Presumably, if the customer doesn't have the right to repair then the manufacturer would be able to make parts that are exceptionally difficult to repair without specialized knowledge and tools. Or worse, enforce cryptographic locks on any software/firmware to prevent unauthorized changes.

I think right to repair is about ensuring that the customer can make reasonable repairs to the product, and the manufacturer not infringing on their rights when designing the product.

Ah, I see you don't know that companies can "prohibit" chip manufacturers from selling specific chips to third parties [1,2]. Moreover, schematics, repair guidelines, and all sorts of other tools are not available to independent repair shops, which render repairs very difficult, Louis Rossmann has had frequent rants about this on his channel on Youtube [2], and is one of the most prominent advocates of the right to repair.

It follows then that unless right to repair passes/exists, obtaining replacement parts for any devices is exceptionally difficult. There is therefore a stark contrast between 1960s cars and their very limited electronics and current tech that relies on often hundreds of chips and software to operate.

[1] https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/7/3/18761691/right-to-rep...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCFP9P7lIvI