New cars are getting 1.2cm longer and 0.5cm taller each year | Hacker News Reader

New cars are getting 1.2cm longer and 0.5cm taller each year

transportenvironment.org

Cars have become absurd. We have an older car, and I occasionally look at what we could replace it with, and everything is huge and expensive. Literally, the only car I have been interested in is from BYD and will never be available in my country.

BYD also have some humongus cars. I have the BYD Tang and it's too big for some parking spaces.

Hey so, why would you even buy that? Was that some external requirement?

Because it's one of few cars with some space left in the trunk with the third seat row up. Luckily our need for the last two seats has been reduced, so the next car wil be smaller. :-)

BYD also has very reasonably sized cars like the Dolphin.

From what I've ridden in the newer models it seems like internal cabin space remains the same or is genuinely getting smaller, but crumple zones keep increasing in size. There has to be some kind of ever increasing safety bar that keeps rising every year and this is the malicious compliance they're getting in response.

In 2100 every car will have a total of 1 person of internal space, span the size of a city block and will be made entirely of cotton balls to achieve a 4 star safety rating. For the 5 star rating you also have to make sure the driver is immortal so they can't die of old age.

There is no malicious compliance, just compliance. Who would they be malicious to? There is enough competition, it would only hurt their bottom line

To the consumers who hate big bloated cars? It's not like people can or would say they want less safety in exchange for something smaller. There are arbitrary metrics to hit and that's all people look at. The more people say "this car looks absurd" the more it hurts their bottom line.

Also the business model will definitely shift more to services. A car will be not just the matter of buying it, but renting services on it like FSD, paying by data collection (which pays for 30%+ of the actual cost of current gen TVs etc).

And in cars they make it much harder to disable data collection. For safety of course.

Agreed on this point, everyone wants a subscription

The thing is bigger car are proportionally safer. And the market likes bigger cars, so the consumers are voting for bigger cars.

In the markets where consumers prefer or need smaller cars, they are offered. E.g. Japan

part of the problem, at least in the US, is that the SUVs destroy other cars, so it is quickly becoming a weird safety arms race.

Came here to say this. I like that a small car is easy to park and safer in isolation (better stopping and handling), but do not like how they hold up against drunk/distracted drivers in 6000 lbs. SUVs.

Get a Honda Civic Type R

You speaking my language!

That is around $50k, no way would I ever spend that much on a car.

Which is now bigger than the Accord used to be, thereby proving the point.

Mitsubishi just discontinued the car line that I drive [0]. The Mirage was great. I can drive from NYC to Boston on ~10 gallon. The only downsides were: No arm wrest, no sunglasses holder, and the media console won't turn on if you leave the car in the hot sun for a while.

I'm hoping to make my next car an electric car but all of the US ones are massive.

[0] - https://www.mitsubishicars.com/mirage-history

The Mitsubishi Mirage Cyborg ZR was a hell of a car. One of the higher output 1.6 litre 4 cylinder engines there were(175hp). Taking that to its 8200 rpm redline was glorious.

But this isn't the car you're talking about.

> I can drive from NYC to Boston on ~10 gallon.

NYC to Boston is only ~220 miles. You can drive literally any car there for 10 gallons.

Or did you mean there and back?

I have taken a few cars on that drive. Adding in traffic, I usually have to fill up at the gas station just outside of Boston that has the burger king in it. In my Mirage can get me to Boston, drive around a bit, and usually just need to fill up on my way back.

Consider something other than a car.

Last year I purchased an electric scooter to complement my car. I ran into mechanical trouble with my car, and it wasn't worth repairing. Instead of replacing it with another car, I have ended up complementing the shortcomings of the electric scooter with an acoustic bicycle. In particular, the bike is better for carrying cargo (I can put things on the bike or even in a trailer instead of just a backpack; I have even moved furniture with my trailer!), and better at dealing with weather (I never have to worry about the battery getting cold or wet, and I also have studded tires for ice).

If I knew I were getting rid of my car, I probably would have gotten an e-bike instead of an e-scooter. Having both has been quite nice though and they complement each other to be better than just having an e-bike. Depending on your cargo carrying / passenger needs, a cargo e-bike or a regular e-bike may be a much cheaper way to replace your car, and may be much more practical than you expect!

We already barely drive and the car is largely just for groceries and other shopping. We can almost get away without having a car but it was be a bit frustrating and neither of us enjoy biking.

The philosophy that most resonates with me is Colin Chapman's "simplify, then add lightness”, so I really hate everything about what cars have become (even ignoring the spyware part, for a moment).

I want to buy a car that is like the 1988 CRX HF but with almost 40 years of engine and materials engineering advancement. That car with primitive mid-80s fuel injection could do 49 MPG and weight was about 1800lbs.

I am certain with modern engine control technology and judicious use of carbon fiber (without making it excessively expensive) Honda should be able to build a 2026 CRX HF that is 1700lb and get maybe 80 MPG. I wish they would. I wish governments would allow them to build it.

How about Yaris hybrid? It’s quite small, great performance, and very reliable.

The new Audi Q9 is absurd - https://www.topgear.com/car-news/suvs/gargantuan-new-audi-q9...

And yet still in the standard "Jeep Grand Cherokee melted in the sun" shape. I wouldn't mind so much if the popular land yachts of decades past like the 1957 Cadillac Eldorado were revived, but today's most common passenger vehicles are still being made in the same boring sad-beige-mom shapes.

What’s even more absurd is the Chinese vehicles in the same class have better tech and prices. German auto manufacturing is cooked unless they manage to legally block the Chinese in their primary markets.

That could be tricky because I think one of those markets was China.

I'd happily drive a Chinese car but I've yet to see one which has physical buttons for controls. They all seem to have gigantic tablet displays. I categorically refuse to buy a car where I can't adjust the climate controls while keeping my eyes on the road.

Well of course they are cheaper because China has much lower labour costs and they prop up their own industry. The same way they did with solar panels which killed the local EU industry for those.

However we can get one back at China and help our own climate goals more by not buying cars at all

How do lower labor costs explain the better tech?

Engineers are also cheaper, and electronics are cheaper so you can throw more at the problem. You have much less pressure to design towards a price if your costs are lower.

Well, of course this does not check out. Apple trounces Chinese phone manufacturers at all levels and their costs are astronomical.

Eh. Old American sedans were often longer. A '77 Ford LTD was almost 5.5M in length, while this is only 5.3.

I guess I do agree those were insane monsters of vehicles. I couldn't imagine driving one of those today in urban areas.

Apparently my 2009 Crown Vic is slightly longer than this Audi. I get more annoyed at how tall modern cars are.

Sheesh!

> 5.31m long, 2.21m wide and 1.81m tall

vs. the Humvee, according to Wikipedia:

- 4.57m long, 2.15m wide and 1.83m tall

The wild thing for me is that we just recently bought an XC90 and an American friend asked me how we're managing with three kids in a "compact SUV". That car is about as large as cars get over here for the most part.

Weird, XC90 wouldn't normally be considered a compact SUV here in the US

I guess they might have said mid-size? But definitely not large SUV.

Yeah, that's midsize here, maybe on the upper end of that. It has a third row but no room behind it. Full-size would be a Tahoe, then there are yuge ones like the Suburban.

In the USA the X5 is a Mid-sized SUV. Very weird. The X7 is just... too large.

We need a pigouvian tax based on vehicle weight to address the increased deaths due to noise pollution, collisions, and increased wear to roads.

Deaths from noise pollution?

Stress, and so on. No individual death would be attributable, only a statistical increase.

Air pollution would be easier to quantify brake and tire dust are big urban air pollutants.

weight is the easiest measure. wear&tear on road, mpg, damage in accident all scale with weight

> scale with weight

Road damage scales with axle weight to the fourth power (w^4).

So if a 500lbs motorcycle is the unit of damage, a 4,000 lbs sedan does 4,096 units of damage (4096x as much), a 6,000 lbs SUV/pickup does 20,736x, a 14,000 lbs delivery van does 614,000x, and the 80,000 lbs US federal limit 5 axle semi-trailer does 90,800,000x the damage of the motorcycle.

So probably shipping stuff in trucks doesn't cost enough, and SUVs/pickups should cost 5x for road tax what sedans do.

> So probably shipping stuff in trucks doesn't cost enough, and SUVs/pickups should cost 5x for road tax what sedans do.

Nope because the numbers you just posted exemplify what every knows: road cars don't even register on the radar compared to semi-trailers.

The tax for "road damage" should be approximately zero for cars, any cars, and way more expensive for semis.

But people who hate on cars don't want to hear the truth: they're all too happy to take their bicycle to go buy the milk the semis brought to their city.

> But people who hate on cars don't want to hear the truth

A tad heavy on the rhetoric, wouldn't you say?

Check their comment history. With showdead on. Normal talk interspersed with crazy political rants.

It's a bit more complicated than that.

There are fixed or per-vehicle costs:

* signage, lighting, snow removal, etc.

* weather-related wear and tear from freeze/thaw, thermal expansion, etc.

* capacity (more lanes needed, driven by passenger vehicles, not trucks)

So yeah, semi's should probably be paying $100k/year in road tax based on wear, but that doesn't meant that your car's road tax should be $1/year.

There's also a great argument that all the suburbs are not paying enough in property taxes. Those paved roads have high costs to maintain over time, and service just the traffic to/from some large houses. Some have gone so far as to call suburbia a scam, on the basis that it has to perpetually grow to pay for maintenance.

> But people who hate on cars don't want to hear the truth: they're all too happy to take their bicycle to go buy the milk the semis brought to their city.

The truth is it's not all about road damage. In fact I couldn't care less about that because I don't really use those roads anyway.

Tax is more about driving behaviour than anything.

> I don't really use those roads anyway.

If you live in the US, you use roads. Every physical product you buy is transported by road at some point.

I definitely don't live in the US.

Weight and number of miles travelled aren't correlated though. If you go with a fuel tax (more difficult with EVs but not impossible) you get fuel efficiency, weight and miles travelled in one neat bundle.

If you want to encourage EV use and make it the mainstream majority, the last thing you need is to put further obstacles to its use such as an EV miles tax.

You apply a fuel tax to all vehicles, and an additional sin tax to ICE vehicles. They can still both be applied at the point of refuelling.

And credits or rebates for vehicles with improved safety features?

I assume the 18-tonne lorries that move most of the world’s goods would be exempt, too, or would you pass that cost on to consumers? Just make everything a bit more expensive for everyone.

In most countries in the EU weight is already a major factor in road tax though some have changed it to emissions.

And yes lorries are billed lower for road tax otherwise they couldn't exist.

Subsidies for using non-car transit would make more sense (health benefits in addition to safety and savings).

>I assume the 18-tonne lorries that move most of the world’s goods would be exempt, too, or would you pass that cost on to consumers? Just make everything a bit more expensive for everyone.

The demand for large vehicles is inelastic in the short term, but over the long term, more alternatives would be found and the share of the burden to consumers would reduce. Remember also the savings on road maintenance that consumers that pay taxes must pay for.

And this is in EU, not even America where cars have always been tanks.

I do think we will see fewer on the road though. In my city more and more streets are being pedestrianised. And unlimited public transport is only 24€ and amazing quality. Most of the people who still drive are rich foreigners that don't know any better. And also still view them as a status symbol.

Outside cities public transport isn't great though but it would be amazing if we would see car ownership decline by say 50% by 2040. Even electric cars aren't exactly good for the environment and cities become a lot more livable without cars.

The Germans will be pissed but they'll have to find new things to sell :)

A rising trend in the EU has been new buyers going for SUVs. People, especially those with families, have been buying them as sort of an insurance against accidents. You're far less likely to die in an SUV than in a sedan. Although that does mean that you become a much bigger risk for those who drive sedans.

Yes I know, I've seen that in some countries which are still very car-centric like Holland and others too. My ex's sister immediately went from a Yaris to this tank of an SUV when she got a baby.

However it is very much status symbol as well. The most expensive car they own must always be prominently displayed in the driveway with the front forward, and she's always fussy about the child making a mess in the livingroom because it functions more as a museum for the expensive furniture and neighbour-approved family life that she loves to display to the neighbours in her conservative-rich street. I'm pretty sure the SUV wasn't actually for protection but rather for wealth flaunting and virtue signalling (this lady is also very much 'family values'). So she instructed her sister several times to not have any pride stuff lying around which we had lots of lol.

I drove a 12 year old Volvo and she always hated that and wanted me to park far away. And all my furniture was IKEA when I lived there (and still is where I live now). I haven't owned a car for 9 years now.

I really hated her but my ex was a bit of the black sheep in the family, very hippie and happy-go-lucky like me.

But anyway, I just want to point out, the SUV is to certain Europeans as the Pick-Up is to certain Americans.

And the windows keep getting smaller, the beltlines higher, the seats more cramped, though I don't have statistics to back up any of that.

As much as I like to hate on larger cars. In reality, I use my SUV (3 row, Subaru Ascent) all the time for camping and outdoor activities (80% of weekends or so). I just took out the middle seats to build a full-size bed platform (75x45” or so).

My wife also drives a smaller Forester that we realize could have been an EV or hybrid. Although in CA, electricity is so expensive that it’s not much improvement over gas especially if you spend more on the car itself. Really, just a same model year but more fuel efficient sedan or one of those old 100-mile range EV cars is what you have to “downgrade” too.

Of course, it’s silly seeing all the oversized, sparkling clean massive trucks and SUVs on my commute while I’m driving my heavily scratched glorified minivan (since that’s what SUVs are now days).

There's little to no incentive to buy human sized cars usually. Parking costs the same, tolls can cost the same, insurance I have no idea but I don't think size matters, and perhaps more. All of these should be more expensive, much more expensive, for bigger and heavier cars.

Perhaps in the United States, but in a number of European countries, weight is a primary factor in determining annual road tax costs, which can reach into the thousands of Euros. If they keep making cars bigger, they will inevitably become heavier.

Meanwhile the size of residential parking slots usually stays the same for decades after being built. I had "fun" of living in an apartment complex built in the 60's, one could only barely fit modern cars to the designated spots.

we're slowly moving towards a world where people can't afford homes so they'll just be living out of their cars. guarantee that some car manufacturers are already considering/getting ready for this.

Towards? You need to see how many people are doing vanlife, not by choice.

How do they navigate the legal minefield?

Move the van when a police officer knocks on the window.

If only that wasn't illegal.

i can easily see a world where this changes and some genius president will say it's a great idea, and look how great cars are now, they can do everything! live in your cars people!

You'd have to elect the CEO of Ford instead of a real estate guy.

Good then that all vehicles over 6m length and 2.05m wide are not allowed to park in my city. It's good most pickups have custom wide tires, as it makes them too wide.

Australia has a similar issue, in part because we import a lot of US domestic vehicles and advertising, and in part because the ato has tax exemptions that only apply to overbuilt utes[1].

[1]: https://www.drive.com.au/caradvice/ute-tax-breaks-exemptions...

https://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/aEqW3Ze_700b.jpg

I hate this because my parking space, both at the company and at home, are not getting any wider or taller. I chose to purchase my EV6 over the Equinox EV, despite the Equinox being significantly cheaper, mainly because latter was too big (and also worse driving experience).

Cafe standards.

The height of hoods is at least in part because of pedestrian safety standards. I believe these originated in Europe, but I could be wrong.

Higher hoods are worse, not better, for pedestrians.

to put this in perspective;

a lower hood will strike somewhere lower on the body like the legs, and bounce them off the hood (absorbing some impact)

a higher hood will strike somewhere closer to the head and torso, causing substantially more damage, and cause you to go under and get crushed by the wheels, so at a minimum level damage is much more severe.

and this is for adults. they're basically death sentences for shorter people and children.

>I believe these originated in Europe

Not this kind of higher. The EU stuff was about lifting the hood's sheet metal off the engine block so that there is more of a crumple zone instead of pedestrian's head kissing engine block

That’s part of the picture, but the US also has a considerable “my vehicle is an extension of myself” or “my vehicle is a major pillar of my identity” thing going on. That’s how we ended up with so many pavement princess trucks and SUVs shoehorned in where a minivan or hatchback would’ve been a better fit.

Years ago Chrysler did some research on who was buying their SUV's and it wasn't very flattering. The terms narcissism, insecurity, status seeking and aggression all came up.

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2001/12/01/bumper-mentality/

> narcissism, insecurity, status seeking and aggression

So Americans?

This is sadly not exclusive to America. In Holland when a neighbour gets a new car the whole street comes out to ooh and aah about it and for a week you hear nothing but gossip about how he managed to buy another few car after only 27 months, he must be moving up in life. Yuck

A Tacoma is now the size of an F-150, they used to be the size of a Ford Ranger. It's ridiculous.

The people are getting bigger.

Like the bellies, bigger is better

Reply on news.ycombinator.com