Automakers are oblivious to the headlight expense issue, gleefully discuss plans to worsen it

In reply to SV reX :

It doesn't?

I was going to buy an Impreza 2.5RS in 1998.  I waited and waited for the car.  I could have swung the $425 per month car payment.  I could not have swung the $375 per month car insurance.

Jeremy Clarkson, in one of his hour long BBC specials, got to drive the very Ford Econobox Cosworth (cozzie) that he'd bought new.  For £25k.  He sold it because his insurance was £25k per year, due to theft rates.  Yeah, Ford sold him one, but they didn't sell one to the guy who bought it from him, because he was able to buy a nearly new used one instead of a new one.

High insurance costs do hurt automakers.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

SV reX said:

Automakers don't care about what happens to the used car market. Making used cars less affordable is actually in the manufacturer's financial interest (because it increases new car sales).

They also don't have to worry about increased insurance rates because it doesn't affect their new sales in the showrooms.

There was a C&D article a long ways back about how automakers were working with insurance companies to reduce claims expenses.  Things like cooling system modules instead of discrete components in the nose, reduces labor costs dramatically.  Most cars have no key operation on the passenger side as an antitheft measure, fewer avenues of entry.  Lock mechanisms use cables or are purely electric instead of using easily-jimmied rods.  (Most Japanese cars from the 80s and earlier can be unlocked with a screwdriver faster than using a key... after reading the article, and thinking a little, I tried it and they were right)

 

Those things may or may not reduce claim expenses. I strongly doubt they care. 
 

Every single one of those examples also reduces manufacturing expenses. THAT they care about!

Its a shell game. They get to CLAIM they are helping consumers reduce costs while they ACTUALLY save expenses and increase profits. 

In reply to SV reX :

I'll see if I can find the article online.  Insurance claims reductions are the reason why, say, the C5 had a simple hood instead of the C4's clamshell.  A small side bump in a C4 destroys the hood, not so in a C5.

Ask Lotus or Viper owners how enjoyable it is to have a single large expensive body part covering both sides of the car.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

I think you are an extreme minority. It is much more common that people freak out when they get their first insurance bill. 
 

I don't think Subaru reduced their production numbers at all because you didn't buy an Impreza.  The next guy bought it.

And I note that you shared that Clarkson DID buy the Cosworth.  Manufacturer win!

No Time said:

In addition to cost and complexity, don't the CanBus headlights provide a pathway for thieves to bypass security? I seem to recall a thread on here about that. 

Yes:

https://www.autoblog.com/2023/04/18/vehicle-headlight-can-bus-injection-theft-method-update/

In reply to SV reX :

Clarkson bought one from Ford but the guy he sold it to didn't.  Granted, Ford probably only cared about selling enough to meet FIA homologation rules, so they probably didn't care.

The Subaru thing irked me a bit because I was right in their target demographic.  Single guy in his 20s looking to buy a sport compact.  Single guys in their 20s don't have a ton of money, which is why they stuck the Legacy engine in the Impreza instead of bringing the WRX to the US, because that would have been too expensive.  But the insurance...

I'd hate to know what the insurance was on the Integra GS-R, the only other 170+hp compact sold on these shores.  And THOSE were theft magnets!  (Edit: In hindsight, they may have looked to cars like the Integras to gauge where to go for insurance costs)

How are Hyundai/Kia sales doing now? Some insurance companies flat won't cover them

Edit edit: Insurance costs killed the muscle cars in the 70s.  Yes, there were new EPA regs, but if the sales were there then they could have dealt.  Some automakers did deal, like Pontiac and Ford, but sales were dropping due to high insurance.  Some insurance companies refused to insure anything with a manual transmission and a V8.

The best headlamps I've ever driven behind are in my 82 Camaro.  Four 4x6" square lamps, Cibie, H4 lows and H1 highs.  For a while, I had 100 watt bulbs in the High beams, but I could never turn them on, unless there was no oncoming traffic for at least two miles.

Glass lenses.  Easy to replace, with a phillips screw driver.  Not proprietary, so available at every gas station, if you ignore the Cibie part of the story.  Good optics, good range.

I owned a series of Chrysler products built in the 90's, that required the use of a flashlight to see if they were on...

When I am benevolent dictator, designing a headlamp that can't be changed in ten minutes is immediate execution.

My Toyota dealer still sell these for less than $20.  I'm trying not to hoard up over here.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

The 1973 gas crisis killed muscle cars. That and the piss poor manufacturing quality  of US manufacturers at the time.
 

We laughed at Japanese cars.  Thought they were junk.  Until we realized they were well built, fast, and could outperform US muscle cars in almost every measurable way.  It took 2 decades for US manufacturers to catch up with the Japanese. 
 

I don't remember ever hearing anyone complain about insurance rates. Ever. 
 

But you're probably right. Rates for muscle cars were probably higher. Because they caused more damage in a wreck. The risk was higher. 
 

The market decides what they will buy. Manufacturers deliver what consumers ask for because they want to make money. 

In reply to SV reX :

I am citing articles from the 1980s about What Went Wrong, with a lot of first hand accounts.  People choosing the small block Chevelle because they couldn't afford the insurance on a 396.  People having to sell their V8/3 on the tree station wagon because their insurance company called it a "sports car" and refused to insure it.

Yes the gas crisis hit, but musclecars were dying before that.  The end was in sight by 1969 because they were getting too expensive for their target market because of rising insurance rates.  They still made performance cars in the early years of emissions controls but they saw the writing on the wall, and the performance vehicles in the early 70s were not cheap cars made for the youth market.  They weren't the strippo base model and a big engine like in the 60s, they were fairly luxurious and expensive.

That the Mustang II came out right as the oil embargo hit was not a rapid about face so much as half decent timing because the writing was already on the wall for cheap performance cars and the car had been in development for quite a while.

I had a customer stop in last week with a 2018 freightliner with one high beam out. Normally that's a $75 fix with labor; this had the unitized headlights and the side that was out was $2200. After running to the dealer and installing it; it blew the other side when we turned it on and necessitated replacing it also at an additional $2400. Is it necessary? Don't the sealed beams meet requirements?

Back in the Olden Days, we used to slow down at night. 
 

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Performance cars have always been too expensive for some people to afford. They still are. 
 

I agree with you. Insurance rates are too high. But I don't have enough faith in the average consumer to believe they will avoid  buying just because of insurance rates. Especially on items like headlights. Consumers never even know to ask questions like that when they are buying. 
 

aircooled said:

Drive around a car with bad brakes, or super dim headlights at night, and see how fast you drive!  As noted, in a surprise situation, it can help (you can see the moose farther down the road), but for everyday driving, they can make things worse.

 

I got to drive a nearly-unrestored 1935 Nash around the block one time - at night. The above is absolutely true - between the 6V headlights and the cable-activated brakes, yeah... I doubt that I went faster than about 30 mph.

Pete's description of what happened in the 1970s is accurate. I would argue that it really isn't relevant to our current discussion. 

One thing I've learned in 30 years of doing auto claims is:  any time you see a design that seems stupid for repair procedures, the answer to 'why?' is because it was cheaper to assemble on the assembly line. That is Priority One, not servicing after the sale.

I don't blame the consumer for not asking about the cost of headlamp replacements before making a purchase decision. Honestly, even guys in this room don't do that. And it never was an issue before. This is a relatively new (cough...ripoff) thing. 

Consumers are all about the latest whiz-bang tech. That's all that really sells cars now, because styling is dead. Everyone drives a crossover that looks like a bloated ostrich egg. Tech features and fancy interiors is all they've got now. So let's put those blind spot radars on the corners ($600-$1200 a pop replacement cost). And oh...because those radars are there you can no longer repair the bumper cover, because those radars are calibrated to work only with the OEM bumper material thickness. Apply even a skim coat of filler and they may not work. So that bumper we used to repair for $400 is now replaced with a part that costs $800.

This is why your insurance rates keep climbing. But consumers don't care. They want their tech-laden transportation pods.

Now you guys have me paranoid about driving my ND-RF with the steering headlights..........

The newer cars really make me appreciate my BMW e46.  They are sealed beam assemblies but the lense just clips to the housing so it & everything inside is sevicable.  I am currently building a set of xenon projector lights for it from some junkyard housings & projectors from morimoto.

Let's also not forget about the biodegradable wiring insulation used inside the sealed headlights of many vehicles that causes shorts that will require not only the expensive headlight to be replaced but also the equally expensive module that runs it.

When HID lamps came out, they were often an option or included in a higher trim level. Now they (or LED lamps) are quickly becoming standard. Theres no choice for a cheaper light.

The lens on my 2012 Merc are pitted so let's just replace them right?  7k to fix that cosmetic problem.  I passed. 

ddavidv said:

They want their tech-laden transportation pods.

At some point I started feeling suffocated by all the tech in cars.   Looking back I think it was when I test drove a 2022 Merc S class.  
 

It is a huge reason why I am putting together a 72 911 as a weekend driver.  It is about as analog as you can get.  
 

There is a freedom you feel in a low tech car that I was missing.  It may be a bit un settling or even scary to the younger generation. But my generation was raised with it.   It is a feeling I was missing that I came to realize I needed to experience it again.

Are any headlights  linked to the car/truck  by serial number code in the car/trucks computer ?

At these prices  it makes a new item for the catalytic converter thiefs :(

Wait, you guys are seriously saying you'd rather have SEALED BEAMS than modern headlights?  Are you insane?  Sealed beams were miserable.  Hell, even the halogen H-whatever bulb lights that replaced them were pretty bad compared to modern headlights.  Have you ever driven a modern car at night?

In reply to californiamilleghia :

Look up ford pickup tail lights thefts. 

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

Wait, you guys are seriously saying you'd rather have SEALED BEAMS than modern headlights?  Are you insane?  Sealed beams were miserable.  Hell, even the halogen H-whatever bulb lights that replaced them were pretty bad compared to modern headlights.  Have you ever driven a modern car at night?

 

From the technical side, I agree completely, but where does it stop? If "good" lights are now $4K each, would you pay $10K each for "better" ones?

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

I'd put some 7" Hella E-code halogens up against the lighting in any of my current vehicles. I haven't had a car in a long time that had lighting I was impressed by.