Hacker News Reader

Comment by ryandrake | Hacker News Reader

So many cars built within the last ten or so years look like the same boring identical bar of soap on wheels. Minus trivial details like the headlight cluster and grille, you really can’t tell most 4 door sedan brands abart unless you look closely. I wish the Cybertruck succeeds, not because I need one (I don’t) but because finally someone out there is trying to get a little creative with styling again!

View on HN

The trend to sameness is probably due to two main factors, more comprehensive collision safety laws and the push in many markets for fuel efficiency.

The collision safety regulations appear to have caused side and rear windows to get smaller (probably to improve side impact intrusion protection) and pillars to get wider (rollover protection).

Aerodynamic drag is a major contributor to fuel efficiency. To my eye there has been a trend (in Australia at least) to blur the line between sedans and hatchbacks. Sedan boots/trunks are getting taller and more sloped to smooth the transition from the rear window. The rear of hatchbacks have been also getting more sloped. Both are attempts to get a more tear-drop shape without overly compromising utility.

After many iterations working within the same industry wide constraints, it is not surprising that designers all optimise their designs to similar shapes and sizes.

The same effect can be seen in road bicycles. The UCI imposes limits on wheel size and other physical dimensions on bikes that are allowed to be used in UCI events (pro and amateur racing). Above 30km/hr aerodynamic drag starts to a major effect on the power a cyclist needs to output to maintain speed or accelerate. In recent years bike manufacturers have been wind tunnel tuning their designs more rigorously. This has resulted in the aero road bikes from the major manufacturers converging to almost identical designs. Cycling commentators and journalists have started agitating for relaxation of the UCI rules to try to get some innovation happening again.

I actually go an opposite approach. I am buying old cars - the market is great here in the US.

I got a 47k mileage 1991 Mazda Miata for 4500$! And the girlfriend loves how cool it is and shifting stick. You should try to snag something from the 90s before people realize how nice they are.

Modern cars are spy machines needing constant software updates and nonsense features like "push button start" which is probably just a ploy to no longer have to make complicated ignition switches.

that's nice and all. But if you collide with one of these new spy machines, you'll figure out why it's not the greatest idea to prefer old cars when you can afford newer cars. Safety is not something it's worth being a luddite for. I agree with you, even as a software engineer, I find it disgusting the amount of computing power my Honda has for that matter. However, if I run off the road, I would rather be in my current Honda than in my previous Honda (pre 2000).

I think the 2010-2012 strike a sweet spot for what you're saying. Reasonable safety, not a lot of software.

True, it is dangerous to drive a cool sports car. But its light and it handles well - its even modular with a huge aftermarket meaning I was able to easily spend an extra 1k and get both upgraded brakes and rotors installed.

Besides, if my girlfriend and I want to take a risk an enjoy a nice car I don't like the government telling me otherwise.

You're right about that date range, probably the best without software that thinks its better than you. Its going to be bad when cars have full electronic steering with no mechanics - you will essentially be holding an xbox controller and have no idea about your cars alignment lol

The car magazines were calling them "jelly beans" as early as 1999, maybe earlier. The late 90s/early 2000s were full of blunt boring cars

Reply on news.ycombinator.com