I think the issue is to create an ICE is a very complicated process requiring lots of specialist knowledge, skills and technologies. An EV is just much simpler, comes down to who has the cheapest batteries. Europe and Japan are great at the former, the latter no chance.
Im sure some of it is personal bias from experience with them but I don't think ICE are as complicated as some people think. 90% of the extra shit on them are unnecessary for it to work but what those things are and what they do and why it broke or failed or how important they are is essentially obfuscated from the general public so they seem like overly complicated magic. The vast majority of cars I see do not fail or get trashed due to engine failure from design flaws or anything, most get trashed because people stop caring about them and treat them like trash and don't replace that $15 sensor, others think they can't afford the maintenance because car manufacturers don't give a fuck about having to take 3 hours disassembling other unnecessary shit to replace a 30 cent sensor that they know will eventually need replaced, but the only number the customer seems to look at is the total cost of the mechanic quote. They think because something is a $1,000+ repair that something seriously is worn or old and that the car is on its last legs, instead of the reality of that one part being a huge pain in the ass to replace but it is otherwise a good reliable motor for another 100,000+ miles. And of the cars that do get trashed because they have actual major mechanical problems, the vast majority of the problems have to do with the body work rusting out and/or suspension components needing replaced after being used for 3x their expected lifetime, which an EV is not going to improve in any way.
Like ive seen people junkyard perfectly working and good cars because it is over 150,000 miles and some service guy who is looking for work/money told them they need to do scheduled maintenance some time soon and they thought the car was too old and was junk. And yet very few cars ive seen would not make it over 300,000 miles if they spent even 1/10th the money of their new car for maintenance on their old.
Thought the comment was somewhat helpful. Sparked considering the various anti-patterns in automobile design and searches came back with several others that have been vaguely thought about, just never really identified very clearly for me.
- Inaccessible Components (Poor Physical Layout): One of the main ones you're talking about. Take out the engine to repair a light on the dashboard.
- Integrated, Non-Modular Systems: Minor damage or failure ruins an entire assembly. You dinged the bumper, replace the entire front.
- Lack of Standardization: Even from year-to-year, designs change and mechanics have to learn yet another system.
- Forced Replacement over Repair: Object is "black box", thou shalt replace, not repair.
- Dead/Onion/Boat Anchor Components: No longer used, maybe need it, build stuff on top of it, layer after layer, "can we even remove it"?
- Spaghetti Wiring/Code and System Coupling: Single modules that route all over the car, another "can we even remove it"?
- Proprietary Diagnostics and Restricted Data Access: Don't have the special tools, you can't repair, or even find out what's wrong.
EVs are very complicated cars anyway. They need maintenance in service as well as ICE cars. Yes, not so often you need to change liquids, but service is required. Also good luck with water/rodent damage to 400v parts.
Optimizing costs while producing a safe, reliable, durable vehicle isn't exactly simple and requires an entire supply chain to be in place, not just a single company. Look at how many auto mfgs there are in the world that turn out terrible cars. EVs dramatically lower the parts count which helps but you still a lot of expertise to make a safe, reliable car.
My grandfather was a mechanic and told me how replacing a dashboard light in some models required removing large portions of the engine to access the socket.
