First of all this "simple" car may end up being more expensive. Doing a lot of the things the old mechanical way requires a lot of labor and labor is expensive nowadays. Having to use turning wires and vacuum tubes for instrument clusters, and a bunch of pull wires for controls... Not only would that be expensive it would require skills and equipment long lost today. Oh and the wind shield wipers -- it is possible to power wind shield wipers mechanically but those were some very complex rube goldberg type mechanisms.

Furthermore, this "simple" car will not last very long. People have forgotten that nowadays, but in the old times of "simple" mechanical cars, cars used to break down much more often and require much more skilled maintenance.

Most people would not know how to use it. Do you think people will be able to handle an unassisted wheel? You know, actually use their muscles to turn the wheel when parking? How about unassisted brakes? You get into a dangerous situation, you slam on the brakes and then it turns out that you have to use your muscles to actually apply sufficient force. How about even getting into the car without a radio key fob. I very much doubt the majority of people will even know how to lock or unlock their rear doors without a central lock/unlock key. They will probably just leave their car unlocked.

But most importantly, it wouldn't sell. Cars nowadays sell based on electronic features. You can see that from the commercials. Even fairly advanced features like navigation and parking sensors are considered a must have now.

So true. Computing is very cheap nowadays. It is also very reliable.

If you watch Sandy Munro's videos, he mentions often how his visits with Chinese car manufacturers go, when they discuss architecture options. Customers hold up a cell phone and ask "How can we make it more like this?". The cell phone got rid of separate components a long time ago. Everything's on one PCB, plus the display. And many things that used to be on the PCB but consisted of many chips, are now integrated to a single chip. The car consisting of a lot of OEM boxes connected with wires seems so outdated.

And each box having a separate computer makes it in essence stranded. Instead, if the control is centralized, then it's possible to take the complexity to software and keep managing it much better, features are easier to develop and can be sent to existing cars over the air etc.

Everything on the one PCB is great, just ask Tesla owners that get stranded with a hardware failure, or need to reboot their screen for a software failure by holding down steering wheel buttons to get their car operable again.

The reason cars have lots of computers is for price - its cheaper to use a power and CAN data bus rather than have individual wires going from a central computer to each device.

For example, a door module can control the locks, windows and mirrors with just a 2 power wires and 2 thin wires for CAN bus.

Contrast this to old cars which had thick bundles of wires to power the mirror, doorlock and window motors from outside the door.

What if you don't want OTA features, but a simple car you can fix separately form the manufacturer's supply chain?

This might not be a huge concern for the HN demographic, but it is for developing countries operating whatever vehicles the EU deems too dangerous or polluting for their roads. There are no PCBs making their way to Central Asia.

The problem with black boxes is that they work until they don't. In some cases like fuel injection, they're a significant reliability improvement. In others they're a ticking time bomb that can make the entire vehicle unusable.

This a problem in the motorcycle world. You now have bikes that are dead because of computer issues. Small pebbles if you're near a dealership, possibly deadly if you use adventure bikes for their intended purpose.

Yeah, there's some problems with the approach. But I guess if you had an old one, you could install some open source software, or replace the whole computer. I assume it would cost a few hundred bucks at most. It's peanuts compared to engine, or in electric car, battery work.

The main board on an iphone is taking a really small part of the whole nowadays. https://guide-images.cdn.ifixit.com/igi/JtBACGbyZcYSdBfL.hug... Besides maybe some machine vision things, the computing in a car seems to have very low performance requirements.

Sensors, actuators and controllers etc are another thing then, but they're different.

My point is that you won't be able to replace the whole computer if you're disconnected from the supply chain. A few hundred bucks is more than those cars are worth by the time they are exported to those countries.

> cars used to break down much more often and require much more skilled maintenance.

Yeah, but “skilled maintenance “ was an easy skill. There could only be a handful of things wrong if it didn’t start: e.g. no spark, no fuel. In the case of no spark, you check the plug, see if it’s dirty, change it if so; check the distributor, maybe the points are bad; check the coil or condenser… yeah there were things to check, but you could actually fix it once you learned about it. And yes, you could do this on the side of the road—there were “tool rolls” you could have for such purposes.

Now, you get a check engine light and the code reader says, in so many words: “bring to dealer and pay up”

And how often does that happen with modern day cars compared to old ones? I would argue that older cars, pre electronic wizardry, are easier to repair (assuming spare parts are available) but break down more often. Older cars are also in need of more maintenance.

Modern cars need an inspection every 30k km and hardly ever break down. When they do, they are usually toast so (at least financially). Older cars are financially toast as well, if you cannot do the work yourself so.

New cars are reliable because we got better at making cars, not because they're loaded with new points of failure. This started in the 90s at the very least.

> Now, you get a check engine light and the code reader says, in so many words: “bring to dealer and pay up”

That's funny, because my OBDII reader tells me exactly which sensor logged a fault and what the fault is such as reading too high/low. Sure you can have oddball errors where a bus wire has its insulation melted and is sending noise over the CAN bus or something, but you also had bizarre issues on old engines with weird vacuum leaks in pipes and dashpots and all the other analogue junk that electronics have replaced.

People look at old cars through rose coloured glasses and forget having to clean distributors and adjust timing and fix tuning drift with carburettors.

When I was a lad I had an illegal ancient motor scooter that didn't start. One of the dads told me:

"If it's got compression, and it's got fuel, and it's got a spark, then it's got to go".

He was right.

Just wait until you get a sheared pin on the distributor drive... Compression, fuel, spark, no go.

That maybe true, but my anecdotal evidence is the opposite.

> cars used to break down much more often and require much more skilled maintenance.

My '78 John Deere 4640 (not a car I give you that) if it breaks down, I can fix it. If I cannot I can order the part. If I cannot, I can have the part made within a week.

None of that is possible with a 2021 6145M. If it breaks, I have to sit and wait for JD to bless me with their part.

I have less problems with non-electronic equipment than with the electronics enhanced ones.

I venture it is very much the same with personal cars.

Anecdotes are always a mistake in these situations. You might have better luck with your tractor, which isn’t a car, but the average age of cars on America’s roads has been rising for decades. Your experience is, frankly, an outlier.

Also, comparing tractors with cars is an extremely dubious proposition; these are different vehicles with different engineering constraints, uses, and consumer expectations. How many OEMs for cars still make parts for the 1978 vehicles? Hell, what percentage of Americans have the space, knowledge, and interest to build up a garage to service their own vehicles?

Just wait until the new generation of cars with touchscreens everywhere instead of buttons and knobs for control are old.

Do you have any actual data to back up the idea that touch screen interfaces are inherently short lived?

So many smartphones with digitizers having dead zones after just four years....

Car screens are built to different tolerances than cell phones. In particular they must survive a much more harsh environment than most other consumer electronics. This is precisely why the first Tesla screens were so shocking in their size and so unreliable; when Elon Musk found out that he couldn’t get auto screens that large he demanded they use consumer screens, which yellowed and failed due to the heat cars are exposed to. Car screens and normal screens are not the same, at all.

This situation is exactly the same as the tractor example above. You’re taking a similar but different object built for different use cases and different financial and engineering constraints, and declaring that the outcome of one is predictive of another.

I’m not referring to the big screens but the replacement of buttons and knobs with multiple small ones.

Like putting touch screens on the steering wheel!

How many vehicles do that though? I can only think of Tesla, and they’re already pretty notoriously unreliable straight from the factory. All of the vehicles I’ve been in, including at trade shows, had physical buttons for most of the vehicle functions, and touch screens for secondary and tertiary operations.

Ferrari is the only one I can remember but it’s a trend car reviewers have negatively remarked upon

Why do you attribute this improvement to computers? There were many parallel improvements in manufacturing that are fairly well documented and taught about.

> My '78 John Deere 4640 (not a car I give you that) if it breaks down, I can fix it.

That's great, but I don't own a garage, and if my car breaks, it goes to the mechanic. The mechanic needs to eat, and pay the mortgage on her garage, so she will charge $XYZW for repairs.

For all the maintenance and repair work I and my father have had done on our cars, 'Some microchip somewhere crapped out' has never made the list. All the failures have been purely mechanical. Your 70s car proposal solves a problem that few people have, and introduces a lot of new ones.

You don't own a garage, so nobody should get to own repairable vehicles?

The problem with fancy electronics is that only a few people chosen, trained and supplied by the manufacturer can work on them. This effectively gives them a monopoly on maintenance. Your mechanic will be cut out of that deal.

This also creates a risk for the second hand market, not just in first world countries, but wherever they inherit cars that don't pass inspection. Some garage in Georgia (the country) won't be kitted out to fix computer issues and keep the car running. They can't expect help from OEM, nor third party replacement parts. It's a great planned obsolescence strategy.

Indeed. We have an aging Audi that has adaptive cruise control. Recently the radar unit failed. To get it replaced at a dealer will cost about half of what the car is worth.

what, on an aging audi, _doesn't_ cost half the value of the vehicle to fix?

i've heard the same complaint about basically every part of an audi except the tires.

Audi seems to be the brand for people who want a VW, but want to pay extra for it. It’s like the mirror image of Skoda or SEAT (VAG’s more ‘budget’ brands).

This is why it's foolish to purchase a German luxury car, either new or used. The electronics aren't designed to last any longer than the warranty. If you really want to drive one then lease, don't buy.

One of my motorcycles is from 1973. Nary a tube or chip on it. I think it's got a turn blinker that's kinda a flip-flop, but I think it's just charging and discharging capacitors. It's lasted way longer than most modern disposable vehicles.

I don't know if most of these things actually require digital features.

You say "one of" your motorcycles, so I take it you aren't riding this bike everyday, putting 12-15,000 miles a year on it and needing it to be reliable every time you go to work or run an errand.

Apples to oranges comparison.

Frankly aside from the carb, the maintenance and reliability are pretty much the same. A new bike's parts would wear too.

However the computer won't crap out on you, and this is now happening with new bikes. Adventure bikes mind you. I wouldn't want my adventure cut short by a computer problem I can't fix in the field.

They still sell bikes without that crap, and they are absurdly reliable.

But how many parts of it are original? In other words is it the ship of Theseus? Does it pass e-check or is it exempt?

Regardless I do appreciate the simplicity of long past inventions.

Does that motorcycle pass modern emission requirements?

The engine controle unit plays a major role in emission control and fuel economy.

> But most importantly, it wouldn't sell.

You don't know that. I'm pretty sure there is a market for simple cars that don't tell you what to do, don't report you to the authorities, don't shut down unexpectedly because you didn't follow the manufacturer's maintenance schedule, etc.

> How about even getting into the car without a radio key fob. I very much doubt the majority of people will even know how to lock or unlock their rear doors without a central lock/unlock key. They will probably just leave their car unlocked.

I can't tell if this is satire or not, but people who can't open a door with a key and a handle maybe shouldn't be allowed to drive.

I've driven my car with only enough battery to really power the spark plugs and instruments in the dash (alternator failed and I got jump started). It was manageable even with the heavy steering, although to be fair I was driving max 50kph. Perhaps braking at highway speeds would be challenging.

I also much prefer my phone navigation over the in car system (Android Auto/Apple Carplay would solve this). That said, I wouldn't buy the car GP is suggesting, but I could imagine that if you were price sensitive then you might.

No comment around the older systems, I don't really have the knowledge to agree or disagree there.

I have an early nineties car like the parent describes; processor controlled fuel injection/valve timing/other core engine routines, and that's pretty much it with the exception of windshield wiper control and the radio. Practicality of making a car like that today aside, it's remarkably well built, and I have no problem believing it'll last at least another five years.

I think you chose a few wrong examples, power steering and brake assistance (simple depression from the engine) were a thing much before electronics became ubiquitous, as well as central locks (just a bunch of solenoids), the issue is much more with safety-related systems like ABS and engine (and pollution) control.

OP said "electronic control" not electronics, not the same! If you have an analog control on the dashboard directly connected to the heater element than it is electronic, but not electronically controlled.

Is the _market_ begging, or a few folks on the internet? The only folks I know that complain about technology in cars are a couple posters on internet forums.

Sure, lots of internet people who don't want to be tracked (license plate readers notwithstanding).

But also plenty of IRL people complaining about how, for example, they miss their $10k pickup with no power anything that worked great for anytime they needed to haul material X from location M to N, but now you need to drop a minimum of $50k for a vehicle you might use once per weekend to haul gravel, insulation, cement, lumber, furniture, etc.

Trucks are a particularly big market for this idea. It's a vehicle you use when you're already dirty and sweaty from work/projects and don't care about comfort, and serves a primary purpose: moving heavy and/or large items.

But the big carmakers have opted to cater to the market that doesn't actually use trucks for their actual purpose, but rather the market that buys trucks as commuter vehicles.

You can still get a stripped down, plain white F-150 for under $27k through fleet sales. But buyers don’t want that. They want the 4-door people hauler that happens to have a pick-up bed and leather seats.

They’ll imagine the $10k from memories but forget the vinyl seats, no AC, and manual windows. But they won’t buy that one n

They are also thinking of that $10K in todays dollars. Adjusted for inflation, that $10K truck that could could buy back in the mid-80s costs the same as a new one today. You just get a heck of a lot more features.

Assuming those memories are from the 70s, $10k then are worth about $50k today. Never mind the fact you’re also buying a much, much better vehicle in most aspects.

That statement makes no sense. The folks complaining can still buy those old pickups if they want. All that has happened is they are now older. No one is forcing them to buy a new truck that they use sporadically.

I've investigated about 20 of those old pickups; they're crap, because they've been run into the ground. I want a new old pickup.

That will not happen unless new legislation is passed:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-19/bigger-pi...

I would love a stripped down 1990's-era Toyota truck

https://www.thedrive.com/news/42523/84-mile-1993-toyota-pick...

But not for 50k

Ignoring everything else, that new truck is much larger. Compact trucks have not really existed in the US market for a decade at least.

An old Ford Ranger was 175-200 inches long depending on year and model. The new one is 200-210 inches.

Sort this list by class and you'll see a total of two compact trucks in the US market. Both are debuting either this year or the next: Ford Maverick (200") and Hyundai Santa Cruz (195").

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pickup_trucks

Those new "compact" trucks are sadly still 2ft longer than old compact trucks from the early 90s. Can't get anything small anymore.

People can have nostalgia for stuff they grew up with but when it comes down to it don't actually want to spend the money to buy it now.

I reminisce about 90s sports cars that I used to dream about too. But then I think about the lack of bluetooth, keyless start, the low power output, poor handling, poor safety, poor fuel economy, and I just buy a modern car instead.

Yeah, I don't like how overcomplicated many products are becoming but even then wouldn't buy a car without at least AC and Bluetooth.

My must-have now is the backup camera with steering integration. I can hook up a trailer like a god now.

Actually new vehicles are legally required to have backup cameras. At least if they are sold in the US [1]. I would love to see a simple, back to the basics vehicle but there is so much regulation and safety requirements that it is unlikely for any basic vehicle to be sold in the US.

[1]: https://abcnews.go.com/US/cars-us-now-required-backup-camera...

It's absolutely a good thing that these cameras are required with how many children are run over frequently as drivers reverse their cars.

"Where is your god now?"

"Right behind you."

You could easily pick up an after market bluetooth-enabled product. A/C is definitely important however.

Though A/C doesn't really need much in the way of electronics.

interestingly, I go the opposite direction. I try to buy cars without AC (environmental reasons), without electronics (expensive to fix when they fail 'cos the constructor takes a huge premium on these), with the least possible automation ('cos I think these are overpriced)...

Basically, the more sophisticated a car is, the higher the risk of failure and thus price to fix the failures. Now, I buy inexpensive cars. Maybe if I go for expensive brands, the risk is less.

I won't buy a car if it has bluetooth or cellular connectivity, but that is getting harder to find. I want that shit air-gapped. Someday I might have to just rip out the media head and telematics unit after buying it if I can't find one anymore.

I'd describe myself as having above-average privacy anxiety but I have to ask, what's the threat model here? I'm way more concerned about ALPRs than I am about Bluetooth or a data connection.

I think you’re vastly a) underestimating the time it takes to bring a new product line all the way into production in the auto industry, and b) overestimating the true demand for such a product, Hacker News and adjacent crowds notwithstanding – peoples broadly have come to expect those simple features at practically every price point, as evidenced by the ubiquity of said features in the market.

B in particular. Products like the Yaris compete on price alone.

And Yaris is already premium affordable car. Koreans are slightly below it and then cheap ones are India or specific models.

In the United States backup cameras, tire pressure monitors, and electronic stability control are required by law.

So out of your list that leaves..

GPS (already optional on most cars) Ass warmers (already optional on most cars) Telemetry (this could be removed from models that have it, not all cars sold today have telemetry) USB chargers (really don't think USB chargers are causing a production shortage at this moment) Proximity Sensors (already optional on budget cars) Keyless entry (could be removed, I doubt many people would buy a new car without keyless entry tho) Remote climate control (already optional on budget cars)

I tried to buy a car without AC, but as it turns out that’s almost impossible. They had never imported that model without AC and the waiting time was pretty long, because they where not really built in large numbers.

The models without AC mostly exist so they can produce ads saying “available from less than X“

What's the point of buying a car without A/C? You might save $1000 now, but you'll lose several thousand at trade-in time because no one else will want your car.

No parasitic power losses and it's one less system that needs to be maintained.

AC is used for windshield defrost. I remember waiting for heat to defrost the windshield so I could see. AC defrost works in 10 sec.

The power loss from an AC compressor with the clutch disengaged is negligible.

Modern AC also use variable displacement compressors which adjust load according to temperature, so once the cabin is cool they use a constant small amount of engine power rather than toggling to full power on and off like older designs.

For driving indoors.

I'm trying to think of a case where regular passenger cars are driven in climate-controlled indoor settings, and I'm not having much success. What do you have in mind?

Teslas in the Las Vegas hyper loop.

Even those are going to be taken out of service and sold into the used market at some point. When that happens, trying to sell a car without A/C in the Las Vegas area is going to be about as successful as trying to sell a swift kick in the gonads.

That depend on your country. I would save closer to $2500 on the budget model. Other than that you are completely right.

What's the point of keyless entry? Mine comes with key, and yhe auxiliary immobilizer which will not let it drive without radio tag or typing in PIN.

Ease of use. I would love if I could just leave key in my pocket and not worry about opening doors or putting it in ignition. I could even connect it to my keychain.

I wonder if nobody did ssh+nfc keys yet. At least I could trust it.

SSH+NFC sound like horrible protocol choice for such token.

Not that I would be against option to periodically rekey the whole system. Generate new pair of private keys and have the car and key swap them with my approval.

You don't need to ever rekey an SSH private-public key pair. Still, a single hands-free token can be taken by force or stolen.

So can car key... I don't really have a car and probably never will were I truly worried that it was essentially single factor authentication.

But the car key + separate wireless immobilizer token is 2FA and it makes me somewhat confident.

WRT keyless entry, I actually have figured it out. Central wireless lock is cool. It's keyless start that I'm opposed to.

And how often you keep those separate and operate the car? Can you even safely store one in safe place and still use the car? Or is there more factors. Which then increases the potential failure cases. And I prefer really not to involve anything like pin codes, fingerprints, facial recognition needed for me to drive my own car.

Fingerprints and facial recognition is circus, but physical token is a real thing, and I do keep it separate from my car keys

The security of key fobs is not a great concern when the windows can still be smashed.

Key fob allow you to start the car engine, it should be a concern

I think Dacia addresses this market pretty well already. However many of the things you’ve listed (cameras, TPMS, telemetry) are mandated by law in most regions.

I can't imagine anyone would want the car you described, for market-sized values of "anyone"

This feels like the Microsoft Word problem - Word users only use N% of Microsoft Word, the rest is needless bloat wasted on them. The problem is that the N% of features is different for each user.

Some people like blind spot monitoring, others are annoyed by it. Some people need to have satellite radio, others never use it. Some people won't buy a car without Apple CarPlay, others would never so much as buy an Apple product. And so on... but for your product to appeal to customers in general, you need all of the features.

The latest Dacia Sandero is selling better than all other models in its class for a few months now - even if it's basically a revamped last-gen Renault Clio with even lower quality interior and safety features. Some people prefer a basic, cheaper car.

Is that because it's literally impossible to buy other cars since they have a chip backlog though? Is it worth redesigning a car for a trend that will be gone next year?

No, it is because it is a lot cheaper and it can be bought by people that otherwise would not be able to buy a car at all. I know people who bought a Sandero for this reason and I was considering buying one one year ago, just before they announced an electric Dacia that I am still waiting for.

Anyone driving a car thats older than 15 years old is already driving the car that OP is describing.

And that car is worth $2000 on the market. No matter how many features they cut manufacturers aren’t going to be able to sell a new car at that price.

> And that car is worth $2000 on the market.

Yes, because the only reason a person would be willing to part with one at anywhere near that price was if was a lemon.

Sure, but do they actually want that car, or is that just what they have and can afford?

I personally have no interest in any upgrades over my 20 year old car. Maybe electric or no car at all if my living situation changed to support it. Obviously my hand will be forced soon enough as it slowly degrades.

I mean I drive that car because I don't see what I get out of a newer more costly model. I get my 35mpg and have my blutooth. Everything in the new car is exactly the same as everything in my old car.

Is a typical new car buyer currently driving a 15-year-old car?

You could say that's plausible. In a way it even makes sense, that people buy cars and then drive them for as long as they reasonably last. But if you had to, would you guess that this is how the market operates?

No, because in every product sector people have shown when given a choice and the means to make it, they'd rather buy a shiny new thing than mend an older one. We are addicted to the dopamine hit of consumption.

They aren't buying a new car on all these new widgets that might be different between one today and one from yesteryear. I bet for the vast majority of people the primary technological wants of a car are cold AC and blutooth. Everything else, your TPMS, your brake alert system that beeps like a missile is locked on when you inch too close in traffic, no one stood up and asked for any of that stuff. The market just saddled it upon us and the higher per unit cost is passed right along to us with markup.

Then OP can just buy a used car that has low mileage. Also, with many of the features they list, if they break, then they're just broken. It would have no effect on you if you aren't using those features already. A broken seat with a warmer is just a regular seat.

Mine's from 1997 so easily in that range.

most things you mention are mandated by the government, you can't sell a car in any western market without tire pressure monitoring, stability control, back up camera etc.

the manufacturers have no choice, it would be like suggesting they sell cars without seatbelts.

I hate tire pressure sensors, they are amazingly flaky and makes you uneasy about driving. That and the stupid alarms in my car that informs me that the temperature is below 4 degrees, it disturbs my driving.

You should be uneasy about driving.

For most people, it’s the most dangerous thing you will do today. If you are going to kill someone, it’s with your car.

But I don’t need flaky sensors alert me of no existing problem. That just makes everything worse.

False positives are annoying, but not knowing about a true positive is fatal.

Back up cameras are not mandatory until May 2022 in the EU.

Cars designed at least three years before they are shipped - so May 2022 might as well be tomorrow in car time.

Ah. Not only does our car (VW from 2016) not have one, I don't think I have ever been in a car that had a backup camera.

Reading in this thread that it's impossible to even buy a car without it is very surprising to me.

We're already only a few months away from 2022, most (if not all) carmakers present on the EU market have included back-up cameras in their vehicles. I know that my brother's Dacia Logan built in 2019 already had one.

Backup cameras have been an optional extra for a long time sure, but I don't think I'm aware of any car that actually comes standard with one. Well, maybe a Mercedes-Benz S-Class. I do have a backup camera in my 10-year-old Benz, but I imagine that the original owner paid a four-digit amount of euros for it back in the day.

'Rear Visibility' is required in new cars in US by FMVSS 111. Test procedure mandates field of view to rear of vehicles during backing, that are practical to satisfy with cameras. mirrors would require like a periscope to satisfy.

Yeah, but the US isn't the EU.

I have a 2016 Hyundai Accent. Unless the law is very new my car has no backup camera or much else. I'm sure there's an emergency tire pressure sensor but that's about it. Not much to my car.

You're pretty much right before the cut-off. The rule/law in the US kicked in in mid-2018.

You probably want ABS as well - and then everyone else will want their favorite feature - and pretty soon we'll be where we are.

There are two practical issues with your suggestion.

One is that neither one of us have any idea of the electronics BOM breakdown between the various parts of the car, and whether the effect of shortage would be mitigated in a meaningful way if the entertainment stuff was simplified. And you can't legally sell a new car in the US without back-up cameras and tire pressure monitoring.

The second issue is that re-designing that part of the car takes more than a year (probably years, given that you need to collaborate with business and marketing to fit it in the existing lineup and e.g. not have it be associated with down-market products)

Especially since the chips experiencing horrible shortages are the cheap simple ones used for those dumb features no one even thinks about anymore.

>A simple, basic car, with the ONLY electronic control being for:

- Valve timing - Fuel injection - Oxygen and throttle - Emissions

You still need electronics for

- ABS - ESP - Airbags (- Diagnostics)

Because these are mandated.

Buy a cheap Dacia and there won't be much else except electric windows.

I found that one can live without ESP.

> Buy a cheap Dacia and there won't be much else except electric windows.

As mandated by EU law the latest Dacia models already have most of those, they do have back up cameras, for example.

> I found that one can live without ESP.

True, but on average ESP is highly effective. Cars with ESP are correlated with 40-50% less running off the road or roll over crashes.[0] Carrie Underwood may sing about Jesus Taking the Wheel[1], but she really has GM Stabilitrak to thank.

[0] https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/... [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lydBPm2KRaU

I have a lot of thoughts about this comment, but here are my two cents.

> There's a market for budget and privacy oriented customers that all carmakers seem to have ignored for two decades now. Give us a simple car with no GPS navigation, ass warmers, tire pressure sensors, telemetry, backup cameras, USB chargers, proximity detectors, traction control, keyless entry, remote climate control, etc.

I feel like you're vastly overestimating the market size. Most non-tech people don't care about their privacy on their phone, their laptop or their TV. Most people don‘t even know that their car actually has the hardware to track them, why would they care about their privacy in their car?

> I understand the re-engineering is a cost. But when you're simply removing existing features, this should be a fairly negligible one.

I would not expect that to be fairly simple re-engineering. Many assistive technologies are mandatory in new vehicles (at least in some regions like the EU) such as automatic emergency calls, etc. Those are not standalone systems but they have many dependencies on sensors, etc. With the supply chains of traditional automakers, chances are the components necessary to integrate one mandatory system aren't even from the same supplier. This makes cherry picking features extremely hard if not impossible.

> these carmakers have decided to throw up their hands and shut down production or pile up unfinished inventory waiting on chips. It makes precisely zero sense.

I don't think it's coincidental that they decide to shut down a plant in Germany (besides the fact that Opel is originally German). In Germany we have something called "Kurzarbeitergeld" which is a support companies in trouble can receive in certain situations to support their employees. Employees continue to work a fraction of the time (50% Kurzarbeit basically means you only work half of your weekly hours, 100% Kurarbeit means you don't work at all for a certain period). The money the employees receive is largely paid for by the Government (the taxpayer).

Usually Kurarbeit comes with a very strict set of rules, but thanks to covid those rules have been loosened a bit and especially carmakers (VW and BMW) take advantage of it (BMW for example sent many of their workers into Kurzarbeit but decided to pay billions of dividends to the Quandt family). So I suspect it was cheapest to shut down the Germany plant.

Buy an old Dodge W250 with a 12-valve Cummins 6BT, and enjoy mechanical fuel injection and 160 hp. No emissions control, no timing chain or belt, no overhead cams, no aluminum block or heads, ABS is optional, no airbags.

And with that 15MPG fuel economy you get to give your maintenance savings to the gas station instead while you drive a slow uncomfortable car.

AFAIK, backup cams and TPMS are required. As for privacy, how do any of those features affect anything?

But they're not changing their lineups, product design and marketing are expensive and take a long time. I don't think shrine expects the shortage to last that long.

>AFAIK, backup cams and TPMS are required.

Backup cameras are indeed mandated by law in the US for all new cars and have been since 2018.

Good news, you can buy this car today. It is called the Mitsubishi Mirage. Hardly anyone buys it because it is an absolutely dreadful car to drive.

Every time I hear about self-driving, I just think how bad every media system UI and functionality of BT, etc. in cars have ever been. I know it's probably different teams and much stricter standards for self-driving but all I ever think when using my Mazda's media center is 'fast chance I trust this team with self driving'. As far as media centers go, just make apple carplay / android auto standard...

I personally wish that the infotainment part of the vehicle was a interface cable where the customer could freely choose the platform and also have an upgrade path in the future. Making cars more like cell phones means they will assume the lifetime of a cell phone.

That’s already exist - Apple Carplay/Android Auto. Gets better with every iOS release and app update. First thing i do when i get in the car is plug my phone in and support for wireless Carplay will be major factor in my next car purchase.

tire pressure sensor, gps and e-call is needed by law.

I didn't know TPMS is mandatory in US and EU about a decade ago. It's still not mandatory in Japan so most cars except luxury or imported don't equip it. Maybe vehicle inspection program (shaken) for every two years helps to avoid using worn tires. Also maybe due to less people use run flat tires than US/EU, or roads in Japan is better.

And I'm not sure what kinds of pressure sensors cars use, but I can tell you the ones I need have been impossible to source for months.

TPMS works by calculating the RPM of the wheel and knowing the tire size and vehicle speed. Most TPMS setups don't know the actual pressure, they infer it.

Both types of systems exist, but from what I've seen the indirect TPMS systems you're describing are becoming less popular. I'm somewhat familiar with Mazdas anyhow and that's the way it's going with them.

For 2017 the Mazda6 used an indirect system: https://www.mazdausa.com/static/manuals/2017/mazda6/contents...

For 2020 it's a direct system with in-tire sensors: https://www.mazdausa.com/static/manuals/2020/mazda6/contents...

This is true of cheaper cars, like my Honda. German cars like Audis and Porsches have direct TPMS that can actually tell you the exact tire pressure.

Most Audis have indirect systems, but they have direct TPMS as an optional extra. At least that's the case on the European market, unsure about the US market. Some premium Audis also have loose wheel detection, which is based on a similar technology as the indirect TPMS.

Oh, interesting. Well, my car at least has sensors—either that or I paid way too much for valve stems. :)

And rear view cameras

Maybe we should amend/change those laws back.

Perhaps we shouldn't.

The EU estimates that half the fatalities on the road will be prevented with these systems. That's 10.000 lives each year. If that's true, increasing the cost marginally is more than worth it (and it really is marginally, budget cars have not noticably increased in price).

They probably estimated from behind a desk to justify some activity, not by research. Over 90% of the fatalities on the road in my country, that has the highest numbers in EU, come from excessive speed and ignoring road laws, something no current safety systems can change. Even airbags are completely useless in a front collision at 150km/h.

Good news, the EU realizes that as well. Starting May 2022 all new cars sold in the EU need to support Intelligent Speed Adaptation: https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/european-union-speed-limi...

> budget cars have not noticably increased in price

Actually, they did. The new Dacia Logan starts at 8500 euros, back in 2009 you could buy an entry-level one at about 5500-6000 euros, which would be around 6400-7000 euros in today's money. At those entry level prices those extra 1500-2000 euros do count.

Those systems are good for idiot-proofing. You don't want some idiot with underinflated tires running off the highway. In the same way, you don't want them to back over your kid in a parking lot.

It might make zero sense as a buyer but as a manufacturer it makes a lot of sense. I would guesstimate that most of the margin is made on luxury and add-on features. A good example of this is rims: larger rims don't change anything for a daily driver, but you can add them as an option for a considerable premium. Same for many other add-ons and they're still bought very often. In addition to this, while there definitely is a certain subset of the market that would appreciate a product with considerably fewer features, my gut feeling is that it's the same in automobiles as in tech — it's a very small part of the market.

Some side by sides or UTVs are pretty close to what you are asking for. As these vehicles are not universally road legal they don't have many requirements, it is really up to the market. Many are under $10k and have relatively few electronics. Some of them can be operated on public roads at lower speeds. And when you are no longer designing a vehicle for 70-90+ speeds you can make a lot of other changes, engine 1/4 the size, lighter wheels, brakes, frame while still being able to tow as much as a mid size suv.

Most of the tech results in absolutely critical safety features. Backup/blind spot cams, safer cruise control, breaking systems, etc etc. Nobody is begging for more dangerous cars.

I like your thinking & I wish this was a thing, but even if it were legal to sell new cars w/out ABS, traction control, backup cameras, etc., it seems like anyone who would actually follow thru w/ buying a car like that could just buy a used car - or buy a car w/ a salvage title & replace everything to their exact preferences - for way less than a new car costs anyway

I believe backup cameras and TPMS systems are now mandatory for US cars, so some of the complexity is mandated at least for “production” vehicles.

I think that keyless systems came after few incidents of people's key chains being too heavy and accidentally turning the car off when hitting a bump on the highway.

Since most cars keys already, from the late 90s, had chips in them, to prevent theft. It was the next step to remove the superfluous metal part.

I love keyless entry. I can approach the car with two hands full of bags and still manage to open a door or trunk without having to free up a hand just so I can rummage through pockets to find the keys.

So what about airbags? Or ABS? Those are basic safety features that cannot work without electronics.

That sounds like the Dacia and Tata approaches, although they sell addon packs as well.

Dacia's addon packages are pretty tame since you need to get an addon package for an FM radio or for height-adjustable seats.

I disagree with most of the people responding to you; I think if Toyota re-released the 2000 Tacoma with minor updates to the stereo system and a webcam on the back they'd do a billion in sales.

By the time you finish the product design and manufacturing pipeline the chip shortage will be long over, and the market for a car without any modern amenities is not actually that big.

Almost everything you have mentioned are expensive add-ons. Any budget base model car today comes only with stuff mandated by law and little else.

> tire pressure sensors ... luxury features

These are to keep people alive! They aren't luxuries unless you think living is a luxury!

Completely agree and it's because they don't want to make great cars they want to make profit on add-ons.

You assert removing those "luxury" items results in a car that is immune to chip supply issues.

Tire pressure sensors, ABS, ESP, airbags, etc. are compulsory in new cars in most countries.

You are welcome to buy the most basic Dacia at any time

This is a surefire way to sell hundreds of cars. Yes, hundreds!

I want something (exactly) like a Ford Escort 1988 model with the 1.6 diesel (Ford LT "Dagenham") engine.

That thing would work long after a massive solar flare and nuclear apocalypse... If it wasn't rusted to shit.

So yeah, better alloy/treatment for the frame :D

I like your idea. The only reason all those accessories are mandated, is because the car industry made it so, thus increasing the value (profit) of a standard car. We could just as easily 'mandate', a different class of vehicle. Call it a classic class, or something. For example, motorcycles don't have back up cameras, air bags, etc. Back to the consumer having a choice. Similar to right to repair.

Motorcycles don’t have a reverse gear and airbags only help if you have seatbelts. Not sure what your point is. Motorcycles are radically more dangerous for riders than passenger cars are for drivers.

> motorcycles don't have back up cameras, air bags, etc.

why do you think that is?

Organ donation lobby no doubt.