Noticing how the M6 has finally doubled the M1's single core performance, nearly six years later. The M1 mini was my first foray into mac computing. I used it as my daily driver until I got the M1 Macbook Pro a year later. Been using that ever since. I think Apple's real problem is that they built machines that can last. I've had no interest in upgrading or buying something else, even though I want to just for pet projects but can't justify the extra cost.
> Toyota and Honda have competitors that are pretty interchangeable, like each other.
Do any of these competitors build "machines that can last" as much as Toyota and Honda? Does any other manufacturer have a longevity reputation of either of these two? What are the depreciation schedules of competitors (AIUI, T/H hold their value pretty well)?
Toyota and Honda have each other as direct competitors. If one of them sacrifices reliability, it's over. There are also second tier ones like Nissan making interchangeable cars, so if say Toyota stoops to Nissan's level, then they have to start selling at Nissan prices.
I would also say Ford, but their reputation for reliability applies only to their trucks.
Funny that Honda's hybrids seem to be licensing Toyota's eCVT magic, so it's quite a bit like Apple and Samsung, where they would be filling each other's pockets while also being at each other's throat.
Honda's hybrids are their own thing. They're mostly-series hybrids with one or two direct-drive gears for cruising speeds, as opposed to Toyota's parallel hybrid system.
When Ford and Mazda were working together they had some pretty reliable cars. My Focus outlasted two Hondas that I owned. The Hondas were "nicer" cars in terms of features and interior but mechanically the Ford kicked their asses.
Yeah, there was an era of good Focuses, also the Crown Vic. Crown Vic is probably their only car a random person will see and assume it's reliable, in the US at least.
Which is great to throw around numbers, but how are their reliability numbers? Before I throw out my 20 year old Honda for a BYD, how is the 20 year old BYD (or Telsa or Slate) doing? Unfortunately we don't know, though we're coming up on 29 years for Tesla soon.
The comment you're replying to is saying that in fair markets, BYD is taking market share away from Toyota even without the proven track record of reliability. Saying "But I wouldn't buy a BYD unless I knew it was reliable" is kind of missing the point.
If enough people are buying a certain car in your country, you can't go too wrong with it. So even if BYD turns out to be less reliable than Toyota, maybe the price is so much lower upfront that it doesn't matter. The much scarier thing is buying a "reliable" car that nobody knows how to repair.
> In most countries without 100% tariffs and outright bans Toyota's sales are in decline because of competition from BYD.
Is it because BYD is more reliable or 'just' cheaper?
There are a number of folks for who H/T would be their first pick if not for (a) waitlists and/or (b) price considerations. And there a lot of folks who don't necessarily care if the car will last 10 or 15(+) years because they'll replace it earlier that that, so as long as it's 'good enough' it's fine.
12.5B rmb is like 1.5% of BYD operating revenue. It's nothing. Western brands range from 1-3%. BYD subsidy is pedestrian, ~400 USD per car. Do you think any western brands can compete with BYD if they bumped unit costs by $400. Rhe answer is no.
Also what dumping? They're selling abroad at 2x domestic MRSP, i.e. $10,000s over domestic price, aka fully covers any subsidy, multipe times over. PRC "dumping" is just delulu innumerate cope at this point. The reality is without subsidies PRC structurally make cars for much less (~50%) than western auto, a few $100 per chassis of subsidies is immaterial to $10,000s of retail price gap.
OPs post was from BYD filings. But parsimonious answer is look at literally every industrial sector PRC involute/value engineered to more and more affordable prices, which they have been doing, for decades, and still remains cheap. Hence entire PRC industry subsidize + dump and take over narrative is mathematically stupid. PRC isn't continuously/ruinously subsidizing global TVs, phones, toy, clothes, machine tools insert whatever category for the last 20+ years in some grand scheme to drive western industry out of business. They are simply good at value engineering, and they have to simply to compete domestically.
Or just do the simple math, if one assume western auto production is somehow competitive with PRC auto if PRC auto simply no subsidies, we are talking about PRC subsidizing each vehicle to tunes of $10000s... PRC made 35m cars last year. For this frankly retarded position to mathematically square, PRC would have to subsidizes ~300B+... aka more than they spend on defense in one sector. The entire position PRC competitive because subsidies is unserious. Even overinflated CSIS study only assumes PRC spend ~250B over 15 years. Like you can come up with the dumbest propaganda numbers on PRC auto subsidies (which CSIS is), and PRC structural production advantage is simply economically unassailable.
In South Africa Toyotas (Hilux in particular) get stolen all the time because they are so reliable (and you get parts throughout Africa). So then you end up making new sales when people replace their stolen cars. One way to get around the problem for them I guess? /s :)
magicmicah85 · · focus · HN ↗
throw0101c · · focus · HN ↗
So do Toyota and Honda, and their sales seems be pretty steady.
mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
throw0101c · · focus · HN ↗
Do any of these competitors build "machines that can last" as much as Toyota and Honda? Does any other manufacturer have a longevity reputation of either of these two? What are the depreciation schedules of competitors (AIUI, T/H hold their value pretty well)?
mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
I would also say Ford, but their reputation for reliability applies only to their trucks.
WesolyKubeczek · · focus · HN ↗
NobodyNada · · focus · HN ↗
WesolyKubeczek · · focus · HN ↗
DwarvenEngineer · · focus · HN ↗
Tagbert · · focus · HN ↗
Honda's hybrid, including their version of eCVT is entirely different.
SoftTalker · · focus · HN ↗
mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
schaefer · · focus · HN ↗
For example, sales for the first half of 2026 vs first half of 2025 in Australia show:
Toyota is down 20% BYD is up 68%
fragmede · · focus · HN ↗
gumby · · focus · HN ↗
schaefer · · focus · HN ↗
I am engaging in this from a "Logic 101" perspective. I saw a false premise used in an argument and I only wanted to point that out.
I have no actual position on cars brands or apple computers or any of that.
ndiddy · · focus · HN ↗
mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
throw0101c · · focus · HN ↗
Is it because BYD is more reliable or 'just' cheaper?
There are a number of folks for who H/T would be their first pick if not for (a) waitlists and/or (b) price considerations. And there a lot of folks who don't necessarily care if the car will last 10 or 15(+) years because they'll replace it earlier that that, so as long as it's 'good enough' it's fine.
cpursley · · focus · HN ↗
Lio · · focus · HN ↗
If you give any car company that amount of money every year they would be able to undercut the competition and grow their market share too.
When you don't need to make a profit you can afford to dump enough product to kill the competition.
<a href="https://eletric-vehicles.com/byd/byd-posts-first-annual-profit-decline-in-four-years/" rel="nofollow">https://eletric-vehicles.com/byd/byd-posts-first-annual-prof...
maxglute · · focus · HN ↗
Also what dumping? They're selling abroad at 2x domestic MRSP, i.e. $10,000s over domestic price, aka fully covers any subsidy, multipe times over. PRC "dumping" is just delulu innumerate cope at this point. The reality is without subsidies PRC structurally make cars for much less (~50%) than western auto, a few $100 per chassis of subsidies is immaterial to $10,000s of retail price gap.
mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
maxglute · · focus · HN ↗
Or just do the simple math, if one assume western auto production is somehow competitive with PRC auto if PRC auto simply no subsidies, we are talking about PRC subsidizing each vehicle to tunes of $10000s... PRC made 35m cars last year. For this frankly retarded position to mathematically square, PRC would have to subsidizes ~300B+... aka more than they spend on defense in one sector. The entire position PRC competitive because subsidies is unserious. Even overinflated CSIS study only assumes PRC spend ~250B over 15 years. Like you can come up with the dumbest propaganda numbers on PRC auto subsidies (which CSIS is), and PRC structural production advantage is simply economically unassailable.
Gud · · focus · HN ↗
The rest of the car industry was sleeping on electric, while BYD made it their sole focus. That s why they're now eating everyones lunch.
timbaboon · · focus · HN ↗