No that is not the direction automobiles have been going since they were invented. Cars unlike many objects are built to last longer today than they were in the previous decades. It used to be people expected 100,000 miles or so out of their vehicle and now its over 200,000 miles.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2013/03/14/cars-tha... Whether by necessity or choice, U.S. motorists are holding onto their cars for longer than ever, with the age of the average vehicle on the road at a record-high 10.8 years, according to the research company R.L. Polk in Southfield Mich. By comparison, the average life expectancy of a new car in 1930 was a scant 6.75 years. Fortunately, today’s cars are more than up to the task of going the distance.

But that's not the argument the article is making.

It doesn't actually argue that the Model S won't be able to have a longer lifetime than its predecessors (we don't know because there aren't any old ones).

The article says that the lack of DIY maintainability implies that the lifetime will be limited, but DIY maintainability has always been going down and the cost of service has always been going up – yet the lifespan of vehicles has also always been going up.

Edit: And as an aside, some of the stuff brought up here is pretty ridiculous sounding. Like the lack of diagnostics sent to the OBD-II.

"Why I think Tesla is building throwaway cars"

I'm sorry but the article is a lot more than just DIY mechanics...

>According to the US DOT, the average age of cars on the road in 2015 was 11.4 years - and this has been steadily increasing over time. So the question shouldn't be, "How easy is it to maintain a Model S in 4 years" - it should be, "Can they be reasonably maintained to survive 20 or 30 years on the road?"

It is definitely more difficult to work on a new car than one from the 60s or 70s, and despite that the Average LifeSpan of a Vehicle has increased.

I think the newer cars are easier in some ways and harder in others. The design commonality, use of common subcomponents, on-board diagnostics (fallible, of course), fuel injection, electronic ignition, and closed-loop ECU controls make a lot of maintenance activities easier.

Plug in, pull the codes, replace a part, clear the codes is a lot easier than the old days of diagnosing carburetor issues, changing/adjusting points, etc.

Where it's harder is when you need something that is now locked down, but for regular maintenance activities (as opposed to modifications for more power), that is fairly rare in my experience, wrenching on my own cars for about 30 years.

Right, which is exactly why I'm asking why the Tesla is seen as such an exception. It's definitely a large leap, but it's a whole new architecture for a vehicle.

It's more difficult and expensive to work on a new car than old ones, yet the lifespans have been increasing.

It's more difficult and expensive to work on a Tesla than a non-Tesla, therefore the lifespan will decrease? This is where I'm confused.

OBD-II doesn't really get you much though(aside from maybe speed).

99% of the things that an OBD-II outputs(RPM, O2 sensor, timing, intake temp) just don't exist on a Tesla. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OBD-II_PIDs there's about 3-4 that actually make sense.

Ah, that's fair I suppose. It just seems like a blatant regulatory workaround to put in a port that literally provides power and ground. It would've been less weird but, you're right, not monumentally meaningful, if it had included the things it can include (like speed).

Sounds like we need an ODB-e standard for electric vehicles that has more appropriate data and takes modern mobile LAN security into account. Maybe it would help open up the third party service market, against Tesla's intent obviously.

Considering how hard it's been to build a standard DC-FC standard that seems like something that would be hard to do pull off without formal regulation(like OBD-II).