Quote:
Originally Posted by Xist
I have always heard of great $1000 cars. Wouldn't they belong in the unicorn coral?  |
I've had quite a few sub-$1000 cars that were nice.. they took a bit of work at first to undo the neglect they had seen at the hands of their FPO's but that's the key to a great cheap car, find one that's mostly sound but isn't running, then fix it.
I do get rather tired of (mostly older people) saying "DARN COMPUTERS ARE TOO COMPLICATED WHY DON'T WE JUST HAVE CARBURETORS" - fuel injection systems aren't really that difficult to operate. Yes, whole modules can simply die and need to be replaced as a unit - but diagnosing them isn't the nightmare that carbophiles make it out to be. The cars are smarter, don't blame them for your failure to do the same.
That said, high tech doesn't need to be synonymous with high complexity. In 1999 I made the leap from an 87 Mitsubishi with a parsec of vacuum hoses and an oxygen sensor controlled carburetor affectionately called The Rubik's Carb to a 99 Hyundai with one vacuum hose under the hood and generally as tidy and well-ordered an engine compartment as I had seen (that was me at 21 buying a brand new car on warehouse schmuck wages). The vehicle was undoubtedly higher technology, producing similar power from a third less displacement and other refinements - but I'm pretty sure it had a much lower piece count under the hood. Lower piece counts are good.
I'd love to see an automotive industry that bases their business model on the idea of 20 year+ cars. Make them modular and sell us the modules. Instead of profiting from selling brand new cars to those who can afford them (and almost no other profit), sell brand new cars that can be renewed and upgraded with engineered-in modularity. Finance buyers a hybrid powertrain for their 10 year old Jeep, made possible because you deliberately built the new ones around the same mounting points so it snaps right in to several years' and models of vehicle.