why the fuck won't they make cars with part-replacement as a top-tier feature? Do we need the government to step in? I want a fucking engine that I can one hand yank a piston out while scratching my ass. They can do it, they're just no thinking with replacement as a feature

>>28486436 (OP)
And why should they do that when they can make good money on you (when you return the car to the mechanics) ?

>>28486440

This.

All car companies are publicly traded now so they have to bend over to the investors.

The safety features pushed by the gubbermint is intentional to ensure the car is always marked as totaled if anything happens so the state can auction off your wagon, and you can once again feed money into the system that's fucking you everyday.

Just buy a classic and then get multiples for spares so you'll never have to worry about shitty nucars again.

>>28486436 (OP)
>design an engine even an idiot can repair and only an idiot will want it...

>>28486436 (OP)
It could always be worse .

For example in a lamborghini gallardo changing the engine oil and oil filter can cost a “modest” 1500 usd.

>>28486436 (OP)
The Land Cruiser 70-series is still on sale.

>>28486436 (OP)
Because how else are you supposed to trade in and trade up? Cars are now designed to get payments out of you no matter what if that means lease payments or paying the mechanic to replace every timing component outside of warranty

>>28488510
>70 series
Mogged by a gas superduty. Ford literally makes the best trucks in the world. Cope and seethe.

>>28489500
I never knew how shitty trucks could be until I owned a 1999 Ford 7.3. One of many known problems is that the fucking doors fall off because the sheet metal around the hinge cracks.
Doors have been a solved concept since the beginning of cars. But there was Ford, in the '90s, failing to figure out doors.

>>28489500
>Ford literally makes the best trucks in the world.
But since how long is the current model in production? OP wanted something that is never obsolete(tm).

>>28489768
80s-onwards saw an era of trying to cut costs wherever possible. It's likely that none of their test mules suffered this over 80,000 miles or so, and it only becomes an issue at 150,000+. Does it suck? Absolutely. Can they foresee everything? Absolutely not.

>>28486436 (OP)
Only 2% of car owners are intelligent and interested enough to do their own repairs. So easy repairability is not a desirable enough feature to drive sales. Yet it has enough downsides that would actually affect sales, such as being more expensive and difficult to manufacture, having less performance, having less technology, and requiring very big engine bays with human-accessible layouts that would increase the length of the car dramatically. Therefore this is a retarded idea.

If you want a repairable car then buy a classic. If you're so good at repairing then it should be no problem to keep one on the road.

>>28486436 (OP)
>I want a fucking engine that I can one hand yank a piston out while scratching my ass
Yeah, never going to happen. Not even on a single cylinder lawn mower engine. If the rings are so loose that you can move the piston by hand then it's going to consume lots of engine oil or be low enough compression to just not start at all.

>>28486436 (OP)
>Government
>Fixing anything ever

Pick one and only one youngsters

>>28489768
Can you post a picture of the actual issue that you stated you had instead of the broken door handle plate of the mid 80's to 1997 pickups. This is the first time I have ever heard of the superduty body style having door hinge failure issues.

>>28486436 (OP)
>Do we need the government to step in?
Yes, but good luck with that in America.

>>28492515
>it should be no problem to keep one on the road.
Getting new parts is