• FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        41
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Not always. If you keep that car in good condition and it ends up being a desirable color it it could be considered rare by resale time, you’re just rolling the dice when you buy it with that strategy compared to a more common/basic color.

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          4 days ago

          That’s kind of the point, though. The colored cars are less desirable colors, so the resale value drops.

          90% of cars will never become sought after vehicles. If the 10% that could, you’re very likely to have already sold it before it ever became collectable.

          • kernelle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            I agree, also haven’t seen anyone mention the cost of repairs. Buying a car with a common colour will make the replacement of an exterior part much cheaper.

      • TWeaK@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        More specifically, all of the bright colours tend to fade in the sun over time.

        • Kjell@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          Is that true today? In my experience it is mostly Japanese cars from the 80s where the fading is a big problem. On the other hand, my country is not having a lot of sun so I guess it could be a problem in other countries with more sun.

    • SpruceBringsteen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      That, and many of these cars wouldn’t last long enough for the paint to fade from UV. Your yellow car turning beige wasn’t a concern if it wasn’t going to reach 100,000.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        Are you inplying these older cars weren’t intended to last longer than 100k because I’d wager most of the cars in the top image at least doubled that before going to scrap.

        • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          4 days ago

          I park next to an 80s beetle with over 350k on the odometer. My own truck is from the 90s with 280k.

          I work with a guy who daily drives his dad’s old Mercedes. While he inherited it, it wasn’t a “project car” or anything, it was a daily driver kept in good repair. Honestly, you put on a new clear coat, detail the interior? It feels no more than a few years old. 500k miles.

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            I owned 6 SAABs that were made from '82 - '90. I refused to touch a GM SAAB. Didn’t even buy them with less than 100,000 miles on the odometer. 1/6 died at ≈750,000 miles. That was my fault, found out about hydroplaning the hard way, on I-75. The other 5 died between 1.3-1.7 million miles. Never quite got one to 2,000,000. Several hundred people have, and despite SAAB not making a car since 2011, they still keep adding cars to the list of 2,000,000+

        • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          4 days ago

          Not OP, but most of those cars only had 5 digits on the odometer. It says something about how long the manufacturer expected them to last.

          It’s important to remember how far we’ve come on longevity. 100k as the expected lifespan wasn’t common until the 90s. My grandmother once told me that 40k meant it was time to start looking for a new car. This probably would’ve been for cars in the 50s.

          Obviously you can take any car to any mileage if you’re willing to sink the time and money into it. Many of these cars are prized by enthusiasts, and became project cars. But your standard utility cars of the 70s and 80s were probably not getting to 100k before needing a lot of repairs.

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Curious how old you are, because until this century, a car with 100,000 on the odometer was considered a piece of crap no one in their right mind would buy. Powertrain warranties of 50,000 were pretty nice in the 90s and when 100,000 came out people were astounded. 3 years/36K was standard warranty for everything else.

          SOURCE: Worked Nissan consumer affairs, late 90s.

        • GenosseFlosse@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          Problem was mostly rust because they used unprotected steel without any zink coating. In a wet country that would damage the frame and chassis within a few years, and sooner or later you end up patching one hole after the other. It’s even worse when they use salt on the roads in winter.

          I watch some car restoration channel on YouTube. Some old cars look excellent at first, untill they lift it up and the floor plate or any mounts crumble into dust because some water was leaking inside the door frame, into the trunk or some hidden corner.

      • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        This is (mostly) a myth, and dispelled by (among many others) Progressive and Allstate. How would they even know? Color is not part of your VIN, and is not something they will usually ask.

        However, there is one small kernel of truth - sports cars, which genuinely are more expensive to insure, are far more likely to be red. But they would be the same price in blue, silver, or black.

  • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    103
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Not just the color. Each make and model used to look distinct and unique. Now they all have the same vague SUV shape. It makes sense aerodynamics and safety standards are a thing but it still feels so corporate and almost dystopian.

      • Fades@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        There are also things like safety standards and whatnot, there’s more nuance here beyond some shape conspiracy lol

        • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          safety standards are bs, tho. they still say more blinding headlights are safer than less blinding.

    • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 days ago

      The funnier interpretation IMO is that they’re all trying to be either wagons or minivans while maintaining plausible deniability.

      No it’s an SUV! Right right…

    • Somewhiteguy@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      4 days ago

      It’s carsinisation but for cars. Everything evolves into a type of SUV. It makes sense since physics kind of dictates how aerodynamics works and engineers just have to work around that.

      I’m looking forward to the day when we don’t have rear-view mirrors and just use cameras. Kind of surprised we haven’t just gone that direction already. Screens and camera tech has gotten good enough that we can do that pretty efficiently.

      The issue I have with some of the more “modern” cars is getting rid of the door handles on the outside. These pop-out things are just a hazard for people in colder climates or places where dust and other ingress can cause problems opening the door. Although, it would be nice to have my kids walk up to the door and not jerk on the handle 2-3 times before I can get the keys out to unlock it.

      • brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Mirrors just work. No electricity, no lenses to get covered and blocked.

        Cameras are good for the places mirrors can’t see, but otherwise it’s more shoving electronics in places were it’s not needed driving up cost, complexity, and decreasing repairability.

        I like function over form for safety items. Simple, reliable, and imo there is beauty in something clearly being designed for a purpose.

        • otacon239@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          4 days ago

          Another factor that seems to get ignored with mirrors vs cameras is depth. A mirror is still a 3D reflection and there’s usually enough depth information to judge distances pretty well. You lose all sense of scale and distance with a lens and screen.

          • IronBird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            objects in mirror are closer than they appear

            (i still have zero idea what this means…is the object closer in the mirror or is closer irl?)

            • Lyrl@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              4 days ago

              That label is used for convex mirrors that show a wider area at the tradeoff of shrinking things. You get some depth perception in a mirror (unlike a camera, as otacon pointed out), but the shrinkage in a convex mirror throws that off. The object itself (not the reflection) is physically closer to you than what your depth perception on the reflection would indicate.

        • MBech@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          I suppose cameras can give you a better field of view than a mirror can though.

          • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            4 days ago

            Sure but if they break, it’s a more expensive repair, one that I may be able to do myself whereas replacing a mirror or mirror housing isn’t that hard.

            I want less computerization of cars, personally. Or at least a repairable, customizable, and FOSS system, if I have to have computers in my car.

      • toynbee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        One of my cars is a Chevy Bolt EUV. The rear view mirror, in place of the classic switch to change between day and night mode, has a switch that alternates the view between reflection and camera.

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      There are far more sedan shapes over SUV ones on the road, but with that said I agree with your reasoning. It’s natural that the most efficient shapes are adopted en masse so everyone can benefit. Same with other things like safety standards/regulations.

    • harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      I can’t remember which car magazine did it, but about 6-8 years ago, the cover was a profile of every crossover in the US market. I was able to pick out the Honda but couldn’t tell any of the others apart.

      Aerodynamics and safety get everyone to a generally uniform shape, but then they focus group it to death.

  • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    People choose their colour based on how they think it’ll affect resale value. If they pick a punchy colour, that narrows down the demand and brings down the resale price.
    It’s the same thing with millennial gray.

    It’s not that people don’t want colour, it’s that it costs such a huge part of their wealth that they’re scared about recouping it.

  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    there’s a study that shows that car colorfulness is positively correlated to being in a good mood for longer periods of time (i.e. not having depression)

    so, car colors reflect the mood of a society. and that they’re all gray today is a bad sign.


    there’s a number of additional signs to read the mood of society. i was told by a colleague that the length of women’s skirts is another indication (the shorter the skirt length, the better society’s mood is overall).

    i also believe that the music they play i.e. in the supermarket is a good indicator. the more love songs on the radio, the better the mood of society. the more break-up songs on the radio, the worse the mood of society.

  • mechoman444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Blame this on the car insurance companies. They claim that certain car colors are less likely to be in a wreck.

    Also blame car manufacturers. Some colors cost more than others. Check the sticker price next time you’re in the market.

  • karashta@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    It’s like we live in a world built out of that gray shit inside that Krabby Patty in the one episode.

  • invictvs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Many people here say that people don’t want to be targeted by cops but I don’t feel like cops target colored cars specifically. At least where I live I feel like they target stereotypical vehicles, which would mean a combination of brand and model, color, tinted windows, any visible modding etc., and also the body style of the car. For example a gray roadster will have a higher chance to be targeted by the police than a yellow minivan. A modded car will always be stopped more than average.

    So the way to not get targeted is to get a car that screams “mother/father of two in an unhappy marriage”. Or go to the other extream and get whatever the mafia drives if you have the money. I have never seen a G-class Mercedes stopped by the police.

    • Shamber@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      The target here is vans, black BMW, Audi, Mercedes, and then the grey of the same 3 brands, it became an absolute stereotype

  • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    4 days ago

    Paging through the 80s and 90s car colour options for somewhat mainstream cars like bmw is crazy in comparison to today. Sure they were the expensive paint option but there were hundreds.

    There’s some awful colours today (eg you can get 3 shades of grey, red, or the precise shade of yellowish green that a newborn infant leaves in their diaper for a Prius). I say - at least it’s a colour.

  • krakenx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 days ago

    Everyone wants a car that blends in so that they are less of a target for cops.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      That’s apparently apocryphal. The rate of pullover tracks with the most common car color (currently white). Driver behavior (speeding, illegal turning, etc) and other outstanding features (lapsed registration, broken tail light) are the most common proximate causes for a pull over.

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        It should be a concern for literally anyone in America right now. Unless you’re white and actively licking boots, you’re a target.

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          I’m white and OP has hella privilege if they’ve never been concerned about cops targeting them. They were all over my ass in the 90s for having long hair and driving beaters. They’d lock on and follow until they had an excuse.

    • Psythik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Not me! I’ll take a flashy sports car over a boring beige box any day of the week.

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      Oh, that’d be an interesting study I’d read about! Any sociology majors out there who need a thesis? lol