Hacker News Reader

Comment by Erlich_Bachman | Hacker News Reader

Because there are many great cars that fit all those requirements and that are usually cheaper than a current Tesla, better equiped than a Tesla (autopilot being the single exception, even though BMW, Porsche, VW and many others already have lane assist which is basically a little worse (but still comparable) version of Tesla's autopilot). Why bother with renting when you can just take your own car?

View on HN

"basically a little worse (but still comparable)". No, not even close. I had an M5 with BMW's latest lane keeping assist. Tesla's Autopilot is exponentially better. Especially in the last two weeks with unattended highway lane changes. It is night and day different.

What does it mean practically? What do you mean by "exponentially"? VW, BMW, have lane assist. It means the vehicle will stay in the lane. Autopilot will also stay in the lane. Let's say on a 30 minute drive, autopilot will disengage 2 times, VW will disengage 6 times. Is this about right? I don't see an "exponential" difference here, care to explain? I have tried several vehicles that have this, but for short periods of time.

The point is, none of the vehicles are truly automatic yet. I've seen videos of recent automatic lane changes too, there seems to be problems with proper speed and accurate changes, unless perfect road conditions...

I mean exponentially as in the experience is radically different. VW, BMW, etc will disengage multiple times during a trip by itself. Autopilot does not. 99% of my trips, I do not have to take over from autopilot. It just works. Sharp curves, stop and go traffic. The intelligence of the system - Tesla will look at cars in adjacent lanes, detect a blinker and slow the car to allow a merge. Tesla will look at cars approaching from an on-ramp merge and slow down to properly zipper merge. Tesla will detect a car in a blind spot during a lane change and automatically steer to avoid a collision. And yes the automatic lane changes are even further. They don't require perfect road conditions and there are no issues with proper speed or accurate changes. For me in SoCal traffic, the car will drive onramp to offramp, changing highways and avoiding slow traffic without me doing anything. This is what I mean by exponentially different. It is night and day.

I don’t talk about Tesla. I am talking about a small car, electric or not, that cost a fraction to buy, drive, insure and will be easier to park. And then renting for that fishing trip or long road trip when your small car won’t do.

I looked at this for a fun car to use at the weekends twice a month but it wasn't cost effective.

To rent for a weekend:

    - Rental: £300 (dependent on the car, but £300 was the cheapest)
    - Fuel: £100

To do it twice a month, between April and October would cost £5,600. Instead I picked up a fantastic car for just under £10,000 with less than 50,000 miles on it.

Man Maths has me at (over 12 months):

   - Depreciation: £500
   - Maintenance: £1500 (includ. tires)
   - Insurance and tax: £750
   - Fuel: £1000

which is £3,750 v.s. £5,600.

One small tip for renting cars is to look around at a few rental places, ideally in lower-traffic or lower-population areas. £300 for a weekend seems pretty high (but comparable to e.g. renting from the local airport here), whereas I could take an Uber to an Enterprise just outside of town for ~$30 and get a "premium" car for $140 for the weekend (48 hours at $70/day).

This is for renting sports cars (fun cars) for weekend use. Enterprise and the like don't have such cars available in the U.K, it's more of a specialist market.

If you actually use the cat like that twice a month for a big part of the year it of course makes sense to buy one. But most people use the car for that fun drive maybe twice a year (even though they of course dream about doing it all the time when they buy their expensive car).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com