|
I think eventually more small cars will appear. However, most won't be manual and most won't be petrol. They will all be EV with a smattering of hybrids.
FIAT is doing a new 500 based on the 500e which will be a hybrid of some sort, we have the new Renault 5 coming next year, VAG are planning a new small EV (ID1/2) and there will be new stuff from the Chinese.
So, yes, we are in a bit of a desert small car wise at the moment but I think the gap will be filled eventually.
|
I think eventually more small cars will appear. However, most won't be manual and most won't be petrol. They will all be EV with a smattering of hybrids.
FIAT is doing a new 500 based on the 500e which will be a hybrid of some sort, we have the new Renault 5 coming next year, VAG are planning a new small EV (ID1/2) and there will be new stuff from the Chinese.
So, yes, we are in a bit of a desert small car wise at the moment but I think the gap will be filled eventually.
There might be 'vehicles', but a good deal of people who'd previously afford a car of that size / trim level won't ever be able to buy one new.
Many will either shy away from (likely older) second hand ones due to the costs involved and because of the risks of owning BEVs (fires, range, charging), including that a significant failure of the battery pack would mean (to them) the car would be a write off they cannot recover.
At a time when we in the West should be pulling back our 'involvement' with the Chinese, why on Earth would we want to push on? Potentially devastating the Western car market in the process by flooding it with (government-supported and INHO) cheapo inferior Chinese knock-off imports?
As we're seeing with Nissan and a good deal of other car manufacturers in the West, many are really struggling and if they go under, could lead to many millions of job losses across many Western nations in that and related industries.
|
|
|
|
Ford is a good example. They stopped doing their KA, Fiesta, and Focus. They all have a good history, but they replaced them with an ugly Fusion.
Ford stopped production of the Fusion back in 2012. Production the Focus, KA and Focus continued long after this. You can still buy a new Focus.
No wonder Jeremy Clarkson has had enough.
Most of us had enough of Clarkson years ago. Not missed him one bit since he was removed form main stream TV.
After discount and contributions you can get a Skoda Fabia MPI for around £17k new after discount and contributions, search a bit harder and you would probably pay less. Find another £500 and you would get the exact same car with the truly excellent 95PS TSi engine.
If you are happy with something less good how about a Dacia, look to be a bargain. Certainly better than a 12 year old Ford Fusion.
|
|
Like it or not the future is electric. ICE is increasingly limited to run out models and short term range gap fillers.
Small and relatively cheap EVs are on there way. Early adopters inevitably pay a premium to be first in market - hence the fairly high cost of current EV offerings. As battery costs decline prices will fall.
If you desperately want a current ICE I can do no more than recommend a Dacia Sandero - I am currently hiring a Stepway in Spain and have been very pleasantly surprised.
Adequate performance, entirely acceptable basic accommodation, never going to win prizes in the sophistication or status stakes. But very good value!!
Edited by Terry W on 19/12/2024 at 15:43
|
The new version of my car is also awful IMO. It's 20% heavier, uglier, and bigger in every dimension, but feels cramped on the inside. It's also slower and uses more fuel ??
I'm interested to learn what your current car is?
Ford is a good example. They stopped doing their KA, Fiesta, and Focus. They all have a good history, but they replaced them with an ugly Fusion.
Ford stopped production of the Fusion back in 2012. Production the Focus, KA and Focus continued long after this. You can still buy a new Focus.
I think the OP means fusion as in a combination of stylistic elements rather than the Ford Fusion (though the term Crossover would be a better fit for such a car)
|
|
|
Like it or not the future is electric.
I don't this this post will age well ??
I don't want one unless the tech can be proven. Also, I don't mind others buying electric cars, but shouldn't be funding their purchase with huge tax incentives, and shouldn't be forced to buy one myself.
|
|
Making the decision to buy a BEV relies on the assumption that the UK grid will be able to supply the power to keep it running,
You may be surprised to learn from non-mainstream sources such as this, that there are doubts both on achieving reliable power, and paying for it.
davidturver.substack.com/p/fintan-slye-outfoxes-ma...0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep - I quite agree. We're now in the era of ugly, bloated, heavy 'vehicles' that have all the appeal of a washing machine. No wonder Jeremy Clarkson has had enough.
And in my view, the engineering / build quality is now lower, because, like home appliances (including AV), they are now all built to a much tighter budget on R&D (including testing - we're now the beta testers) and have a much shorter economic lifespan built into their design.
That and the ridiculously high purchase price for new cars (which, coupled with deliberately reducing production of ICE to artificially meet mandated sales targets for EVs), safety, logistical and ownership problems with EVs will likely drive a large percentage of car owners out of that over the next decade.
One of the things I hate is all of the tech. If they didn't have so much tech, then they could either improve the quality or reduce the price. I drove a car with blind spot warnings once, and I found it quite distracting. I would probably get used to it, but why would I pay for it? Don't get me started on the need to use a tablet to operate the heating controls ??
|
|
I agree on the tech...much of it is now legislated directly or indirectly. I've a 7 year old MX-5 and value aside I wouldn't swap it for a new one with an energy recovering capacitor and stop start. It's just unnecessary because the benefit is negligible.
One thing I like about Mazda is that they have not gone the tiny engine+turbo route, and they have also not taken up DCTs. When not in the MX-5 we like autos, and were the DSG in our 10 year old Roomster to pack up, I think we'd go for a Mazda 2 with a proper epicyclic torque converter gearbox. DCT's are a complex bodge in my book.
|
I agree on the tech...much of it is now legislated directly or indirectly. I've a 7 year old MX-5 and value aside I wouldn't swap it for a new one with an energy recovering capacitor and stop start. It's just unnecessary because the benefit is negligible..
I think the rot set in somewhere around the new millennium. Basic simple car technology had been just about optimised, so makers had to invent new gizmos to add novelty and keep the buying cycle running. The gizmos, not surprisingly, got steadily less 'useful', and seemed to be a continuing challenge for nerds to see what could be computerised next.
For some reason autonomous cars seem to have lost a bit of momentum ?
|
I think the rot set in somewhere around the new millennium. Basic simple car technology had been just about optimised, so makers had to invent new gizmos to add novelty and keep the buying cycle running. The gizmos, not surprisingly, got steadily less 'useful', and seemed to be a continuing challenge for nerds to see what could be computerised next.
I am not sure whether it is the manufacturers or the EU which has mandated fitment of "safety" technology - possibly a joint effort.
I am unconvinced by some - in the current hire car I now disable stop start and have worked out how to switch off the lane assist system which otherwise continually bleeps its displeasure and tugs the steering (totally distracting)
These systems clearly increase the cost and complexity of cars - as most major manufacturers generate profit margins in the 3-8% range the high prices seem mainly due to high costs not exploitative - possibly not helped by increased R&D, transition to EV etc.
For some reason autonomous cars seem to have lost a bit of momentum ?
A recent and fairly comprehensive summary of where things are at the moment. Still some hurdles to overcome but they estimate 2030 for likely availability.
Driverless cars: all you need to know about self-driving cars | Auto Express
|
|
|
|
I looked at new cars recently and most of them are awful, unless you want something that runs on batteries. I want a small and simple petrol car, with manual transmission, and there are hardly any.
Out of curiosity I just had a wee look on Autotrader for brand new hatchbacks under £20k with petrol engine and manual gearbox. There are 844 of them, from 13 different manufacturers.
Cheapest were a couple of Fiat 500's under £13k.
Most "bang per buck" would appear to be the Citroen C4 with the 130bhp engine starting at under £19k. I do quite like these anyway, but as they would probably sway into the Crossover territory, probably a no no for the OP!
Skoda Fabia starts under £14.5k for the n/a 1.0, but spending an extra grand to get into the 95bhp TSI would seem wise. If you need a bit more space, Scala's (with the same TSI engine) are also available within the remit, one of which (at £16,590) is just under £6.7k under rrp!
So yes, not sure the OP's claim stacks up?
(and still curious to learn what car?)
|
(and still curious to learn what car?)
They did post upthread that they had an old Citroen C1
|
|
To the OP, nothing wrong with the latest Aygo X, fairly simple, nice normally aspirated 3 pot engine, not a lot of power but perfectly adequate, sons got the last of the regular Aygo, same car basically, and it's a genuinely nice car.
I've got a swift, latest shape with the new 1.2 3 pot engine, it's currently averaging 62mpg, not complaining about that, yes it has a lot of tech etc. I honestly believe the hybrid component does help with fuel consumption and works in the background, the only time I can feel it getting involved is under mild acceleration when you can feel a little 'push'. As for adding weight well yes of course it does ( battery is under the passenger seat and is the size of a cereal box) but the whole car weighs under 1000kg.
Lastly your comment about the tech not being proven in ev cars, not exactly sure what you mean, there's millions of them currently ( pun?) running around reliably in near silence.
Edited by paul 1963 on 19/12/2024 at 19:26
|
To the OP, nothing wrong with the latest Aygo X, fairly simple, nice normally aspirated 3 pot engine, not a lot of power but perfectly adequate, sons got the last of the regular Aygo, same car basically, and it's a genuinely nice car.
I've got a swift, latest shape with the new 1.2 3 pot engine, it's currently averaging 62mpg, not complaining about that, yes it has a lot of tech etc. I honestly believe the hybrid component does help with fuel consumption and works in the background, the only time I can feel it getting involved is under mild acceleration when you can feel a little 'push'. As for adding weight well yes of course it does ( battery is under the passenger seat and is the size of a cereal box) but the whole car weighs under 1000kg.
Lastly your comment about the tech not being proven in ev cars, not exactly sure what you mean, there's millions of them currently ( pun?) running around reliably in near silence.
I need confidence that an EV won't burn my house down. I also don't see how we'll be able to build all the infrastructure. How much copper is needed? How many batteries are needed? How many more power stations will be needed? How many additional substations are needed?
|
To the OP, nothing wrong with the latest Aygo X, fairly simple, nice normally aspirated 3 pot engine, not a lot of power but perfectly adequate, sons got the last of the regular Aygo, same car basically, and it's a genuinely nice car.
I've got a swift, latest shape with the new 1.2 3 pot engine, it's currently averaging 62mpg, not complaining about that, yes it has a lot of tech etc. I honestly believe the hybrid component does help with fuel consumption and works in the background, the only time I can feel it getting involved is under mild acceleration when you can feel a little 'push'. As for adding weight well yes of course it does ( battery is under the passenger seat and is the size of a cereal box) but the whole car weighs under 1000kg.
Lastly your comment about the tech not being proven in ev cars, not exactly sure what you mean, there's millions of them currently ( pun?) running around reliably in near silence.
I need confidence that an EV won't burn my house down. I also don't see how we'll be able to build all the infrastructure. How much copper is needed? How many batteries are needed? How many more power stations will be needed? How many additional substations are needed?
Do you remember when petrol cars were new? Probably not, but there was no infrastructure for making petrol/moving it/selling it/no proper roads etc - but it's all been built since then. So it can be done.
|
|
|
I need confidence that an EV won't burn my house down. I also don't see how we'll be able to build all the infrastructure. How much copper is needed? How many batteries are needed? How many more power stations will be needed? How many additional substations are needed?
An EV is less likely to burn your house down than a petrol (or diesel) car.
I would suggest the infrastructure is not really your problem. However, we won't be needing more power stations as our electricity use is declining. It gets harder the closer.you get to the consumer, so that's where the problem might be. Expect to see more subsidies for solar panels and battery storage soon.
|
I need confidence that an EV won't burn my house down. I also don't see how we'll be able to build all the infrastructure. How much copper is needed? How many batteries are needed? How many more power stations will be needed? How many additional substations are needed?
An EV is less likely to burn your house down than a petrol (or diesel) car.
I Seriously doubt that. I cannot remember loads of stories of that happening. Whilst (per car on the road) EV fires might be rare, that may increase as EVs are more common and charging becomes more prevalent, and where people living in flats or working in offices / shopping and using underground / multi-storey / unattended communal car parks also charge their cars when away from them.
The problem is that with EV battery fires being so much more intense, are not capable of being extinguished and give off far more deadly fumes, I suspect that there will be a LOT of really nasty incidents in the coming years.
I would suggest the infrastructure is not really your problem. However, we won't be needing more power stations as our electricity use is declining. It gets harder the closer.you get to the consumer, so that's where the problem might be. Expect to see more subsidies for solar panels and battery storage soon.
Subsidies that transfer more and more wealth from the ordinary and poorer people to the (already) rich and powerful and those in such positions in several rather nasty foreign powers, like the CCP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(and still curious to learn what car?)
They did post upthread that they had an old Citroen C1
Ah, missed that!
I have an old Citroen C1, and it's replacement would be the Aygo X ??
Well as much as I like its looks, I'm not really a fan of the Aygo X because it is so poorly packaged (if you want to see what is possible within the same overall length and wheelbase, look at the Suzuki Ignis).
The new version of my car is also awful IMO. It's 20% heavier, uglier, and bigger in every dimension, but feels cramped on the inside. It's also slower and uses more fuel ??
Haven't actually sat inside an Aygo X, but my understanding is that while there is less space in the back, there is more space in the front. Also, the boot of the Aygo X has 90% more volume.
As for economy, are you talking about what is claimed?. If so, you need to bear in mind that when your C1 was new, claimed MPG was under the NEDC system. It was hopelessly optimistic and was replaced by WLTP system, which is far closer to what you can actually achieve. Claimed (NEDC) MPG for your C1 was 61.4-65.7, claimed (WLTP) MPG for the Aygo X is 58.9. But according to the Real MPG section of this website the Aygo X is actually more efficient than your C1 (56.6MPG vs 55.1)
And I have no doubt in an accident, you'd be much better off in the Aygo X!
|
(and still curious to learn what car?)
They did post upthread that they had an old Citroen C1
Ah, missed that!
I have an old Citroen C1, and it's replacement would be the Aygo X ??
Well as much as I like its looks, I'm not really a fan of the Aygo X because it is so poorly packaged (if you want to see what is possible within the same overall length and wheelbase, look at the Suzuki Ignis).
The new version of my car is also awful IMO. It's 20% heavier, uglier, and bigger in every dimension, but feels cramped on the inside. It's also slower and uses more fuel ??
Haven't actually sat inside an Aygo X, but my understanding is that while there is less space in the back, there is more space in the front. Also, the boot of the Aygo X has 90% more volume.
As for economy, are you talking about what is claimed?. If so, you need to bear in mind that when your C1 was new, claimed MPG was under the NEDC system. It was hopelessly optimistic and was replaced by WLTP system, which is far closer to what you can actually achieve. Claimed (NEDC) MPG for your C1 was 61.4-65.7, claimed (WLTP) MPG for the Aygo X is 58.9. But according to the Real MPG section of this website the Aygo X is actually more efficient than your C1 (56.6MPG vs 55.1)
And I have no doubt in an accident, you'd be much better off in the Aygo X!
I sat in an Aygo X and felt really cramped. In contrast, my C1 is fine.
I was looking at the claimed fuel consumption. I can see the 'real mpg' on here shows it being a bit better (about 2mpg), but there are only 7 submissions for the X, so it's hard to draw conclusions from that. I think it also has start/stop, so 2mpg improvement would seem pretty poor given that it's slower.
|
|
|
|
|
I looked at new cars recently and most of them are awful, unless you want something that runs on batteries. I want a small and simple petrol car, with manual transmission, and there are hardly any.
Out of curiosity I just had a wee look on Autotrader for brand new hatchbacks under £20k with petrol engine and manual gearbox. There are 844 of them, from 13 different manufacturers.
Cheapest were a couple of Fiat 500's under £13k.
Skoda Fabia starts under £14.5k for the n/a 1.0, but spending an extra grand to get into the 95bhp TSI would seem wise. If you need a bit more space, Scala's (with the same TSI engine) are also available within the remit, one of which (at £16,590) is just under £6.7k under rrp!
So yes, not sure the OP's claim stacks up?
After having a closer look, there are more manuals than I thought. The websites seem to be quite good at hiding the specs. However, the choice is still quite limited. Let me give you some examples.
Mini - all auto's?
BMW - all auto's?
Mercedes - all auto's?
Honda - all auto's?
Toyota seem to do two manual cars: Aygo X, which is awful IMO, and GR Yaris, which is good, but not everybody wants a hot hatch.
|
Mini - all auto's?
BMW - all auto's?
Mercedes - all auto's?
Honda - all auto's?
Horses for courses and all, but I much prefer an auto anyway. In our congested roads, why would yiou want anything else?
I do like the current Jazz but am put off by the reliability issues. As for Mini, BMW and Merc?, wouldn't want any of them!
|
|
Manufacturers are going with what the market wants. Younger drivers are increasingly learning auto only. They have zero interest in a manual.Very few people go back from auto to manual. Basically the demand is waning. EVs and hybrids are default auto.
As far as only offering EVs, well manufactures have to. We can argue whether that is right but it is irrelevant as the manufacturers will only sell what they are allowed to. They're not going to invest in new manual small cars when they will only be able to sell them for 5 years.
There is demand for small cars but they'll be EV, hybrid and auto ever increasingly.
Edited by pd on 19/12/2024 at 20:34
|
Manufacturers are going with what the market wants.
Apart from the manual/auto choice you mention, this is chicken and egg, surely. Buyers in the market can only want things which makers already offer, unless enough of them create a pressure group of some kind. Initiatives must come from the makers, who come up with some odd stuff much of the time. Styling in particular is going through a bad patch IMHO.
|
Manufacturers are going with what the market wants.
Apart from the manual/auto choice you mention, this is chicken and egg, surely. Buyers in the market can only want things which makers already offer, unless enough of them create a pressure group of some kind. Initiatives must come from the makers, who come up with some odd stuff much of the time. Styling in particular is going through a bad patch IMHO.
Yes. I don't remember members of the public walking into manufacturers premises and demanding to have this or that. It's designed and incorporated, then the public have to accept it. As for styling, there is lots of research making engines more frugal then putting them in a bluff, heavy crossover. I can see who is winning here and it's not the environmental concern.
I read many comments on the internet about touchscreen controls for ventilation, none of them positive. The only reason I can see is to make things cheaper to build. No public demand for it.
|
|
<< I read many comments on the internet about touchscreen controls for ventilation, none of them positive. The only reason I can see is to make things cheaper to build. No public demand for it. >>
To be fair, having arrived at cars fitted with dozens of gizmos, if all were controlled by knobs it would be hard to see forwards. Rather like flying a jet.
|
|
Mini - all auto's?
BMW - all auto's?
Mercedes - all auto's?
Honda - all auto's?
Horses for courses and all, but I much prefer an auto anyway. In our congested roads, why would yiou want anything else?
Simplicity, fuel consumption and reliability! I don't want an expensive, electronic thing which can go wrong.
|
Mini - all auto's?
BMW - all auto's?
Mercedes - all auto's?
Honda - all auto's?
Horses for courses and all, but I much prefer an auto anyway. In our congested roads, why would yiou want anything else?
Simplicity, fuel consumption and reliability! I don't want an expensive, electronic thing which can go wrong.
On modern cars the auto is nearly always more economical than the auto now. Maybe not on one or two small ones but on most.
Edited by pd on 19/12/2024 at 22:26
|
|
All Toyotas apart from Aygo X and GR Yaris (which is a little more than a hot hatch, its a rally car for the private buyer, but I'd still have the auto!) are hybrids designed for an auto box.
They are capable of doing 250,000 miles so not a concern as regards reliability,
|
|
|
|
Mini - all auto's?
BMW - all auto's?
.........
Horses for courses and all, but I much prefer an auto anyway. In our congested roads, why would yiou want anything else?
Simplicity, fuel consumption and reliability! I don't want an expensive, electronic thing which can go wrong.
The ubiquitous Stellantis powertrain of tiny turbo + reliable TC autobox is globally successful. After 5yrs we are very happy with it in our little Peugeot 2008 runabout. Its 'tiptronic' design means if you want to change gear manually, you can.
|
|
|
|
|
Out of curiosity I just had a wee look on Autotrader for brand new hatchbacks under £20k with petrol engine and manual gearbox. There are 844 of them, from 13 different manufacturers.
Manuals are usually cheaper than autos so dealers will list them however the question is do they actually have them when a buyer asks for one? My guess is that some or perhaps many of those listings are just there to show a low price but if you actually enquire they will not have any in stock and no idea when they can get one. Dealers stock what they can sell and what they will make a good profit on and that is not basic base models with no frills.
|
One of the things I hate is all of the tech. If they didn't have so much tech, then they could either improve the quality or reduce the price.
Some tech are now legislated so manufacturers have to comply. But I don't think not having tech would reduce price. Most techs are electronic which don't push up manufacturing cost as such. Tesla charges £7000 for full self driving package which is already built into the car and the charge is simply to "activate" the software.
Some tech, which I thought I'd hate, actually ended up liking them.
Digital speedometer
Way better than analog. Now I don't even look at analog speed anymore.
Android Auto projection on infotainment screen
Brilliant invention. I was upset it was wired in my car but a cheap device turned into a wireless Android Auto.
Electronic Parking Brake (EPB)
If Auto Hold is enabled, then hardly there is any need to touch the EPB button. OK, I get it if the system malfunctions then problem but otherwise it is not that bad.
No spare wheel
If I get a puncture I'd call a recovery service anyway. It would be nice to have a space saver spare wheel but in most cars you can get one yourself if you want (assuming there is space in the boot).
Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC)
Wonderful feature. I can stretch my hands and legs on long journeys on motorways.
Auto Emergency Braking (AEB)
I rather have it than not. If you don't want it can be disabled.
Lane Keeping Assist (LKA)
Legal requirement but can be easily turned off.
Reversing camera
Excellent thing. Now can't imagine not having it. It is a pain to clear the lens when raining or picked up muck. I don't have 360 camera on my car (typically comes in top spec trim only) but it does make parking easier.
Manual transmission
Americans never really had it. In old days manual cars were cheaper and more fuel economic. Modern autos are more economic than manual. Granted they can go wrong sometimes but often depends on brands. Most autos offer paddle shifters so one can still drive manually. 90% of the time I don't feel like overriding what gear the car chooses.
|
|
Citroen have some views which should cheer some people up www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/value-focused-...r
Some manufacturers clearly see a market for price conscious cars.
In terms of tech I doubt they would be *that* basic. I wouldn't buy a new car without some basic things like Andriod/Apple auto (or the equivalent - Tesla does not have them but has Google maps and spotify which is what most people use it for!). Radar cruise sort of comes "free" with ADAS stuff so should be there anyway and I agree it is far more useful than regular cruise.
I never get why people moan about EPBs. I buy hundreds of cars a year and they are reliable and more reliable actually than old style manual ones.
LKA is the only one I don't like - fine if easy to turn off, a pain if it requires multiple menu selections every time.
|
Citroen have some views which should cheer some people up www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/value-focused-...r
Some manufacturers clearly see a market for price conscious cars.
In terms of tech I doubt they would be *that* basic. I wouldn't buy a new car without some basic things like Andriod/Apple auto (or the equivalent - Tesla does not have them but has Google maps and spotify which is what most people use it for!). Radar cruise sort of comes "free" with ADAS stuff so should be there anyway and I agree it is far more useful than regular cruise.
I never get why people moan about EPBs. I buy hundreds of cars a year and they are reliable and more reliable actually than old style manual ones.
LKA is the only one I don't like - fine if easy to turn off, a pain if it requires multiple menu selections every time.
I don't recall the HJ 'Good and Bad' section being replete with faults with handbrakes. Brake callipers and shoes, maybe, but they would just as much get stuck with an EPB than with a handbrake. And the former doesn't have an expensive motor and gear to replace, just an inexpensive cable.
|
|
|
|
|
<< Lane Keeping Assist (LKA) - Legal requirement but can be easily turned off. >>
What does that mean ? Requirement, where ? And if 'required', how can it be turned off ?
|
<< Lane Keeping Assist (LKA) - Legal requirement but can be easily turned off. >>
What does that mean ? Requirement, where ? And if 'required', how can it be turned off ?
Button on the Yaris steering wheel, press 5 seconds and its off for the trip. Cannot turn it off permanently.
|
|
|
|
This is the EU law on LKA
www.interregs.com/articles/spotlight/229/eu-regula...d
On most cars you can disable it by pressing LKA button on steering wheel for ~3 seconds. But gets re-enabled upon next ignition start.
|
|
Along with LKA speed warnings are also law on new cars and you can't turn it off, I found it mildly irritating at first.
Can only suggest the op looks at older cars if all the tech worrys him.
|
|
|
|
"Some tech, which I thought I'd hate, actually ended up liking them"
Totally agree with this. I did find a new car with buttons and knobs for essential features but it obviously had a lot of modern gubbins which I've ended up loving including the lane assist and adaptive cruise , it's amazing in use on a motorway makes life a lot less stressful. I also like the speed limit change "beep" surprisingly. Auto hold/electric handbrake makes life sooo easy. As for the reversing camera - wow and for now something like Android Auto is essential!(who knew)
However I'm not a fan of an SUV and the demise of many new good car model is depressing. The % fines relating to zero emissions cars are already biting. In my eyes SUV's look like boxes on wheels eg A Bentley SUV, why on earth would you - or is it just me (and Mrs BJ)- just an extreme example.
Edited by Big John on 21/12/2024 at 00:04
|
... adaptive cruise , it's amazing in use on a motorway makes life a lot less stressful. I also like the speed limit change "beep" surprisingly.
Most new gizmos are (obviously) electronic, and can go expensively wrong, but to be fair, usually don't. But we have recently discussed speed-limit change detectors, which are clever, but inherently unreliable, meaning they should not become an unconscious habit. IIRC they depend either on GPS and a database (potentially out of date) or on cameras looking for speed limit signs, which many local authorities do little to keep clean.
Other gizmos such as LKA seem to me to be beta-testing components for autonomous cars ?
|
|
I agree that many of the features can be annoying but I too like the VW EPB. However I don’t like emergency braking in reverse. It’s over-sensitive and alarmingly fierce. Its feels like you’ve hit something.
As for buttons and knobs, of my many last cars, the Saab 9-5 wins all round. It had a lot, really a lot. When driving however, finding them was never an issue. It also had the night driving feature that meant you could select that to keep it to the essentials dials and controls. I know their aviation ancestry was a bit exaggerated but the ergonomics of the controls was impressive. If they could do it with physical controls so could others. However maybe it’s indicative of the costs that saw Saab’s demise.
|
|
Re. car styling, we're going through an unfortunate phase at the moment, where stylists are more concerned with making a car look different than making it look nice. There are exceptions, like VW Golf and Tesla Model 3, but so many cars look like a pot-pourri of unused ideas from designers' old sketchbooks.
|
|
The Model 3 looks like a repurposed margarine tub.
|
The Model 3 looks like a repurposed margarine tub.
Eh?!
What brand of margarine do you buy?
|
|
It's the visual equivalent of a tune you can't whistle. A shape that holds no interest. That is the impression it leaves me with.
Compare with e.g. a Saab Mk1 Golf, Citroen XM, Rover P6, Triumph 2000, Skoda Roomster, Jaguar XJ6, Saab 900, Peugeot 504 etc etc all cars with a visual identity that most of us can see in our minds' eyes decades later - whether or not we find them attractive.
|
|
But a margarine tub is essentially a box with rounded off corners. I'm struggling to think of a less boxy car than a Tesla?.
One of the aspects which makes me like or dislike a car is how well it has been designed to fulfil its purpose. The Tesla is an electric car designed to be used over longer distance and so aerodynamic efficiency is of prime importance to maximise range. Because the brand is so young, there is no stylistic "baggage" that needed to be incorperated into the shape. The designers had a clean sheet to make the car as aerodynamic as they could. That, to me, is just as pleasing and interesting as the 504 saloon's kinked boot lid, the 900's wrap around windscreen and the (Citroen) CX's (saloon) concave rear window.
|
One of the aspects which makes me like or dislike a car is how well it has been designed to fulfil its purpose.
This is the old question of combining Form with Function. The main purpose of a car is Function, and most makers have worked out how cars function. The best cars also manage to include satisfying Form without compromising Function - for example limiting visibility (out) or awkward access. The Pug 205 was a trailblazer, and when sales of that started to flatline, they made a slightly bigger one, the 306 (and Ford came up with the Fiesta which was pretty much the same simple shape).
These days designers seem to get inspiration from spaceships, apparently concentrating on novel LED clusters.
|
|
Style-wise, my understanding is that the combination of various safety regulations places a real limit on how cars can look these days. To try to get some differentiation, some brands (Hyundai spring to mind) get their blob and and the keep pouring more and more questionable design details on top. Others (Tesla already noted) just go with the blob, some use retro design cues to try to make people recognise a brand. Then you get the likes of BMW who have become hyper-focused on one design element (the grille, in BMW's case) and point everyone at that.
|
|
The laws of physic are common to all manufacturers.
The pursuit of efficiency - be it mpg or performance - relies upon substantially similar aerodynamic and engineering models. It's no surprise most cars are differentiated only by the superficial and largely inconsequential.
|
|
Maybe the question should be will there be any more interesting cars.
Most cars are now very competent, they can do almost everything one wishes at least till the warranty expires, but as can be seen from the new sales figures ( registration figures which may or may not mean sold to the end user) they arn't exactly capturing the motoring publics imagination.
In the past when a new model was introduced it was something motorists wanted to see and potentially drive, usually completely different to the previous therefore creating interest, now increasingly you can only tell the make of a car from how eye wateringly ugly its grill is, or on the case of Kia how horrible the rear end is, apart from adding more fairy lights or ridiculous wheels you can barely tell a new model from the previous, little wonder there's no real interest even from once enthusiastic drivers any more.
|
The laws of physic are common to all manufacturers.
The pursuit of efficiency - be it mpg or performance - relies upon substantially similar aerodynamic and engineering models. It's no surprise most cars are differentiated only by the superficial and largely inconsequential.
But SUVs are less aerodynamic as they are taller and as they say have a big bottom, The SUV popularity is just a current fashion.
|
I have just purchased 3dr hatchback with 4k miles. 1.6 naturally aspirated petrol engine with 120 bhp.
Came fitted with 1.5 inch steel wheels, A/C, electric windows, central locking, 2 airbags and electric boot release. Also previous COTY winner though I guess that doesn’t always guarantee it being a good car. Is at it would have come out if the showroom when new.
The car - A 2002 Alfa 147 Turismo. To drive it is a complete joy with excellent handling and ride, no rattle or squeaks - feels as tight as a new car would.
Obviously it will get the full rust protection.
Personally I think this is the sweet spot of car design before tech took over.
I’m briefly considered using it as a daily but it’s probably the only one of its kind in this condition. Paid marginally over the odds but peanuts compared to the price of a new similarly specced fiat 500.
|
|
1.5 inch wheels, eh ? :-)
|
But SUVs are less aerodynamic as they are taller and as they say have a big bottom, The SUV popularity is just a current fashion.
True - but they fill a niche - much easier entry and exit for those will some mobility problems, better visibility, more internal space for the same footprint.
Pursuit of absolute efficiency would otherwise have us all driving micro cars.
|
But SUVs are less aerodynamic as they are taller and as they say have a big bottom, The SUV popularity is just a current fashion.
True - but they fill a niche - much easier entry and exit for those will some mobility problems, better visibility, more internal space for the same footprint.
MPV's were better at filling those requirements, but let's not let efficiency get in the way of trendiness.
|
But SUVs are less aerodynamic as they are taller and as they say have a big bottom, The SUV popularity is just a current fashion.
Unless one is a high miler M-way driver (and even there, speeds are probably slower than they were 40yrs ago) the small difference in the drag coeffiecent on an SUV and a Ferrari are immaterial when overall average speed is usually no more than 40mph.
|
|
<< .... the small difference in the drag coefficient on an SUV and a Ferrari are immaterial when overall average speed is usually no more than 40mph. >>
Averaging your speed doesn't necessarily give the same result as averaging your drag !
|
|
Since the the magnitude of the drag force is proportional to the square of the speed, aerodynamics really matter only at high speed - hence sports cars need it more than family cars.
|
|
I wonder if John F and movilogo have ever ridden a bike in a headwind, and you don't have to be going fast!
|
I wonder if John F and movilogo have ever ridden a bike in a headwind, and you don't have to be going fast!
The drag coefficient of a bike rider fairly upright (not drooped over the handlebars) is ~1.0 - the same as a flat plate. By comparison a modern car is ~0.3.
The average cyclist produces around 100w - enough to light an old fashioned bright light bulb. Elite sports cyclists can get to 400w for short periods.
A small moped or petrol lawnmower produces 2-3hp. No most folk find it tough riding into the wind or up a hill! Tour de France riders are extraordinary athletes - they manage around 25kph up a mountain pass!
|
But SUVs are less aerodynamic as they are taller and as they say have a big bottom, The SUV popularity is just a current fashion.
True - but they fill a niche - much easier entry and exit for those will some mobility problems, better visibility, more internal space for the same footprint.
MPV's were better at filling those requirements, but let's not let efficiency get in the way of trendiness.
I disagree - the seat height above ground level is higher on my VW Touareg than b-i-l's Ford Galaxy - and 2nd row knee room is better too - I don't need/want a 3rd row.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
