Hacker News Reader

Comment by charlesdm | Hacker News Reader

I'm 100% sure the interior of this car will have a much better finish than a Tesla. A Tesla inside just feels cheap to me.

View on HN

Agreed. I was interested in Tesla before I took one for a test drive. It handled fine and it was nice to drive, but the interior really felt lacking for such an expensive vehicle. Drop the same for a Mercedes and you'll have a very comfortable ride. I ended up not getting a car at all, I'll wait for an EV with an interior to match the price tag.

It was the other way for me. Test drove the Cayenne, Macan, GLC43, S, X and a few other vehicles. With the Porsches and Mercs, while the seats were super comfortable, it was like walking into a "button exhibition". And my god the typefaces they used on the Merc and the forced use of a barely working "joystick" instead of a touch-screen was all counter-intuitive.

Of course this was in 2017 and things could've changed now, but with my 2 years in the S, I'm sold on Tesla. Only rule being get a Tesla 1 year after the model is introduced so they iron out all the production issues.

I've never been much of a fan of Porsche interiors, but Mercedes have always felt quite intuitive to me, and very comfortable seating. I quite like the central wheel thing they've had forever, more so than the new touch pad thing I've seen on the newer models. I also prefer buttons and other physical interactions over touch screens though, never quite understood why they are the new hot thing. The big screen in the Tesla just made me stressed, and I couldn't use it while driving because of the need to look at the screen. Maybe this goes away with time, but I find the same with the big touch screens in the new Volvo models as well.

Touch screens are really bad to use on uneven roads too, where bumps will make you accidentally press whatever and now all my fans are at 100% and I don't know how to fix it...

Tactile interfaces matter on the road! Car touchscreens are a modern trend that needs some evolution.

I really like the combination of Mercedes rotary wheel/button interface with a Apple CarPlay, it's pretty much my ideal interface. Huge icons and text, not a lot to clutter, and a simple and consistent input mechanism. The wheel is great, and comfortable. A few more buttons for things like temperature control and seat/mirror adjustment and I'm set in terms of non-steering column interface.

I don't understand. Why would anyone want a touchscreen when you can have actual buttons?

It seems like a good and futuristic idea until you almost drive off the road trying to change radio volume.

Case in point: I was in a new Volvo XC40 just yesterday and the fans were going like crazy. I tried adjusting this on the big screen in the middle but ended up having to park and adjust it while standstill because I couldn't figure out how to do it without taking a (long enough to crash) moment to look at the screen to know where to point and drag. Before they went on board with the touch screen craze they had physical dials for this, did the job every time. Mercedes have buttons, which is less ideal, but still better than a touch screen I have to navigate through.

The issue is that while buttons are far more expensive and provide a better user experience, touchscreens look better and are much cheaper. So what is a luxury car manufacturer to do?

I suspect expense is not as much of a problem as upgradeability. Buttons are fixed in place forever, digital interfaces can change with each app, and apps themselves can change with a firmware flash or OTA update.

Despite early detractors, touch interfaces are now dominant in mobile devices for this reason, their flexibility.

On the other hand, cost or not, tactile interfaces let human drivers keep their eyes on the road. I suspect that when cars are fully autonomous, nobody will care about that any moore.

Despite early detractors, touch interfaces are now dominant in mobile devices for this reason, their flexibility.

I'm in the market for a new flagship phone (mostly for a highly portable connected camera), and if I could get one with a physical keyboard I'd buy it in a heartbeat instead of debating and delaying trying to decide.

Especially in a car, reconfigurability is an advantage for the manufacturer more than it is for the user. Like you hint at in your last paragraph, touchscreens completely deny the use of, ironically, our sense of touch.

There is a perfectly valid market for devices with keyboards, home buttons you can press with gloves on, &c. We agree on this.

I absolutely agree on the ugly fonts in Mercedes. New Porsche replaced a multi button interface with a dual touchscreen, which I am not a fan of. I really like the Bmw iDrive system. It gives you an option to use either a touchscreen or a rotary wheel, it’s super convenient.

In the auto enthusiast circles, it's widely accepted that this side of ~2006 Audi is the gold standard for interior. They're going into the full EV market and are really pushing the advertising for their Audi e-tron very hard. I don't know about anything else, but I can guarantee you it will be luxuriously finished with attention to detail.

(VW group owns both Audi and Porsche. Porsche interiors, despite coming in more expensive vehicles, still play second fiddle to Audi's and are generally a little more austere.)

I've owned Audis. Recently visited a Porsche dealership to look at Macans and Panameras. Shocked at how cramped the interiors were... And maybe if the Macan was going to be cramped because it's a small car, the Panamera would be roomier.

But at 6 feet tall, I couldn't imagine sitting in either car regularly. So maybe I'm not a Porsche kind of guy.

So, all things being equal, that experience lowered my Taycan interest, and kept Audi e-tron interest pretty high.

And I don't know enough about their roll-out plans yet, but I do wonder about the Audi charging network availability.

But at 6 feet tall, I couldn't imagine sitting in either car regularly. So maybe I'm not a Porsche kind of guy.

Unlike some other brands, the Porsche Macan can be configured exactly the way you want it. Options are a la carte. There are some option bundles, but you aren't forced into them. A Macan without a sunroof has lots of headroom, both front and back. I'm 5'11" and my head doesn't come close to the roof.

But if you're 6'6" then you're probably very limited to the cars you can sit in. Basketball players tend to drive large SUVs, such as the Cadillac Escalade.

The only way to know what the Taycan will be like will be to sit in one. Plus you certainly don't want one of the first few model years. The pioneers always wind up with arrows in their backs.

I do wonder about the Audi charging network availability.

Tesla was forced into doing a supercharger network, because there was nothing like that out there. But it would be insane if every manufacturer felt the need to build out their own network. That seems crazy inefficient.

Porsche interiors are typically solid (albeit German-ly engineered, especially the cupholders). It'll be miles ahead of Model 3 interior.

IMO, Porsche's interiors are pretty ugly with thousand buttons everywhere. I personally prefer the clean lines of Tesla

For me that's a plus.

I'll take buttons I can operate without taking my eyes from the road every single time over clean lines that I only see with eyes off the road. I'm very much not a fan of more and more touch making its way into every car make.

porsche can be worse than an 80s cheap honda when they want to, so get them down of that high horse.

for proof, go see a 1999-2006 carrera 911/996.

Which details should I look for, exactly?

Quality of plastics is the main thing. I don’t think it’s as poor as people hype it up to be.

This doesn’t make sense.

Looking back a decade to try and descredit a notion about cars they build today does what exactly?

Company goals, priorities and quality change over time.

exactly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com