Carice Tc2 – a Non-Digital Electric Car
Key topics
The Carice TC2 is a non-digital electric car that has garnered attention for its unique design and minimalist approach, sparking discussions about the role of technology in vehicles and the appeal of analog driving experiences.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
26m
Peak period
86
0-6h
Avg / period
20
Based on 160 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Nov 5, 2025 at 9:25 AM EST
about 2 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Nov 5, 2025 at 9:52 AM EST
26m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
86 comments in 0-6h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Nov 7, 2025 at 11:30 PM EST
about 2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
It has a standard EV charge port, so it's definitely got computers in it somewhere to negotiate charging at a minimum.
I think OP meant there were no screens in the sparse cockpit, just some analog gauges.
And yeah electric cars need a battery management computer, a charge controller, and a motor controller at least.
So much of "old school" auto maintenance was having a relatively standardized size/fit for similar components.
I have an unusual EV made by a relatively small company of which only a handful got to private customers, so if I want to fix something, I have to reverse-engineer it first. Most of the time, I will find out that the components used in my vehicle were also used in other cars.
Regarding the difference between EVs and ICEVs, only the powertrain components are relevant and between those, some are more exchangeable and some are less so.
As with ICEVs, most manufacturers have "platforms" that are shared between multiple makes/models. Having shared components with other vehicles of the same platform is the rule rather than the exception.
In the cars I have seen, the whole battery often only fits that specific model, sometimes also for other cars within the same platform. The modules that make up the battery are often exchangeable with other cars made by the same company/group. The cells that make up the modules are almost always generic, but very hard to replace. The battery management system is usually specific to the battery.
I don't know about the current state, but for early EVs the motor and inverter (which converts battery DC to AC for the motor) were often made by external suppliers. Especially EV variants of otherwise ICE-based vehicles like the Fiat e500, VW Golf/Jetta, and some french cars all use the same motor and inverter made by Bosch. If an inverter is connected to a different type of motor, it needs to be tuned for it which is not trivial.
Onboard Chargers (OBCs), that convert AC line voltage from AC chargers to battery voltage are often quite generic and developed and manufactured by suppliers. They are almost always interchangeable within the same platform, but I haven't yet seen completely unrelated OEMs use the same OBC. The same applies to fast charging communications equipment, which is often integrated into the OBC.
DC/DC converters (the alternator equivalent) are rarely separate components anymore and often integrated into either the OBC or the inverter.
Voltage-wise, all these components are often surprisingly flexible and can be used with much lower voltages than their maximum rated voltage.
Other components like contactors and connectors are very generic and I haven't yet seen one that only one OEM would use. There are likely exceptions to this. Often, the base components like the OBC or the inverter are almost identical, only using other (also generic) connectors.
While technically all these components could be replaced in the "old school" style, almost all of them require either coding the components to the specific vehicle, or flashing an OEM-specific firmware. While the former is only doable with OEM-specific software (that is far too expensive for both indiviuals and most independent workshops), I haven't yet seen any example of the latter, at least not for swapping components between unrelated platforms.
As of now, there are almost no "official" aftermarket replacements for these major components. I don't know of any major supplier that will directly sell parts in small quantities and OEMs likely won't sell you as an individual replacement parts either. For DIY repairs, finding used parts from wrecked cars and coding them with cracked software or having it done in an authorized workshop (if even possible) often seems to be the only option so far. Also, everyone will discourage you from working on your EV for "electrical safety" reasons (actually, it's more profitable if they do the work). Working on an EV is quite safe, if done right (which is not hard).
Most of these limitations do not only apply to EVs, but to almost all modern cars. Often, the necessary work of reverse-engineering and cracking software has already been done for ICEVs for tuning purposes.
A stupid title.
I agree that a PWM signal is not really a digital signal, but it's kind of on the edge—for example, https://tinyurl.com/25y54mph is a simulation I designed of a completely analog PWM generator (a simulated LM324 op-amp, five transistors, 13 resistors, and a couple of caps), and several vendors offer better-designed versions of the same thing on an IC, but you can also get a perfectly adequate PWM signal out of a digital GPIO pin, and the PWM peripherals commonly included in microcontrollers are entirely digital.
For USB sure.... I'm pretty sure this doesn't charge over USB.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_J1772#Signaling
I can't fathom why we can't have a modern car with analog displays and switches in the cockpit.
I own a 25 years old car which only has a digital radio (removeable!) and that's it, perfectly enough.
My 34-year old base spec Chevrolet has digital controls for timing advance, fuel trim, and integrated Engine and Transmission Control Units. But my dash has some analog components ( fuel level is variable voltage instead of PWM ). The mechanics would all say that my truck is very simple, and "old school"
The Lay use of 'analog' is far removed from function. As long as there isn't a screen, it isn't seen to be digital. I studied photography in college and loved shooting film. I have a processing machine that is based on a 6502. When people would talk about non-digital things as analog it would bug me (One is chemical, and one is a computer).
However, those ECUs are more closely related to embedded programming than digital dial outs and SIM Card loaded cars with a internal network canbus these days. Analog / Digital Inputs and outputs as a closed loop controller.
WP says, "In the early 1970s, the Japanese electronics industry began producing integrated circuits and microcontrollers used for controlling engines.[6] The Ford EEC (Electronic Engine Control) system, which used the Toshiba TLCS-12 microprocessor, entered mass production in 1975.[7]" Reference [6] says, "First half of 1970s: Japan starts developing ICs for automobiles ahead of the U.S.: Development of ICs for automobiles started with analog ICs for in-car entertainment, and was followed by 4-bit microcontrollers and other digital ICs for use with the wipers, electronic locks, and dashboard, and then by microcontrollers with 8-bit and wider bits for engine control."
But I don't know any more details. Was Toyota controlling its windshield wipers with a 4004 in 01974? Was Nissan controlling a speedometer with an RCA 1801 in 01973?
Anyway, if we date it from 01975, then 01995 would be year #21.
Figure 5yr between "developing" and "fielding". And if you ignore the Plymouth Prowler exercises in putting cutting edge tech into low volume models to get practice doing so it adds another few years depending on what the item is and how bad the OEM wants it in the field.
In any case, by the 1990s these are computers comparable in complexity to the bare minimum it takes to run an oven from 2010 that has a digital timer and some automatic functions. They read inputs and implement simple if-then and timer logic. They don't do any communicating with other systems, and if they do they pretend to be a simple sensor or actuator (depending on which end of the connection they're on). The closest thing you're gonna get to a "bus" is a shared ground or a shared reference voltage circuit.
Take for example a hypothetical 1995ish Ford (EEC-IV, which was pretty advanced for its time) that combines every possible module you can have across the whole lineup. At best you're gonna get is five computers. ABS module reads vehicle speed (VR sensor) and does it's thing. It then sends out approximately the same voltage/frequency signal it got in to the transmission controller or ECU which does the same thing and sends the signal to the digital odometer. The ECU directs the ignition module, but the ignition module isn't really a computer, it's a bunch of solid state circuitry that implements essentially one function which is turning on and off high current in response to a low current signal but with some automatic loops in there (it's broken out from the ECU for cost reasons, on some models it's integrated). You also have a body control module but once again, just simple dumb logic that people the world over implement with analog controls every day, "if engine off then door close wait 30sec before headlights off"
At no point is there bidirectional communication nor is there any sort of bus anywhere. When there is complex feedback where A tells B to do something and then cares about the result, it's architected such that B isn't implementing any logic, it's pretending to be a sensor and an actuator, taking a "do things" signal and returning a "I did things" signal (voltage change usually).
These are not in any way comparable to a modern car where everything shits messages onto various buses and things actually listen for messages, ignore what they don't need, output messages when they've done things, etc, etc.
The only people using CAN in the 90s were Ze Germans, because they're who invented it.
>Was Toyota controlling its windshield wipers with a 4004 in 01974? Was Nissan controlling a speedometer with an RCA 1801 in 01973?
No. Toyota was using analog circuitry for that then and Nissan kept a physical cable at least into the 90s.
Wake me up when a manufacturer finally commits to making an EV that everyone can afford and isn't a cloud-connected privacy nightmare.
> Prices for a TC2 start at €44.500 excluding taxes (€53.854 including 21% btw/Dutch tax).
It can lead to conflicts of interest (see also: https://www.law.com/delbizcourt/2025/10/29/attorney-for-amaz...) but that's a far cry from significant data sharing.
I haven't heard specifically about connectedness otherwise, but I highly doubt there is a hidden SIM card in there somewhere.
If you can't buy one, blame your government:
https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-reviews/2026-byd-atto-1-rev...
The Cerice is lovely but if you have a high-speed crash with another car in it you're in big trouble.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45741357
Talk to your kids about the dangers of VPNs before it's too late.
So basically be suspicious of every single "free" or suspiciously cheap VPN. Go with known brands that come recommended by mulitple people, especially from people "in the know".
Though PirateSoftware (a person) has a good bit on why he doesn't advertise for VPNs on his channel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bright_Data
What, you think they're leaving that money sitting on the table?
It's another thing to claim all of them are obviously corrupt.
If that is not your demographic, they might have geo-located your IP and blocked you based on the median income of your area. (Only half joking.)
Why are you guys ignoring that part of the equation and only talking about $44k as though it's the same as the $44k everyone else spends on that Hyundai that they actually need to be useful and haul kids and tools and furniture around a country that's bigger than the Netherlands all day every day like a mule?
Those are two entirely different $44k.
Pretty sure I can get groceries in that thing, but that isn't the point.
Why are you guys ignoring that part of the equation...
Because that wasn't the question at hand. I was responding to the idea that to buy this thing one must have a country club membership and two Ferraris in the garage already. I'm just saying that this is wrong, and plenty of "ordinary" people would drop that on a weekend toy. But if you're poor, yes, this is not the car for you.
Not a hell of a lot more than say a Fiat 500E convertible, and quite a bit cooler.
It actually looks rather more expensive than it is - it's about 44,000EUR putting it at the same sort of money as a Focus ST. Expensive toy, but not horribly so.
Unsure what it's based on, probably (like the Figaro) some fairly inexpensive existing car's subframes.
Okay, nobody is putting in a placebo sim, but in software, we DO have placebo controls. If you flip a switch saying "don't track me", that usually means "track me slightly less". If you delete something, that doesn't mean delete it - that means keep it, but say it's deleted.
If you go through the Windows install, for instance, even if you flip off all the stuff it will tell you "we're still going to do this, just in less circumstances".
What are those circumstances? I don't know. I'm not even sure Microsoft knows.
It is everyone's information that they value, not that one guy who goes to the trouble of killing the radio.
Given that, I hardly think that 'decoy sims' are much of a stretch.
The only reason a decoy sim is going a bit far to believe, is because it wouldn't actually work. It wouldn't actually fool anyone and would just look bad when the first reviewer pointed it out a year before the car is even available for sale. If it weren't for that, we already have countless example proofs that a company will do literally anything if it will work merely 1% more than whatever it costs. Including car makers obfuscating and even flat out lying about their various connections.
What do they get out of it? data & control, same as ever.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45824658
Cars should be independent, local only devices. Having cloud dependencies is just reckless and stupid.
You can filter for all the frequencies that show up regularly, then you differentiate by signal strength - group occurrences of the same frequency into similar dB buckets, then correlate the changes based on new fixed positions within the car, and run some calculations on changes in signal strength to obtain a dB to distance calculation. The strength to distance calculation can be estimated by making some assumptions about the type of radio you're looking for - a simple cellular module is going to be different than a WiFi repeater, or a wireless fob, or a bluetooth tracker.
From the fixed points within your car, you can tie one end of a piece of yarn to where the sensor was affixed, and the length of the yarn should correlate to your dB to distance estimate for that position, and with 2-3 or even 4-5 threads you'd be able to group their loose ends together to get a rough physical indication of exactly where the radio transmission is coming from.
The grouping won't be exact, but it'll literally point in the right direction, and if the threads are too long, or pointing to something buried in the chassis or whatnot, then you can reduce the lengths of your yarns by the same percentage of reduction and they'll be "pointing" at wherever the radio source is.
You're going to get a general location, like "under the dashboard" or "in the glovebox" or "somewhere under the spare in the trunk", not a millimeter precise location. You could probably vibecode a way of processing the data in a browser, and use a bunch of splats and AI modeling of your car and so forth to get a very precise and useful pinpoint of a device with a fancy UI, but you can just use a spreadsheet and text files of logged signal records, the process isn't super difficult.
(one of those things I've seen very little discussion of, the WP page correctly points out that this mandates a mobile-station in every car; although it does not precisely mandate that it be always-on, in practice it will be in order to manage messaging promptly)
In the past they handled the call without that information, but after an incident in 2013 the court ruled that the requirements also must be fulfilled without a SIM (0).
So some carriers (notably all German ones) stopped accepting Emergency calls without SIM, first to not be in violation of the law but nowadays apparently due to "misuse" (?) (1).
(0) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...
(1) https://www.heise.de/en/background/112-Emergency-Call-Day-No...
I have no words that would not end up in things that might necessity calling 112...
I no longer receive updates to the infotainment system and I can't unlock the doors with my phone, but I also don't have the dealer emailing me service ads with my exact current mileage and tire pressure.
Cameras reading numbers plates at multiple locations -including speed! - is one thing.
Noting your : location, speed, direction in subsecond increments, your climate control preferences, what songs/eBook you are listening to, your face imagery (thanks sleep alert camera) and listening to your conversations... this is a whole other level of possible privacy invasion.
Is all of the above being tracked? I could imagine much of that is unwieldy, or not that useful, data. But how can you know whether a company is taking this data or not without first being suspicious? And if you are suspicious at this level, then what could a company say to convince you they are above board, and only using your data to your benefit.
I wonder if, now that China has a developed supply ecosystem, it's becoming possible to build a car with lots of commodity/white-label parts. And I wonder if, as the quality of this supply chain improves, that means we'll start to see more small players emerge?
(Pure speculation)
I respect your choice, but do you walk the walk - don't carry a phone, no bluetooth devices, built your own router, run no javascript on your browser, etc, etc, etc.
My newer EV that came with LTE connectivity will also fully work without network connectivity, except for the apps and remote updates. You can turn off the built-in cell connectivity via the head unit menus, and if you're especially paranoid, you can pull the fuse on the modem (and I've done it!). When it doesn't have a network connection it too operates just like a normal car.
There's a lot of fear around EVs being "software on wheels" based on a few manufacturers making non-remote features that depend on remote connectivity and botching updates or requiring subscriptions, and I agree that all is super problematic both from a privacy perspective and point-of-failure reason. But there's absolutely nothing intrinsic to the core design of EVs that demands that they're connected to the network.
I really don't get this insane need to track everything. The computers in cars should be pull data, never push.
> Prices for a TC2 start at €44.500 excluding taxes (€53.854 including 21% btw/Dutch tax)
Street legal in Europe but not the US, up to 300km range.
- 31.5kWh
- 630kg
- 300km (186mi) range
This review explains the concept behind the car in more detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aTzuUrdyIc
You can drive from just about any point in the Netherlands to any other in less than 300km.
For a weekend toy in the densely populated parts of Europe the range is fine.
Oh that reminds me, I should go check my lottery ticket.
Except for one thing: the brushed metal dashboard. I can imagine how terribly it's going to reflect the sun from behind when the roof is folded. I hope they can offer a tasteful matte dark version.
As of the lack of bells and whistles, the dashboard seems to be prepared for being customized. I suppose it's not a cheap car, so a customization job is not going to ruin the buyer's finances. I can imagine that a custom radio with protected but visible vacuum tubes could appeal to some buyers.
I'm amused to see that so many cybertrucks have been powder coated or wrapped in vinyl.
There are car enthusiasts and Cubertruck owners. There is little overlap between these two sets.
Apparently owners often want a bit more manicured looks.
They both wrap their vehicles or get custom paintjobs. How can they be differentiated by vehicle appearance alone?
I guess the main appeal is "paint protection". Seems redundant to me, but people do like to apply screen protectors to their phones, which is another thing I don't fully comprehend so you know...
> Prices for a TC2 start at €44.500 excluding taxes (€53.854 including 21% btw/Dutch tax).
> The Carice TC2 complies with the European regulations and can therefore be driven in all EU countries and countries that adopt those regulations, like Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Monaco and Norway.
I know that's just me, but still, it bothers me and I'll likely cancel my pre-order.
There's a stink around everything he touches that is repugnant to me.
Short of getting some sub-BYD CDM manufacturer to compete directly, there's not much scope out there to cut much further than that for an acceptable 2+2 QOL car in 2025. Mainly I can see the likes of Dacia cutting corners in the interior to crew-cab standard and releasing a low-tide mark EV like their proposed 'Hipster'.
Dacia has stated that the target price for the entry-level Hipster is planned at around €12-15k - undercutting Dacia's most affordable electric model, the Spring, with an entry RRP of around €18,000 euros.
https://www.carscoops.com/2025/10/dacia-hipster-previews-dir...
46 more comments available on Hacker News