upvote
I rented a basic Fiat sedan recently in east Europe with a tiny (6-7cms maybe ?) screen for a backup camera that can barely be seen in daylight and a 1990s era type OS that had maybe three functions and never needed to be used. All the lane warning and wheel shaking nonsense (who the hell thought that shaking the steering wheel at speed is a good idea) are controlled by clear buttons on or around the wheel/dash. The car to be honest was not great, because it was very cheaply put together, but the controls were heaven compared to most of the new offerings. İt can be done.
reply
I'd be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

"Infotainment" functions in that require interacting with a touch screen were bad ideas at the time and seem incomprehensibly bad in retrospect. It's a certainty that people have died in accidents that occurred because of this.

On the other hand, backup cameras are a genuinely helpful tool. And so are electric power windows: it's far easier to roll windows up and down pushing a button than manipulating the roller. It takes less concentration, so you can focus more on driving. In 2026, the cost of adding motors instead of a hand crank to control the windows has got to be negligible.

There are other improvements that were luxuries in traditional ICE vehicles, but become necessities in hybrid or electric vehicles. Hybrids like Priuses have CVE transmissions, so there's no manual transmission or stick shift. Electric vehicles have electric seat warmers and even steering wheel warmers because there's no gas-burning engine to heat the cabin.

reply
The Prius-style Toyota hybrid transmissions are actually much simpler than in an ordinary car. The planetary gear system allows engine RPM to be decoupled from the wheel rotation, with the motor/generator taking up the slack. There is no clutch or changing gear ratio.
reply
Once I fully grokked how the Toyota hybrid transmission worked it kind of blew my mind.

It’s so simple, but so adaptable, and far simpler than any other transmission I’ve seen in a car.

reply
And you can get "All Wheel Drive" for low cost by adding another electric motor to drive the other axle.
reply
"You can try marketing a barebones car which doesn't have a 5 rating on NCAP and see how that goes."

Dacia did, and their CEO said they would let customers decide - which they did in droves, to his benefit, despite scoring three stars or fewer.

The newest Dacia Spring has one star.

NCAP lost its way years ago when it diluted its ratings from just crash testing into including "safety assistance" software.

reply
A car which tells you when you're about to reverse into the path of another car is safer. I don't really know what to tell you. It's obviously safer.
reply
Sure, but that's a different kind of safety than _crash_ safety.

Plenty of people (rightly or wrongly) are confident in their ability to prevent accidents. Or, at least, confident enough to be skeptical of the tradeoffs involved with these assistive systems.

If I had to choose between a car that has high survivability in a crash versus a car that how worse survivability in a crash but has a few assistive systems that can prevent some crashes (which, mostly, I already prevent by paying attention), I'd choose the former every time.

reply
> Sure, but that's a different kind of safety than _crash_ safety.

It literally is not. Both are crash safety systems, active and passive, respectively. The active category also includes things like ABS and ESP.

> (which, mostly, I already prevent by paying attention)

This is an extremely well researched area (car crashes cause trillions in dollars of damages annually and therefore get a lot of attention) and not to the support of your stance.

reply
Yeah, those sensors are great (and, incidentally, even the budget model of the Dacia Sandero has them).

The ones that are less great are the attention sensors they mandated in last-year's models. I test-drove a Kia EV3 a couple of months back, and they've set that sensor up so that even a brief glance at your instrument cluster can ring the attention chime...

reply
The problem was that European manufacturers sought to market EVs as a "premium product" because they make no noise, accelerate quickly, produce no fumes and the lack of vibrations.

That idea almost sank the entire industry because the Chinese were undercutting them left and right. And unlike the U.S. Europe still hasn't closed off its markets to Chinese EVs.

What people want most of all is a cheap and reliable car.

reply
> The problem was that European manufacturers sought to market EVs as a "premium product"

Tesla came up with that strategy, executed well on it, and is top of the European BEV market. Despite Musk's subsequent antics.

I don't think the European manufacturers really wanted to do BEVs in the first place, which is why so many were anemic until recently. This is finally changing even though VW are desperately lobbying against the competition. The VW EVs are adequate despite the mis-design reliance on screens (which they are correcting) and pricing (nobody ever bought German cars for their low prices, except the Beetle). Renault have a hit on their hands with the 5.

It's fine for EVs to exist on a market segment curve like regular cars. So long as they deliver value at each level. This is different in the US and Europe, yes, but the real problem has been a combination of lack of seriousness and the general malaise that forced all the legacy manufacturers into Stellantis in the first place. I wonder if there has been an equivalent of the Nokia "burning platform" memo which has made people in the industry realize that, yes, the transition away from petrol engines is now happening and they need to adapt properly.

(edit: I have just been reading up on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luca_de_Meo vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Ghosn and think the Renault turnaround can be attributed to the old CEO being arrested and replaced by someone actually trying to do a decent job)

reply
Ghosn (the previous CEO) is widely credited with turning around Nissan. Some people figure he was actually too successful and his legal troubles in Japan were an extension of the boardroom fight he had with the old guard at Nissan.

Also, the world's first mass market EV, the Nissan Leaf, was spearheaded by Ghosn. Obviously Nissan completely squandered the first mover advantage, but that was no longer under his watch.

reply
Tesla is a premium product because they had first-mover advantage.

But VW is merely a manufacturer of cattle-class vehicles. They saw BEVs as an opportunity to "grow" the base price of their best selling vehicle (VW Golf) to $50K. They were just misguided to believe that buyers would accept that.

Fortunately they've seen the error in their ways and are now releasing cheaper vehicles.

reply
deleted
reply
I personally think the VW ID designs are excellent, save for their price. They're just too darn expensive.

BEVs will eventually be (much) cheaper than ICE cars since they have almost no moving parts compared to the latter. We tend to forget that ICE cars are mechanically very complex machines which only work so well because manufacturers had more than 130 years to refine and perfect them.

reply
> They're just too darn expensive.

Well yeah, that's the problem for most people, things being expensive. It would be nice if we could all afford Bentleys or at least top end Volvo EVs with all the safety features and long range.

But VW ID is not a luxury car, not even a premium car brand, it's a working class brand, and even that one it's too expensive for that.

VW lost the plot on what their customers can afford since the VW Golf days and are now moving to the wealthy urban yuppies segment of buyers.

reply
I have an ID.3 - I'd not buy it again.

Nice to drive sure, but software is TERRIBLE (like embarrassingly bad, even years and years after release and endless OTAs) both in the car and app. And the dashboard is all touch sensitive nonsense where they've cheaped out in places that really really really cause annoyances - e.g. to control the rear windows, you have to press a touch sensitive "rear" thing and then you can use the same two window buttons that normally operate the front buttons - wtf?! There is no backlight on the touch sensitive heating controls so you can't change them at night without just flapping your hand around etc. There are no rear speakers, no alloy wheels, drum brakes, no reversing camera, hell there is even visible exterior paint panels around the window where they didn't put a bit of fabric like every other car.

The ID3 is a very very basic and badly implemented car as a daily driver. Take it in to VW to fix the faults on the warranty and you always have to pay a diagnosis fee for them to even look at it because that's not covered. Hateful contempt for the user/owner/driver.

I understand they have made some updates in the newest model, but certainly the OTA updates have not prevented the software problems so you'll probably still have those even if you are wowed by having physical buttons for demisting the windows or unlocking the doors.

reply
>nobody ever bought German cars for their low prices, except the Beetle

Huh? VW Golf cars were hugely popular in Europe for being low price and sturdy. Not every German car was a Mercedes or a BMW. But now even the Golf equivalent, the ID, is too expensive for a vast majority of Europeans.

VW moved itself as the premium brand of the group and relegated Seat and Especially Skoda as the cheaper brands.

reply
The Golf was a “premium” supermini since the 90s certainly.
reply
VW got a majority stake in Auto Union (later Audi) in 1966, and the Audi 50 was launched in the 70s. The Audi 50 was rebadged as the VW Polo, and by the 90es, Audi was the luxury brand. Why would you then label the VW Golf the premium supermini at that time? They had a dedicated brand for premium.
reply
We just got a rental Tiguan eHybrid. It's so big I can't park it anywhere without wasting my time, the high turning angle is annoying compared to my Suzuki, the controls are a hallmark of bad ergonomics and the driving experience is a let down even compared to a Toyota Yaris. I would never pay upwards from 36k euros for such an underwhelming car, when I could get a Corolla hatchback for 26k. The latter is boring, but it offers a seamless driving experience and okay controls.
reply
They marketed EVs as a premium product because of battery cost and availability.

You couldn't build a cheap EV with a decent amount of range and make a profit, and car companies literally couldn't give away EVs with only 50 miles of range. So they stuffed 2-300 miles worth of battery packs into a car, added a bunch of cheap electronics with huge margins and sold the cars for a lot of money to people with a lot of money. Then they realized they could just to that to ICE cars and make a lot more per car.

Meanwhile, China focused on building battery factories instead of cars and now has a lead in both cost and numbers of batteries produced, and can undercut everyone else on the most expensive part of an EV.

reply
> The problem was that European manufacturers sought to market EVs as a "premium product" because they make no noise, accelerate quickly, produce no fumes and the lack of vibrations.

There’s a few lower-end EVs around here, from the Zoé to the Ami (it’s a funny one, but they are not that rare, probably what I would get if I really wanted a daily car). More recently, the Renault 4/5 seems to be doing ok.

There’s a bunch of mid-range hybrids as well, mostly Toyotas it seems.

reply
> Ami (it’s a funny one, but they are not that rare, probably what I would get if I really wanted a daily car)

As someone who uses their Ami every day: it's too under-specced for me to recommend it (for example, no AC is tough in the summer), and it's cheaply made, but man, it's the best car I've every owned.

reply
The Ami has AWCO (All Windows Can Open)
reply
EVs are marketed as premium because the cost much, much more than ICE vehicles. Or at least did/do today. The logic is this: you make a car with a very expensive battery in it. It now costs 1.5/2X the cost of the same size ICE vehicle. Nobody will buy it. But if you add some bells and whistles that have high margin, you can now make a luxury EV that only costs 1.2X as much as the equivalent ICE vehicle. Government tax incentives close the gap further.
reply
This concept is supposedly aimed at the new "E-car" regulations in Europe that means (from what I can tell) that while they still have to retain the same standards of physical crash safety (airbags, crumple zones and all that etc) but don't need to have all the other things like AEB, road-sign detection, lane departure assistance etc which apparently push the price up many thousands somehow for some software and a few sensors.
reply
False. M1E means type approvals will be valid for ten years instead of requiring compliance to changing / updating rules and requirements on a roughly biennial schedule. The requirements will be the same as the current M1 requirements. You can just sell an outdated/unsafer car for way longer without investing into changes and R&D.
reply
Yeah, the safety features aren’t _bad_, though. If you want to go 75mph and not die (or kill others), that’s the cost. You don’t need the next 2 tons and the infotainment system, but 500kg at 70 ain’t safe.
reply
>Yeah, the safety features aren’t _bad_, though.

In theory yes, nobody opposes more safety, but in practice some new digital electronic safety features range from destructive and annoying do downright dangerous and surveillance dystopian which is why people are looking more towards physical safety at crash results rather than the checkbox safety that's purely theoretical on driver aids.

reply
Yeah, always the problem with tech - a camera is a useful tool and also an opportunity for a parasite to watch over your shoulder, a display is a place for presenting information and also an opportunity for a parasite to influence your behavior. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
reply
I didn't mean the technical safety requirements - presumaby those create a somewhat level playing field as all manufacturers would be required to include them for the EU market - I simply mean all the luxe crap that every car seems to insist upon.

Every car review vid I watch on YouTube has me shaking my head at the sheer excess they seem to have.

reply
It's actually customers who insist on the lux crap. If that were not there, they would be looking at a spartan but very expensive car, vs a spartan but cheap ICE car, and they would always buy the ICE version.
reply
>It's actually customers who insist on the lux crap.

Pretty much. Consumers are suckers for luxury, or just cheap tat that gives off the impression of luxury (touch screens, computers, gizmos, etc)

Ironically, computers and screens were a real luxury in expensive cars 20+ years ago when computers were large, expensive and bulky, but now that they're cheap comodities, they make most cars look and feel cheap as the actually luxury cars moved away from them to more discrete and vintage designs that try to hide screens and tech as much as possible.

reply
> It's actually customers who insist on the lux crap

I don't know that we can say that with any surety - when is the last time a manufacturer offered a "no-frills" SKU with all the safety features intact?

Literally the only brand I can think of which does this is Dacia, and they sell like hotcakes in the EU...

reply