Here’s a look inside a six figure Land Rover. You’ll notice it looks a lot like what you can see inside a five figure Kia. No slam intended – as far as the Kia.
Ten years ago, smartphone emulating LCD instrument panels were still pretty uncommon in new vehicles. You mostly saw them in expensive vehicles. It was when you think about it a lot like the way that smartphones were initially uncommon. Many people didn’t have them as recently as about ten years ago. Today, almost everyone has one – including most kids. Similarly, almost every new car now comes standard with or is available with an LCD instrument panel. Many of them – such as the one in the ’27 Kia Seltos I recently reviewed – are as big as and look the same as the screens you used to only see in the most expensive, top-of-the-line luxury-brand vehicles.
I think this is a problem for the luxury brands. 
If you’re not getting something that not everyone else gets, what are you getting? That used to be the main reason for spending what it cost to buy a luxury brand vehicle.
The problem with LCD displays is they’re – fundamentally – cheap. Inexpensive, to be precise. That’s why it’s a problem for luxury-brands. Kia can install a display that looks like and functions like the displays inside six-figure luxury-brand vehicles. This greatly takes away from the exclusivity of the same thing inside a six-figure luxury brand vehicle.
There is also no meaningful way to make one of these displays appreciably “fancier.” Bigger was – briefly – a way to put some distance between the displays found in Kias (and other mass-market brands of cars) and the luxury-brand cars. Now everyone’s got a big screen – or soon will – because there is nothing inherently expensive about a bigger screen. Have you priced flatscreen TeeVees lately? The small ones are almost free and the huge ones cost what the small ones did just a few years ago. You can face them with glass rather than plastic (which VW has done) or you can make them curved (as in this Land Rover I’m driving right now) but at the end of the day, it’s still a screen and they’re all pretty much the same thing.
I think it’s a mistake to put them in luxury-brand vehicles at this point because it’s no longer a selling point. They can only be made so much bigger.
Going back to smartphone-emulating, which is responsible for this mess. I have a six-year-old unit I got at Wal-Mart for about $50. At a glance, it looks very much like a $1,000 unit. Pretty much the same size. Glass-faced. It glows when you swipe it on. It takes pictures and videos – granted, they are not as high-res, but I’m not Steven Spielberg – and it makes calls and sends texts just as well as the $1,000 unit does. That’s why I’m happy not spending $1,000 on a phone that’s basically the same thing as my $50 phone. I realize there are people who want to spend $1,000 on a phone because it’s not a $50 phone. That’s their prerogative, of course. It just seems a little silly to me.
Bugatti – which makes pretty much the most exclusive vehicles extant – is veering away from screens. The Tourbillon hasn’t got them. It has what an expensive luxury-brand car ought to have, which is something that does not look cheap. It has intricate, chronograph watch-emulating actual instruments. The italics are to emphasize the difference between a chronograph watch – a Rolex – and a watch you bought at the Dollar Store (or Wal-Mart). Both tell time – and the Rolex, with its intricate mechanical movement, may actually be just slightly less accurate than the Dollar Store or Wal-Mart watch.
Which would you rather wear?
Obviously.
Bugatti calls it Digital Detox. Exactly so.
Of course, most of us will never be able to afford to wear a Rolex – but isn’t that exactly the point? It is precisely what makes a Rolex something special and so, desirable. It used to be the same thing with luxury-brand vehicles. Not everyone could afford one, but most of us would have loved to drive one. Most of us still can’t afford to drive a luxury-brand car, but what does it matter – since we can afford to drive a Kia?
I hope the luxury-brands take a hint.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is: EPautos 721 Hummingbird Lane SE Copper Hill, VA 24079
Oh the irony, Eric, in that we have flipped sides. In that many will gladly pay MORE to NOT have the touch screens, electric this, electric-controlled that, etc. I never thought there would be a day when hand-rolled-up-windows, and simple, analogue dials would be more popular than tech. And possibly just as expensive to replace, too?
It’s a good sign, Shadow!
Also, that there seems to be a rising cohort of GenZ kids who are going analog. It’s astounding, since these kids grew up in this digital dystopia.
>hand-rolled-up-windows, and simple, analogue dials
Keeping my 1989 F150 forever, if possible.
Roll up windows? Check.
Analog instruments? Check.
Conputer controlled port fuel injection?
Good stuff. Runs extremely clean. Check.
Off the deep end with digital shit?
Not happening, comrade.
KISS principle.
The antodote to Murphy’s law.
Aaah yes, the KISS principle. It always served me well. And Eric, after sending that last reply, I read shortly thereafter, where people are now wanting “dumb” TV’s. You know, the kind that do not spy on them! I believe it is “Westinghouse” that is stepping up to the plate to make the TV’s we used to have. Albeit, now, we probably will not have to wait for the TV to warm up in the morning (ha ha). Rabbit Ears are most likely “…not included”.
Speaking of enshitification….
Uncle Tony(‘s Garage) ripping on the fake and gay EV Ferrari: (With it’s fake ‘manual’ non-transmission!)
https://youtu.be/FBqfeYgYwVA?si=I2wJrvEuzVe7fi4A
Hi Eric, et al,
While I am not a big fan of LCD displays in cars, the Bugatti display is just fucking butt ugly IMO. I have the same reaction to the Rolex….I do like analog watches and own a number of them….but I like the time and possibly the day of the month on the display…otherwise, like your typical cell phone, it’s mostly a distraction from the function.
Now, granted my friend who is into Model Ts and Model As, has backup cameras and uses his phone as a speedometer. But he and I are old…..he recently modified his 1915 Model T to add an electric starter because hand cranking it was getting to be a challenge. I would love to have a simple VW Beetle like daily driver and a Toyota Hilux like pickup truck. The market would gladly accept such vehicles…..hell, add a stinger and a 50 cal and you’ve got a genuine insurgency vehicle. A gas guage, speedometer, ammeter, oil pressure meter, and tach would be enough tech to keep one informed. As always, YMMV and OALA, EHOATAS.
When I saw the photo of the Bugatti, a Shawshank Redemption movie line came to mind. In this case, from the Warden, when he angrily demands, “What the Christ is this happy horse sh**”? That display/screen of the Bugatti is ugly as hell!
The fascination with jewphones will never cease to amaze me. right up till the day I die. It’s a sickness.
I know for most people it’s social media addiction, that’s the overwhelming majority. Personally, I use my cell phone for 2 things – while at work, I use it for music via my Bluetooth speaker, or YouTube videos I can listen to while I work; and if I’m not at work and I’m on my phone (which isn’t often), I use it to play chess. In fact, the only thing that would make it hard for me to give up my phone would be having to go without chess. I could live without every other thing it does. It’s not easy being a chess junkie when most people can’t play the game and if they do, they can barely move the pieces and call knights “horses”.
By matter of fact, unless I have absolute need of it, I never even have it with me when I’m out doing things like running errands and whatnot, aside from taking it to work I generally leave it at home. My phone overlords understand I own it, not the other way around.
So due to the kinds of people I have to “share” the roads with around here I have a rental Corolla for the time being.
Of course it’s an AT. The engine has enough power, but this transmission is often in the wrong gear or something. When I need to accelerate NOW and press the gas the engine revs up but practically nothing happens. To get the car to accelerate properly I have to press the throttle just so. It does okay if I do it just right. Annoying. And in a must go now situation this using a special technique isn’t the muscle memory.
And then there’s the screen. Ug. The radio is through the screen. There’s no real tuner. There’s channel -/+ and scan. They both do much the same thing. I wanted to find coast to coast am which if it’s still available in my area it will be on weak/distant stations. Of course it didn’t stop every 10 for AM, only when it found something strong enough to please the machine. Which meant about half dozen AM stations out of the whole spectrum. Could play find the special manual over-ride while driving but everything else I tried parked for various things didn’t exist so I doubt there is one.
The seat belt chime gets angry at me for driving into the garage at a crawl. There’s the red speed limit sign if it doesn’t like my speed. Then it tries to read street signs and puts the icon for that sign on the instrument cluster. No apparent settings for the cluster, which is another screen. One size fits all. After a couple days it thinks there are back seat passengers and puts a red buckle up sign on for several seconds.
Enough of my rant. It would be a fine basic car with real gauges, radio, and a manual transmission.
Toyota has been doing that for a while now.
If you floor it, it will (eventually) accelerate properly but only if you hold it down, they put a lag in there. If you “blip” the throttle it does nothing, just holds a steady speed. Yes, it’s rather annoying.
I never held it down because the free-reving just says something’s wrong to me due to driving MTs and the occasional normal AT.
If a person who bought an iphone every time a new model was released since 2007 had instead bought the same dollar amount of Apple stock they’d be able to afford to pay cash for a multi-million dollar home.
Gone also is the ‘safety factor’ of manual controls / muscle memory.
Eyes on the road, citizen! Well that was a whole better bet with old school mechanical controls. HVAC in a ‘70s Pontiac. Top left/right slider was mode select, all the way right got you defrost/defog and that activated the AC pump so yes, it would defog the windshield on a humid day. Bottom slider, all the way right was hot. Fan switch up/down. So, need a brute force attack on a fogged up windshield sliders right, fan switch up – good to go without looking or hunting for a stupid icon on a screen.
Muscle memory is a way under appreciated habit.
Another factor is even with universal controls their placement might change in a vehicle so when you got in an unfamiliar car you’d still have to figure out the relative placement.
It might take a few days but as long as you’re in a family of cars you’d get used to it. GM cars with their sliders, Japanese with their 3 dials, etc. If might be placed high on the dash in a pickup, lower near the console in a Camaro but after a few times you’d figure out the reach from a solid starting point, like the gear shift.
With people rotating through cars and brands every year these common touch points were no longer appreciated. It was even down to the shape of the steering wheel. You’d know instinctively where to find the horn buttons on a steering wheel, where to find window cranks or switches, how to adjust mirrors or the dash back light just by knowing the manufacturer.
-anon
When in school “full stack” had a totally different meaning…….but then we were old fashioned.
I always liked the early 2000s Lexus IS300 chronograph gauges.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/geofx/3735152039
Not only is he history’s greatest military strategist, but also Donnie Bone Spurs is a brilliant naval engineer, personally configuring our great carriers in his spare time, in between writing symphonies and discovering new galaxies:
‘President Trump ordered the U.S. Navy on Thursday to remove the electromagnetic catapult system on aircraft carriers to launch fighter planes and revert back to using catapult systems.
‘Trump directed that Ford-class aircraft carriers have steam-powered catapult and hydraulic systems instead of the newer Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Advanced Weapons Elevators.
“Billions of dollars more they spent on electric catapults and they’re not good,” the commander-in-chief said last month during a defense summit in Pennsylvania, employing his characteristic Yiddish syntax.
‘Steam catapults are no longer in production. The Navy bought the last set 20 years ago. It will need to “spend tens of millions and take years to stand up this production capacity again.”’
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/6029103-trump-orders-navy-catapult-reversal/
Here’s what an actual pilot and engineer had to say:
“I’ve launched off the front of aircraft carriers hundreds of times, have a master’s degree in aeronautical engineering, and am a test pilot. And even I wouldn’t suggest to the Navy how to engineer specific systems on its ships,” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a former Navy pilot who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Thursday.
Now Donnie is a real estate prodigy
Who barely had time for three wives
And he’s ordering Davy, who’s still in the navy
To screw up its big ships for life
— Billy Joel, Piano Man
Who will stop this narcissistic, ego-deluded f*cktard?
I think Donnie Demented should get strapped to the catapult on the USS Abraham Lincoln and launched into the Strait of Hormuz. A nice morale booster for the crew who are about ready to mutiny over the worse than prison-like conditions they currently endure.
Second that, Mike!
I’d love to hear his yelp…. Hormuuuuuuuuuuuuzzzzzzz fade into the distance.
Yes, and let’s use the existing EMALS,
https://www.navair.navy.mil/product/Electromagnetic-Aircraft-Launch-System-EMALS
just to prove to Donnie Dumbshit they actually do work.
Now comes Donnie Dumbshit, the Great Naval Architect, who has decreed, in his latest führerbefehl, a return to the Age of Steam.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-aircraft-carriers-steam-catapults-ffa9f3ce102ecd5d6126db03e901a56f
Fact is, Ford class eliminated “service steam”
https://man.fas.org/dod-101/navy/docs/swos/eng/60b-102.html
>On most ships the propulsion boilers also provide steam at reduced pressure for hotel services mentioned above. On ships which are not propelled by steam, gas turbine and diesel ships, for example, some type of boiler is still used to provide hotel service steam.
as well as steam catapults.
Will Präsident Dumbkopf, GNA, require future Ford class carriers to return to the Old Ways? Did L’il Donnie get big campaign contributions from Pipefitters’ and Boilermakers’ unions? Inquiring minds want to know.
If the U.S. Navy still has a pair, they will tell the Orange idiot to sit down, shut up, and let the adults (you know, qualified engineers). run the show. We’ll see.
There hasn’t been a ton of pushback from the upper brass because so far the 3 operational MALS launchers that exist have a failure rate at about 450 launches, which is roughly 9 to 10 times the rate of failure on the traditional steam catapults.
https://breakingdefense.com/2018/06/navys-troubled-ford-carrier-makes-modest-progress/
https://centerformaritimestrategy.org/publications/failure-to-launch-how-political-backpedaling-could-hand-china-the-carrier-edge/
Part of the reason it takes fewer sailors is it’s an automated, software-driven system that is rife with bugs and glitches. The old launchers were mostly manual. This is not unlike the comparison of a 1976 Trans-Am vs a 2026 EV Mustang. The Navy and their contractors are far from immune to the shiny new thing syndrome.
https://news.usni.org/2017/07/28/emals-fix-finalized-reduce-stress-put-heaviest-airplanes-ford-class-carrier-launch
-anon
General Dynamics doesn’t care, they are making good money either doing corrective action on MALS or building traditional systems.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/navy-news/2026/uss-enterprise-cvn-80-general-atomics-emals-contract-modification
-anon
When I was a boy long ago, my Dad liked to pose the question, “Why are there so many more horses’ asses than there are horses?” Biologicallly and mathematically, you would expect the mapping to be 1:1.
[vox John Beelushi]
But noooo….
[/Belushi]
This happened to Nokia in the 2000s. They have the Vertu line of phones, that were basically the same guts as a 3310 but “bejazzled” with nicer plastics. Didn’t sell well at all. Turns out when there’s only cosmetic differences between hardware, no one cares.
One option that might make a difference is to introduce a lot of small buttons with dynamic displays, like a Stream Deck. Or a UI like our church’s Behringer X-32 audio console, where there’s a ton of buttons and knobs but they change in context. For example when you hit “select” on lead vocal 1 (AKA Kari’s) channel strip the preamp, EQ, dynamics and effects sends controls all adjust her audio settings. There’s also a nice OLED display on the strip that can be color-coded and has Kari’s name and a little microphone icon. Same thing with the bass strip. It’s a different color that’s only used for instruments. Of course all the critical controls, like the main fader, mute, etc. are on dedicated controls and nothing else can be mapped to them except for specific cases where there’s red flashing lights to give feedback. Having used old analog consoles, where you have a single control for every channel strip feature, it’s really pretty intuitive and quick to learn.
And zero’ing out the console involves twisting a control knob and pushing GO.
Point is, they don’t have to go with a giant touchscreen. A hybrid approach can work really well while looking high tech and keeping from having 10,000 controls.
>Of course, most of us will never be able to afford to wear a Rolex – but isn’t that exactly the point? It is precisely what makes a Rolex something special and so, desirable.
I have no idea how much a Rolex watch costs, nor do I care.
I am perfectly happy with my light powered Citizen, for which I paid $225 many years ago.
It keeps almost perfect time, never needs batteries, is highly water resistant, and even has a “glow in the dark” dial.
What more do I need? It has a day-date function, which I don’t even use. I don’t SCUBA, so do not need a diver’s watch. All I need is a device which reliably keeps accurate time, and doesn’t cost a fortune in case it gets lost, damaged or stolen. The one I bought fits the bill.
What I do *NOT* need is a piece of jewelry which incidentally tells me the time, anymore than I need a surveillance device which incidentally allows *me* to make phone calls. I’ve read that some people actually *finance* the purchase of expensive cell phones. Are they nuts?
Hi Adi,
There is a place for beautiful things; art for its own sake. A chronograph watch is such a thing.
No doubt, Eric.
Just be clear about what you are buying.
Artful result of exquisite fine craftsmanship!
How’s about a ‘Grand Complication’
https://www.alange-soehne.com/eu-en/timepieces/1815/grand-complication
Hey Adi, I have one of those Citizen solar watches too, forget what I paid but I’ve had it for a very long time and it works great. Never needs a battery or winding and accurate enough for me; like the old Timex ads – “it takes a licking and keeps on ticking”.
Relativity, Adi. In most of the world a watch costing $225 is absolutely a luxury item. Rich people view a $100K Rolex exactly how you view your Citizen. It gets the job done. Price out a custom one-off Swiss watch. Relatively.
I regularly see guys beating on $250k Porsches like high schoolers in rental cars. Why? Because they can afford it.
What I really get a kick out of is the Rolex commercials that feature “scientists” in the rainforest wearing Rolex watches…for some reason. Have you seen those commercials yet?
There isn’t a scientist alive that doesn’t wear a Casio, and Rolex KNOWS this. I LOVE my Casio watch. Solar powered, Atomic-clock automatic time setting, temperature, altitude, barometer (it even sounds an alarm if the barometric pressure drops too fast), digital compass, multiple time zones and alarms…A quality Casio Pro-Trek watch is 1,000,000x better than a Rolex in pretty much every circumstance.
Been wearing a version of the same Casio G-Shock since 1996, which is when I jumped to the DW-6900. I think I paid about $40 for that first one at the Lackland BX. The GW-6900 I wear now has 6-band radio time sync, solar charging and uses an LED for backlight instead of the nicer blue electroluminescence. I remember thinking at the time the DW-5600 looked too much like the cheap shit Casio I wore as a kid in the 80s. Now, yeah, I wish I was smarter. Thanks to Keanu and the Speed movie an old school G-Shock DW-5600 is really worth something while my original DW-6900, not so much. Oh well, that’s the way it goes I guess.
-anon
Mid-20th century engines also used vacuum advance; centrifugal advance for engine speed and vacuum for load compensation. As you said, automatic control of ignition timing was a huge upgrade over driver-controlled advance.
New cars’ stupid smart-phone-like driver interface per se precludes my ever buying one, never mind their fortyleven other fatal faults such as driver ‘assist’ features and spyware. An OEM trying to sell me a new vehicle today has as little chance as the blockhead who tried to sell me a fishing boat when I lived in Tucson years ago.
That was meant to be a reply to Jim H.
You are right, of course. Two variables, rpm and manifold vacuum, controlled spark advance. Not bad, but not optimum.
Whereas driver ‘assist’ represents technology devoted to a function no one even asked for.
I mean, that’s the difference. It didn’t take anyone trying that hard to sell a buyer on EFI. The manufacturers sold carbs and EFI side-by-side for years and the market mostly decided without overt coercion.
There’s the question of whether EFI would exist at all without the EPA. I tend to think it would have eventually come out and the benefits mostly were obvious, so the EPA nudging the issue probably only changed the timeline of what was inevitable.
-anon
The few things I do like are the digital speedometer and the ability to see my trans temp and oil life. Beyond that I don’t use any of the features except android auto for gps.
If I don’t use it, why do I need it?
I don’t even know what 90% of the selections are for.
I prefer analog gauges over most digital ones, but that Bugatti instrument panel is hideous. I prefer clean, simple analog gauges.
I had a ride in a Mini Cooper a few months ago and the interior was an abomination. It had an ugly, oversized round touchscreen in the middle of the dash that looked like something out of a cartoon. (So did the rest of the car, really).
Simplicity, parsimony, proportion and symmetry are virtues in design.
Morning, X!
I’ve been in that Mini – and I agree. A tacky plate in a spartan waste space. The Bugatti is gorgeous to me. I realize I’m a kook!
‘63 Alfa Gulia Sprint and a ‘69 Alfa Spyder, dash Heaven. The 63 had a stitched dash, not formed plastic. Real gauges with glass faces. Big tach and speedo faces.
Had to be careful with ‘63, ignition switch was just that, the ignition. Everything else was live switches – wipers, radio, heater fan, lights.
‘This lemming-like instinct to emulate the smartphone.’ — eric
It’s almost 20 years since Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone on Jan 9, 2007. His breakthrough was to eliminate most hardware buttons in favor of a touchscreen. Given tight limits on the physical size of a phone — it should fit in a pocket — a touchscreen is an efficient use of limited space and an effective human interface.
Cars don’t have such space limits. They were around for a hundred years with all necessary functions controlled by buttons, levers and switches. No breakthrough opportunity awaited to transform their human interface. But once the shartphone [sic] interface reached popular acceptance, it migrated into vehicles anyway. 🙁
A broad definition of enshitification would be the superfluous replacement of simple, maintainable electromechanical tech with electronic chips, which are neither.
In the mid-20th century, ignition timing advance was accomplished by mechanical weights inside the distributor — an upgrade from a manual lever on the steering wheel in the 1920s. It meant that engine rpm was the only variable setting the timing. Now a chip can modify ignition timing to suppress knock when lower-octane fuel is used. It’s an upgrade in functionality.
But that’s not so for the enshitification of the automotive human interface — which was well developed by the mid 20th century — with superfluous douchescreens to ape shartphones. In others’ cars, I’ve watched passengers who were more menu-savvy help a mystified driver find an elusive GPS display mode. How dysfunctional is that?
Even the Bugatti Tourbillon instrument cluster in the embedded video exhibits a poor understanding of human interface. Its analog gauges have inappropriately tiny markings derived from watch dials, that are not easily read with a half-second glance at 85 mph.
Automotive engineers have made outstanding innovations in suspensions and drivetrains, tripling engine specific output and improving handling. But the rest of automotive technology has become trendy, dysfunctional crap, suffering simultaneously from ‘over-tech’ and poor maintainability. Bin it.
The replacement with analog dials with touch screens is all about the Patents.
Where I currently work, a tech name you would recognize in a heartbeat, it was all about Patents up until AI came along.
Now it is all about teaching the AI how to do your job. Or try.
Touchscreens also allow replacement of the requisite US-trained mechanical and electrical engineers with lower skilled “full stack” developers from the Subcontinent.
Every time I hear the words “full stack” come out of one of their mouths, I want to smack them.
To be fair over complication has long been a challenge in engineering. I’m on the hardware/PCBA/firmware side of the house. Rube Goldberg recognized and poked fun at it a century ago now.
Chip designers do this all the time, adding features because a process feature shrink lets them pack more in, so they do. Software has always done this, GUI driving the bus for 40 years in PCs. What’s so wrong with a CLI for your OS? Does that temp sensor chip really need an ARM core plopped in?
If it was me I’d have no problem having stopped in the 1980s and 1990s in electronics. I like vinyl records and tube amps but I’m not so Luddite to think that was the height of electronic perfection. General purpose and embedded microprocessors and AMPS cell phones aren’t so bad. I even don’t mind CDs or iPods. But we couldn’t leave well enough alone and had to keep churning. LoRa and WinTAK and IoT are siren calls to engineers. The problem is most of us don’t have a life outside of the work. I was doomed with an analytical brain but I don’t love it, so it’s always just been a job for me, the low drag way to make money since I don’t have to work all that hard at it.
I have no trouble cutting the lights at 5PM and doing something else, ride a bike, go backpacking, seeing a band, practicing guitar, whatever. But I’m the exception. Most of my cohort are spending free time pushing updates to OSS to their Github accounts and being “makers” of pointless things, so the merry-go-round just spins and spins.
In high school math class we were asked to simplify problems, to break them down into manageable parts.
In automobile design and manufacture……
The door is wide open for enshitification reduction.
Engineering exam, some decades back. “How would you calculate how long it takes a 5 pound beef sirloin roast (dimensions given also) to reach 160 degrees F when cooking in a 350 degree F oven? Show your work.”
The two that got an A: “Meat thermometer, timed via clock or wristwatch”
“Telephone. Call my mom and ask her”