High-Tech Cars Are Killing the Auto Repair Shop
wired.com
wired.com
A big part of the issue is the manufacturers don't care if a repair procedure is too complex or if the equipment required is too expensive. That's a benefit to them because it means less independent repair shops and dealer networks will simply pass that cost on to the customer because customers have no alternatives.
My family has always purchased cars that are just off warranty, so about 5 years old, and driven them for 5-15 years. The less money we had, the longer we drove them. We've always done our own repairs. However, that's changing because there are some things we simply can't fix. My dad has never driven a vehicle that costed more than $100 per month and has always owned a vehicle that I'd consider reliable. Those days are gone.
I think something that could help would be if the right to repair movement pushed for some kind of limited repair or downgraded repair mode. For example, the article talks about the complexity of doing a wheel alignment due to calibrating lane drift sensors, etc. I think vehicle owners should be able to opt out of that and simply lose those features if they're not required for the car to function. IE: Get the wheel alignment, skip the convenience features.
Of course, we all know the opposite will happen. The vehicle industry will lobby the government to have those complex features become requirements "for safety" and the only option we'll get as consumers is to buy overly complex, overly expensive vehicles. I guess another option may be to rent or lease and never own anything which might be the ultimate goal of the industry regardless of complexity.
I don’t want to be driving on the road at all, unless it’s for sport on a closed track. Since I must, since this is America and public transportation is not profitable, I want everyone else to driving the safest vehicles possibly affordable. That lane drift sensor has prevented numerous distracted drivers from causing accidents with their negligence. Opting out of the sensors is more directly reckless than emissions defeating devices on diesels.
I dont think lot of people would reject an offer to replace their cars with a newer and safer version.
But thats not why you want, is it? What you really want is for someone else to pay for your desires.
If I am incorrect about what I pointed out, please point out what exactly I am incorrect about so I can review and correct.
If on the other hand i misunderstood your argument, then please feel free to clarify it to reflect the specifics of what you propose.
I am happy to engage on the actual facts and the underlying realities of those facts.
But really, that is super handy! I wonder if other makes have a similar feature that I just have never heard of or if it's a Jeep thing?
OBD readers are expensive if you want a decent one, but save a lot of headaches.
IOW, laying the blame at the feet of consumers is unsupportable bollocks. They buy what's on offer, and what's on offer is what makes more money for manufacturers.
They're are many others and they nearly all have worse 'quality' reputations. Obviously the sum total of all their sales is way higher than Toyota's.
So the base car costs 26k. It only comes in Orange. But if you don't want it in orange and you want us to remove the interior fart smell package you are going to have to upgrade to the metaverse deluxe package that replaces all the windshields with a vr set. Unless you are a fucking moron and you can't afford the upgrade to 48k and you are too stupid to understand how great replacing every functional thing in the car with a touchscreen is. Then just order the orange one from the factory and we'll deliver it in 2026.
Ok, whatever, I'll keep my 2011 Mazda that I want to get rid of but will still run for another 20 years if I change the oil once a decade
I've always been extremely against this stuff. I'd be interested to hear a good faith defense of the other side
>Newer cars have advanced driver-assistance systems, which can keep cars in their lane, detect blind spots, and avoid collisions—functions that require a car to have a firm grasp of where it is in space. That requires repairers to calibrate the sensors and cameras in a car underpinning those advanced systems.
I can't speak for all of those systems, but things like 'electronic stability control' (required in 2011) saves an estimated 2000+ lives every year. Fuel injection is obviously a huge advantage over carburetors for reliability, fuel efficiency, and squeezing more power out of an engine. Even relatively simple systems like these require numerous sensors, computer-units, and aren't easy to diagnose/fix for a shade tree mechanic with basic tools.
It seems like a lot of what's being sold today goes way past these points though. Just an impression
- We are already seeing many 90s-early 2010s vehicles where we cannot repair or support certain parts. One big issue is the difficulty of board-level repair on discontinued electronic parts. Most auto shops can't/won't tackle that, their comfort level is just replacing whole electronic modules. Even if you can/will do these kinds of repairs, there is zero documentation and individual components may no be longer made or have obfuscated part numbers. There are some independent specialists doing good work in this field but it's still really hit-or-miss. If manufacturers were compelled to release detailed schematics and parts lists once parts are discontinued, it would help.
- Also, I see many shops struggle to run older specialized diagnostic software/hardware. For example, certain subsystems that can only be programmed with proprietary interfaces that won't run on anything newer than windows 98. Or technical documentation software that needs a hardware key attached to a parallel port. I've worked around some of this kind of stuff using VMs or preserving older hardware, but it's really tough for the average shop and not something that's easy for an independent entrepreneur to turn into a product or service. Again, mandatory open-sourcing once things are discontinued or no longer serviced by dealers would be a major help here.
- Regarding the two points above, I've heard counterarguments about the average new car being much more reliable than older cars. Mechanically, this may be true, but in my experience lots of car electronic systems fail due to age, not mileage. So my prediction is that even though new cars may travel 200k miles without major mechanical malfunctions, as they age a whole cohort of these cars will be plagued with issues due to stuff like capacitors leaking, solder joints cracking, water/dust intrusion, adhesives and coatings failing etc. This will be tough on lower income buyers who previously could buy something like a used 90s Camry which provides reliable cheap transportation even today.
- The article uses the common euphemism of "labor shortage" to mask what is a crisis of labor conditions and pay. The automotive repair industry in the US is undergoing a severe brain drain due to a combination of exploitative labor practices and bad pay. I'm talking about total lifetime earning potential, not just "low starting wages" mentioned in the article. The trade association representative quoted at the end is doing a lot of wishful thinking about attracting young techie folks to the industry, because the industry currently is a very raw deal for any smart young person compared to other options. I imagine we will soon see articles like these invoke "passion" and "inspiring young car enthusiasts" as the industry tries emotional appeals to gain new hires.
- Ultimately, NONE of these concerns about supporting older designs or attracting talent matter to the major manufacturers. Even high end cars now are only built to last the warranty period. The ideal new car customer leases the newest model each year and never buys. Under this model, dealer techs will only need to do routine maintenance and occasional parts swapping. No diagnostic skill required. The manufacturer considers the cars essentially disposable and "someone else's problem" once they can no longer make money off leases or financing. The incentives are completely against high quality, durable, repairable cars, and this won't change without some kind of stronger right-to-repair regulation.