-C's Motorsports Engineering Department in
| Charlotte, North Carolina and curates his small collection
| of dysfunctional automobiles and motorcycles.
|
| Being a recognized expert in the field, he might understand
| how safety works.
| philipwhiuk wrote:
| "Do as I say, not as I do"?
| yipbub wrote:
| Why, what's he saying?
| evanreichard wrote:
| Exact reason why I think it should be illegal to own anything
| other than a Volvo XC90. It's objectively the safest car, and
| anyone who purchases anything else is reckless and unethical.
| dharmab wrote:
| Man, repairing my XC90 sucked. I remember ripping the busted
| blower motor out through the passenger footwell because the
| service manual called for a full removal of the dash and A/C
| system which exceeded the value of the car. And the rear four
| spark plugs were horrible to replace.
|
| Anyway, no, I don't think everyone should be required to
| drive a huge SUV with either a notoriously fragile
| transmission or a gas guzzling V8 motor. To say nothing of
| the unreliable sensors in the engine bay.
| dotancohen wrote:
| > Norman Garrett was the Concept Engineer for the original
| Miata back in > his days at Mazda's Southern California
| Design Studio.
|
| The author is not your typical automotive enthusiast. He is an
| expert in the field, and knows very well the perils of this
| car. Those old Porches are an experience unto themselves,
| separate from the experience of getting from point A to point
| B. You would drive one for the same reason that you would climb
| Mount Everest. Not because it is fun or useful, but rather for
| the adventure and uncertainty about ever returning home.
|
| This article does a terrific job of conveying that adventure.
| zirgs wrote:
| The trip to the end of the driveway isn't very adventurous.
| You can't legally drive any farther with this deathtrap.
| dotancohen wrote:
| Presumably the vehicle is licensed in the state.
|
| Take your complaints about licensing unsafe vehicles to the
| state - far more unsafe vehicles are licensed to owners who
| are ignorant of the vehicle's condition than to those who
| are aware.
| alvah wrote:
| If you live in a Western city and genuinely don't know anyone
| who owns a car, it's not much of a surprise that you never
| understood old car culture - how would you?
| bityard wrote:
| > I'm not a car person
|
| I think that says enough, the article is quite obviously a
| humor piece aimed at car people. It's not weird or strange that
| you didn't get it.
| throwaway22032 wrote:
| [flagged]
| [deleted]
| lmm wrote:
| > Surely a vehicle operator would have reduced response time
| with the increased cognitive load to any divergent situation
|
| Maybe. I would think it more plausible that a vehicle that
| requires the operator to actively engage in its operation
| would, well, keep the operator engaged, and therefore their
| overall reaction time would likely be faster than a typical
| driver.
|
| > and be placing other's lives at risk by not having their
| equipment maintained to an expected performance standard.
|
| > Not to mention the lack of braking, and lack of things like
| crumple zones etc, plus feeling light headed from engine fumes
| and poor ventilation.
|
| I'd bet that all of that adds up to less endangering of others
| than the mass and size of today's popular vehicles.
|
| > I don't understand ignoring the fact that you are exposing
| unconsenting members of the public to an increased risk of
| injury or death because of your interest in old technology. I
| don't understand accepting the freedom of that choice when it
| exposes unconsenting others to more risk just for your own
| personal interest.
|
| I take it you don't understand the legality of driving cars on
| the public road at all then? In fairness neither do I, but if
| you figure that one out then this one will likely follow.
|
| > I can't help but harshly judge the author for their reckless
| decisions because the car isn't restricted to a closed course
| and can severely impact others lives simply because they enjoy
| the thrill of it.
|
| Fun is the one thing that justifies everything else we do.
| While I agree that it's bad to endanger other people, IMO fun
| is a much better reason than simple carelessness or keeping up
| with the joneses.
| throw1234651234 wrote:
| Here is a message that will resonate with you: Old cars avoid
| wasting natural resources and the pollution that comes with
| creating new cars. Also, recycling isn't nearly as effective
| as you think.
| necovek wrote:
| > Maybe. I would think it more plausible that a vehicle that
| requires the operator to actively engage in its operation
| would, well, keep the operator engaged, and therefore their
| overall reaction time would likely be faster than a typical
| driver.
|
| While I believe you are right on average, an attentive driver
| not fighting their vehicle is going to have better reaction
| times than an attentive driver who does.
|
| But to support your point further, reaction times for each of
| us on the road differ depending on the circumstances
| (personal, vehicle, road and traffic). Safe driving is when
| we are attentive enough to react to common "failures" in
| traffic and avoid any catastrophe.
|
| "Common" as in there is no fast enough reaction time when
| someone decides to eg. head-on you at the last second in
| regular traffic conditions as you are passing them in the
| other direction on a two-way street. Or someone jumping in
| front of you at exactly the moment you are passing by (even
| driving at 20 mph is enough to kill a pedestrian jumping in
| front of a moving car, even with the driver breaking as
| quickly as possible). It's useful to remember that we are all
| participating in traffic (and life) together, and we rely on
| general sanity of each participant to avoid disasters.
| THENATHE wrote:
| > Maybe. I would think it more plausible that a vehicle that
| requires the operator to actively engage in its operation
| would, well, keep the operator engaged, and therefore their
| overall reaction time would likely be faster than a typical
| driver.
|
| This is one of the best arguments for stick shifts: even if
| the extra layer of control may take extra effort, the thought
| process of having to shift, feather the clutch, think about
| what gear you should be in, rev match, engine break, etc
| makes you a better driver
| necovek wrote:
| Having driven stick shift since I started driving (22 years
| ago), it becomes totally automatic: you simply start
| relying on the engine noise to switch gears when needed and
| are not really thinking about it.
| nucleardog wrote:
| Ditto. Every car I've owned for over 20 years has been a
| stick. It's not more work than an automatic at this point
| and it's not forcing me to pay any more conscious
| attention to the road.
|
| I can carry a full technical conversation while I heel-
| toe to rev-match the downshift into second at 60mph so
| the engine braking bleeds enough speed that as I throw it
| through the corner into town and lose a bit more momentum
| I hit the city street at exactly 30mph and can shift back
| up to third and tap the cruise control and coast to
| wherever I'm going. I'm not going to test it, but I'm
| pretty sure I could do it drunk and with one hand.
| michaelrpeskin wrote:
| For me, being stuck in traffic with an automatic is more
| cognitive load than a stick. I'm always overthinking my
| inputs..."if I'm extra light on the throttle here, it may
| stay in gear and not shift since I know I'm stopping in
| 100m and I don't want constant up/down shifts"
|
| In my truck (automatic), when I'm climbing up to the
| Eisenhour tunnel, I want it to stay in 4th gear and I'll
| just give it more throttle, but it won't do that, it
| thinks it's smarter than me and downshifts to 3rd and I
| need to hear the engine scream all the way up the
| mountain. I always try to find the sweet spot for
| throttle input to keep it from down shifting which means
| that I'm running about 5mph slower than traffic, and
| that's annoying.
|
| Since my only inputs are throttle and brake, I'm always
| trying to find the combination of those to put the
| transmission in the gear that I want it in rather than
| just sliding the stick and putting it in the right gear.
| spookie wrote:
| I would wager it isn't even noise, but a fusion of all
| senses, especially your butt :)
| myth2018 wrote:
| I'd say noise plays a major role. I've driven a noisy car
| for years and now that I'm driving a quiet one I
| frequently switch a bit too late when I'm distracted.
| dizhn wrote:
| I like automatics but learning on stick turns it into a
| skill game. Mind you not too much skill because basically
| everybody is doing it fine. But it does give the learner a
| clue that you're operating something serious, not something
| where you can push a pedal and be done. With that kind of
| attitude comes overconfidence. Like the manufacturer would
| have thought of everything. If I can reach 100mph easily,
| it will stop just as easily etc.
| hoosieree wrote:
| > feathering the clutch
|
| For maximum fun, don't use the clutch at all except to
| start moving.
| yodelshady wrote:
| Partially related, low speed parking lot and shop window
| accidents are much less common in manual-dominant countries
| (although those are less frequent yearly).
|
| The usual cause is hitting gas instead of brake, followed
| by disorientation (expected = braking, result =
| acceleration, usually _strong_ acceleration). Humans,
| especially elderly, can 't reorient quickly enough. With a
| manual, you're depressing the clutch as well, so the
| mismatch is much lesser.
| harywilke wrote:
| This was the reasoning my friends parents gave for getting
| her older sister a stick shift. After driving stick a while
| it just becomes habit. You don't even think about it.
| Though i do prefer being able to drop down a gear for extra
| acceleration on the highway, rather than waiting for the
| automatic transmission to figure it out and change gears 20
| seconds after i needed it.
| michaelrpeskin wrote:
| My plan is to get my son some really underpowered old
| stick-shift car when he learns to drive. If you're always
| rowing gears, you won't be texting and driving.
| technothrasher wrote:
| While I prefer driving a manual transmission as well,
| modern automatic/DCT transmissions are much better at
| engaging gears quickly when you ask them to than they
| were even ten years ago. In my current daily driver, one
| flick of the downshift paddle and the car instantly
| shifts down.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| I can confirm this - had for 11 years manual shifting bmw
| (3 series e46), some 2 years ago it sorta died and we
| bought automatic (5 series f11). The amount of cognitive
| load is much much lower (also thanx to laser projection of
| speed and other info on windshield, this is by far the best
| security car feature in last couple of decades) to the
| point it becomes boring way too easily.
|
| Once or twice I got into situation where I was very tired
| and was almost getting sleepy, this would never happened
| with manual shifting and the need to be more engaged with
| vehicle. Also, for 98% of the situations, 1 hand on
| steering wheel is enough so you can handle stick, and the
| rest of situations you should be able to anticipate if you
| are a seasoned sane driver.
|
| Another data point - once I had to take my wife's car for
| 1500km drive to take it back home. It was old Toyota
| without any cruise control, _not_ ideal for such long
| drives on European highways full of speed radars. It was
| the only time in my life when I could drive this run
| through whole night alone with basically only stopping to
| refill, buy vignettes or go to toilet (5pm-8am drive).
| Normally on this road, I get too sleepy around 3-4am and my
| eyes literally start to close even if mind still can go
| further, and I have to sleep a bit. Was way too pumped from
| all sensory input. But I am sure I don 't want to repeat
| this.
| stefs wrote:
| > Maybe. I would think it more plausible that a vehicle that
| requires the operator to actively engage in its operation
| would, well, keep the operator engaged, and therefore their
| overall reaction time would likely be faster than a typical
| driver.
|
| someone once told me: "i'm a safer driver when drunk because
| then i driver slower and pay more attention."
| freetanga wrote:
| Probably much safer to have around that a juggernaut SUV from
| 2019, driven by a soccer mom running to do errands like her
| life depends on it while texting on her phone with her friends
| about last night.
|
| Sorry for the oddly specific and somewhat sexist example, but I
| got clipped twice on a bike by such a vehicle.
| necovek wrote:
| I know you are aware of this, but I'll still insist :)
|
| How did you establish it was a "mom" (as opposed to an aunt
| or someone taking care of someone's kids), that she was
| texting with "her friends" or even texting at all, and what
| the topic of her texting was (if it even was texting)?
|
| Maybe it was a girl borrowing her brother's (who is a dad: I
| am assuming you noticed child seats or kids) car looking at
| the weather forecast at her phone driving recklessly?
|
| Yeah, I get annoyed at people using their phones while
| driving (both when they drive recklessly and when they drive
| too slow making everyone around them nervous). So you should
| too. Moms running errands should not be the target of your
| anger :)
| ot1138 wrote:
| You can't text on your phone while driving a stick shift.
|
| As others have said, manual transmissions tend to make for
| safer drivers.
| hoosieree wrote:
| Counterpoint - given that people will always text and drive,
| the auto makes the task slightly safer.
| ot1138 wrote:
| I'm assuming you don't drive manual. It's just not possible
| to drive stick and text because your right hand is
| constantly busy
| hoosieree wrote:
| My first car was a manual, and several cars since then. I
| can assure you not only is it possible to drive stick and
| text, it is possible to concurrently drive stick, text
| with T9 word, adjust the radio, and put fire sauce on a
| chalupa while it's snowing at night.
|
| The trick is to be an idiot teenager.
| ot1138 wrote:
| LOL! Ok you got me there. Idiot teenagers can do just
| about anything provided it's stupid enough!
| LanceH wrote:
| Every car guy has an attachment to a car the empirically
| doesn't return the value of what is put into it. Some are able
| to get past this and be "productive" with their car hobby. A
| lot will have a car that sits in the garage and doesn't move,
| but is always worked on. Some have a car (like this 914) that
| can only be driven by one person.
|
| Specifically referencing 914', they are incredibly fun to
| drive. The mid engine places the weight between all 4 wheels in
| a way that it handles like magic. There is always the dream of
| this car returning to it's glory. This guys is facetiously
| admitting it's just a dream.
| barbs wrote:
| I get the feeling that the author is a car enthusiast, and the
| vehicle in question is a hobby project and not something to be
| driven on public roads. I think the fact that it is
| unroadworthy is the point of the whole article i.e. "good luck
| stealing this car, here's a big list of all the things wrong
| with it that make it a nightmare to drive".
| zirgs wrote:
| Where would you drive a car like that then? On your driveway?
| Klonoar wrote:
| Some people don't drive them, they just enjoy working on
| them for the engineering aspect. Same way Linux people
| tinker with their setups. ;)
|
| Some people haul them to tracks for vintage racing.
|
| And then yes, some people drive them.
| technothrasher wrote:
| > Some people don't drive them, they just enjoy working
| on them
|
| Yep, I bought a '72 Triumph GT6 a while ago and drove it
| just enough to get it the few miles home. That thing
| really was a death trap and made this 914 look brand new.
| This was about five years ago, and it's still not back on
| the road. I'm working on it as I can put money into it
| and enjoying every moment.
|
| > And then yes, some people drive them.
|
| For fun, I drive my '86 Porsche 951. I put about six
| months of work into that, and it is reliable and drives
| beautifully.
| duck wrote:
| Of all the things I read on the internet today, this might be
| the most mind blowing one - you lived there for 10 years and
| don't know a single person with a car in Toronto?
| CosmicShadow wrote:
| That is the portrait of a typical Torontonian.
| xcxcx wrote:
| They don't know a single person with or without a car
| selectodude wrote:
| Isn't highway 401 the widest freeway in the world? No cars
| though, eh.
| thsksbd wrote:
| He's not driving it, the thief is!
|
| And, if you read his bio you'd see that this guy is not a mere
| car guy, but in the pantheon of car guys. When he takes it for
| a spin around the block he's doing what any mechanic does when
| diagnosing cars - driving it to see why the car doesnt: steer
| well, stop well, move well, etc.
| macintosh-hd wrote:
| This shouldn't be street legal. Danger to themselves and, most
| importantly, others.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Nobody claims that it is, but you're allowed to own cars that
| aren't street legal, you just can't drive them anywhere on
| public roads.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-18 23:02 UTC)