Even before having been involved in a car accident two years ago, I have always been annoyed with the car industry, and looked on incredulously at the kind of racket that people are suckered into dealing with. Buying a car is like being forced to consume a lifestyle brand, being the result of what amounts to light collusion from automakers to offer nothing else. Since the accident, forced to have dealt with a process that I had been able to avoid up to that point by sticking with my past purchase and staving off the temptation for anything newer and shinier (which wasn't really very tempting at all, given the status quo in the car industry), I have become only more convinced of the need for a reliable $5000 "Costco car". It's a special source of despair knowing that low-income people get ensnared under the current regime that ends with them thinking that the the best option is to pour so much money into $10–20–30k cars that end up being junk, or else risk gambling on something in a lower price range.
Musk professes to have a mission of weaning it off its addiction to fossil fuels, but at Tesla's luxury car prices for what are luxury products, it's not going to make much of a dent, at least not very quickly. The availability of a no-frills EV with reasonable (i.e. next to zero recurring) maintenance costs would almost certainly contribute more to humanity than all the work so far that's gone into SpaceX and Tesla combined.
Cars are a hidden drain on society. In part because, like you said, its a $10k-$30k admission ticket just to participate in society. In fact its worse than that, because people don't see the hidden costs. When you pay for an Uber or a train ticket, the full price of your transit is up front. When someone gets in their car, they aren't thinking about all the effective price of owning the car per day. They just see the immediate marginal price of things like gas and tolls. As a result, they have extremely skewed view and make deeply irrational choices. Eg people see the sticker price of using Uber and think its "obviously" more expensive than driving yourself. In truth, if there are public transit options most of the time but you would still sometimes be stranded without a car, taking an Uber up to 3 times per week is cheaper than owning it yourself.
Say you own a $36,500 car for 10 years. I'd call that a bit more pricey than normal, but also a bit longer than normal. You can buy cheaper but the lower quality won't last as long so let's just use these numbers for now. When you work it out, owning such a car will cost $10 per day just to have the privilege of letting it sit in your drive way. Tack on insurance price per day ($4.50 per day by some quote I looked up) and effective maintenance costs ($? per day) and you've already spent over $15 each day before even leaving your garage. Even in your costco card example, say you treat it well and made a $5000 car last for 3 years. That's still about $4.50 per day just for the privilege of having it plus the insurance (maybe a bit cheaper for the cheap car?). The "costco car" option is still more expensive per day than taking the metro, and that's before you even left your driveway!
Sad this is down voted, IIAOPSW has a great point.
We as a society pay a lot to support a car infrastructure. From crappy land usage for parking lots, which necessitates increased property taxes on everyone else, to land that could be used for housing/businesses instead being used for roads.
Add on top of that the number of injuries, and how much time we have to spend in cars because we live in a society designed around cars, personal vehicles are a huge dead weight cost.
I'm not saying everyone needs to give up their cars, but families having more cars than people is insane.
> We as a society pay a lot to support a car infrastructure.
With a large part of the world having had lockdowns, I’ve been surprised at the readiness to go back to normal where cars are concerned.
As someone currently locked down, the silence is amazing. I hear the odd power tool, or pet, lots of bird song and maybe some noisey human. I hear push bikes coming down the hill, long before they pass me.
The typical city noise of cars, engines, tyres, horns etc is so very very obnoxious, quite apart from the points raised above.
There was an interesting thread here on HN recently on a link between road noise and dementia.
You are right, few people are aware how high the costs of just owning a car are. Fortunately, here in Europe, a car isn't mandatory everywhere. While there are remote locations in the countryside where you really want a car, a large part of the population can get by quite well with public transport. And once you got rid of your car, you save so much money that you can easily afford to occasionally call a taxi, if a car is absolutely needed.
A car that sells new for the price of the Chery is not going to have good safety measures and will be a death trap in an accident. Cars today can last a long time if you take care of them. New they cost a lot, but after about 10 years most are in a much more affordable price range. Sure you may have to spend a little more on maintenance, but still.
The key with all of this is spending the time to maintain them mechanically and physically. I have always done that which is why I am still driving a 20 and 17 year old cars (along with a newer Chevy Volt). Most people think they look close to being like new.
Sure it takes some time to wash them myself, add protective sealants/polishes to the outside, protectant in the inside, leather preservers to the seats, keep up on the repairs etc., but the reduced insurance costs and overall running costs make it an easy thing to do.
In the US most people do not take care of their cars, mechanically and physically they often start to look really bad after about 10-15 years (even in the milder southern and western climates) and people just junk them and buy new. In some other countries people take care of them and you see the net result of people with cars over 20 years old in good condition still being driven.
My car (at 200,000+ miles at the time of the accident) was exactly such a case of "take care of it, and all will be well", which is why I was able to avoid dealing with the nightmare that is the auto industry today. (It's also why I still think of that one as "my car," while the others I own today do not.) Again, being well-aware of the worth of a car that is well taken care of by experiencing it firsthand and having spent some time looking for something that would allow me to replicate the previous 10+ years of car ownership, you're not really teaching me anything. Because at the end of the day, it comes down to the affordances offered to you by the market, and the market deals in junk.
I don't know what you are expecting. A 200k mile car that lasted ten years before an accident is something I would consider as "well built".
How many miles do you drive each year? What kind of car did you expect to get, and how many miles+years would you expect it to operate at to be considered "well built".
You have misunderstood something. Yes, that car was worth the price. It is the benchmark against which I am measuring newer cars. "Cars today", which is what we are talking about, give an experience that is unlike that one. (Including the Chevy Bolt @ $14k that you mention in your other comment, which is more like a Walmart car than a Costco car, and nowhere close to the price point I mentioned or the cost/value ratio of the reference car.) That that car lasted 200k, and would have been on its way to last another 100k at least, underscores my point, not undermines it.
For the reason above, the question is not "What kind of car did you expect?" It's "What kind of car do you expect to get?" And the answer is, "Considering the opportunity we have had to make technological progress, I would expect that I should be able to find a car today that is at least as good as that one. I should definitely not expect to be disappointed to find that as a general rule what's available is so much worse."
> My car (at 200,000+ miles at the time of the accident) was exactly such a case of "take care of it, and all will be well"
Bargain priced domestic-market cars in China have a reputation for needing major repairs within the first couple years of ownership.
We had vehicles like this in the US in the 70s -- it is possible to build vehicles very cheaply with the use of cheap materials. But today, even the cheapest cars in the US make extensive use of anticorrosive coatings, ultra-high-strength steel, and have extensive active and passive safety systems.
That car would be a death trap in the U.S. because most Americans feel the need to choose their personal vehicle as if it's some sort of urban tank. It would get crushed by even a small SUV or truck.
I'd love to live in a world where it's safe to be on the road driving a scooter, moped, smartcar, etc., without worrying if Karen in her Humvee is going to flatten me because she literally can't see the street within 20ft of her bumper.
I like your "Costco car" phrase! When I read the article, I saw a car under $5000 that fits the needs of many US citizens automotive needs and thought "why can't we have that over here?"... instead we're pushed $50,000 pickup trucks and cars capable of reaching 150+ mph with price tags to match. We need the "Costco car" you speak of!
> why can't we have that over here?" (snip) We need the "Costco car" you speak of!
We already have them. A "Costco Car" built to meet all minimum US safety standards is how you get stuff like the 2021 Chevy Spark (retail out-the-door price of about $14,000 brand new - https://www.chevrolet.com/cars/spark . It's cheap enough that a working fresh graduate could buy one brand new, off-the-lot. (approx $240/month or so on a 60 month loan)
Most people don't like "Costco Cars". Stuff like the Chevy Spark, or Mitsubishi Mirage, or the Nissan Versa -- they generally aren't as comfortable in seats or interior trim or interior features, they aren't as fun to drive, they tend to be louder and lighter which can make them feel unsafe (even though they aren't), they aren't very big or roomy, they generally won't impress anybody, etc.
But you can buy a "Costco Car" from any Chevy dealership anywhere in the US today, if you really want one.
The above commenter was saying we needed a "Costco Car" that was actually an EV to increase EV sales. Despite it's EV sounding name the Chevy Spark to date has never been an EV.
Chevy's Bolt, their current closest to an entry model EV, still starts at $36,500.
According to your link that was a limited production run from 2013 to 2016 and $31,000 is a far cry from the Chery QQ's $5000 price tag.
You may be technically correct about the previous poster's claims, but that says nothing to the fact that we simply don't have a low cost, low expectation electric vehicle in the USA.
One reason unfortunately is you have to share the road with those $50k pickup trucks and I would not want to be in a $5000 box anywhere near those things. I've seen a video once of a lifted pickup hitting a small economy hatchback. It was horrific.
Absolutely, but successfully enacting such measures would mean political violence, which is a whole different thing from traffic deaths, and even attempting it would probably lead to a wave of elections going toward the party promising not to do it (and likely to do a bunch of other things that are the governance equivalent of punching yourself in the face—god, our politics are dumb in this country). You think people get upset about any hint of gun regulation, look out if you go after big trucks. No-one's going to be crazy enough to try it, though yes, we definitely should take measures to drastically reduce the number of large personal vehicles on the road, in an ideal world.
Nobody in the USA will buy it. Anyone who claims they will, and doesn't own a Mitsubishi Mirage or first-gen Nissan Versa is lying. These cars stayed under $10k new for a while, and yet never really sold well in the USA. It was even possible to get a Ford Fiesta for <$10k new after discounts up until they stopped selling them in the USA. They seriously sat on lots for 2-3 years before being auctioned off (and probably sold at used car dealerships for more than they sold for new).
Americans don't buy cheap new cars, and it's not because they don't exist. Manufactures would love to get Americans buying cheap new cars, but Americans stubbornly refuse to. They claim to want cheap new cars, but they take one look at an actually cheap car and decide that a 10 year old <nice car> is a better buy.
Honestly, I don't think our auto industry is the result of soft collusion at all. I think it's 95% due to market forces (and 5% regulation that basically gives companies a break for producing what the market wants).
The car market naturally bifurcated itself such that wealthier individuals buy new cars, that they trade in on a frequent timeline, and are sold used to lower income buyers.
The reason I believe this is because there have been tons of great, small, cheap cars sold in the US, and they have never succeeded. The quintessential example would be the Honda Fit or Scion xB. Both were very cheap cars, with a relatively large, usable interior, and rock solid reliability. None of these cars lasted in the USA for more than two generations. And the second gen xB is basically a totally different car from the first gen.
For better or worse, the majority of low cost car buyers believe in, "Why buy a new <cheap car> when you could get a five year old <nice car> for the same price?" I honestly thinks that the majority of buyers have been brainwashed to think that used cars are always a better deal, because it's not uncommon for lightly used cars to cost more after two years than they did new. That really only makes sense if used car shoppers aren't even bothering to price new cars.
Another point of reference: the best selling vehicles in the USA are all full sized pickup trucks. In their financial statements, Ford reports the number of F150s sold for >$50k.
> None of these cars lasted in the USA for more than two generations. And the second gen xB is basically a totally different car from the first gen.
The 2nd gen xB had none of the charm of the first generation, and then it wasn't updated for ages, then it vanished.
Then Kia came along with the Soul and basically proved the market for a box car was still there, it just had to be a good value.
IMHO Kia has gone down the same road with the Soul that Toyota did with the xB, the new souls are larger and more expensive, and they don't have as much personality.
I would say Musk 100% agrees with the need to lower costs here, and they are aggressively trying to get there.
However, much better than low cost cars would be robo-taxis, as the utilization rate on cars for people is low that this dramatically changes the economics. Musk and others realize this, which is why they are pursuing it so vigorously.
Its much better for the poor and for the environment to have a fleet of $30k cars @ 70% utilization than a bunch of $10k cars at 5% utilization.
VW may be on the path to delivering such a "Costco EV car" in the near future, but haven't hit it today. Their ID.3 is the current closest, isn't sold in America, and starts at 33.900 Euros (roughly USD$39,700 at today's exchange rate).
I think the modern replacement of VW in this respect might be Dacia. They are selling bare minimum cars at an affordable price. They just introduced the "Spring" which is a small 4-seated electric car starting below 20k€, after subsidies you can get it in Germany for less than 10k€.
Interesting. Dacia is in the Renault family. I enjoy seeing what Renault have been doing in Europe, though as an American it is mostly watching with envy. Their closest relative in the US is Nissan America and they are just awful and extremely out of touch. (They barely sell the Leaf and still haven't really brought any other of Nissan's EV efforts to the US market, and certainly don't have anything like the Renault Zoe much less a Dacia type low end model.)
What's nice about that is that if you're not sucked in by the lifestyle branding you can get what's basically a VW — VW, SEAT and Skoda share engines, gearboxes, even most of the knobs and UI — for quite a lot cheaper. SEAT and Skoda list prices are somewhat lower, and dealers will knock more off too, in my experience (we got a new SEAT at about 1/3rd off).
China has about twice the purchasing power of the US. So the Chery QQ would be like buying a $8k car in the US accounting for PPP. Outside of the current pandemic used car market, $8K will buy a pretty great used car and will be more practical than the Chery QQ. e.g. I can buy a 2003 Honda Pilot 4WD for $5,600 which probably has a good 200k miles left.
People buy expensive cars because they want expensive stuff and don't know any better. As long as these people exist the cheap vehicle market will be fulfilled by used vehicles. It would be hard to make a new vehicle compete with a slightly used one at the same price because newer vehicles are subject to higher taxes and emissions standards.
That said we certainly need cheap electric vehicles which means we need enough new EVs so that the used EV market grows. The Cherry QQ only has a range of ~120 miles and top speed of 60mph. I just looked and I can get a used 2015 Nissan Leaf S for $12K which is a much better value overall.
> e.g. I can buy a 2003 Honda Pilot 4WD for $5,600 which probably has a good 200k miles left.
I frankly would not take that bet. There are many catastrophic (costing more than the purchase price) repairs that can come up between 100k and 200k. If its survived that long it probably has more left in it, but a lot depends on how its been driven and maintained.
> China has about twice the purchasing power of the US. So the Chery QQ would be like buying a $8k car in the US accounting for PPP. Outside of the current pandemic used car market, $8K will buy a pretty great used car and will be more practical than the Chery QQ. e.g. I can buy a 2003 Honda Pilot 4WD for $5,600 which probably has a good 200k miles left.
Except China doesn't have used cars. All cars have to be scrapped after 8 years, and can be pulled from the road much earlier by any arbitrarily imposed new safety, or emissions regulation.
> I have become only more convinced of the need for a reliable $5000 "Costco car".
As a person who hates cars and think they are ludicrously expensive, I agree. My next car will be an e-bike if I can get away with it, because that's probably the closest thing there is to a $5000 reliable car.
I fully agree. And this obsession with shiny delicate paint everywhere, so that even the slightest smudge shows up making the car look worn and dirty and old. On top of that, the slightest dent can't be popped or hammered out, and it just encourages the viewing of cars as lifestyle items rather than utilitarian ones.
We need a kind of bike type of car, everyone can get one fairly easy and they are durable and last almost forever if you take some care. In reality, we need to go back to walkable neighborhoods with shops and cafes within a few minutes walk and light rail to connect everything further.
regular and electric bikes. let’s replace parking on major urban streets with dedicated, protected bike lanes. along with dedicated bus lanes with synchronized lights, we could replace a lot of car trips with just these two changes in how we use our existing streets.
LA, where i live, is so perfect for these two changes (given the mostly mild year-round weather and relative flatness) that it pains me every day looking at how poorly we’re using our limited land and air resources (including the relative dearth of dense mixed-use along major corridors).
After my accident, for a while I blew so much money on Lyft to travel to the office and back, which was a fairly straightforward 10-mile trip one-way.
Later, after the pandemic started, I watched the movie 1922 (although I don't really recommend). Having been through the previous ordeal, the simplicity of the family's unassuming farm truck was not unnoticed. For all the money I spent on Lyft, I would have much more happily dropped it on a car similar to the one from the movie, even if it meant open-air cooling (no AC) and a top speed of 35mph.
If the best part is no part, than we have to ask ourselves if we truly need a car for daily living or that we could transform society in such a way that don't require cars for daily living.
What do we need a car for? To transport heavy objects or people over distance longer than a bicycle or a human in a reasonable amount of time in a manner more flexible than a bus or a train.
I agree with this in principle, and would have agreed even prior to the accident, but in reality, after the period where I was forced into a "no car" lifestyle, yes, you actually do need a car in the meantime, at least while waiting for society to transform itself.
I don't buy on billionaires dreams, if Elon wanted to help humanity, he would focus on making Teslas more affordable and/or other projects that impact more closely the environment/people's life. Obviously, everyone spend their money in the way they want, but the non ending hypocrisy coming from those people is truly disgusting.
Tesla is focused on making more affordable cars. But they need to get to a level of scale which will enable cheaper cars. There are basic economics related to battery production which prevent a really affordable car atm. This the problem they are solving right now. The Model 2 is expected to be announced in 2023. That will be their $25k car. And I would imagine later in the decade they will be able to release a car sub $20k.
Tesla doesn’t have to be the one that makes the cheap car (even though indications are that they will, at least for the Asian markets) — making electric cars that are cool and capable and prove that it can be done it still immensely valuable.
And there are plenty of electric cars in the same rough segment as the Model 3 — but not many much cheaper. Which should probably tell you something about how easy/feasible it is. Tesla nor anyone else has a magic wand here.
Musk professes to have a mission of weaning it off its addiction to fossil fuels, but at Tesla's luxury car prices for what are luxury products, it's not going to make much of a dent, at least not very quickly. The availability of a no-frills EV with reasonable (i.e. next to zero recurring) maintenance costs would almost certainly contribute more to humanity than all the work so far that's gone into SpaceX and Tesla combined.