Hacker News Reader

Comment by exar0815 | Hacker News Reader

I would love to buy one of the Maruti Suzuki Jimnys. It's been sold in Europe, but you can't get one in Europe anymore because its not complying with arbitrary eco-guidelines (Which somehow a G-Wagon, a Defender or a Land Cruiser are). Prices for 50K KM Used Cars are nearly double the price of new ones. Since also LADA isn't on the European market anymore, you can't get a small off-road capable vehicle anymore. Okay, there are no dedicated off-road vehicles anymore, only luxury SUVs that no one can afford and no one would take off road.

View on HN

I guess it is because of EU fleet-wide CO2 averages. From next year on fleets must be below 93 g of CO2 per kilometer or the manufacturer is fined.

Suzuki has a very small fleet without any real low-emission cars, thus struggles to get below this new average. Combine this with the EU Jimny's four-cyclinder 1.5 l engine terrible gas mileage and it is easy to see why Suzuki is pulling this car (and many others) from the EU market.

That's why critics say that the fleet-wide CO2 average regulation favors manufacturer with large fleets. Since actual sales number do not factor into the equation low or no emission vehicles average out the wasteful SUVs and other big cars on a fleet average on paper only.

I'm not completely against fleet-wide averages, but I would like to see a competition. The fleet with the lowest average CO2 emission per kg sets the lower bound for a given year and all others are fined. This would cause a very fast scramble (just to catch up with Tesla, Jaguar, and Honda) and level the playing field for smaller manufacturers.

It appears volume is somewhat accounted for: https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/co2-perform...

But only in the sense that manufacturers are pooled together to reach a certain volume and very small manufacturers are basically excluded from the regulation.

The engine is beside the point, it's the square unaerodynamic shape that's penalized.

This averaging doesn't make any sense, they allow a G600 (13l/100km) while disallowing the 7l/100km Jimny.

> This averaging doesn't make any sense, they allow a G600 (13l/100km) while disallowing the 7l/100km Jimny

Who do you think lobbies the EU ? /s

Join us in the chorus to get rid of fleet-averages ;)

The crux, however, is that nobody is allowing or disallowing anything. Suzuki has made the choice to withdraw the Jimny in light of the fines, while Mercedes-Benz made the choice to keep the G600 available despite the fines.

Consider, Mercedes-Benz has many cars, esp. Smarts and EVs, in their fleet that significantly lower the fleet average to around 110 g CO2/km. Suzuki, with a small portfolio of ICE cars, in comparison, hovers somewhere 115 g CO2/km (all from the link above). MB is a higher-margin shop, its cars, esp. the G600, are much more expensive then Suzuki's, so MB opts to shoulder the (lower) fine, while Suzuki does not.

I can't really blame Suzuki on this and I'm looking forward to the Toyota-Suzuki co-op on EVs.

It got canned because it doesn't meet the new Vehicle General Safety Regulation laws from the EU. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_...

It was emissions [0]. In fact, it's still being sold as a "Light Commercial Vehicle", having less strict emissions needs, under the names Jimny Pro (at least on Spain), Jimny Mata (Italy, starting to sell in the end of this month IIRC) or Jimny Horizon (Germany).

The electric model seems to be confirmed for the future, and there are rumors of a hybrid model.

  0: https://motorillustrated.com/suzuki-jimny-no-longer-sold-europe/42315/

> I'm not completely against fleet-wide averages, but I would like to see a competition.

They seem absurdly silly. Just put a tax for each car of $$$ per g of CO2 per km. Then you're properly targetting the thing you care about rather than a lossy proxy. Or even better, increase tax on fossil fuels!

I think the idea is that car manufacturers are motivated to internally subsidize low emission car development and sales, so that they can sell high margin high emission cars, making the latter even more expensive. Double win?

g/CO2 is widely taxed and fuel is typically one of if not the highest taxed consumer good, e.g. in ger 2/3 of the fuel price is taxes.

I just want to interject that "50K KM" was fun to parse out. I like the way two conventions collided here. 50Mm would have been correct, but confusing.50MM more so.

To be fair, 'kk' is often used as an abbreviation for million in some countries.

Interesting - I hadn't heard that one.

I hope I wasn't being unfair, and I certainly didn't mean to criticise.

I sometimes see kk on the interwebs when writing the full numbers doesn't make sense ie too many zeroes or to avoid the accidental confusion between k and M.

Are you American? As a European, I did not even think twice about this.

Kilometers (km) is how we measure distance. 1000 km = 1k km, not 1Mm (nobody ever uses that), so it follows that 50000 km = 50k km.

Eco guidelines apply to manufacturer's fleet sales as a whole, meaning a larger manufacturer which makes EVs and eco friendly ICE variants has the "budget" to offer models that are not eco friendly, such as your examples. Suzuki doesn't have offers on the market that would offset the Jimny's pollution so they can't sell it anymore.

Fiat Panda 4x4 isn't a bad off-road option.

I don't believe it's being built anymore - the target audience go for Dusters

Yes, the current Fiat Panda Cross is no longer 4x4. Wanted to buy one new, but they aren't available anymore here in Austria.

Dacia duster 4x4 is nowadays answer indeed

Good news!

Jimny is in a completely different league than Panda 4x4, not even remotely close. Ladder-frame chassis, no center differential, beam axles, double-range gearbox — none of that typically applies to SUVs (especially cheap ones)

With modern horsepower levels, modern transmissions and modern stiff body/chassis that stuff doesn't matter nearly as much these days as it did 30yr ago.

A modern crossover with ~200-300hp and whatever stupid low first gear they gave it in it's 8-10spd transmission typically has the same 0mph torque as whatever 90s meme-mobile the fanboys are all drooling over at any given minute. Modern unibody chassis are rigid enough ladder frame doesn't really matter. Suspensions mostly get mounted to thicker subframes anyway. Modern clutched center diffs are typically capable of transmitting more power and torque than you have traction to make use of (even with real tires and sometimes chains, trust me I've tried).

The biggest hurdle is that any given model may or may not be neutered in software. Unless the particular vehicle in question has some mode you can put it in to tell it that a little tire spin is fine all the electronic nannies are gonna flip the F out because what works well in sloppy off road conditions is pretty much the exact opposite of what's ideal for preventing some Karen who's got her Gingerbread (gotta pick a winter seasonal flavor for this comparison) latte in one hand and the steering wheel in another from getting ever so slightly sideways in the snow dusted parking lot. This has the hilarious side effect of resulting in "off road" and "sporty rally car" trim AWD subcompact SUVs and small cars running circles around the "soccer mom trim" versions of "proper" SUVs (in real situations, not sand on the beach or parking in a muddy field stuff) because while the latter has a more impressive hardware stack it's software stack won't let it actually use it.

I would love one of these too. However, being in Singapore I was not in position to drop 152k (SGD) or 113k (USD)[0] on one.

[0] https://www.sgcarmart.com/new_cars/newcars_listing.php?MOD=S...

There is the Dacia Duster if your off-road needs are not really hardcore.

Since we're on safety ratings; the Duster gets a 3/5 from Euro NCAP.

Many of Dacia's newer models get 1/5, some 2/5, and only the Sandero gets 4/5, their highest score (in this market).

In the UK, a Duster starts at £20k for the base model , while something equivalent with a 5 star rating like a Nissan Qashqai or Kia Sportage starts at £30k.

But they compare with Lada Niva. Does it have any stars in EuroNCAP?

Lada Niva has a benefit of making sure you don't suffer for long in case of a crash.

The Ladas break down before you get in a crash. Can't get injured if it was parked at the mechanics.

Aren't modern Ladas based on Renault tech (so essentially the same as Dacias)

Only Lada Largus which is based on Dacia Logan MCV. There was also Lada Xray based on Dacia Sandero, but it's not produced anymore.

Lada Niva is essentially ancient car from 1977 which changed very little since then. It's awesome cheap car with extreme offroad capabilities, -1 star safety and poor reliability. Interesting and unique combination of properties in modern world.

There's also Lada Niva Travel which was developed in 1998 with a bit different market orientation.

Lada Vesta is most modern Lada development and it's not directly based on Renault tech. Lada Granta is a bit older Lada which is in-house development as well. Those are not 4x4, though.

I have no idea whether those cars are sold in Europe. Probably not.

Nivas (both classic/4x4/Legend niva and travel/chevrolet niva) are not based on Renault tech, they've been developed inhouse (with GM help on Travel one)

Yes, but if you look at the euroncap the low score is not for essential safety stuff, it's more because it doesn't have lane assist and other highly optional whistles and bells (in my opinion).

https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/dacia/duster/51909

Adult Occupant: 70%

It's crap.

Not great, not terrible.

Better than the likes of Suzuki Swift, Ford Turneo etc.

I mean it's not terrible if the price is a concern, even something I'd consider "simple", like a Ford Focus is £30k these days. 70% for the driver is pretty bad though, you'd want much higher safety for the seat that's going to be occupied for 100% of the car's use, and if like myself you have young children you'll want that 5* rating for their safety (even if that includes bells and whistles like lane-exit alerts etc; they can matter when they need to).

For the sake of £10k I'd take a 5* safety rated car, likely with a better finish and quality overall, over a 3*, and as much as I'd like to be understanding about budgets, there's plenty of reliable, high-quality, safe cars on the used market for much less than their new-price.

Is there any _good_ reason to buy a mediocre car new for £20k, over a £40k+ car with a few years on it for £20k? I'm asking genuinely because I don't know, I'd buy the used car every time.

EDIT: Typos

Agreed. If you're just non-milionaire regular Joe a second hand great car can be cheaper than a new mediocre one.

> and if like myself you have young children you'll want that 5* rating for their safety

But don't forget to put the children in child seats appropiate for their age. Else the 5* will become 0*.

100%. Don't cheap out on the car seats either, isofix, top tether, correct sizing, all the padding and side impact support, good 5-point harnesses.

> there are no dedicated off-road vehicles anymore, only luxury SUVs that no one can afford and no one would take off road.

I saw a classic Willys MB -- an original Jeep -- the other day, and it really brought home to me how far modern "SUV"s have strayed from their roots. It was shockingly small, and open, and, yes, dangerous for modern roads, but also fun-looking. It would be at home next to a tuk-tuk.

>Which somehow a G-Wagon, a Defender or a Land Cruiser are

Makes sense in a sort of perverse way when you think about who buys what and who votes for what.

They sold for a while the "commercial vehicle version" (Jimny Pro) that removed the two seats in the back. There is a "Jimny Horizon" on a limited edition only sold in Germany and quite expensive.

Until the arrival of the rumored hybrid or electric versions, there isn't anything like that :(

But Suzuki Jimny is still being sold in Europe. Sure it's a bit pricy, but so are all cars these days

I believe that the Jimny is only sold as a "commercial" vehicle now, which in most EU countries precludes you from actually buying one unless you are a company (probably being sold to farmers and etc). At least, this is the case in Spain. I think it's to dodge some sort of emissions regulations, I guess commercial vehicles are at a lower standard.

You're not getting a Jimny for 8k USD and you are not getting a 5-star crash test rating with one either. But it is cute AF!

It is for sale and also available for private leasing in Denmark. So not dropped in all of Europe.

> [...] its not complying with arbitrary eco-guidelines [...]

Anyone know what these are?

"arbitrary" means the poster doesn't know what there is actually, but wants to blame EU anyway

Any rule that allows G600s and disallows Jimnys is arbitrary. The G600 doesn't become any more eco-friendly if you also sell an electric car.

It's a regulation which is, let's say, "mindful of social hierarchy".

Mercedes does not make a G600. If you're not talking about Mercedes then you should specify a manufacturer because I can't figure out what car you mean.

Nice nitpick. For you effort you get to choose between GLS600 (13.7l/100km) and AMG G63 (14.7l/100km).

It's not arbitrary and it's not just CO2. The Euro 6 and upcoming 7 standards also test for carbon monoxide, unburnt hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxide, and particulates from the tailpipe, brakes, and tires. The Jimny couldn't pass on those and Suzuki decided it wasn't worth the price of compliance to add things like gas particulate filters and change the brake pad material.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com