What would cars cost if they left off the silly frills?

Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
> Maybe so--I don't know much about the regulation of the car market. But I
> wonder how many people really want stripped cars. Admittedly, I don't hang
> around with a lot of po' folks, but I only know one eccentric engineer who
> likes driving around without A/C (in SoCal) or power anything. He recently
> had to purchase more of a car than he would have liked, when his junker
> Corolla gave up the ghost, but most people I know like pretty heavily loaded
> cars. I certainly do--I'm a road geek _and_ a gadget freak.

I like mine loaded too, with features that actually do useful things
(a nice radio, automatic transmission, air bags and ABS, and power
steering). But I had to special-order my car to get it without a
sunroof (they leak), and was not even allowed to get it without power
windows and keyless entry, both of which I'd pay extra not to have.

Gary V wrote:
> Contrary to popular assumptions, auto company execs are not Stoopid.
> They spend thousands of dollars every year just to figure out what
> color will be popular amongst buyers 3 years hence. Don't you think
> that if there was a market for stripped down vehicles they would figure
> it out?

Sure, they know. But they know that their profit margins on stripped
cars would be a lot less, so it's in their interest to keep it next to
impossible to get one.

[Mr. Opperman:]

> Southern Illinois isn't that hot and muggy. Come on down a few
hundred
> miles further and to an urban area. Windows when you're stopped at a

> stoplight with diesels all around you and it's 102 degrees with a
heat
> index of 120 -- that's not quite the same as 93 degrees while you're
> doing 55 through a cornfield.

I hardly ever use air-conditioning even in the summer, but I would
never consider buying a car without A/C. Why?

In the winter, A/C speeds up windshield demisting by reducing the
relative humidity, while the added load on the engine helps warm it up
faster.

In my experience, passengers tend to be more patient on long summer
drives when there is A/C. Although I will never turn on the A/C for
myself, I do turn it on for passengers to be polite, and try to bite my
lip when the fuel consumption numbers come in.

Although the ambient air in most rural areas is generally cool enough
even in the summer to allow cruising at high speed with just the fan to
cool down the car (windows rolled up, vents open), this is not true in
urban areas where buildings and other structures absorb and re-radiate
heat from all directions and create localized hot spots all around the
car.

Finally, although it is possible to drive long distances safely without
A/C even in the deserts of southern California and Arizona during the
summer, provided one has adequate supplies of fresh cold drinking
water, it is not possible to avoid sweating heavily. I did a daytime
drive between San Diego and Tucson in late August 2002 and managed to
ruin both the shirt I was wearing and the driver's seat in my car; the
salt in my sweat permanently stained the shirt and took the pile out of
the velour on the seat. Since desert floor material absorbs and
reradiates heat to nearly the same degree as paving materials in
cities, I would not repeat that drive unless I were wearing a T-shirt I
considered more or less disposable (like a gym shirt) and I had draped
a thick cotton towel over the driver's seat.

The sweat issue is also important for white-collar commuters who have
to contend with fairly strict dress codes.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm also not impressed with the O.P.'s other suggested economies in car
design and assembly. Power braking, properly designed, enhances
control over and precision of stopping maneuvers. Power steering also
puts the steering gears under continuous load and eliminates play,
which in turn promotes precise tracking. I am not in favor of extreme
window tints (< 30% of incident light), but I do favor the light bronze
tints (~80% of incident light but no U.V.) which come as standard on
the vast majority of new cars. They remove ultraviolet light, which
causes sun fading and embrittlement of plastic pigmented materials in
those parts of the car interior which cannot conveniently be protected
by sunshades or towels.

On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 wrote:

> Power braking, properly designed, enhances control over and precision of
> stopping maneuvers.

Absolutely not. Power assisted brakes do exactly one thing: reduce pedal
effort relative to the same-bore master cylinder with the same lever ratio
of the pedal over the master cylinder without a booster. They do not
shorten stopping distances, they do not enhance control or precision.

> Power steering also puts the steering gears under continuous load and
> eliminates play, which in turn promotes precise tracking.

Wrong again, it does no such thing. Power assisted steering reduces
steering wheel effort relative to the same-ratio steering gearbox or rack
and pinion with the same steering wheel diameter without power assist. It
does not "eliminate play" or otherwise promote precise tracking.

"Larry Bud" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> But, I disagree with one of your statements. Most people DO seem to
> have a
>> irrational emotional attachment to their vehicles.
>
> Some of us spend countless hours working and tinkering with their
> vehicle to make it run perfect. In my '86 Vette, I've had that car
> since '92. I know every little squeak and sound that it makes. It's
> not that I have an attachment to the plastic and fiberglass, it's the
> though of getting rid of something that I've spent so much of my time
> and money on.

I can't add any more that.

>
>> it either! It's a inanimate object, for Pete's sake! It is a tool,
> nothing
>> more, use for personal conveyance purposes.
>
> Depends on the car. Certainly true of my Saturn which is winter
> transportation, but not for the Vette. True pleasure is gained by
> driving it. I wish my vette has a couple more of the gadgets on it,
> such as heated seats.
>

I can't add any more to that either.

Both points make the case. But that is what makes us all individuals...our
"hobbies" and how much time and dollars we're willing to spend on it. I
believe the topic was basically framed in the context of the average person
and average car. I think you're in the realm of "hobbyist" here...which is
a different situation.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 wrote:
>
>
>>Power braking, properly designed, enhances control over and precision of
>>stopping maneuvers.
>
>
> Absolutely not. Power assisted brakes do exactly one thing: reduce pedal
> effort relative to the same-bore master cylinder with the same lever ratio
> of the pedal over the master cylinder without a booster. They do not
> shorten stopping distances, they do not enhance control or precision.
>

I believe that Porsche, at least, decided at some point in the
development of their racing program that power assist was desirable for
full race cars even considering the possible slight loss of pedal feel
due to less fatigue on the driver over the course of an endurance race.
Of course, this is the same company that has mandated full-synchro
gearboxes in all of their race cars, so not *everything* they do makes
perfect sense... the power brake thing seems reasonable though, and I
don't have enough expertise to second guess them.

Their street cars do have damn nice feeling brakes though, even with
boosters. (helps when your front wheel bearings are tight, too... um,
or so I've heard. #$%^$%&^* previous owners.)

>
>>Power steering also puts the steering gears under continuous load and
>>eliminates play, which in turn promotes precise tracking.
>
>
> Wrong again, it does no such thing. Power assisted steering reduces
> steering wheel effort relative to the same-ratio steering gearbox or rack
> and pinion with the same steering wheel diameter without power assist. It
> does not "eliminate play" or otherwise promote precise tracking.
>

To be perfectly pedantic, with the old Bendix "ram" style power steering
(think Corvette or Avanti) the PS setup does completely eliminate play
in the reach rod which is replaced by a control valve that's always
pressurized - at least while the engine is running. So there are two
joints that are eliminated as a source of play. Still won't compensate
for a sloppy gearbox or tie rod ends though

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

Scott en Aztl=E1n wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:33:18 GMT, Eric Opperman
> > wrote:
>
> >Southern Illinois isn't that hot and muggy.
>
> It is compared to where I live.
>
> --
> Sloth Kills!
> http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/

Love your site, those are my thoughts exactly: it's the slow asses that
cause the wrecks, road rage, etc. I sure endure enough of the assholes
here.

John David Galt wrote:
> Paul D. DeRocco wrote:
> > Maybe so--I don't know much about the regulation of the car market.
But I
> > wonder how many people really want stripped cars. Admittedly, I
don't hang
> > around with a lot of po' folks, but I only know one eccentric
engineer who
> > likes driving around without A/C (in SoCal) or power anything. He
recently
> > had to purchase more of a car than he would have liked, when his
junker
> > Corolla gave up the ghost, but most people I know like pretty
heavily loaded
> > cars. I certainly do--I'm a road geek _and_ a gadget freak.
>
> I like mine loaded too, with features that actually do useful things
> (a nice radio, automatic transmission, air bags and ABS, and power
> steering).

> But I had to special-order my car to get it without a
> sunroof (they leak),

Sunroofs do not leak. I have had one in my Honda Civic for 4 years now
with no problems. Same goes with our Nissan Pathfinders. I have no idea
what kind of cheap car YOU were driving but you should not have any
problems; in the event that you do, you should take it PROMPTLY to the
dealership.

> and was not even allowed to get it without power
> windows and keyless entry, both of which I'd pay extra not to have.

Power windows are a time saver and a safety tool. While driving down
the road, its easier to push a button to roll down the window, versus
having to reach for the crank and having to manually do it.

Matthew Russotto wrote:
>
> In article ich.edu>,
> Daniel J. Stern > wrote:
> >On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Dick Boyd quoted the Wall Street Journal:
> >
> >> The auto business is plagued with excesses. There are too many models,
> >> too many car factories and too much money spent on advertising.
> >
> >Ah yes, more of the Wall Street Journal's pretense at being auto experts.
>
> They're not pretending to be auto experts. They're pretending to be
> auto business experts.

So - they fail at that also.

Ed

John David Galt wrote:

> I like mine loaded too, with features that actually do useful things
> (a nice radio, automatic transmission, air bags and ABS, and power
> steering). But I had to special-order my car to get it without a
> sunroof (they leak), and was not even allowed to get it without power
> windows and keyless entry, both of which I'd pay extra not to have.

One man's useful feature (ABS, Air bags) is another man
waste of money (ABS) or dangerous device (air bags). I like
having choices, but I especially like having the choice not
to pay for things I don't want. Unfortunately some of the
items I particularly dislike (ABS and Air Bags) are being
rammed down my throat. Personally I like keyless entry and
power windows, but could (and do) live without them. I am
100% in agreement with you on the sun roof. If I want open
sky, I'll buy a convertible.

Ed