FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > New car conspiracy
New car conspiracy
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Following the success (not) of my last conspiracy post i thought i'd do another one.
Obviously now the onus is on the environment and fuel efficiency and we are encouraged to invest in new cars to meet this expectation. Then you read that actually it's far more damaging to the environment to build a new car than it is to keep an old one running, especially when you factor in scrappage. For the slight improvement in fuel efficiency it seems it's just not worth it, the numbers don't add up.
If this is all true i can only assume this is a cynical tactic to prop up the car industry which would of course collapse.
On a side note. The lighter a car is the more fuel efficient it is. Why then do we continue to fill them with extraneous shit we don't actually need? ie electric windows, central locking, air con, ABS etc. But what really drives me wild is this sudden surge in popularity of these ridiculous SUV sports crossover hybrids or whatever else you want to call them. Too big to be a car, too shit to be an off-roader bought by people who's only experience of going off-road is walking the dog in the local park.
Your thoughts please.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Salesman, "...and of course it comes fitted with electric windows as standard".
Customer, "wow, that's really useful because i don't have any arms".
Or how about:
Salesman, "it's fitted with ABS".
Customer, "what does that mean?".
Salesman, "it means that if you hit anything slippery the brakes won't actually stop you".  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It completely a way of keeping the motor industry alive. Cars are classed as old when they are older than 10 years. Yet engines can now easily do 200k plus. The other issue is the debt bubble on lease cars; where cars at the end of the lease period are worth less than the expected value |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"It completely a way of keeping the motor industry alive. Cars are classed as old when they are older than 10 years. Yet engines can now easily do 200k plus. The other issue is the debt bubble on lease cars; where cars at the end of the lease period are worth less than the expected value"
And the irony is is that due to the new legislation regarding MOT's my tester has told me that it would be better to keep my 2004 Hilux running for as long as possible rather than trade it in for a newer one. This seems counterproductive if the industry is to be believed.
Btw, cool username.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No matter what the problem the solution is always you buying more shit!!.
The entire world runs on sales of utterly useless pointless nonsense to fill your life with wonder  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The only people who can really tell you how much energy goes into making a new car are the manufacturers and I can’t imagine they want to start that information leaking out.
All I know is there are about 50,000 components in a car and they all have to be made from something, put through a factory, tested, packaged and shipped to the car factory. When you think of all the people doing that who have to drive there it’s a lot of pollution that otherwise wouldn’t be happening.
The mantra now is about emissions but again the manufacturers are talking about exhaust emissions only, something like a third of car emissions are from brakes and tyres - they all wear out, those particles have to go somewhere and they’re too big to get absorbed into the air so they just hang around for us to breathe and be poisoned by.
It’s an interesting topic (if you’re a bit geeky) but the truth is probably impossible to get at. Car manufacturers are building cars to make money, not save the planet. That’s worth remembering a bit more often. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Basically agree - especially when it comes to the trend for shite pseudo off-roaders (ESPECIALLY the Alfa Stelvio, which Alfa expects people will prefer to a Giulia estate, therefore no need to build the car I would love more than any other)...
BUT - there is a definite benefit from newer cars in terms of local air quality in bigger cities. Just sayin'... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The only people who can really tell you how much energy goes into making a new car are the manufacturers and I can’t imagine they want to start that information leaking out.
All I know is there are about 50,000 components in a car and they all have to be made from something, put through a factory, tested, packaged and shipped to the car factory. When you think of all the people doing that who have to drive there it’s a lot of pollution that otherwise wouldn’t be happening.
The mantra now is about emissions but again the manufacturers are talking about exhaust emissions only, something like a third of car emissions are from brakes and tyres - they all wear out, those particles have to go somewhere and they’re too big to get absorbed into the air so they just hang around for us to breathe and be poisoned by.
It’s an interesting topic (if you’re a bit geeky) but the truth is probably impossible to get at. Car manufacturers are building cars to make money, not save the planet. That’s worth remembering a bit more often."
If anyone looks to the manufacturers for guidance i would point them to the recent VW farce. I don't really think any of them are to be trusted. As you say it's all about profit margins.
If you're coming at this from the perspective of pollution you have to look beyond the vehicle itself, at the factories that build them, the import/export of parts, distribution of the finished product. All contribute towards pollution, on top of that there is pollution created in the scrapping of our old vehicles.
I think it's fair to say that the majority of second hand cars are bought and sold locally and the manufacture and transport of a new alternator is far less environmentally damaging than that of a new car. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Following the success (not) of my last conspiracy post i thought i'd do another one.
Obviously now the onus is on the environment and fuel efficiency and we are encouraged to invest in new cars to meet this expectation. Then you read that actually it's far more damaging to the environment to build a new car than it is to keep an old one running, especially when you factor in scrappage. For the slight improvement in fuel efficiency it seems it's just not worth it, the numbers don't add up.
If this is all true i can only assume this is a cynical tactic to prop up the car industry which would of course collapse.
On a side note. The lighter a car is the more fuel efficient it is. Why then do we continue to fill them with extraneous shit we don't actually need? ie electric windows, central locking, air con, ABS etc. But what really drives me wild is this sudden surge in popularity of these ridiculous SUV sports crossover hybrids or whatever else you want to call them. Too big to be a car, too shit to be an off-roader bought by people who's only experience of going off-road is walking the dog in the local park.
Your thoughts please.
"
I agree with you ... I’m due a change next year but who knows what to go for! I always down grade for company car tax reasons - BIG JOB but chose to stick with a smaller version... less in the tax mans pocket and more in mine!
Cross-over 4x4! why would you! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
In 5 years time.......
There will be thousands of hybrid battery cars lying around unwanted,
Because the cost of replacing their battery packs is more than the vehicle would be worth.
Bring back Morris Minors, Triumph Heralds, and Citroen 2CV's.
Simple. Affordable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Following the success (not) of my last conspiracy post i thought i'd do another one.
Obviously now the onus is on the environment and fuel efficiency and we are encouraged to invest in new cars to meet this expectation. Then you read that actually it's far more damaging to the environment to build a new car than it is to keep an old one running, especially when you factor in scrappage. For the slight improvement in fuel efficiency it seems it's just not worth it, the numbers don't add up.
If this is all true i can only assume this is a cynical tactic to prop up the car industry which would of course collapse.
On a side note. The lighter a car is the more fuel efficient it is. Why then do we continue to fill them with extraneous shit we don't actually need? ie electric windows, central locking, air con, ABS etc. But what really drives me wild is this sudden surge in popularity of these ridiculous SUV sports crossover hybrids or whatever else you want to call them. Too big to be a car, too shit to be an off-roader bought by people who's only experience of going off-road is walking the dog in the local park.
Your thoughts please.
I agree with you ... I’m due a change next year but who knows what to go for! I always down grade for company car tax reasons - BIG JOB but chose to stick with a smaller version... less in the tax mans pocket and more in mine!
Cross-over 4x4! why would you!"
* Honey i'm taking little Timmy to school in the SUV because, as you know, the school is located in a completely inaccesible spot on the other side of a large wooded valley with a river running through it and it's been pissing down all night, see you in a jiffy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Following the success (not) of my last conspiracy post i thought i'd do another one.
Obviously now the onus is on the environment and fuel efficiency and we are encouraged to invest in new cars to meet this expectation. Then you read that actually it's far more damaging to the environment to build a new car than it is to keep an old one running, especially when you factor in scrappage. For the slight improvement in fuel efficiency it seems it's just not worth it, the numbers don't add up.
If this is all true i can only assume this is a cynical tactic to prop up the car industry which would of course collapse.
On a side note. The lighter a car is the more fuel efficient it is. Why then do we continue to fill them with extraneous shit we don't actually need? ie electric windows, central locking, air con, ABS etc. But what really drives me wild is this sudden surge in popularity of these ridiculous SUV sports crossover hybrids or whatever else you want to call them. Too big to be a car, too shit to be an off-roader bought by people who's only experience of going off-road is walking the dog in the local park.
Your thoughts please.
I agree with you ... I’m due a change next year but who knows what to go for! I always down grade for company car tax reasons - BIG JOB but chose to stick with a smaller version... less in the tax mans pocket and more in mine!
Cross-over 4x4! why would you!
* Honey i'm taking little Timmy to school in the SUV because, as you know, the school is located in a completely inaccesible spot on the other side of a large wooded valley with a river running through it and it's been pissing down all night, see you in a jiffy. "
I love my Q5 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I drive a 10 year old 4x4 SUV because we have a large caravan and the current breed of lightweight eco boost cars cant cope with it. If I remember correctly it was calculated that a Prius doesnt break even ecologically until 10 years and 120k miles! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Following the success (not) of my last conspiracy post i thought i'd do another one.
Obviously now the onus is on the environment and fuel efficiency and we are encouraged to invest in new cars to meet this expectation. Then you read that actually it's far more damaging to the environment to build a new car than it is to keep an old one running, especially when you factor in scrappage. For the slight improvement in fuel efficiency it seems it's just not worth it, the numbers don't add up.
If this is all true i can only assume this is a cynical tactic to prop up the car industry which would of course collapse.
On a side note. The lighter a car is the more fuel efficient it is. Why then do we continue to fill them with extraneous shit we don't actually need? ie electric windows, central locking, air con, ABS etc. But what really drives me wild is this sudden surge in popularity of these ridiculous SUV sports crossover hybrids or whatever else you want to call them. Too big to be a car, too shit to be an off-roader bought by people who's only experience of going off-road is walking the dog in the local park.
Your thoughts please.
I agree with you ... I’m due a change next year but who knows what to go for! I always down grade for company car tax reasons - BIG JOB but chose to stick with a smaller version... less in the tax mans pocket and more in mine!
Cross-over 4x4! why would you!
* Honey i'm taking little Timmy to school in the SUV because, as you know, the school is located in a completely inaccesible spot on the other side of a large wooded valley with a river running through it and it's been pissing down all night, see you in a jiffy.
I love my Q5"
If that's an SUV can you explain to me what made you buy it? Do you think such a vehicle is essential in your day to day life? Curious not having a go. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Im into my classics so drive one when the weathers nice, the rest of the time i drive whatever i choose for the 2 year, i have a new car on lease every 2 year hassel free just tick 'premium audio', 'sports pack (amg/M sports ect) & choose whichever big petrol engine the brand does and it comes in the back of a lorry. Unfortunately i went from my usual Mercedes-Benz to audi this time and its absolute shi7 (excuse my french)
Reason i do this is
A- im a petrol head and like to change my cars.
B- tax break, can put it against expenses.
C- no hassel selling
D-never need to change tyres/service/mot- just get in and drive
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Following the success (not) of my last conspiracy post i thought i'd do another one.
Obviously now the onus is on the environment and fuel efficiency and we are encouraged to invest in new cars to meet this expectation. Then you read that actually it's far more damaging to the environment to build a new car than it is to keep an old one running, especially when you factor in scrappage. For the slight improvement in fuel efficiency it seems it's just not worth it, the numbers don't add up.
If this is all true i can only assume this is a cynical tactic to prop up the car industry which would of course collapse.
On a side note. The lighter a car is the more fuel efficient it is. Why then do we continue to fill them with extraneous shit we don't actually need? ie electric windows, central locking, air con, ABS etc. But what really drives me wild is this sudden surge in popularity of these ridiculous SUV sports crossover hybrids or whatever else you want to call them. Too big to be a car, too shit to be an off-roader bought by people who's only experience of going off-road is walking the dog in the local park.
Your thoughts please.
I agree with you ... I’m due a change next year but who knows what to go for! I always down grade for company car tax reasons - BIG JOB but chose to stick with a smaller version... less in the tax mans pocket and more in mine!
Cross-over 4x4! why would you!
* Honey i'm taking little Timmy to school in the SUV because, as you know, the school is located in a completely inaccesible spot on the other side of a large wooded valley with a river running through it and it's been pissing down all night, see you in a jiffy.
I love my Q5
If that's an SUV can you explain to me what made you buy it? Do you think such a vehicle is essential in your day to day life? Curious not having a go."
Well, I do use it to tow a caravan and live out in the sticks. Also use it often in France and just love the higher ride and comfort. I also have a TT which I enjoy driving. Wouldn’t take either into London.
I’m afraid I’m a child of the internal combustion age. I was raised to want and need a car.
I’m addicted. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We've had a similar conversation recently after being given a brand new Nissan X-trail as a hire car for the last week, my first thought was it's fricking huge, closely followed by it's a bit of squeeze in the back for two teenagers and a child in a car seat, they had more room in my old Meriva!!
I looked to see how much it was and starting price was £25k, but for what? A few nifty features; anti glare mirror, fancy sunroof and a shit load of wasted metal/fibre glass on the outside. I much prefer older cars where even I can have a go at repairing them and doing the basics.
Ginger |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The only people who can really tell you how much energy goes into making a new car are the manufacturers and I can’t imagine they want to start that information leaking out.
All I know is there are about 50,000 components in a car and they all have to be made from something, put through a factory, tested, packaged and shipped to the car factory. When you think of all the people doing that who have to drive there it’s a lot of pollution that otherwise wouldn’t be happening.
The mantra now is about emissions but again the manufacturers are talking about exhaust emissions only, something like a third of car emissions are from brakes and tyres - they all wear out, those particles have to go somewhere and they’re too big to get absorbed into the air so they just hang around for us to breathe and be poisoned by.
It’s an interesting topic (if you’re a bit geeky) but the truth is probably impossible to get at. Car manufacturers are building cars to make money, not save the planet. That’s worth remembering a bit more often.
If anyone looks to the manufacturers for guidance i would point them to the recent VW farce. I don't really think any of them are to be trusted. As you say it's all about profit margins.
If you're coming at this from the perspective of pollution you have to look beyond the vehicle itself, at the factories that build them, the import/export of parts, distribution of the finished product. All contribute towards pollution, on top of that there is pollution created in the scrapping of our old vehicles.
I think it's fair to say that the majority of second hand cars are bought and sold locally and the manufacture and transport of a new alternator is far less environmentally damaging than that of a new car."
With the components I was talking about an alternator being made in China or Mexico and then being shipped to Germany to be fitted to the car which then gets shipped to the new owner.
There’s also some very high-energy processes used; making steel takes a huge amount of power, turning that into car parts takes even more.
Riversimple are trying to not only introduce an electric car but make it lighter and more efficient so it’s polution is much reduced. They’re also trying out a different kind of ownership scheme where the car is owned by the company and sort of rented to the buyer. As the car stays owned by the company this means it’s in their interest to make it last as long as possible which again is very different to other manufacturers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
How odd I just spotted this thread, while on hold to Ford!
I ordered a new car 3wks ago, half paid, rest on monthly plan.
The dealers called to say, there's a delay & can't now actually give me a date.
The reason Ford have decided to 'face-lift' the model, and it's not gone into production yet.
It also means there may also be a price rise!
I spent months test driving cars, this was the perfect one.
So I've now got to decide do I stick with it no idea how long I'll have to wait and hope the rise isn't too high, or get my money back & go for another car, that I know I'll never be fully happy with?
FFS..
I was having such a good day too!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I still think importing spares from the other side of the world is still better than importing a new car even from as close as Europe. You can get alot of alternators in a shipping container. I understand the point made about the energy required in the manufacturing processes but surely the amount required to manufacture spares cannot be compared to that of a new car, they have alternators too.
As for electric vehicles i cannot comment as i lack sucficient knowledge, however i have read that there is not enough Lithium in the world to replace every internal combustion engine with an electric alternative. Unless this issue is dealt with i'm not sure where it can go.
Those that buy SUV's because they feel they need them for their day to day existence i have no problem with, be it to tow a caravan or because they live in a rural location. I know what it's like driving across wet crass to get to a pitch and rural roads are often in poor condition, muddy and never see a gritter in winter.
It's those in urban centres who buy them as a fashion accessory and only ever use them for the school run and the supermarket that stokes my ire.
The vantage point afforded by SUV's is a reason that people often cite for buying one, it makes them feel safe. I drive a 4wd Hilux which sits quite high and enjoy a clearer view of the road ahead begond the cars in front. But where does this end, if we were all to get one we still wouldn't be able to see. It has the hallmarks of starting an automotive arms race where they keep getting bigger and bigger ad nauseum until we have to start avoiding low bridges. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
New range rover £125k
Old range rover £1 k
What fucking divvy loses that much wonga ..I'd put £5k into a land cruiser and £115k into a lambo to sit on.. hth  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We've had a similar conversation recently after being given a brand new Nissan X-trail as a hire car for the last week, my first thought was it's fricking huge, closely followed by it's a bit of squeeze in the back for two teenagers and a child in a car seat, they had more room in my old Meriva!!
I looked to see how much it was and starting price was £25k, but for what? A few nifty features; anti glare mirror, fancy sunroof and a shit load of wasted metal/fibre glass on the outside. I much prefer older cars where even I can have a go at repairing them and doing the basics.
Ginger"
.
Cars a bit like smart phones the new ones don't really do anything different than the old and hence why they spend gazillions on marketing convincing people that they really really really do need a new one! I just won't be anybody unless I'm driving the new hip blah blah blah.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"We've had a similar conversation recently after being given a brand new Nissan X-trail as a hire car for the last week, my first thought was it's fricking huge, closely followed by it's a bit of squeeze in the back for two teenagers and a child in a car seat, they had more room in my old Meriva!!
I looked to see how much it was and starting price was £25k, but for what? A few nifty features; anti glare mirror, fancy sunroof and a shit load of wasted metal/fibre glass on the outside. I much prefer older cars where even I can have a go at repairing them and doing the basics.
Ginger"
Some of my earlier cars were my favourites, Cortinas and VW Sciroccos, you could get any spare you wanted from any breaker for just a few quid.
I miss not being able not to have a tinker. I look under the bonnets of new cars and i have no idea what/where anything is, even something as simple as an oil change leaves me scratching my head.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Scrapping 10 year old cars,
Maybe the big car manufacturers are running out of raw materials to make the shinny new cars for us to buy, More about keeping the share holders happy then saving the environment |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Scrapping 10 year old cars,
Maybe the big car manufacturers are running out of raw materials to make the shinny new cars for us to buy, More about keeping the share holders happy then saving the environment"
That's the way i see it. This fuel efficiency spin is just a red herring, if they really wanted to save the planet you'd think they'd make cars as light as possible. Instead they stuff them full of the latest gadgets in order to convince us to buy this year's model.
They hide the truth from us because if it became common knowledge they'd be finished. It's all smoke and mirrors. I'm hanging on to what i've got, anyone else with a conscience should do the same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The only people who can really tell you how much energy goes into making a new car are the manufacturers and I can’t imagine they want to start that information leaking out.
All I know is there are about 50,000 components in a car and they all have to be made from something, put through a factory, tested, packaged and shipped to the car factory. When you think of all the people doing that who have to drive there it’s a lot of pollution that otherwise wouldn’t be happening.
The mantra now is about emissions but again the manufacturers are talking about exhaust emissions only, something like a third of car emissions are from brakes and tyres - they all wear out, those particles have to go somewhere and they’re too big to get absorbed into the air so they just hang around for us to breathe and be poisoned by.
It’s an interesting topic (if you’re a bit geeky) but the truth is probably impossible to get at. Car manufacturers are building cars to make money, not save the planet. That’s worth remembering a bit more often.
If anyone looks to the manufacturers for guidance i would point them to the recent VW farce. I don't really think any of them are to be trusted. As you say it's all about profit margins.
If you're coming at this from the perspective of pollution you have to look beyond the vehicle itself, at the factories that build them, the import/export of parts, distribution of the finished product. All contribute towards pollution, on top of that there is pollution created in the scrapping of our old vehicles.
I think it's fair to say that the majority of second hand cars are bought and sold locally and the manufacture and transport of a new alternator is far less environmentally damaging than that of a new car.
With the components I was talking about an alternator being made in China or Mexico and then being shipped to Germany to be fitted to the car which then gets shipped to the new owner.
There’s also some very high-energy processes used; making steel takes a huge amount of power, turning that into car parts takes even more.
Riversimple are trying to not only introduce an electric car but make it lighter and more efficient so it’s polution is much reduced. They’re also trying out a different kind of ownership scheme where the car is owned by the company and sort of rented to the buyer. As the car stays owned by the company this means it’s in their interest to make it last as long as possible which again is very different to other manufacturers."
I worked at a place that made parts for Honda,Toyota,Jaguar and Land rover. You would be surprised at how many HGVS would coming in and out in 24 hours. Some would leave with just two containers on.You could fit the two containers in a Transit,they literally transported fresh air. This happens night after night,sometimes they hire helicopters to fly the parts. It's cheaper to pay for a helicopter than pay the fine for stopping the production line. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *JB1954Man
over a year ago
Reading |
I also have a caravan. Use a honda 2.2 diesel to tow. This a 08 plate and has only done 33000 miles from new. If this vehicle has to be changed. Trying to find another that can tow does not leave me many options. None of the new so called eco vehilcles etc cannot tow. The only one i have found that will tow is the tesla. Which due to price and having to have charging point installed is not even viable. Also on long journey , where to charge. You have to unhitch caravan to charge car. Which motorway services will not allow. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'd need the evidence to be presented to me, in order to take an intelligent decision upon this.
In any event, the population need transport solutions that they can afford, whether they be new, existing, public or private. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
