5 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

2 years ago and the alleged conditions, of which some people still think is true today.

That’s why the talking head should do their research properly. I’m not seeing any references for that problematic statement in video. People’s thinking does not equal it is the truth. 
 

The EV bit the only bit that is relevant to this thread. Thus it is the only bit I didn’t fast forward. 
 

I only reacted and referenced the FUD statement. I also don’t agree with the conclusion for EV because justification is solely based on a FUD misinformation statement. 
 

But as I said, I agree with overall idea of the video, I never called the whole video FUD. You are free to draw whatever conclusion from my posts. But don’t bait with a tangibly thread related video, with only relatable bit in the video to be FUD, and expect anything different. 

@wyx087So you don't think that cars have built-in obsolescence then when compared with older cars. OK that's fine, I do and that is applicable to all new cars regardless of their motive power sources on my view. 

2 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

@wyx087So you don't think that cars have built-in obsolescence then when compared with older cars. OK that's fine, I do and that is applicable to all new cars regardless of their motive power sources on my view. 

 

EVs are made as well as they can be at the time.  As have been ICE cars 

 

It is just that lecky vehicles are improving hugely year on year whereas ICE plateaued many years ago......  

 

 

Edited 20 February, 20242 yr by lol-lol

Lots of innovation in ICE in the last ten years

 

Mazda’s 2.2-liter SkyActiv-D 2.2-liter engine is said to have the world’s lowest compression ratio (14.1:1) of any diesel,

 

Chevrolet 2.7-liter Turbo engine. In all, the engine offers 17 different cylinder deactivation patterns, can emulate a 4.3 litre v6

 

Ford’s 1.5-liter EcoBoost engine is noteworthy because it’s another example of a smart little engine capable of driving a relatively large vehicle with as few as two cylinders. The inline three-cylinder EcoBoost accomplishes that with cylinder deactivation, which senses when one cylinder isn’t needed and therefore automatically shuts it down. The system can deactivate or activate a cylinder in as little as 14 milliseconds to maintain a smooth ride. Even on three cylinders, however, it manages to produce 180 HP and 177 lb-ft of torque (when burning 93 octane fuel). It serves on the Ford Fusion in Europe and on the American Ford Escape SUV, where it can tow as much as 2,000 lbs.

 

In another of the major engine innovations of 2018, Mazda rolled out the SkyActiv-X engine, said to be the world’s first commercial gasoline-burner to employ compression ignition. By merging two classic technologies, Mazda engineers say they’ve combined the high-revving character of a gasoline engine with the efficiency, torque and response of a diesel. The key to their accomplishment is a technology known as Spark Controlled Compression Ignition, which maximizes the zone in which compression ignition is possible, and produces a seamless transition between compression ignition and spark ignition. When introducing the engine last fall, Mazda reported amazing numbers: torque up 10-30% and efficiency up 20-30% over its predecessor. Mazda says the engine also offers more latitude in the selection of gear ratios, adding even more to the engine’s fuel economy and driving performance

 

 

35 minutes ago, Stonekeeper said:

Lots of innovation in ICE in the last ten years

 

Mazda’s 2.2-liter SkyActiv-D 2.2-liter engine is said to have the world’s lowest compression ratio (14.1:1) of any diesel,

 

Chevrolet 2.7-liter Turbo engine. In all, the engine offers 17 different cylinder deactivation patterns, can emulate a 4.3 litre v6

 

Ford’s 1.5-liter EcoBoost engine is noteworthy because it’s another example of a smart little engine capable of driving a relatively large vehicle with as few as two cylinders. The inline three-cylinder EcoBoost accomplishes that with cylinder deactivation, which senses when one cylinder isn’t needed and therefore automatically shuts it down. The system can deactivate or activate a cylinder in as little as 14 milliseconds to maintain a smooth ride. Even on three cylinders, however, it manages to produce 180 HP and 177 lb-ft of torque (when burning 93 octane fuel). It serves on the Ford Fusion in Europe and on the American Ford Escape SUV, where it can tow as much as 2,000 lbs.

 

In another of the major engine innovations of 2018, Mazda rolled out the SkyActiv-X engine, said to be the world’s first commercial gasoline-burner to employ compression ignition. By merging two classic technologies, Mazda engineers say they’ve combined the high-revving character of a gasoline engine with the efficiency, torque and response of a diesel. The key to their accomplishment is a technology known as Spark Controlled Compression Ignition, which maximizes the zone in which compression ignition is possible, and produces a seamless transition between compression ignition and spark ignition. When introducing the engine last fall, Mazda reported amazing numbers: torque up 10-30% and efficiency up 20-30% over its predecessor. Mazda says the engine also offers more latitude in the selection of gear ratios, adding even more to the engine’s fuel economy and driving performance

 

 

 

Complexity to provide small incremental improvements in efficiency is not quantum improvements as with battery energy density and even electric motor design we are seeing.

Petrol engines are still about one third thermal efficient, diesel maybe closer to 50% efficient but have those nasty NOX and PMs. 

Electric vehicles around 90% efficient and batteries improving many percentage points per year. 

ICE is a nice way for all that waste heat to use to keep the passengers warm but rubbish at use all that chemical energy in to motive power.

Maybe just a small single cylinder, or vankel or the like, ICE to produce a bit of waste heat for thermal comfort and do a bit of powering a generator to charge the battery but other than that do not see any medium to long term future for combustion engine on European roads, maybe in the middle east where petrol costs less than water.    

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/engine-thermal-efficiency

 

 

 

Guys, I feel that maybe I have inadvertently started a war between ICE and FV, and if I have, I apologise, but like the person or as @wyx087 quaintly, puts it, "The Talking Head" in that video I posted, and as I have tried to explain, but it seems unconvincingly, that the question I was posing, is exactly the same as the talking head was asking, do the newer models have built-in obsolescence?

 

The clue was in the thumbnail and it seems that predictably some seem to be taking it as a direct attack on electric cars. I made a reference to electric cars because they are indeed mentioned in the video and like it or not, the Nissan Leaf is now in its 14th year so the early models could also be compared to the current model for example.

 

Now I have the Mk3 Superb, but I have also had the Mk1 and the Mk2 versions and I can confidentially say that as far as the Superb is concerned, yes I do believe that is the case, the Mk3 is nowhere as well-made as the other two, and it is a very clever car, it is also too complicated and has too many gadgets and innovations to go wrong and I honestly see that in 10 years time if something like any of the ECU's fails, new spares would be like hens teeth, if for no other reason than the fact the hybrid chips used in them just will not be made any more such is the pace of electronics today. These chips are used in both ICE ad EV's that's a fact.

 

I dabble in electronics and there are many items of decent consumer products which end up in land fill simply because some of the chips are no longer available.

Edited 20 February, 20242 yr by Graham Butcher

3 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

@wyx087So you don't think that cars have built-in obsolescence then when compared with older cars. OK that's fine, I do and that is applicable to all new cars regardless of their motive power sources on my view. 

I'm not saying that at all. How many times do I have to say that I agree with the general video theme? I agree we shouldn't view cars as own a few years get another one luxury items.

 

I'm only pointing out the EV argument based solely on a very low battery lifetime is spreading misinformation.

1 minute ago, wyx087 said:

I'm not saying that at all. How many times do I have to say that I agree with the general video theme? I agree we shouldn't view cars as own a few years get another one luxury items.

 

I'm only pointing out the EV argument based solely on a very low battery lifetime is spreading misinformation.

Oh, I'm sorry, I must have got confused when you fast forwarded the ICE section of that video.

Vehicles in the UK are on the roads with Air bags out of date. No issue as far as the DfT / DVSA or Insurance companies are concerned.

The cars that started having no Spare Wheels have 'Compressors and a slime kit and sometimes a dealerships flag as out of date'.

 

We have had members point out electrics and components that expire, corrode.  There are door and hatch looms that are crap / scrap after as little as 5 years old.

 

Much less welding has been required of cars from the past 15 or more years though.

Disc brakes can last less miles than brake pads.

 

Door Seals can be sh!t5, timing chain / tensioners can be guff.   Water pumps can be guff.

Euro 5 TSI engines can be guff.   & Euto 6 (1.5TSI ACT a looming issue.) TDI,s with SCR can be guff.

DQ200 DSG,s can be guff.

 

So that covers VW Group but not comprehensively.

 

Others have here issues. The Air Bags cover many car manufacturers.

 

There will be totally guff EV,s and there are already, and some duff Technology & the way might be lead by the VW Group.  Vorsprung Durch Technik. 

14 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

@wyx087So you don't think that cars have built-in obsolescence then when compared with older cars. OK that's fine, I do and that is applicable to all new cars regardless of their motive power sources on my view. 

Interesting.

In this BBC article Tesla are held up as an example of a company fighting against built in obsolescence.

 

A business-minded approach to smarter recycling, reuse and repurposing has arguably made a big dent and will so in future, says Sawhney. For instance, Tesla, the electric automobile manufacturer, has plans to take back the spent batteries in its clients’ cars and repurpose them for home energy storage. The company also auto-downloads and upgrades the software in its clients’ cars as the vehicles charge overnight. Sawhney, who is a Tesla owner, says the company planned ahead for these sorts of upgrades by including “basically future-proof” sensors and hardware in the vehicle. 

“Instead of selling model after model of the car to me, [Tesla] just changed the software,” Sawhney says. “So that’s an antidote to planned obsolescence in a way – it makes obsolescence obsolete.”


Also interesting from same article:

“The auto industry for years has been sort of a fashion-driven business, where your car had fins and five years later, fins were out of style,” says Tullman. Yet that’s changing: he cites United States Department of Transportation figures showing that the average age of a passenger vehicle on the road in that country now stands at 11.4 years; in 1969, the figure was 5.1 years.

1 minute ago, Winston_Woof said:

In this BBC article Tesla are held up as an example of a company fighting against built in obsolescence.

Tesla owners may be against built-in obsolescence, and Tesla's focus on over-the-air software updates speaks volume about their commitment. I'm due to get a matrix headlight update soon to enable matrix lights function now that EU have signed off to allow it. I'm sure any autonomous driving regulation changes will be applied to the older cars. 

 

BUT Tesla are also known to be not friendly towards third party repairs and the idea of right to repair. Their parts are historically to be difficult to obtain.

 

Although situation is slowly improving, they have opened up their service manual for free. They have implemented service mode in vehicles to allow user/3rd party diagnostics and its functions are improving with every software update. 

https://service.tesla.com/docs/ModelY/ServiceManual/en-us/

I don't think the failure of components in a car can be put down to "built in obsolescence" per se.

 

Cars now as a whole product last way longer than old ones. Citing the odd old Merc etc is a red herring. Some people look after their vehicles and others don't.

 

Individual components however have become victim of cost savings, they are often sourced from third party suppliers battered by the Manufacturers to keep the costs down so are made to "acceptable" lifespans.

 

We also have the major cost in repairs being Labour so now many components are no longer sold alone for easier fitting.

 

E.g many bushes involve buying the part it is fitted to to avoid having a highly paid mechanic pressing them in and out. and that plastic thermostat housing in the video  includes the new thermostat.

 

It's progress?

 

Remember the days when people rented Televisions and a man came round to fix it? Who does that now? If the tv breaks people buy another. Consumers think along the lines of time and price If it costs £300 and lasts 6 years that's a £1 a week.

 

I remember the days we used to put new elements in Kettles that process now would be dearer than buying a new one

@Winston_WoofTesla's still have built-in obsolescence despite their over the air software updates as all that does is to address software issues in much the same way as Microsoft do with their Windows software updates, sometimes its to fix a bug or maybe to fix or add-in a small feature etc. The video and indeed as @Rootedsaid in his post about actual physical hardware failures is where the problem is coming from and the fact that the particular hardware might not be economical to continue making after a few years after a car has stopped production. The more equipment that is fitted to a car, and the more that equipment interacts with other bits on the car, just adds to the problem. By way of example, take this Rolls Royce Silver Ghost car, made in 1908 and still running today, I seriously doubt that there will not be a single car made today that will still be running in 116 years time.

 

Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost - Wikipedia

 

I have had a couple of software updates done on my car FOC but that does not class as fighting obsolescence, just rectifying an issue that was not correctly implemented in the first instance.

 

@wyx087 The items that you mention, the matrix headlights, the autonomous driving etc will only be implemented where the physical hardware was already installed but was disabled because various countries where their cars are sold into, banned them from being used so Tesla, removed the software or disabled the software for those features from working, so that again is not an anti obsolescence measure at all. It just streamlines their own internal systems by reducing the administration required to keep their electronic systems operating in safe and secure fashion and to try and prevent hackers from gaining control over their cars systems etc. After all if they can make 2 production lines produce cars all the same apart from the option of right or left-hand drive, they only have to disable via software options not allowed in certain parts of the world once they know why each car is destined for, thus keeping their costs down and speeding up production.

Edited 21 February, 20242 yr by Graham Butcher

6 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

@wyx087 The items that you mention, the matrix headlights, the autonomous driving etc will only be implemented where the physical hardware was already installed but was disabled because various countries where their cars are sold into, banned them from being used so Tesla, removed the software or disabled the software for those features from working, so that again is not an anti obsolescence measure at all. It just streamlines their own internal systems by reducing the administration required to keep their electronic systems operating in safe and secure fashion and to try and prevent hackers from gaining control over their cars systems etc. After all if they can make 2 production lines produce cars all the same apart from the option of right or left-hand drive, they only have to disable via software options not allowed in certain parts of the world once they know why each car is destined for, thus keeping their costs down and speeding up production.

Just like phones, these days cars are a software platform on wheels. There will be many new features that the car can do with a software update to maintain its functionality lead and thus not require the user to buy a new car in order to benefit. Many are not hardware related, for example those autonomous driving features. 

 

Example is blind spot warning. When I bought the car, there wasn't blind spot warning. It was added through OTA update. There are no dedicated hardware for blind spot warning, unlike traditional car. It relies on its cameras to identify cars. Another example is parking visualisation, where those cars without parking sensors can now show 3D mapped visuals. Everything is done through its existing cameras, doesn't need dedicated hardware. 

 

The point is with modern cars (not just Tesla's), unless hardware restricted, one shouldn't need to buy a new car to enjoy the latest new features. Just like smart phones. I've been using iPhone's from its inception back in 2007, without buying latest phones every year, I still get to enjoy latest features. 

 

Software updates are part of the fight against obsolescence. 

36 minutes ago, Stonekeeper said:

I don't think the failure of components in a car can be put down to "built in obsolescence" per se.

 

Cars now as a whole product last way longer than old ones. Citing the odd old Merc etc is a red herring. Some people look after their vehicles and others don't.

 

Individual components however have become victim of cost savings, they are often sourced from third party suppliers battered by the Manufacturers to keep the costs down so are made to "acceptable" lifespans.

 

We also have the major cost in repairs being Labour so now many components are no longer sold alone for easier fitting.

 

E.g many bushes involve buying the part it is fitted to to avoid having a highly paid mechanic pressing them in and out. and that plastic thermostat housing in the video  includes the new thermostat.

 

It's progress?

 

Remember the days when people rented Televisions and a man came round to fix it? Who does that now? If the tv breaks people buy another. Consumers think along the lines of time and price If it costs £300 and lasts 6 years that's a £1 a week.

 

I remember the days we used to put new elements in Kettles that process now would be dearer than buying a new one

These problems may not be deliberately built-in but nonetheless they are there, many of them you have highlighted already, we have become a throwaway society and that is not being green in any way form. these videos throw further light on the problems and it makes zero difference if its a cheap car or not.

 

 

 

 

@wyx087 Like it or not, your Tesla and my car all will suffer the same fate in time, certain crucial parts, cameras etc will be go out of production and will knock out certain functions when those parts fail and will not be available to buy. The same goes for your iPhone, and also my Android smartphone. I have already had to throw away many phones because the software updates just do not become available for the phone after a few years, and then you discover that slowly certain apps etc start to fall over as they are no longer being supported by the developers and so the process continues until you end with just a basic phone that nobody wants, assuming you can still get new batteries for it. Most companies, especially apple have started to code their batteries, screens etc to the phone and so they effectively kill it for you.

I look out each and every day for what nice older cars are around.  sort of S, T W, Y reg and up to 2007 type cars.

 

There are ones that were sold in high numbers that kick about.

Golf, Passat, Audi,s, some Fords, Toyota, Nissan, small cars like Kia Picanto etc.

 

There are quite a lot of Fabia.  Lets say Mk1. Also Superbs,  maybe not so many Octavia. 

But 1999-2007.

But then nothing is Mk1, or Series 1 until you get Mk2 or Series 2.   They were a Fabia.  I do wish Skoda would not keep faults into Face Lifts, Gen 2, FL, Gen 3, FL, Gen 4.   Learn their mistakes...

 

Different areas of Scotland can have vary different types of 'Older cars' that are daily transport which you might see parked, work places, roadside, car parks, supermarkets or Airport / Long term or short term parking.

Edited 21 February, 20242 yr by Rooted

4 minutes ago, Rooted said:

I look out each and every day for what nice older cars are around.  sort of S, T W, Y reg and up to 2007 type cars.

 

I like that game as well

And yes this is a genuine mileage, not been around the clock

PS

Ford Eco-Boost.  Brilliant.  Needed to admit a Balls-Up quicker.   Ford - VW Engines in a partnership now. What a coc-k,up.   My pals service van has lots of thousands of quids equipment in to deal with these.

 

VW Twinchargers. Engine of the year for 9 years.  What a carry on.  At least Volvo shorted things out, after Stephan Jacoby left VW to head Geely (Volvo).

 

Mazda, fantastic, they had to become so, as they got stuff so wrong in the past.  The tech was is great. Just needed snagging sorted.

 

Mercedes, well that can be a Renault engine,  etc etc.

21 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

@wyx087 Like it or not, your Tesla and my car all will suffer the same fate in time, certain crucial parts, cameras etc will be go out of production and will knock out certain functions when those parts fail and will not be available to buy. The same goes for your iPhone, and also my Android smartphone. I have already had to throw away many phones because the software updates just do not become available for the phone after a few years, and then you discover that slowly certain apps etc start to fall over as they are no longer being supported by the developers and so the process continues until you end with just a basic phone that nobody wants, assuming you can still get new batteries for it. Most companies, especially apple have started to code their batteries, screens etc to the phone and so they effectively kill it for you.

Parts obsolescence is a different matter to software updates, please don't confuse them. Parts go out of production all the time and it is difficult to source correct revision of parts. It is indeed a problem needs attention. This is true across all cars. 

 

2013 Model S are still receiving software patches. Don't think they get new features due to hardware limitations (processor not fast enough, no AP cameras) but certainly isn't left out in the cold with vulnerabilities like relatively short life for smart phones. 

 

Although Google have recently announced their new Pixel get 7 years of updates. Apple generally update for 5 years minimum. I'd expect cars to receive 10+ years of software updates. 

 

To my knowledge, I've replaced a few Apple and other device batteries over the years, Apple have not coded their batteries. The security device, yes, screen, may be, but never the batteries. Your source on your claim? 

https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/diy-iphone-battery-replacement-how-i-fixed-my-phone-at-home/

There are always Simply Clever plans.  Great ideas. 

 Then it is the UK and the issue is Dealerships, lack of actual staff, trained staff, booking your car in. 

They are too busy with Warranty Work.  Recall Campaigns, RECALL Actions, SAFETY CRITICAL Recalls, or ignoring / delaying them to be bothered with sorting cars.

They are Fitters, not repairers, even Servicing can be beyond the comprehension of the Service Desk staff. 

 

Lack of interest is an issue with Franchised Main Dealers. 

 

 

Maybe even cheaper than anticipated..........

 

 

 

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

Maybe even cheaper than anticipated..........

 

 

 

 

 

 

BYD are aiming even lower apparently
 

 

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

Parts obsolescence is a different matter to software updates, please don't confuse them. Parts go out of production all the time and it is difficult to source correct revision of parts. It is indeed a problem needs attention. This is true across all cars. 

 

2013 Model S are still receiving software patches. Don't think they get new features due to hardware limitations (processor not fast enough, no AP cameras) but certainly isn't left out in the cold with vulnerabilities like relatively short life for smart phones. 

 

Although Google have recently announced their new Pixel get 7 years of updates. Apple generally update for 5 years minimum. I'd expect cars to receive 10+ years of software updates. 

 

To my knowledge, I've replaced a few Apple and other device batteries over the years, Apple have not coded their batteries. The security device, yes, screen, may be, but never the batteries. Your source on your claim? 

https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/diy-iphone-battery-replacement-how-i-fixed-my-phone-at-home/

It seems as if we are both saying almost the same things but not quite.

 

I'm not confusing software updates with parts obsolescence, it is the parts that I'm referring to. Modern cars have so much tech in them these days compared to the example I gave with the 1908 Rolls Royce, a battery, coil, set of points was used and these can still be sourced today, hence the vast old classic car scene and annual rallies, London to Brighton runs etc. Todays cars are controlled by computers and electronics and it will be these parts that will become obsolete long before mechanical parts as most mechanical parts can be fabricated, electronic chips cannot, the world is full of dead electronic equipment that cannot be restored to working status because these chips are no longer made. 

 

Software can always be updated as long as there are people around who understand the programming language and can carry out the coding of the program. Software is just a language.

 

Apple has been proved to be deliberately obstructing third party repairers and even coding things like batteries, screens, digitizers etc to specific phones, tablets etc, not just a model range, but each individual piece of equipment. The older products, if you can source batteries etc are fine, they predate their coding. They also degrade the battery performance of older devices as they reach the ending of software support, again this has been proven.

 

Now if you attempt to replace a battery etc without going to a Apple Service centre, where they can code the part to the device, they device will now tell the user that the device is not a genuine part and react accordingly.

 

About genuine iPhone batteries – Apple Support (UK)

10 minutes ago, Winston_Woof said:

BYD are aiming even lower apparently
 

 

 

Be interesting to see if Anti Dumping duties get shoved on the Chinese cars.

There is already a 10% Ad Valorem tariff on cars from non preference countries and what the Peoples Republic of China might do is outsource the final assembly to a pref country to get sufficient local contect to qualify and they can avoid both the 10% Most Favored Nation duty and the ADD.

 

Edited 21 February, 20242 yr by lol-lol