Hacker News Reader

Comment by Grombobulous | Hacker News Reader

Unless you’re Ferrari or Porsche, you don’t want to be in the situation where your vehicle has future collectors’ value. That usually just means it didn’t sell very well (rarity).

Let’s keep in mind that Tesla invested in this truck to be the next F-150, which is the best-selling vehicle in the USA for the past multiple decades.

View on HN

You’re talking about different things. A failure from a manufacturer perspective can be a major success from a collector perspective (see also the DeLorean).

Even the hated Edsel is worth quite a bit today.

Of course it might be harder to keep a Cybertruck running for 50 years due to all the computerized components. Restorers will probably be relegated to rebuilding Cybertruck bodies with new components.

> Of course it might be harder to keep a Cybertruck running for 50 years due to all the computerized components

And all the well-documented reliability and quality issues.

That’s not such a big issue for restorers, there were also extreme quality problems with the Edsel.

Considering the recent headlines about the decompilation and reverse engineering scenes, I doubt it!

If anything, the centralized control units of modern cars may make this sort of thing easier. A 2000’s car has more distributed pieces of vehicle control units (more similar to microcontrollers) while a modern EV built in the style of a Tesla has fewer compute components.

So in 50 years you’ll have some kind of recompilation scene where those computers get replaced, almost like how people replace their router software with OpenWRT or the people at vintage computer festivals who stand up reverse engineered AOL Instant Messenger services.

> Of course it might be harder to keep a Cybertruck running for 50 years due to all the computerized components. Restorers will probably be relegated to rebuilding Cybertruck bodies with new components.

Really no different than any classic car, really. GM isn't selling OEM parts for a '57 Chevy, for example. If you need replacement parts on those, nowadays, you're likely going to specialty manufacturers given there really aren't any "parts cars" around anymore.

True, I just imagine that it will be harder for non-OEMs to make replacement electronics given how locked down Teslas are.

We'll have to wait and see. I honestly kind of doubt that will be true. There's all kinds of Tesla hacking that's been going on for years. It's possible to get a Tesla motor running without any external Tesla electronics through aftermarket solutions that carry support from the vendors.

I didn’t know that, that’s surprising, but I haven’t been following it that closely; I’ve just occasionally seen stories about Tesla shutting off service for DIYers. In that case maybe it won’t be so difficult.

For combustion engine parts all you need is metal work tools, not locked down proprietary software and electronics. My dad has a 1954 Citroen b11 that he’s kept alive and humming since he got it in the late 60s.

In its time, the Edsel was more meh than hated. Mainly people didn't buy them because they were essentially pricier Fords and it was a recession year, and Ford threw in the towel for Ford-internal political reasons. The looks were not as much of an issue as people think today. It certainly didn't have the same political associations.

Good book on the subject: https://www.sup.org/books/history/disaster-dearborn

Thanks for the clarification. My understanding was that the quality issues and exaggerated features drew a lot of mockery at the time. That’s not always enough to prevent something from succeeding (other polarizing vehicles like the Nissan Cube did OK) so the recession/internal politics angle makes sense.

I am talking about how value to collectors is irrelevant for most automakers.

Tesla’s corporate leadership would be much happier if the Cybertruck was selling 100,000 units a year and was not at all a collector’s item.

That’s not relevant to what the person you were responding to was talking about. They were talking about collectors.

And I’m talking about how their discussion of collectors is no consolation to the people at Tesla who were trying to make a mass-market profitable and successful vehicle.

I don’t have to talk about exactly what my comment parent is talking about in all facets. This isn’t a courtroom cross-examination.

Your comment is a non sequitur then. It reads like you’re just tacking on an irrelevant comment based on your personal feelings about the company.

If anything the original discussion of collectors was the non-sequitur. How this relates to the business of automobiles is far more relevant to the topic and article.

I guess I can’t really complain. They were making an interesting point about collectors that opened up a new line of discussion, in which I learned a couple of things. But that seemingly wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t responded to your comment, so somehow your non-sequitur response to his non-sequitur seems to have been necessary to generate that discussion. So thanks?

You’re welcome!

1990s F150s are selling for much more than their original new price, with low enough miles.

Best selling truck of all time. Not really about rarity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com