all 40 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 36 points 8 months ago (4 children)

It's anti-consumer as hell, but is it really enough to keep servicing only to dealerships? Seems like someone can machine a tool head for this in like two seconds, it's just two prongs. What's stopping a manufacturer from selling tools for it and individuals/mechanics from buying the tool? Can they patent the tool and not sell it to anyone?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Get ready for black market socket sets. lol.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    Which happened over and over again in past attempts. Like "TR Torx" or "Tamper Resistent Torx", the star bit with the hole in the middle. You can find matching bits in any decent bit set.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 35 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I feel like BMW charging a monthly subscription for the heated seats in the car should’ve been enough to stop anyone from buying their new cars, but they continue to sell!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago

    Not only that but the recent disgusting design language and the lowering of interior quality and the reliability issues, none of it seems to affect them? People really only see the badge and nothing else.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    The type of people who buy BMWs and the like don't do it out of concern for any practical considerations. It is a status symbol, and membership card, and sexual posturing all in one. The fact that they have to pay extra to have it serviced because the dealer has the only magic wrench that doesn't void the warranty is part of the allure.

    And as stated elsewhere, by the time the thing is out of warranty and is on the third or fourth owner they'll be using hacked tools to do what should be easy but is made much harder by this shitfuckery.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 27 points 8 months ago (13 children)
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    Coming from the position of "I'm not sure it's possible to protect the source of a space frame chassis"

    Things like the Locost 7 have plans in the wild, and quite a few have been built.

    You kind of have to pick your poison in terms of "off the shelf". Does buying a BMW steering column or a Chevy crate engine count? The feasibility of casting and machining a block or head is way beyond most. (To the point where developing an open source engine would struggle to go beyond design phase without a company backing it IMO) a donor car is a good place to start, of course.

    EVs may improve this, which would be good, though fucking with high voltage battery packs would be a negative.

    Chassis is relatively straightforward so long as you stick to box section or tubing.

    Body panels are tricky too, something like the Locost isnt too bad. Even more complicated is within the grasp of a dedicated home gamer - but we're talking big 3D printers/serious clay or polystyrene modelling skills/CF or GF moulding etc. high expense high skill.

    If you're talking at the level of open source chassis produced by a few companies, few different companies do EV motors, few do trims, few do body work etc and then integrators put them together - I could see it working, it's not that dissimilar to how say VW/Audi/Skoda/Seat operate.

    I do like the idea of PC style integrators and you spec the car you want, probably pricey though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (11 children)

    Why would someone design a car that anyone could copy? Even worse, how do you handle certain legal issues where the designer and manufacturer don't have a legal agreement with each other?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 8 months ago (10 children)
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    How many open source projects include safety guarantees of use? I can legally sue car manufacturers for faults in design of the car that I or others purchase. Who do I sue with open source projects if the crash is due to a flaw in design?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (8 children)

    The manufacturer? Why would that change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (7 children)

    Why would the manufacturer take on liability for a design issue they didn't design?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (6 children)

    They built the thing and sold it as safe, the liability is implicit. If you produce something you need to produce it to established standards.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (5 children)

    you need to produce it to established standards.

    And what if the established standards get people killed? Open source doesn't provide a person or organization who is liable for design faults.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (4 children)

    Again, the manufacturer, why would that change?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (3 children)

    Because, in this case, the manufacturer didn't design the car.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    Right, but they built and sold it. No-one is forcing anyone to use the design.

    There's nothing stopping me from going online right now and grabbing a design for a car, building it, doing an IVA test and putting it on the road - the original designer is dead, who would get sued in that scenario?

    Alternatively, can I copy the design of an existing model, build it to the exact spec, sell it to someone else and absolve myself of all liability if a design flaw is found in the vehicle?

    I'm ignoring the fact an open source design is likely to get more analysis than just about any other car on the market.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    who would get sued in that scenario?

    There is no equivalent to an IVA where I live. It also is likely going to become a major government problem needing to process a sizeable portion of the country's vehicles through an IVA like process which requires an in-depth inspection and, a lot of times, comparison against the design standards for which the car was imported from.

    And, as I noted earlier, the issue isn't analysis but liability. A lot of the burden involving design and verification falls on various manufacturers who designed the cars they manufactured. Hell, few countries allow people to build their own cars from aftermarket parts only. The supply chain is there, but no one is building older cars that they just have to assemble with aftermarket parts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    There is no equivalent to an IVA where I live. It also is likely going to become a major government problem needing to process a sizeable portion of the country's vehicles through an IVA like process which requires an in-depth inspection and, a lot of times, comparison against the design standards for which the car was imported from.

    An IVA is only checking the car meets established standards - it won't say there's no design flaws or attribute liability. Hence my previous comment about meeting standards. Presumably there is type approval of some kind where you live. Again it's UK centric, I'm not a car lawyer and I've mostly skimmed the page, but there's nothing glaringly insurmountable in what I can find here:

    Type approval guidelines

    Type approval fees

    From what research I've done in the UK at least the responsibility appears to fall on the manufacturer and I can't really see an argument for how it would fall anywhere else as they're the entity producing the product. By using the design there has to be a presumed level of acceptance that they have liability for the product. (I can't just go and make an exploding kettle and sell it and say "I downloaded these plans off the internet and built it, it's not my fault")

    In reality they'd have insurance to cover it, the insurance would most likely require the type approval in place.

    The supply chain is there, but no one is building older cars that they just have to assemble with aftermarket parts.

    If the demand is there and the products are available and possible within the legal framework then it's happening. Believe it or not I watched a video on YouTube in the last 7 days about Tuksedo Studio in Indonesia who do pretty much that.

    If it's not doable within the legal framework of a country it's a moot point.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago

    Chinese subindustry manufacturers:


    Hold my pork bun!

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Wait, so they don't want people changing their own wheels if a tire blows out? What kind of crap patent is that?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago

    Those, in my book, are single-use only, ready to have real screws/bolts replace them

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago

    I just patented BMW! Only the dealer can buy and keep the car.

  • source
  • I'll admit having your logo on the screws is, in itself a neat idea, not a good one, but I see why it's cool. making it propertary and control the production of who can remove it, is a terrible idea. and looking at it's design, it seems trivially easy to make a screwdriver for it.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago

    The Nazi mobile is anti consumer? Say it aint so!

    Didn't they run slave labor camps at multiple points in their history?

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    Home machinists "Bet"

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    @rssbot

    Great! One brand less I need to consider when deciding on my next car.

    #enshittification #bmw #screwyou #german #cars

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    I the part is not user serviceable, that means you have a lifetime warranty on service, and need to prove the price you charge for parts is reasonable.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    As someone who used to turn wrenchs for a living, I can objectively say that those are the worst tool ever made.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    not that I care much for obvious reasons but like what's stopping people from ordering it for 5 bucks off of aliexpress?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago*

    Wouldn't hold my breath on that one (edit) not to mention the massive cam-out risk of that shitty design

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Coming soon to Harbor Freight.

  • source