Which auto manufacturers don't want you to have a right to repair? Almost all of them.

Just ran across an article on an automotive industry group, the Alliance For Automotive Innovation, suing the state of Maine over one of the first right-to-repair laws:

https://www.techdirt.com/2025/02/07/automakers-sue-to-kill-maines-hugely-popular-right-to-repair-law/

The list of this group's members can be seen here:

https://www.autosinnovate.org/about/our-members

Members of the AFAI include pretty much all of the automakers plus a lot of electronics megacorps (including Samsung, LG, and Panasonic who collectively make most EV cells), "mobility" companies and even some car component manufacturers like Bosch, Denso, Aisin and Magna. There are only a few auto manufacturers I've been able to think of so far who aren't members, and they're mostly split between the tiniest of the niche manufacturers and the ultra-high-end: Geely/Lotus, TVR or whatever's left of it, Morgan, Bugatti-Rimac, Koenigsegg, Praga, and Tesla (the only mainstream-ish non-member but a trailblazer in repair-unfriendliness oddly enough). There are no agricultural/construction vehicle manufacturers in the group which may also explain why R2R arch-villain John Deere isn't included.

I bought it, I ought to be able to fix it. 

Anti-R2R is such bullE36 M3.

It worked for John Deere, didn't it?

Of course they don't.  A repaired vehicle doesn't get replaced with a new one and selling new cars is all manufacturers care about.

In reply to Ian F (Forum Supporter) :

They probably make more money selling access to service information than selling vehicles.

There are legitimate reasons to limit right to repair. Does that mean I agree that people shouldn't be able to repair their own cars? Not necessarily. But if I were a manufacturer trying to ensure a consistent customer experience, I can say I would love to ensure that only properly trained people are able to declare something "fixed".

sorta like performing repairs on houses. If someone is repairing their own house, I'm not too worried. But if someone is charging money to repair houses for customers, I do think some systems should be in place to make sure they do it at or above a reasonable level of quality and correctness.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

I forget, aren't you a big fan of Tesla?  
 

Who don't even have to comply with OBDII, which does cover powertrain right to repair, since it standardized the powertrain diagnostic system across OEMs selling cars in the US. 
 

Robbie (Forum Supporter) said:

There are legitimate reasons to limit right to repair. Does that mean I agree that people shouldn't be able to repair their own cars? Not necessarily. But if I were a manufacturer trying to ensure a consistent customer experience, I can say I would love to ensure that only properly trained people are able to declare something "fixed".

sorta like performing repairs on houses. If someone is repairing their own house, I'm not too worried. But if someone is charging money to repair houses for customers, I do think some systems should be in place to make sure they do it at or above a reasonable level of quality and correctness.

You have the right to repair your home as long as you meet consistent requirements and submit to regional requirements. Conditional right to repair- similar to cars. 

When there's a whole generation of Subarus that make goofy power, spit fire and smell like a lawnmower but won't throw a CEL. Yeah, I can see why manufacturers don't want you messing with stuff while it's under warranty, then miraculously returning it to stock before it comes in for a "warranty" repair.

In reply to alfadriver :

OBDII is intended to monitor emissions related components. Why would it be on an EV? Sure, some manufacturers have piggybacked on the connector to expand the capabilities, but in terms of required monitoring I think it's all things that can affect emissions.

That said, there are a lot of diagnostic and calibration items available through the onboard screen in a Tesla for free, and a higher level available for a short term subscription fee. The factory workshop manual is available for free and is pretty comprehensive. The parts fiches are also online. I would say that Tesla is more right-to-repair friendly than Mazda is. In fact, I think they might actually be compliant with that portion of the Maine law other than not having an OBDII port.

More details a few posts down: https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/build-projects-and-project-cars/living-with-a-car-from-the-future-tesla-model-3/159522/page42/

There are some systems in an EV that require proper training and some very specialized tools - basically anything to do with the high voltage system. I can understand why you'd only want certified shops working on that. It's a lot easier for someone who doesn't know what they're doing to kill themselves with a big battery than with an ICE.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Tesla won't sell parts to a shop.  If we do service on a Tesla that requires Tesla-specific parts, we have to give the car's owner a shopping list, THEY buy the parts after proving to Tesla that they own the car in question.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Fair enough, I've only looked at it from an owner's viewpoint and I know I can buy a lot of parts.

The Maine law is flawed, so I wouldn't read too much into the fact that the automakers are opposing it. There's a difference between "we don't believe in right to repair" and "this law is terrible".

In reply to alfadriver :

Not really, their cars are...interesting and it's good that they popularized EVs and have tried their own cell designs, but that's about all that I like about them. Their policies around repairs are one of the worst things about them.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Thank you for demonstrating my point. 

In reply to GameboyRMH :

I think you give them more credit than they deserve. But that is just my opinion. From a right to repair standpoint, they are worse than the other OEMs, so thanks for that. 

All the manufactures need to do is whisper to the insurance providers that non-dealer repairs are not safe and maybe they should void a few claims because of it. Then go down the same road as that submersible dude and "Buy a Congressman" and the deed is done.

The insurance and legislative anchors are so that no upstart competitor could make a pitch to self or indy repairs.

This WILL happen within the next 10 years and 95% of the population will be perfectly happy with it.

So if they are saying we can't repair our car. Then does the liability fall back onto the manufacture if something breaks? Say like the newer Audi or BMW, or whatever car without a dipstick. To me they have taken full responsibility of the motor.  They say that the car has a electronic oil level that you can check. The one thing with that is.

It isn't a valid level representation of what's in the motor. If you look in the manufactures hand book with the car( this is what it says) in my Q5. So if it isn't accurate and you run out of oil because it isn't accurate shouldn't that be the responsibility of the manufacture to repair the engine for no cost.

Since you cannot physically inspect the level were does that leave your responsibility at. In my eyes it's wholly on the manufacture as they have decided that the customer is either incapable of changing the oil correctly or they have the notion the customer is the root cause of engine failures from contaminants getting into the engine. 

This is what I was told from BMW when I inquired about it. They said that self service customers whether at a shop or home were the reason for engine contaminates and motor failures.

No I said it was crappy engineering that caused their engine failures not contaminates from oil changes.

Damn I feel the older I get the more I'm turning into a I Can't trust any kind of Corporation period. They make it  hard to be a person with any type of moral compass or integrity when buying their product.  

brad131a4 (Forum Supporter) said:

So if they are saying we can't repair our car. Then does the liability fall back onto the manufacture if something breaks? Say like the newer Audi or BMW, or whatever car without a dipstick.

Do you know why they don't have a dipstick?  It's not a conspiracy to make working on your car harder, and it's not just the German love of "why use one part when three will do?".  It's because dispstick seals fail and over 100K miles that contributes enough to the evaporative emissions show up against government-mandated limits.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

True story: We had a Jetta TDI in a couple months ago that wouldn't pass its monitors.  Dealership wanted to replace basically everything in the exhaust train.  The O rings on the dipstick were torn, and this represented enough of a vacuum leak that it would set EGR flow codes.

Working in the collision repair industry as I do, every single one of us that has to handle Tesla claims hates them. Tesla makes it extremely difficult to get their cars repaired, and the cost of doing so is usually 2-3 times what it costs for a 'normal' car. And I'm talking about just doing regular body repairs, not anything to do with the electrical systems.

Another trend I've noticed is all the manufacturers universally discontinuing key parts on vehicles that we wouldn't consider old. Okay, it sucks I can't get airbag sensors for a 2006 Escalade, but that's an old vehicle. But why can't I even get headlights for a 2016 car? We're seeing this across most all the brands, domestic and foreign. They clearly don't want us fixing out of warranty vehicles; they just want people to buy new ones. But people with slightly older cars probably can't afford new vehicles. And so a death spiral begins.

In reply to ddavidv :

From one perspective, if a headlight assembly is $1000, how many do you pay taxes on to stock in inventory after your legal requirement to replace them is over?

I used to have a roommate who worked for a lighting subcontractor.  Among other things, they made a lot of components for Chrysler cloud cars.  They would make enough to meet their contract, and then when the contract was fulfilled they'd scrap the tooling that couldn't be repurposed for another product.  With that in mind, I can understand why a car manufacturer can't just go back five years after the fact and say "hey, whip me up another 300 headlights."  That would involve all the retooling that was needed to make the first batch of 50,000.

This is probably a large part of why the big automakers are investing in additive manufacturing technologies.  Data on a drive takes up a lot less space than molds and tooling.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

Pretty sure that "legal requirement to stock spares for 10 years" is a myth. Can't find an actual "LAW" that states such.

In reply to NOHOME :

I'm 100% sure it's a myth, since some manufacturers didn't stock spares at all.

But they do have a requirement to repair cars under warranty, or buy the car back if they can't.  That's the bit I'm alluding to.

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

Do you know why they don't have a dipstick?  It's not a conspiracy to make working on your car harder, and it's not just the German love of "why use one part when three will do?".  It's because dispstick seals fail and over 100K miles that contributes enough to the evaporative emissions show up against government-mandated limits.

Interesting.  I always assumed it was to reduce parts count and have one less potential leak.  My '19 VW has a dipstick.  Is VW just buying better o-rings?

ddavidv said:

Working in the collision repair industry as I do, every single one of us that has to handle Tesla claims hates them. Tesla makes it extremely difficult to get their cars repaired, and the cost of doing so is usually 2-3 times what it costs for a 'normal' car. And I'm talking about just doing regular body repairs, not anything to do with the electrical systems.

Another trend I've noticed is all the manufacturers universally discontinuing key parts on vehicles that we wouldn't consider old. Okay, it sucks I can't get airbag sensors for a 2006 Escalade, but that's an old vehicle. But why can't I even get headlights for a 2016 car? We're seeing this across most all the brands, domestic and foreign. They clearly don't want us fixing out of warranty vehicles; they just want people to buy new ones. But people with slightly older cars probably can't afford new vehicles. And so a death spiral begins.

You also know that the manufacturers are afraid of liability.  People in here are the 1%.  The vast majority of people don't even know how to check air pressure in a tire, let alone check or change oil.  Years ago you could change the belt of an air cooled Beetle on the side of the road using your SWMBO bra strap.  Open the hood on a new Porsche.  Should shade tree Billy "fix" the car?  When he gets himself killed or kills someone else, guess who's going to get sued?  Even worse, what if shade tree Billy then sells the car to your kid?  While I understand the views of people here, there's a reason behind the madness, and it's "us" (us being society in general).