Degrowth

726 readers

10 users here now

Discussions about degrowth and all sorts of related topics. This includes UBI, economic democracy, the economics of green technologies, enviromental legislation and many more intressting economic topics.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

MrMakabar@slrpnk.net

660

Innovation makes useful things smaller - overconsumption makes them bigger and more meaningless (norden.social)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by MrMakabar@slrpnk.net to c/degrowth@slrpnk.net

121 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Source: https://norden.social/@hart/112513927064083221

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The modern unloaded base 2 is 3400lbs and the first Gen X3 started at 4k and you could load it up when features to 5k. This 3 series in its poverty trim weighs 3k (and functionally represents a different class of vehicle today) Nice try playing fast and lose with loaded vs base vehicles. Also let's not pretend the 3 series EVER had a short wheel base. In 1990 it was 175.5 inches. My accord from that era is 179, 1 inch shorter than my 2021 outback.

[–] tomalley8342@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I will admit that I am fully biased against the absurd weight of the new 2 series. I'll update the post to reflect what I found instead - the new 2 series is of comparable curb weight, powertrain to powertrain, to the first generation x3, not significantly heavier:

2L AWD: 3640 vs 3650 3L AWD: 3870 vs 3900

The 5k weight listed for the x3 seems to be the gross weight (i.e. car + max rated cargo capacity), which wouldn't be comparable to the 2 series, having no such rated capacity.