KahnBB6

iTrader: (5)

If I buy a 2022 Supra and its standard engine, at my own risk, can handle far more than the stock 382hp... well... regulatory concerns aside I have paid for that vehicle and while I did not invent the Intellectual Property I own that physical example of that hardware system.

So maybe for a Toyota factory approved one-time fee to flash the ECU for more power I *might* do that.... but I would never pay a subscription fee for that bump in power which reverts back to the standard 382hp if I stop allowing my credit card to be charged every month or year for it.

With a 100% electric car this scenario is even clearer: the hardware itself, which you will pay very good money for, can do what it can do within the ultimate maximum design limits of the overall powertrain design (the wiring, battery pack, inverter and motors).

If the car as sold to the buyer/owner is designed to handle more than the stock horsepower and torque output it originally rolled off the dealer lot with.... the owner of the car privately owns that car and its hardware.

And again, regardless of how much of a fuss the manufacturer will make about it... that owner, at their own risk, can if they wish to pursue an aftermarket programming scheme that circumvents a ridiculous expiry fee structure that they must keep "subscribing to" in order to keep that car at some higher output state of tune.... that the *hardware* was already designed and built to withstand in the first place.

....

Dodge with their Daytona EV appear to be taking a middle ground approach: they want to lock out aftermarket tuning mostly to force you back to the dealers to pay marked up staged power upgrades (that the vehicle is already designed for out of the box if only it were programmed for maximum output already)... but they will make these one-time upgrade fees and they will tie them to the EV's VIN number, not to an owner/user account. This means that in Dodge's case (so they say so far) when you pay for the pre-designed staged power upgrade you want it will stay with the vehicle even when that vehicle goes into used resale.

But... this is still somewhat annoying because it's basically printing money. Not very much will be fundamentally changed when using Dodge's model other than perhaps adding stickier tires, larger brakes and a more compliant suspension. The powertrain is already designed from the factory to go far higher than stock with no compromises to reliability with just the flash of an ECU.

I am interested to see where national Right To Repair legislation and the overall approach from aftermarket tuning companies go in opposition to manufacturer walled garden business models like these. Dodge's is so far the best compromise that I've heard of to date but it's still not totally ideal. Mercedes seems to be the worst so far.

...

I'm with you regarding heated seats and sterring wheels or even fees to allow you the "privilege" of operating a sunroof that the vehicle already has built in.

This is a new paradigm of control schemes over the consumer in order for manufacturers (and dealers) to make up what they consider as lost revenue in the light of a new generation of vehicles (EVs) that will fundamentally require far less repeat maintenance than with past models.

Truly annoying that with a much simpler and newer vehicle technology comes a push from the manufacturers and dealers to find new ways to nickel and dime and control the experience of owners in relation to the physical hardware that they have paid good money for.

Some will acquiesce to this just because it's far easier not to fight it and people lead busy lives. But not everyone will. I can see "unlocking" some features in a Gran Turismo game which is little more than an entertainment toy device. Not so much in an expensive automobile which is a completely different kind of experience and emotional connection to enjoy over a very long period of time.

Plus... some people just like to customize their cars in their own unique way outside of what the manufacturer would prefer. The challenge of modifying a special car your own way is the entire point for some. Because unlike cellphones cars are often emotionally enjoyed and highly personalized machines in our lives.

Some of these subscription feature schemes are attempts to drastically depersonalize the vehicle ownership experience. And that is just not going to fly with some folks. Unless you're hailing a taxi or rideshare your personal car is not a "service". It's your personal car.

Tuning ICE vehicles often gets into a gray area due to CO2 emissions concerns admittedly but as most of what we're talking about here is going to apply to EVs going forward that is not a concern with those kinds of cars, so this built in feature subscription nonsense really gets simplified down to a tug of war between vehicle buyers/owners and the manufacturers/dealers.

KahnBB6

iTrader: (5)

A news update on this topic:

https://www.motor1.com/news/623570/m...urdles-europe/

Of course..... Mercedes *could* easily eliminate these "legal hurdles" instantly by just offering the power increase in the context of a normal software update.

The car is already reliably capable of it as-is with zero hardware changes being necessary so it's only a code and/or firmware update away from enabling the extra power capacity that is already built into the cars their customers have bought and paid for.