Auto Industry in 10 years: Your Predictions?

[MR2 Fan]

Time to shine your crystal ball and predict what the industry will look like in 10 years.

Will there be a market of 60% electric 20% hybrid and 20% ICE?

Will manufacturers back off from trying to make all vehicle types electric and focusing on the ones that make the most sense? (might be showing bias on my question)

Will there be huge strides in battery efficiency and weight savings to finally make electric vehicles way more useful and affordable for everyone?

Will 3D printed, locally manufactured cars become popular, depending on laws and regulations?

Will the U.S. dealer networks finally go away?

[Yw-slayer]

MF Ghost.

[dodint]

I'll still be driving 2008 BMWs. But the wife will probably have an EV Porsche.

[Kchrpm]

Will there be huge strides in battery efficiency and weight savings to finally make electric vehicles way more useful and affordable for everyone?

Something like that.

[MR2 Fan]

Something like that.


I've seen a few videos about upcoming Tesla technology but some of it feels like it's just Tesla shills and not necessarily what will happen. Something about how they could soon sell cars as cheap as $16,000 due to a lot of advancements, but I don't believe it yet.

[FaultyMario]

Personal evs (assisted bikes and such) should account for a not insignificant percentage of trips for the 8.5 billion people not living in North America.

[MR2 Fan]

Personal evs (assisted bikes and such) should account for a not insignificant percentage of trips for the 8.5 billion people not living in North America.

:up:

I love the concept of a lightweight, low-cost but SAFE EV commuter vehicle (something like the size of a smart car) that can be the daily driver vs. large vehicles used for special occasions. Agreed this is more for people outside of North America because most people here would hate the idea for a lot of silly reasons.

[Kchrpm]

I've seen a few videos about upcoming Tesla technology but some of it feels like it's just Tesla shills and not necessarily what will happen. Something about how they could soon sell cars as cheap as $16,000 due to a lot of advancements, but I don't believe it yet.

They're not the only ones in the race, though. It's a huge competition with an even bigger potential payout to the winner.

[FaultyMario]

:up:

I love the concept of a lightweight, low-cost but SAFE EV commuter vehicle (something like the size of a smart car) that can be the daily driver vs. large vehicles used for special occasions. Agreed this is more for people outside of North America because most people here would hate the idea for a lot of silly reasons.

I think that as urbanites become more exposed to the concept of complete streets and its amenities, a significant minority will prefer to stay car-less.

Do remember that car culture is dying the same death as guitar rock and beer (https://nielseniq.com/global/en/insights/analysis/2020/hard-seltzer-defies-categorization-and-limits-as-the-most-resilient-alcohol-segment-in-u-s/).

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, difficult to predict what consumers in different regions really want, what car companies will be pushing for, and how the government will interfere with mandates...

For me, I think plugin hybrids are the way to go. Small battery pack enough to let us drive in EV mode while doing local errands or commutes, but during long hauls or extreme hot/cold conditions, having a backup ICE is probably ideal.

However, I think car makers don't want such complexities in their cars. Most likely it's because they can't compete with Tesla with such complexity? Plus, if governments around the world is going to ban ICEs, what'd be the point of developing that further? They all just want to become the next Tesla now...

Still, I really don't see how we can convert to all EVs by those mandated dates.

[George]

Do remember that car culture is dying the same death as guitar rock and beer (https://nielseniq.com/global/en/insights/analysis/2020/hard-seltzer-defies-categorization-and-limits-as-the-most-resilient-alcohol-segment-in-u-s/).

:(

[Kchrpm]

Strange. Local/craft breweries are all the rage in my area, it seemed to me like beer is more popular than ever.

[CudaMan]

My biggest worries:

1) Punitive laws against driving ICE cars

2) LED headlights *everywhere*. This trend needs to be stopped yesterday before proliferation makes all our lives worse.

I'm not an expert but I imagine battery tech (weight, capacity, cost) will improve in 10 years but I'm not sure I expect something revolutionary. Given how close we are to EVs being "good enough" for many people on charge time and range, I think modest improvement will be all it takes for more widespread adoption.

[Crazed_Insanity]

What's wrong with LED headlights? I thought they look cool and very functional? Only drawback is that they're expensive?

[samoht]

> Will there be a market of 60% electric 20% hybrid and 20% ICE?

Here in Europe I expect:
1% ICE (at most, likely less)
25% Hybrid
74% BEV

The EU (and UK) are committed to phasing out combustion cars by 2035. At the very least, plug-in hybrids will be required as these are entirely satisfactory already, there's no real use-case for continuing with pure ICE cars. I suspect however that BEVs will meet nearly all needs by 2035, so in 2033 I'd expect to see them be a clear majority already. They aren't far off now, and with a double act combination of better charging provision and better EVs, I think they'll do the job for almost everyone. Look at concepts like the Mercedes EQXX, with 600+ miles of range, to see what the next-generation will look like.

I think the US won't be so different, maybe 10% pure ICE at the bottom of the market, 30-40% hybrids and 50% BEV.

> Will manufacturers back off from trying to make all vehicle types electric and focusing on the ones that make the most sense?

No, apart from anything else governments are committed to the changeover so manufacturers don't have much choice.

> Will there be huge strides in battery efficiency and weight savings to finally make electric vehicles way more useful and affordable for everyone?

I don't predict huge strides, I do predict continuous incremental improvements in every aspect of the car that add up to quite a meaningful change by 2033. Better aero, lower rolling resistence tyres, more efficient regen, more efficient motors, as well as the better batteries will all come together to give double the range for the price (see EQXX as mentioned).

I don't think the SUV will go away as such, but I do think the average car will become lower and longer for better aero with the same interior volume.

> Will 3D printed, locally manufactured cars become popular, depending on laws and regulations?

I see 3D printing as playing a role for small components, I don't see it as a way to make a chassis or body panels (?). Local manufacturing is an idea that's been around for a while but hasn't really come through to be honest. If anything with the retrenchment at Arrival and so on I wouldn't predict it happening, I think cars will still be made in big factories as now tbh.

> Will the U.S. dealer networks finally go away?

No idea, it's possibly a political question rather than a business one, dealers may lobby for protection? Since there are longstanding anomalies in the US, like no online tax filing and the price of medicines, supported indefinitely by lobbying, it's hard to bet against this particular special interest group continuing to defend its existence.

I think 'self driving' will be a lot better than now but still not complete. Perhaps there will be large parts of a trip where you can genuinely nod off, and other parts where you can either drive yourself or supervise the machine. There will however be various automated local delivery services.

[FaultyMario]

people who like beer really like it.

one of the lessons of the pandemic was that the newer generations were getting as drunk as everyone else, but they like the sweeter drinks more.

[TheBenior]

Given the dramatic increase in lithium carbonate prices over the past few years, I don't have a lot of faith in long range EV affordability dramatically getting better. There have been good efforts to use less rare earth minerals, but I have a hard time seeing an increase lithium carbonate supply/processing doing more than keeping even with prices. Sure, the Chevy Bolt starts at $27k, but it's at least a size class down from the size of vehicle Americans prefer, and I'm pretty sure that it's being sold at a loss.

[MR2 Fan]

I see 3D printing as playing a role for small components, I don't see it as a way to make a chassis or body panels (?). Local manufacturing is an idea that's been around for a while but hasn't really come through to be honest. If anything with the retrenchment at Arrival and so on I wouldn't predict it happening, I think cars will still be made in big factories as now tbh.


Czinger is making chassis and body panels and a majority of their cars 3D printed. Yes they're hypercars for now, but they supposedly have a lot of manufacturers interested in their technology

[Yobbo NZ]

What's wrong with LED headlights? I thought they look cool and very functional? Only drawback is that they're expensive?

Nevermind they're fucking blinding everyone else within a 5km range.
Self leveling on them seem to be non existent, you still end up with a bright flash when they hit a bump or go up a rise etc.

[Yobbo NZ]

I know Toyota was testing hydrogen tech here in Australia a couple of years ago, no idea where that ended up as I'm not working for them anymore.
I'd say if anyone was going to be successful at that, Toyota would be. But when and even if it comes out is another story.

[retsmah]

Toyota has been selling the hydrogen fuel cell Mirai in the US since like 2015, I drove one back in I think 2016. At the time I believe all of the fueling stations for it were in southern California only though.

The Mirai was impressive from the standpoint of it just seeming like a normal car, if I got in it without knowing what it was I could have been convinced it was the latest Prius. The fuel cell and related pumps and cooling or whatever could pass for a quiet gasoline engine working in the background.


On the headlights, it seems like you just have to have brightness limits, which I'd imagine already exist? From what I've seen the biggest problems seem to be aftermarket LEDs which explicitly say they aren't for road use, and Teslas, which I assume are not following regulations.

[Tom Servo]

My worry is we're going to see more and more of the "options as subscriptions," where the car you buy will be kitted out with all the options, but unless you subscribe to the option through their integrated app store, you can't use it. BMW already do that, and I hear the upcoming EX90 will have lidar that supports self driving but will be locked behind a subscription.

[Crazed_Insanity]

This is to lower their manufacturing cost... so they build them all the same and don't have to differentiate.

However, if I'm not subscribing to that lidar and then an accident happens and got it damaged... am I liable to pay for it or repair it? Or can I just take it out and leave it empty and just fix the rest of the car?

If not, I wonder if I could just uninstall it and sell it and make a profit? ;)

When I buy a car like that in the future, I wonder what I will be signing...

I suspect everything will probably be an 'integrated' unit so owners won't be able to easily take the unused/unsubscribed parts off. So when a big accident happens, owners will need to buy a whole unit in order to repair it. Actually, these all in one units will probably be so expensive, insurance will be forced to write the car off so you can go buy another car.

[Rare White Ape]

Nevermind they're fucking blinding everyone else within a 5km range.
Self leveling on them seem to be non existent, you still end up with a bright flash when they hit a bump or go up a rise etc.

It’s the colour temperature. Halogen and LED lights are typically quite cool in their hue. Old fashioned incandescent bulbs are yellowish.

And because high-tech new cars somewhat rely on high-tech new marketing, one way to sell a car is by making sure it has blue-ish headlights which ensure that a prospective buyer feels like they own a fancy car.

It is a well-established biological principle, and it is also why phone and operating system vendors include ‘night light’ modes that adjust the hue of a display to facilitate better sleep later in the evening.

This is why new cars feel like they have bright white or blue headlights. There should be a law that dictates maximum colour temperature.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Hmm, I didn't realize this before. With the same level brightness, LED light can still appear to be 40% brighter to our human eyes compared to regular bulbs! I guess the colder/bluer color temp is just more piercing to our eyes?

Having lots of tall SUVs don't really help matter either. Yeah, regulation probably ought to consider maximum level of color temp for head lights besides just brightness level...

Personally, I'd just avoid looking at lights of oncoming traffic, plus I'm mostly driving an SUV now... so I guess LEDs don't bother me that much... :p

[CudaMan]

Yeah I suppose if one drives a vehicle with a high seating position all the time at night it may not seem like an issue. Drive your S2k on a 2-lane country road with no center divider at night and if you're unfortunate to have any oncoming cars have these too-bright headlights you might not like it. It can be blinding to the point where I personally can only barely see the white line to the right of my car and I just stare at that and hope. Light that bright can't be good for the eyes I would think, too.

If I were king I'd make it mandatory to lower both the intensity and maximum allowed height of headlights. That much light output from a tiny pinpoint source is just nuts. Cool that it *can* be done now, but should it be done? I think not in this application.

I understand European headlight regulations may be different particularly when it comes to dazzling oncoming traffic. samoht, have you noticed this at all with oncoming newer cars while driving your FD or McLaren on B-roads?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I'm not sure if it's a good idea to lower brightness of lights..., of course there should be a minimum and maximum brightness. I'm assuming manufacturers are not just going all out by going way over the min requirement? It's probably just a matter of color temp and height.

If lowering color temp and height can help, that's definitely something regulators should push for.

I think we're already seeing some new SUV designs with head lamps on the bumper. That is probably some manufacturers' solution to this problem?

I always thought such design is stupid because you can easily damage your expensive head lamp with a tiny bump..., but this is most likely out of consideration for people who drive sports cars at night. ;)

[retsmah]

If I were king I'd make it mandatory to lower both the intensity and maximum allowed height of headlights.

Agree with height too, it's crazy that you can just put the headlights as high up as you want. I wonder if that's totally unregulated, or just another one of the nonsense things that 'light trucks' don't have to comply with in the US. With new pickups having hoods and headlights that are like 5 feet off the ground there's no way you aren't going to be blinding people. At night in rain it can be really difficult around here to spot pedestrians.

It would be nice if in the next 10 years in the US we addressed that roads are now getting less safe in the US, where they've continued to get safer in most developed nations. It seems like high hoods / poor visibility out of big SUVs and pickups is a big contributor. Blinding oncoming drivers and preventing them from seeing pedestrians can't help!

Edit: I guess I could have googled, it looks like required headlight height in the US is minimum 2 feet to maximum 4.5 feet. A maximum of 4.5ft seems too high, obviously this is a problem for cars like the MR2 or S2000 that are just over 4 feet tall, but even a modern taller hatchback like my Accent is only 4.75ft tall, current Civic is a little shorter. This comparison makes the problem pretty clear! (https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/honda-s2000-1999-roadster-vs-ford-f150-2017-4-door-pickup-supercrew-5.5-raptor/front/)

Edit2: It also looks like European regulations have a maximum headlight height of just under 4 feet (172mm), and require headlights to be aimed more steeply downward (https://www.aaa.com/AAA/common/AAR/files/ResearchReportEuroSpecvsUSHeadlamps.pdf) if they are mounted higher, which also seems like a good rule to encourage mounting the headlights lower. You can get clever with design if you want the appearance of higher headlights, for example the Hyundai Kona (https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/honda-s2000-1999-roadster-vs-hyundai-kona-2017-suv-electric/front/) (which I guess is probably also sold in Europe) has low headlights which are styled more like fog lights, and the upper lights that are styled like headlights are just running lights.

[samoht]

I did have an issue with my eyes getting tired on long drives at night in the FD, yeah. It was more of a general thing over an hour or two of driving, but it did affect me. I noticed it was much less of an issue in the 350Z, although the difference in height can't be that great, but it is higher. I also think the Merc is better. I haven't done any long night drives in the McLaren yet, longest was coming back from collecting but that was daylight.

I do sometimes find it tricky to see where I'm driving with oncoming traffic at night, yeah, and I think being in a low car with a taller vehicle oncoming is worse.
The McLaren has much better headlights, including the dipped beam, so that does help a bit as you have a bit more chance of seeing the verge on your own side.

[MR2 Fan]

Edit: I guess I could have googled, it looks like required headlight height in the US is minimum 2 feet to maximum 4.5 feet. A maximum of 4.5ft seems too high, obviously this is a problem for cars like the MR2 or S2000 that are just over 4 feet tall, but even a modern taller hatchback like my Accent is only 4.75ft tall, current Civic is a little shorter. This comparison makes the problem pretty clear! (https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/honda-s2000-1999-roadster-vs-ford-f150-2017-4-door-pickup-supercrew-5.5-raptor/front/)


that is true and scary....most vehicles in the US now are trucks/SUV's and sedans and small cars are mostly dying out.


This is a long video but has a lot of important points. I don't agree with 100% of it, but much of it is accurate and makes me second guess wanting larger vehicles:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo

[CudaMan]

That video makes several interesting points. The seemingly well-researched nature of it is somewhat undone by the unnecessary meme-snark inserted all too frequently, though.

[Tom Servo]

Yeah, I'm 100% on board with that guy's point and I also got annoyed enough I couldn't finish watching it.

That was one thing I was happy about with the new ride - the front end seems lower than most, and the headlights follow on that. They're also self-levelling, and I've noticed they don't even shine into the rear of cars in front of us as much as the RAV's do.

[MR2 Fan]

agreed on the annoying parts. Also, a lot of people are buying crossovers/smaller SUV's than larger ones that seemed to be what people wanted 10-15 years ago

[TheBenior]

agreed on the annoying parts. Also, a lot of people are buying crossovers/smaller SUV's than larger ones that seemed to be what people wanted 10-15 years ago

Heck, Suburban/Yukon XL sales peaked in 2001 at 225k, and it's been selling less than half of that since 2008. Expedition sales peaked at 233k in 1999, and it hasn't broken 100k annual sales since 2005.

Pickup truck sales bounce up and down a lot more, which probably has to do with lower fleet and tradesman sales when the economy/building activity is down.

[retsmah]

That video makes several interesting points. The seemingly well-researched nature of it is somewhat undone by the unnecessary meme-snark inserted all too frequently, though.

Agree, I like the Not Just Bikes channel and he's got a ton of good content, this particular video was a little over the top though.

I think the stroads one is a good one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM) to start with, there's still a bit of snarkiness but it feels appropriate.

[21Kid]

:up:

I love the concept of a lightweight, low-cost but SAFE EV commuter vehicle (something like the size of a smart car) that can be the daily driver vs. large vehicles used for special occasions. Agreed this is more for people outside of North America because most people here would hate the idea for a lot of silly reasons.

Personal evs (assisted bikes and such) should account for a not insignificant percentage of trips for the 8.5 billion people not living in North America. I heard in a podcast how e-bikes(and the like) are one of the fastest growing segments.

Their research team estimates that while 608,000 electric cars and trucks were sold in 2021, more than 880,000 e-bikes were also purchased. That's almost double the estimated 450,000 e-bikes that were sold in 2020.
https://www.bicycling.com/news/a39838840/ebikes-are-outpacing-electric-car-sales-in-the-us/

[Tom Servo]

I've seen that going around too. E-bikes are a game changer for a lot of people, myself included. I bike plenty, but sometimes you just want a way to bike to lunch and not be all sweaty when you get there. They strike me as a very happy medium - you get some exercise but don't have to beat the shit out of yourself, and you get to avoid traffic and parking issues. Win win.

[Yw-slayer]

I've seen that going around too. E-bikes are a game changer for a lot of people, myself included. I bike plenty, but sometimes you just want a way to bike to lunch and not be all sweaty when you get there. They strike me as a very happy medium - you get some exercise but don't have to beat the shit out of yourself, and you get to avoid traffic and parking issues. Win win.

I agree. Sadly they are not legal to use on public roads in HK. If I lived in the UK I'd almost certainly have one for commuting and recreation.

[CudaMan]

I just found this last night. I was looking forward to hearing what three of these men had to say on the future of the automobile, and for the most part I was not disappointed. I only wish they had touched on the future of ICE for the middle class, but I can understand they mostly look at things from the perspective of their worlds (exclusivity and wealthy customers), although Gordon has done some work in the affordable sector.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JP9Swop_Fg

I really admire what Christian, Gordon, and Mate have done and the intelligence they exude. Mate's story is so fascinating and unbelievable, how this guy came out of nowhere from a country that had zero car industry and is now not only producing the fastest EV in the world and growing an industry in Croatia, he's also in charge of making the next Bugatti. It's staggering.

[MR2 Fan]

...then there's Hennessey, lol

[Kchrpm]

Yeah, that video was great, I was glad to see they all got a chance to talk about everything, and all of their viewpoints are slightly different just as their cars are quite different. They show a lot of mutual respect and curiosity with each other.

And I agree that they have little to no concern about people like us, except that our attention makes their customers feel more special and therefore their products more valuable.

And yes, Hennessey is a weird addition, but I'm sure they wanted an American and he's perhaps the closest to fitting the bill.

[Crazed_Insanity]

These people must be idiots to be admirers of Elno Must? :p

Anyway, I like the part near the end when they were asked, with the last tank of gas on earth, which car would you fill up to drive...

None of them picked a super/hypercar! :lol:

The car Gordan picked was something I actually never ever heard of before. Series 3 Lotus Elan? Did a quick google and these old cars are still worth $30~$40k!!!

Anyone driven one of them before? To be complimented by Gordan Murray regarding it's steering feedback, it's got to be one great car!

[MR2 Fan]

I recall the Lotus Elan was one of the very rare cars that were front-engined but had rear weight bias (more weight in the back half of the car) which is great and would give it mid-engined characteristics

"the Elan is nearly close to perfect, with 53.1% of the weight in the back and 46.9% in front – assuming a driver and full tank of gas". The person who wrote that seeimingly still believing the 50/50 weight balance is "perfect" myth. 53/47 sounds closer to perfect to me, maybe 55/45 is better

https://stevelarsen.net/elan-static-weight-distribution/

[Crazed_Insanity]

I don't really get how they made these determinations. Nissan is claiming it's better to have 53F/47R distribution because as you accelerate, weight will then shift back. However, I can understand the benefit of 47F/53R because under braking, weight will then shift forward to balance things out, but then we don't usually turn too hard while under heavy breaking anyways so why do we really need the car to be balanced at 50/50 under braking?

Anyway, we can try to explain things all day, but best way is to drive them and compare them if we can! :p

Just as Gordan Murray said himself... he couldn't understand why that Lotus handled so great as he has discovered the Lotus engineers violated his very own design principles. According to Murray's own theories, it just shouldn't handle that great!!! :p

Automotive engineering is still some sort of dark art which nobody has it all figured out.

So personally if I were to design my own car, I'll just stick to 50/50 weight distribution just to be safe. :p

[Kchrpm]

The reality is there probably isn't really a perfect weight distribution. It's likely far more important to have your mass as close to the center of mass, or maybe the center of rotation instead (which would be set by suspension geometry, correct? Russ? DN?), than purely the static balance.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, all other things being equal, if we could adjust ONLY the center of mass to achieve 50/50 distribution or move slightly fwd or rearward bias... which configuration is really better?

My guess is different drivers might prefer them differently.

The only objective assessment would be lap time.

Finally, the car with the fastest lap time may not be the one drivers prefer to drive using that last tank of gas on earth... :p

[MR2 Fan]

The reality is there probably isn't really a perfect weight distribution. It's likely far more important to have your mass as close to the center of mass, or maybe the center of rotation instead (which would be set by suspension geometry, correct? Russ? DN?), than purely the static balance.

I don't know if there's any realistic sim driving/racing programs where you can just move a ton of weight the farthest front and rear extents of the car....which I've also thought about as well, being as close to the center as possible is more important than distribution in that case.

[CudaMan]

The thing is you have to tune the suspension around the weight distribution.

I don't think 50/50 is the end all be all, it's definitely a nice thing for a certain type of feel and cornering balance at the limit, but arguments can be made for a bias change in either direction depending on what the driver values (or packaging concerns for the manufacturer). For lap times, it depends on how much power and grip you have at the driven wheels. A 700hp car on street tires with 50/50 weight will definitely improve its lap times by moving weight bias rearward. [Again with the suspension adjusted for it]. This is why the mid-engined Cooper T51 revolutionized F1 with its engine placement.

[FaultyMario]

But isn't that what makes great drivers, the ability to feel and to anticipate the effects of weight on the vehicle as it travels along the different patches of pavement that make up a racing circuit?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Anyways, in 10 years, we may end up only with 2 wheels self balancing Segway like cars…, making this discussion irrelevant! Better yet, wheel-less flying/hovering cars! :p

Out of curiosity, which car would you drive with that last tank of gas?

Of course my most emotionally connected car is the S2000.

[MR2 Fan]

With EV's it sort of goes out the window a bit since the weight is so much differently distributed I'd guess.

I feel like my choice for the last tank of gas is obvious............Citroen 2CV..........j/k

Probably a TRD 2000GT MR2

https://i.redd.it/xm7ut6zddvb31.jpg

[Rare White Ape]

But isn't that what makes great drivers, the ability to feel and to anticipate the effects of weight on the vehicle as it travels along the different patches of pavement that make up a racing circuit?

Engineering a car for certain conditions happens before a driver ever lays a hand on its steering wheel.

And that’ll give a hint as to why the optimum weight distribution for a Hyundai Getz is exactly what it is.

[JoshInKC]

I feel like my choice for the last tank of gas is obvious............Citroen 2CV..........j/k
Deux-cheveaux!

[Kchrpm]

Last tank of gas car...McLaren F1? GT Longtail version maybe?

[Tom Servo]

Probably a TRD 2000GT MR2

https://i.redd.it/xm7ut6zddvb31.jpg

That image is wrong and against God.

[MR2 Fan]

:?

What's wrong about it exactly?

[speedpimp]

I guess because it's made up to look like a Ferrari.

[Tom Servo]

That MR2 is maybe one of the best car designs of the past 50 years and trying to make it look like a weird cross of a 935 and an F40 is an affront to everything good and true.

[MR2 Fan]

It's just a widebody version made by TRD with lots of possible upgrades, only 35 were produced officially, all customized. (there were several knock-off body kits sold though). I think you could order with up to 500hp.

[Yobbo NZ]

And inspired by the JGTC GT300 MR2 at the time.

[CudaMan]

Right, that makes it way more legit in my book. I believe the street cars were produced as a celebration of the success of the JGTC car which looked very similar.


Last tank of gas I think tugs at nostalgia for a lot of people, especially these guys on the discussion panel who have access to insanely fast cars.

[Tom Servo]

I stand corrected, though I still think it's an abomination.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Right, that makes it way more legit in my book. I believe the street cars were produced as a celebration of the success of the JGTC car which looked very similar.


Last tank of gas I think tugs at nostalgia for a lot of people, especially these guys on the discussion panel who have access to insanely fast cars.

Yeah, you’ve driven lots of cars, which one would you take for that last spin?

[Yw-slayer]

It looks good to me. Don’t see everything through an Euro Lens!

[Rare White Ape]

My last tank of gas has already happened.

I crashed my motorbike and nearly ripped a leg off, which led to a complete shake-up of my life and a career change for the better. That job allows me to catch public transport to work. Now I am in house-deposit-saving mode with no pressing need for any wheeled conveyances.

House is priority 1, car is priority 2.

By the time I buy a house I am expecting that small 3-door electric cars will be available with instant torque electric motors, hopefully with 4 driven wheels and enough tyre shredding performance to embarrass a Yaris GR4.

So the question now becomes; what is the next set of tyres?

And for the record, it was 15 liters of BP Ultimate, purchased at the Coomera truck stop on the morning of October 16, 2020. The vehicle was a 2015 Aprilia Tuono Factory 1100. Googling that is dangerous because it leads me to bike replacement territory, so then the answer changes to same vehicle but shifted back a few years.

[JSGeneral]

At least my state seems to have been able to work towards a guarantee that no matter how complex our automobiles become, we'll still be allowed to actually work on them without voiding a warranty.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/feds-ok-massachusetts-right-to-repair-law-so-the-state-can-finally-enforce-it

[Cam]

I loathe our car's infotainment system. I've heard similar experiences from others. I think (I hope) this will cause manufacturers to revert to using physical/analog controls.

[Tom Servo]

I wish ours was a little snappier, but overall I don't really mind the Android Automotive one. The only part that I wish wasn't on the infotainment screen was the climate control stuff, but at the same time it's one of those where you just set a target temperature and it handles the rest, so we very rarely actually make any changes to it.

[Yw-slayer]

Oh, physical is still definitely the best for some things. Climate controls, volume, mute, and next/previous track.

[George]

So the question now becomes; what is the next set of tyres?

Raised white-letter ones, of course!

[MR2 Fan]

I don't mind audio controls on a touchscreen as long as there's still controls on the steering wheel including volume and prev/next track options.

Climate control I definitely prefer physical buttons but I think I've ranted about that before.

[JSGeneral]

I don't mind audio controls on a touchscreen as long as there's still controls on the steering wheel including volume and prev/next track options.

Climate control I definitely prefer physical buttons but I think I've ranted about that before.

The touchscreen vs manual buttons solution for Rivian is an approach I've been enjoying. Rivian, unlike most of the major auto companies, have a regular habit of sending over the air updates to their vehicles (and the app) on a MONTHLY basis. Usually this is for improvements to the touchscreen UI, but sometimes there are fun surprises. You see, Rivian has UNLABELED buttons on the steering wheel. You learn what each button does through the UI and experience over time. Adaptive cruise control, changing radio stations or playlists, changing the info of what your UI is displaying (such as toggling what height you're at, or showing your PSI for each tire, etc.) But because there are no labels on those steering wheel buttons, they are free to enhance them.

Just in the most recent update, they added the ability to use one of the manual buttons that is normally used for adaptive cruise control... to now also open and close your garage door when you're close to home. So now you can bypass using the touchscreen to open the garage by clicking one button (but still can use the touchscreen if you want to.)

Climate control is still exclusively only in the touchscreen UI--so you probably wouldn't like that MR2--but with regular updates always on the horizon, complaints from customers regarding UI issues can and have been improved and addressed.

[JoeW]

Going that route might allow the user to make customized use of the buttons themselves in the future. Then whenever it needs servicing a tech could just switch it to default mode and back again after you get the car back.

[Tom Servo]

The touchscreen vs manual buttons solution for Rivian is an approach I've been enjoying. Rivian, unlike most of the major auto companies, have a regular habit of sending over the air updates to their vehicles (and the app) on a MONTHLY basis. Usually this is for improvements to the touchscreen UI, but sometimes there are fun surprises. You see, Rivian has UNLABELED buttons on the steering wheel. You learn what each button does through the UI and experience over time. Adaptive cruise control, changing radio stations or playlists, changing the info of what your UI is displaying (such as toggling what height you're at, or showing your PSI for each tire, etc.) But because there are no labels on those steering wheel buttons, they are free to enhance them.

Just in the most recent update, they added the ability to use one of the manual buttons that is normally used for adaptive cruise control... to now also open and close your garage door when you're close to home. So now you can bypass using the touchscreen to open the garage by clicking one button (but still can use the touchscreen if you want to.)

Climate control is still exclusively only in the touchscreen UI--so you probably wouldn't like that MR2--but with regular updates always on the horizon, complaints from customers regarding UI issues can and have been improved and addressed.

That's actually really similar to how our XC90 is. They've changed the function of some of the steering wheel buttons via OTA updates. They don't come monthly, but we've probably had about three updates in the six months we've had the car.

The downside to that is that sometimes updates happen and you have new UI elements and they're not mentioned in the manual and you have no idea what they mean. Right now, if I have the car on adaptive cruise control and it's slowed down from its target speed, there's a second box the speedometer has drawn that covers part of the gap from where you are to the target speed. It doesn't actually match it though, and I have no fucking clue what it's trying to tell me.

[JSGeneral]

That's actually really similar to how our XC90 is. They've changed the function of some of the steering wheel buttons via OTA updates. They don't come monthly, but we've probably had about three updates in the six months we've had the car.

The downside to that is that sometimes updates happen and you have new UI elements and they're not mentioned in the manual and you have no idea what they mean...

Do they update the manual during the OTA updates? Rivian does, but I'm not certain it's flawless. I have yet to encounter a feature that I couldn't ascertain such as you described, but between reading the manual online (or on the touchscreen) and going to forums--I usually find answers to my various headscratchers. Forums for any early adopter product tend to be enthusiastic, informative... but also can be pretentious. Often I look to the newest manual before searching the interwebs, so I'm glad they provide those updates.

[Tom Servo]

They do update the manual, but it is surprisingly sparse given how insanely long it is. I've actually read through it, and there's still stuff I'm learning about the car as I go.

It reminds me of a lot of games now, where there's a certain amount of knowledge that they just assume you already have, but this is the first car I've ever owned with a lot of the newer tech and the manual kinda glosses over it. Like you mention, I feel like I get more info from watching youtube videos or things like that than I do from the actual manual.

[CudaMan]

Call me crazy but I'm personally tired of endless, frequent software updates. Sometimes it's necessary but IMO it's far too frequent and constantly changing things for users gets old fast. I'm not personally a fan of contextual buttons even if it does make sense from a penny-pinching perspective. Having button functions change on cars monthly just seems like it's adding potential for bad things to happen.

I could be on board with a handful of buttons that can be user-defined and stay that way, though. [Anyone else do this besides BMW's M button on the steering wheel?]

[Tom Servo]

I don't mind it so much, at least because we've had some button functionality return that previously was Sensus-only. So far, all the updates have been upgrades, so I'm not bummed about them.

[retsmah]

This story reminded me of our 'auto industry in 10 years' thread: Cruise Robotaxis Cause Austin Street Gridlock (https://www.thedrive.com/news/cruise-robotaxis-cause-austin-street-gridlock-due-to-heavy-pedestrian-traffic).

I remember about a decade ago talking with some people at work and actually thinking that self driving cars could somehow 'fix' traffic. As I've been learning and thinking more about urban planning and transportation I (and I think an increasing number of people) are wanting to see decreasing car dependence and improvements in public transit, walk -and bike-ability. I hope the car industry is smaller in 10 years, although I'm not too hopeful, at least for the US!

[Tom Servo]

I'm always a little torn about some of these. We have the Waymo ones all over the place here. They seem like they mostly do okay - they're better about using turn signals and actually stopping at crosswalks than human drivers are. I just also don't like being part of a beta test when I wasn't asked if I wanted to be part of it.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Still not sure about the legal implications of driverless cars. Who’s liable for what?

Anyway, if driverless cars become reality, I think most people probably will stop buying cars? Subscription model should come into full effect? Or perhaps just pay/use like Uber?

Speaking of subscription, that’s one annoying trend. Is this my car or not? It has extra range or extra features already built in but I can’t use because I didn’t pay or not subscribe with a monthly fee?

Personally I’d rather the manufacturer not having that much remote control over something supposedly is my property.

Anyway, as for my prediction of the future? Tesla has definitely started a revolution in the auto industry, but I don’t think the dust has settled yet. Tesla could still disappear like AOL or fade away like Yahoo… however, I won’t bet against Tesla either.

I just hope the future can still have affordable fun to drive cars.

[Kchrpm]

I think, if driver-less cars ever get to the point that the general public trusts them, that someone will have a subscription ride-share service that is significantly cheaper than a new car lease. Something like $100/month for 100 rides/month.

[Dicknose]

I think, if driver-less cars ever get to the point that the general public trusts them, that someone will have a subscription ride-share service that is significantly cheaper than a new car lease. Something like $100/month for 100 rides/month.

Car ownership becomes a thing of the past.
Younger people wont get licenses or have to worry about the expense/loan of buying a car.
You also dont need to be able to drive - underage, drunk, disability etc

I can see a lot of good coming from widespread driverless ride services.

[Yw-slayer]

People be banging in them lol

https://mashable.com/article/people-are-having-sex-in-robotaxis-in-san-francisco

[retsmah]

Agree there can be benefits to self driving cars (safety, drunk driving), but especially in places where cars are required for most or all trips I think they will make traffic worse. The average number of people in a car will drop due to trips with empty cars. I think the same way you get induced demand when you add lanes to a road, I think you'll get induced demand if being in a car / in traffic is less painful due to being able to watch TV or browse reddit or whatever.

For the way the average American drives (i.e. 1200 miles per month, with mostly subsidized-free parking) I'm skeptical of there being cost savings using a driverless taxi. Fuel/electricity, maintenance and depreciation are I think mostly per mile costs that need to get covered either way.

I'm not sure what the car sharing programs around here cost and it's turning out to not be easy to look up without getting an app, but I think that would be a good reference for what the cost would be for a driverless taxi. Making those cars self driving increases convenience since you don't have to go pick up the car, but it wouldn't decrease costs.

[Crazed_Insanity]

In theory, if a driverless car can continue to drive passengers around 24/7/365 and generating income, it'll likely reduce cost/mile compared to a regular car that has to be parked somewhere when drivers take breaks. Even when drivers don't take breaks, driver himself will cost more as he drives!

However, most EVs still need to take a while to charge... so driverless EVs likely won't be able to run 24 hrs/day.

Also the driverless semi trucks will likely help ease shipping bottle necks. However, Tesla is going to come up with robots that can help unload stuffs in order to totally take over Speedpimp's job, right?

I'd also be afraid of big semi trucks on the road without drivers..., just a very scary future IMHO.

Even human operated trains can get into serious accidents, imagine driverless semis hauling dangerous cargos...

Anyway, if they can really get all of that to work smoothly and safely, I'm pretty sure they can reduce cost drastically.

Just imagine a privately owned 737 vs one that's flown by South West Airline. Of course each plane will cost the same to buy and operate, but more trips it takes, cheaper it'll get for each passenger! Naturally owning a plane will cost more than buying a seat from SW. Now the major obstacle is that would you feel safe if South West Airlines no longer employs human pilots because Tesla robo pilots can fly the planes safer now...

[retsmah]

Mostly unrelated, but those cruise sensors are way tougher than I would have expected (https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/san-francisco-police-investigate-vandalism-attack-on-cruise-autonomous-vehicle-caught-on-video/)!

[Godson]

Re: cars can't be running non-stop 24/7

Correct, but neither can ICE cars when they are receiving oil changes, maintenance, etc.

If I car could average 27 mph for 24/7 it would need an oil change every two weeks. That's not figuring fuelling, etc. But the point stands, you wouldn't want to book the car use for 24/7.

You would have spares available and rotate in to reduce wear and tear to allow for adequate. Ideal layout would probably be around 60-70% duty cycle at most. Which is still 14.5 + hours a day.

[retsmah]

In theory, if a driverless car can continue to drive passengers around 24/7/365 and generating income, it'll likely reduce cost/mile compared to a regular car that has to be parked somewhere when drivers take breaks. Even when drivers don't take breaks, driver himself will cost more as he drives!


I agree, driver-less taxis will be less expensive than taxis with drivers.

What I'm saying is I don't think getting rid of your own car, doing all of the trips you were previously doing with that car in a driverless taxi will save you any money.

(Or again at least not for the current, typical American driver that does over 1000 miles per month and doesn't directly pay for parking.)

[Crazed_Insanity]

It must be cheaper, right? Otherwise this business model makes no sense even if they get autopilot to work.

Imagine if my current car is able to go out and make me money on its own. Yeah, there’s be more wear and tear, but hopefully the income generated will be able to make it worthwhile. Otherwise it should just remain in the garage waiting for me to drive it…

Another thing to consider which is if you could work or sleep or just relax during your commute, that ought to also worth something.

Anyway, if you are crunching your #s correctly, driverless car industry has no future! :p

[Tom Servo]

There's also all the supposed benefits of driverless cars, that they can communicate with each other and can therefore do things like drive closer together, but that only works it *every* car is driverless and they all communicate the same way. Even barring some companies not wanting to have a standard, we all well know there's a group of people who will still want to actually drive their own cars, and I don't see the government here outlawing driving your own car anytime soon.

People selling this are the same people who sold NFTs and are currently trying to sell AI. One should have an extremely skeptical eye on their more fanciful claims.

[Rare White Ape]

Regarding rideshare costs:

I use Uber fairly regularly, a couple of times a month when the timing of buses to get to work might be a bit awkward. My trip is about 3 km and it usually costs about $10. Let's call that 2 miles and $7 in freedom units. Uber (and the other rideshare companies) have a minimum travel fee, so if you were to go around the block it would be something like $9.50. Plus the pricing changes according to demand. For example getting around on New Year's Eve could cost $50 or more each way for a 5 km trip.

If there was a wide adoption of driverless commuting, then that will be the baseline of cost. Remember that these companies are out to make money, so reducing costs for everyday travel is not top of their priority list. As noted above, the rideshare vendors have established that $3.50 per mile is what people are comfortable with paying for short trips, and that is probably what they would start charging for driverless trips. Don't as me why, it is just how capitalism works.

Something much cheaper is using the already available public transport. My bus trip to work is $3.55, which is $6.45 cheaper than using Uber. In fact, if I travel within the one transport zone (https://translink.widen.net/s/vjjnklwprw/230109-goldcoast-fare-zone), it stays at the $3.55 price. I can even go out somewhere, do a thing like grocery shopping, and if I come back within the hour then I get a continuation fare, so the entire trip still costs $3.55. No trip starts to approach more than $10 unless I cross more than 4 transit zones. Brisbane CBD is zone 1 and I live in zone 5, so that's $11.46 to travel about 75 km. We will call that 50 miles and $12 in freedom units. Cost per mile is $0.24.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOemjHJxwRE

Is there a single rideshare company willing to transport people at that cost? Checking Uber, getting a ride from here to the Brisbane CBD is over $120. Using the same calculation, cost per mile drops to a more palatable $1.60, but that's still 6.6x more expensive than public transport.

However: caveats with using public transport. You have to travel where and at what time public transport does. If you are lucky like me and live in a very well serviced region, you only lose about 10 minutes of your life waiting for your next connection. A trip to Brisbane has 3 connections so that's 30 minutes, but is often much shorter than that. The last mile of the journey might require you to walk to get to your destination, but think of it as exercise. It just sucks when it's really hot or cold or rainy.

[Tom Servo]

Yeah, public transit here suffers from being just woefully underfunded, so sometimes you have a 1 minute transfer, sometimes you have a 45 minute transfer, and you really never know which you're getting. That said, there are real-time arrivals for most transit things, they did tweak the rail system so a trip from here to Pasadena is now one transfer instead of two, and if you're lucky enough to not have a lot of transfers, you can really make it work quite well. It's $1.75 a trip with free transfers for two hours, and then a $5.00 cap on the day. You can, if you're willing to deal with some of the...quirks...get across almost all of LA county for $5 max.

Then you look at a place like Barcelona, that has underground trains running 4 minute headways all day long at similar prices. I would never take Uber or Lyft in Barcelona, that'd be insane.

Public transit is by far the best solution, but it requires political will and a willingness to subsidize transport. We are currently bending over backwards to subsidize single-occupancy car use but then demand that transit break even. I am slowly seeing people realizing that all our attempts to improve traffic are useless and the only thing that will help is greater use of transit and less use of single-occupancy cars, but it's going to be decades before we reach a tipping point if we don't get someone in charge who is just willing to push it through.

[Rare White Ape]

Yeah it’s insane. Adding more lanes to a highway which could just as easily accommodate an adjacent railway instead. It happens all across the USA.

Now if you want to build the railway you have to remove lanes from the highway, and that’s five years of pain before the construction is complete and people start enjoying the benefits.

After getting injured and then travelling to Brisbane to study, I’ve come to really love using public transport. I used to see it as the thing poor or old people use to get around but it’s much better than that. It’s a way to get around while also using Facebook or watching pre-downloaded episodes of The Clone Wars on Disney Plus. When Forza Horizon 5 came out I started to bring my Xbox controller with me and played it over the cloud. Fantastic!

I’d normally be doing that stuff at home on the couch but I could offset the longer travel time by diving into the same entertainment and actually give myself MORE leisure time.

[retsmah]

Anyway, if you are crunching your #s correctly, driverless car industry has no future! :p

That is also not what I'm saying, I'm saying that a future with driverless cars is just not really much different from our current situation:

Taxis and car-share cars get replaced by driverless taxis. Personal cars get self driving, increasing peoples tolerance for long commutes in the car. Car dependence and traffic increase.


I think my point is that we need cities to be focusing on public transit, walk- and bike-ability, and eliminating stuff like parking minimums and exclusionary zoning.

Things like Uber, driverless cars, boring company tunnels are all distractions that get used to take focus away from the above actual solutions and allow the car-dependent status quo to continue longer.

[retsmah]

Yeah it’s insane. Adding more lanes to a highway which could just as easily accommodate an adjacent railway instead. It happens all across the USA.


This is a battle that's happening here in Portland right now, people want to have a new bridge (on the Interstate 5 Freeway) connecting Portland, Oregon to Vancouver, Washington with somewhere between a bunch and a whole bunch more lanes, and there are people that argue that it should not include an extension of an existing light rail line.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Oh ok. Sorry I misunderstood what you were saying. Yeah, our car dependency is not likely to decrease anytime soon. Kinda hard to shove them back into the Pandora’s box!

I get the mass transit in theory cost the least to society; however, I just could not find a convenient route to get to work and back home whether it’s in LA or Seattle. Also, we’ve seen cost overruns in many high speed rail programs… so if we build something not very useful and expensive, that can’t be that good, right?

Anyway, in order to lure riders, we need to build an affordable and convenient mass transit in the 1st place. Or perhaps some sort of hybrid system? Self driving cars/bus to get riders to the stations and off the stations, self driving vehicles can get people to their final destinations?

[Tom Servo]

Paris feels like an example that with the right political will, things can change drastically for the better and in a reasonable amount of time. I realize it's an outlier, but so were Amsterdam and Copenhagen.

[retsmah]

Anyway, in order to lure riders, we need to build an affordable and convenient mass transit in the 1st place.

Yeah definitely, this is a problem many cities have. They look at ridership of their not very good, underfunded transit and say nobody is riding so we should cut funding further. We need to build useful transit (which can be as straightforward as just increasing frequency of busses on existing bus lines), and understand that it's going to be at least a couple years before ridership really starts increasing, people who want to use it have to rearrange their lives a bit to take advantage of it unless they happen to already live where you've put the line.

Portland's been doing a good job of increasing bike infrastructure where I live for several years now, and it was only a couple months ago that I actually figured out that I need to get an ebike. I've replaced about 50% of my car trips with bike trips so far.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I think those rentable e-bikes or e-scooters do a pretty good job or moving young folks around urban areas before self driving cars take over?

Problem with bikes is that I don’t want to do that during rain. Also, at our age, we certainly don’t want to fall down at speeds… not to mention the occasional horror story of bikers getting run over by cars…

Having a dedicated bike lane certainly would be nice. Not only are bicycles zero pollution, but also good for our health.

Solutions are possibly endless, but I suspect political will will mostly be influenced by big corporations rather than the people. So we better ‘vote’ carefully with our dollars.

[Tom Servo]

I've replaced about 50% of my car trips with bike trips so far.

That is fucking awesome.

[Dicknose]

Regarding rideshare costs:
...
If there was a wide adoption of driverless commuting, then that will be the baseline of cost. Remember that these companies are out to make money, so reducing costs for everyday travel is not top of their priority list. As noted above, the rideshare vendors have established that $3.50 per mile is what people are comfortable with paying for short trips, and that is probably what they would start charging for driverless trips. Don't as me why, it is just how capitalism works.

Yeah but capitalism also says if someone else can come in, halve the cost and still be profitable, then they will and grab big market share.
Not having to pay a driver is a big saving.



However: caveats with using public transport. You have to travel where and at what time public transport does. If you are lucky like me and live in a very well serviced region, you only lose about 10 minutes of your life waiting for your next connection. A trip to Brisbane has 3 connections so that's 30 minutes, but is often much shorter than that. The last mile of the journey might require you to walk to get to your destination, but think of it as exercise. It just sucks when it's really hot or cold or rainy.
My (ex)local train was on 3 minutes at peak time, about 10 mins at the longest for off-peak.
But... that's only helpful if I really want to go WHERE it goes. Some public transport trips could be a train and 2 buses, an hour best case, 2 or more worst case - to replace a 25 min drive. No brainer, Id drive or ride the motorbike.
But if I was heading into the city then its train baby!

Thats a big issue - unless you can remove almost all private transport trips then you probably still want your own vehicle.
But cheap (ie noticeably cheaper than Uber) driverless could fill in the gaps.

[Dicknose]

Oh and where I live now... no public transport and I can tell you the names of all the Uber drivers (its Mal and Greg!)
I dont go out anywhere near as much, not working and not many friends local. But a trip to the shops is definitely a driver when it used to be a walk.
My sister doesn't drive, so she relies on me and her hubby. Or if someone asks her out for lunch that they pick her up. The Uber guys work regular jobs during the day, so no Uber.
Now a driverless service could work. Sure not a huge demand here, but a small number of cars could do it. Hmm - although they would need to be snow rated vehicles for lots of the jobs! Must carry snow chains, which aren't much help if there is no one to put them on!

[Rare White Ape]

DN your entire post is 100% correct but I'ma stop you here:


Not having to pay a driver is a big saving.

Let's edit this bit to say "Not having to pay a driver is a big profit."

Ok now carry on as you were.

[Kchrpm]

Hmm - although they would need to be snow rated vehicles for lots of the jobs! Must carry snow chains, which aren't much help if there is no one to put them on!

Driverless tanks!

[balki]

Public transportation suck and I can only see it working in Tokyo, Hong Kong and ... that's it.
Rode the New York City subways about 10,000x ... it only makes sense in the bottom half of Manhattan (about 1/10th of NYC by population and 1/20th by area).
Outside of that and some very frequent routes, mass transit can easily turn a 15 minute drive into a +60 minute ride.
Mass transit also has more limited cargo carrying capabilities, crazies and requires more subsidies.

Uber and Lyft haven't been profitable consistently so they're not a viable answer either.

Hoping cars get smaller, weaker and have better visibility (which is the opposite of what's happened in the last 40 years).
Pretty crazy that in the US a 2900lb, 120mph, Civic or Corrola is about as small and slow a car that actually gets bought.

10 years from now: unremarkable. We'll continue down the electric trend and fuel will rise in price but it'll still be mostly ICE engines and cars will still be too big and heavy for what their every-day use will be.
Very few driverless cars. Many EV-only mandates pushed back, ....

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yeah, I suspect the EV only mandate will be even less effective than the mask/vaccine mandate. It simply will not work unless it's market driven. At this stage in US, EVs have tax credits and are actually the only ones in a discount war... where as most other ICE cars are still MSRP+markups. So even without mandate, it is possible to see more EVs in the market as they become cheaper than their ICE counterparts.

Technologically, EVs are still not good for long road trip or in extreme hot/cold climates. So it really doesn't make sense to have a wholesale ban on ICE cars.

Anyway, cars are only getting heavier because of all the added life saving tech. That's not necessarily a bad thing I suppose. The only way to get around those safety regulations is to perhaps build trikes or self balancing 2 wheel vehicles? Then we can make them lighter, but then riders will need to wear helmets! :p Anyway, I think maybe the 'mandate' can be done in a localized areas 1st rather than everywhere at once? In population dense cities like NYC or tokyo... zone the area out to keep regular oversized polluting cars out so that people can only travel using mass transit, bikes, or small (self driving) EVs... For folks on long road trips, it still makes sense for them to travel in big ICE vehicles. Ideally folks can eventually switch to electric trains if they ever build such a thing for long trips...

Future will be hard to predict. Too many good or bad things we're not expecting might happen...

Personally, I like to best of both worlds so my next car will likely be a plugin hybrid AWD SUV that can be safely driven in snowy winters and still tow long distances and yet saves fuel when running errands around town. They're just so damn expensive so I might have to save up for another 10 years to get one.

[Tom Servo]

I've had quite good luck with public transit in Paris and Barcelona as well. I've taken two trips to Barcelona so far spending about four weeks and got around almost entirely by transit.

[retsmah]

Yeah, I think those rentable e-bikes or e-scooters do a pretty good job or moving young folks around urban areas before self driving cars take over?

Problem with bikes is that I don’t want to do that during rain. Also, at our age, we certainly don’t want to fall down at speeds… not to mention the occasional horror story of bikers getting run over by cars…

Having a dedicated bike lane certainly would be nice. Not only are bicycles zero pollution, but also good for our health.


The rentable ebike are I think a good solution I think period. They seem to be pretty popular with middle and high school aged kids here, and there's no way a driverless car can be cheaper to rent than a bike.

In the actual city of Portland (i.e. not the suburbs) there's a pretty uniform grid of streets, some of which are more major car traffic arteries, then lots of streets that are less used. I think that's pretty common in American cities. Portland has been building up a network of "neighborhood greenways", turning some of the lesser used streets into bicycle thoroughfares. Flip the stop signs so you don't need to stop every other block, put in occasional posts to prevent cars from driving more than a few blocks on them, and then add some sort of controls to make crossing the car arterials easier. The first two things are cheap, the crossing controls can be a little more expensive depending on the road you're crossing.

I can do pretty much all of my frequent trips on the neighborhood greenways, and while I'm not totally separated from cars I don't have to share the road with high speed car traffic, so there's not much danger.

[Tom Servo]

I loved the rentable e-bikes we had down here. They started as Jump, that got bought by Uber, then Uber decided to scrap it so Lyft came in, and then Lyft decided to scrap it. In the meantime, when Uber ran things, they raised the prices by like 3x and made it significantly more expensive to ride an e-bike than it'd be to ride in someone's Uber. Like, an Uber trip to lunch would be $4-5, and it was $12-13 to ride an e-bike.

I really miss those bikes. They were such a great way to get around and you didn't have to worry about your own bike getting stolen.

[retsmah]

DN your entire post is 100% correct but I'ma stop you here:

Let's edit this bit to say "Not having to pay a driver is a big profit."

Ok now carry on as you were.

The thing with a lot of startups is that they are using venture capital money to under price their service to gain a monopoly, certainly Uber has operated for like a decade without making any profit. I think it's likely that their current pricing only works if they're able to get driverless cars working.

So in short I agree, I am skeptical that driverless cars result in an Uber price reduction.

I hate to bring up topics from the politics/space thread, but it was the exact same thing with SpaceX. You'd think landing and reusing rocket boosters would result in a significant price reduction, but prices have only gone up with re-flown boosters. The expendable rockets were flown at a significant loss to gain market share and put competitors out of business.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Unless Uber successfully lobbied to ban mass transit and ban car ownership and ban taxis and all others who compete with Uber, there’s no reason why driverless Uber will cost the same with a driver.

My future Tesla will be able to make me some side income carrying passengers who thought Ubers are too expensive!

[Rare White Ape]

The thing with a lot of startups is that they are using venture capital money to under price their service to gain a monopoly, certainly Uber has operated for like a decade without making any profit. I think it's likely that their current pricing only works if they're able to get driverless cars working.

Another thing Uber did was pay drivers a very attractive share from the ride fees, attract a bunch of people to come work basically full time with very little overheads (basically as self-employed contractors, so that means no HR department/payroll etc... and no unions!) while it built a strong support base of customers, then worked on getting a now popularised and normalised competitor to the taxi industry made legal, and THEN cut the share of fees paid to the drivers.

Now that Uber has this in its pocket, it is now part of a cadre of companies that will be looking to put many of its drivers out of employment once the driverless car thing takes off. Is this good or bad? Hey, I'm all for replacing menial jobs with automation to save people's physical and mental wellbeing, but that also comes with them being supported with a living wage while they don't have a job, and I can guarantee you that Uber would not step up and people will be back on welfare. With a car loan they have to pay off.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I think most Uber drivers are aware of the situation they’re in. Nobody is expecting to work full time in this side hustle until retirement… employer/employees are just mutually making money off of each other for the time being. They’ll quit their partnership as soon as money disappears.

Anyway, will Uber pass on the savings of self driving cars? In a free market, if they don’t, surely somebody else will. Uber may have crushed the taxi industry, but I doubt they’ll be able to monopolize self driving cars.

[Yw-slayer]

Uber sucks. The Uber algo is designed for the US and is misleading AF. On the other hand, Grab fucking rocks.

[Kchrpm]

The local metro bus company is testing an almost Uber like service with smaller buses:

https://www.go-metro.com/about-rm/reinventing-metro-3/metronow

[Tom Servo]

We have those here, called Metro Micro. I actually really want to like it a lot. It has the promise to be incredibly handy for me, as Metro doesn't serve the westside very well. It'd take me three transfers to take a bus the two miles to where I get my hair cut in a part of town with notoriously poor parking, or I could take Metro Micro for like $1 to go straight there.

On the downside, it's popular enough that it's quite often difficult to book a trip. It can be downright impossible to book a trip to something and be able to reliably book a trip back. I don't mind transit being subsidized, but there are a lot of complaints that it costs too much to Metro per ride.

I really want this model to succeed, I think it's a good one that's useful for people, but we'll see if it works out.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Buses will still create more traffic, right? Like retsmeh was saying, we probably should develop something that won't make our roads busier... light rail above or underground subways or flying cars. E-scooters or e-bikes are probably better alternatives, but then those probably can't handle bad weather very well...

For the next 10 years, it's really difficult to predict how things will go. Not even sure we'll really be able to get full self driving cars. However, I do believe EVs are definitely here to stay.

Current US auto market still has sky high pricing. Only discounts you'll see are for EVs. Along with $7500 tax credit for most of them, comparable sized EVs are now cheaper than ICE cars.

It'll be interesting to see if Americans will continue to resist EVs like they did with masks and vaccines. Another interesting dilemma is that Tesla is still currently out selling their biggest 19 competitors combined! Tesla still has a lion share of the EV market. Conservatives hate EVs but like Elno now. Liberals loves EVs but hate Elno now...

So how will Americans choose? That'll be very difficult to predict as well. :p

[JSGeneral]

Seems like the author of xkcd has been recently lurking here...

https://xkcd.com/2832/

[Crazed_Insanity]

:lol:

[dodint]

If cities weren't such cesspools to walk through I'd consider moving downtown and driving less. Figure out the homeless problem and then get back to me about traffic.

[retsmah]

Buses will still create more traffic, right?

Busses carry passengers at a much higher density than cars, they can and do work well if the system isn't an underfunded afterthought. They've got the advantage of being able to operate on the existing road network, which can make transitioning to mass transit a little easier than having to build or rebuild light rail lines everywhere all at once.

I think usually the issues with bus service are that it's underfunded so service is too infrequent, and almost everywhere busses are in traffic with cars which results in them moving very slowly. Some places are starting to do separated bus lines with signal priority for the busses, San Francisco has a pretty major line that opened up recently I believe. Portland is starting to try to separate bus lanes near me, I believe they're doing a better job in SE Portland but I haven't been down by the bus lines there in a while.

[Dicknose]

Sydney has heaps of bus lanes, a mix of "bus lanes" which also allows motorcycles, taxis and bicycles, then there are "bus only" which is it says are only for buses. Some are time limited, usually the curbside lane on a bigger road. Or can be as little as a short extra lane at traffic lights that also gets priority.
Works quite well, gets buses moving even when there is traffic.
Plus there are a couple of bus ways, dedicated roads for buses, like a mini fwy.

The bus network is not perfect, but it does get you around most places. A few routes are very well used, limited stops and frequent service (5 mins).
We still have a huge number of cars, but with bus, train, light rail/tram and ferry we do have a decent public transport service

[Crazed_Insanity]

Having a special bus lane so that buses don't have to get stuck in the same traffic definitely works for me!

However, city will have to put in a lot of fore-thought/planning in order to make it work. Given today's political climate and how congested roads already are, it'll definitely be hard to implement that in existing cities. Heck, any type of mass transit can be difficult for most US cities I think.

Not to mention cities may have other issues that need to be dealt with as well... like dodint mentioned. If cities are unable to get homelessness and crime under control, hoping that they'll be able to solve the traffic/mass transit problem is probably hoping for too much? ;)

Self driving cars just gave us the hope that someday riding in them will be like riding in elevators. It should be closer to reality than flying cars, but I'm still a bit skeptical of it becoming fully autonomous on the road. It may very well be much safer than human drivers, just like commercial aviation... However, one major accident, it can scare people off of it and not to mention liability issues and regulators shutting your entire fleet down.

Anyway, so for the next 10 years things just might be about the same I think, except thanks to Elno, we'll have more EVs. Cheaper EVs should be more effective than mandates to get more folks onboard.

[balki]

Not 10 years from now*, but perhaps in 20-30 years I can see much smaller buses running much more frequently during peak demand times on a vast network of bus-only lanes.
Buses now are way too big for the majority of their rides and still run too infrequently for them most part.

*I can see an Asian metropolis adopting something like this within 10 years (it they haven't already).

Despite much preferring the subways I'm for buses ... (new subway tunnels cost about $1 billion/km in NYC pre-pandemic/inflation).

[Yw-slayer]

I live in a city which probably has one of the cheapest, cleanest, and most efficient public transport systems in the world, including small and large buses and a great rail system. There is no need for the vast majority to own a car, and in fact most people don't. I can get from home to the border with the mainland in 50 minutes for the cost of usd10. Or usd8.80 if I "slum it" in a "normal" carriage rather than the "first-class" carriage. A "normal" carriage is already very well-ventilated and air-conditioned, clean, and pleasant to sit or even stand in.

In conclusion, good public transport is incredible and makes a huge difference as it can be far more convenient and cheaper than driving.

[FaultyMario]

In conclusion, good public transport is incredible and makes a huge difference as it can be far more convenient and cheaper than driving.

I'm going to frame this right here.

[Dicknose]

In conclusion, good public transport is incredible and makes a huge difference as it can be far more convenient and cheaper than driving.

How big is Hong Kong?
It is tougher to do in cities that are physically bigger and less dense.

I do think driverless is a good thing long term. It means things like minibuses or individual vehicles can be cheaper to run.
Even trucking for most routes could be done.

I just see this as the next step in our workforce evolution - a continuation of the industrial revolution. Some jobs get replaced by machines.

[retsmah]

Not 10 years from now*, but perhaps in 20-30 years I can see much smaller buses running much more frequently during peak demand times on a vast network of bus-only lanes.


It's unfortunate that all the capital going into self driving doesn't go to busses. I think a larger number of maybe a bit smaller busses, mostly self driving, could work really well in places where you've already got a big network of roads.

I was watching this video from MKBHD (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nF0K2nJ7N8) a while back of a Model S with 'full self driving' attempting to drive in New Jersey, and I think actually it could work pretty well for a bus if it got some specific training on the route it needs to drive, and if it had an operator remotely monitoring it. At least to my understanding the cost of drivers is a pretty big part of the overall cost of a bus system, if you could have one driver supervising like 4 or 5 busses that could help a lot with expanding service and frequency.

I think you could probably even use the battery and drivetrain from a Model S in a bus without really needing to modify it much.

[Yw-slayer]

How big is Hong Kong?
It is tougher to do in cities that are physically bigger and less dense.

I do think driverless is a good thing long term. It means things like minibuses or individual vehicles can be cheaper to run.
Even trucking for most routes could be done.

I just see this as the next step in our workforce evolution - a continuation of the industrial revolution. Some jobs get replaced by machines.

I agree. HK isn't large as things aren't spread out, but if you are talking about commuting to or travelling around a dense metropolis then public transport is great. Tokyo, Seoul, and Osaka are much larger and more spread out but they also have incredible and incredibly cheap public transport. Whereas public transport is rubbish in almost every way, but there are many good reasons for that.

I haven't been to the mainland for several years, but it looks like their public transport system is now also incredible. Their high speed rail is world-famous and world class. On private cars, some of the mainland EVs are also probably amongst the best, if not the best, in the world and certainly highly innovative. Nio runs a subscription ownership model (admittedly, so does Polestar, which is ultimately owned by Geely) which allows 3-10 minute battery swaps while you are sitting in the car.

The distance from my home to the border is 30km as the crow flies or 47km by car, although that also includes crossing the Harbour.

Driverless is certainly the future for most commuting and travel. Why wouldn't I want to leave a thankless commute to a smooth-driving robot so thst I can do some other stuff like work, study, or relax/play on the way?

[Yw-slayer]

Just spent 25 minutes on the train in silence to get to my destination. I was in this First-Class Cabin for usd4.50.

No need for tip, no Money-grubbing surcharge, no fucked up algorithm telling you a driver dropping someone off 15 minutes away is "DROPPING SOMEONE OFF CLOSE BY", no "Did you enjoy our service PLEASE RATE US ONLINE/WAS YOUR DRIVER A COOL DUDE" rubbish.

4198

24km if I'd driven.

[dodint]

First Class huh? What's coach look like? Do they just make you stand?

[Yw-slayer]

Nope, the normal carriages have clean steel seats on each side and standing room. For the trip I do, you can save around USD1.75 by travelling in them. Sometimes the seats in First Class are full (all seats on the train are first-come, first-serve) so you may need to stand. But it’s generally less crowded than coach, so it’s still more pleasant to travel in a First Class carriage.

This is a picture of a normal carriage. 4199

[dodint]

;)

[Yw-slayer]

Sometimes i take things too literally.

[dodint]

As a fat entitled American I expect to pay an absurd amount and be rewarded with a recliner when I hear 'First Class.'

At least your trains look clean.

[Yw-slayer]

Ultra-clean and frequent. There's one every 2-3 minutes. A delay beyond 5 minutes is newsworthy. Stations also safe now that Billi's Brainwashed Bros are all gone.

The First Class carriage is an anomaly as it's the only one of our metro/commuting/city transport lines that goes to the border. Our other lines don't have that carriage.

Obviously there are also faster trains which cross the border, cost more, and have full and assigned seating (including I think some recliners) for bodies of various sizes.

[Tom Servo]

The non-first-class train car reminds me very much of what you see in Barcelona, which also generally has 3-4 minute headways.

We're making some rail progress here, but it's still not great.