Most of the 10 except #8 have very limited benefit, a Purdue University research team that studied five years of motor vehicle accidents in Washington State concludes antilock brakes and airbags don’t minimize accidents or injuries because those systems may encourage more aggressive driving. I?m willing to bet you?ll see the same thing with traction control it?ll just encourage people to take bigger risks because the car will save them.
Each ?improvement? they make the driver less responsible because the car will take care of it.
Think about this who would drive more carefully, a driver with all ?improvements? or a driver driving a car with a sharp spike sticking out of the steering wheel two inches from their chest?
I hear what you say about the cost but…once the computer gets installed, electronic cruise, abs, traction control etc. cost fewer than $100 each to add on by the manufacturer. Compare the hardware on a mechanical cruise, my earlier SAAB and MB mechanical fuel injection, points and condenser etc. These parts are miniscule in price when electronic is compared to mechanical. Manufacturers have reached a point where even electric windows cost less and have fewer moving parts than mechanical for most cars.
The point is, with few exceptions, cars are infinitely safer, cheaper and more reliable with electronics.
When the electric motor takes over, the parts industry is in for a huge awakening. The BS is that a Volt could have a small 3 cyl. diesel running at a constant speed. driving a generator and a traction motor and get a steady 100 mpg. The automotive parts industry isn’t ready for it yet.
Remember they give away dvd players and satellite dish receivers with the computing power equal or exceeding that in some compact cars for there entire function.
I have finally come to the conclusion that this entire discussion about electronic gizmos driving up cost and reliability down is completely w/o merit…my very humble, contrite but sincere opinion !
Opinions vary. Mandated technology takes away individual choice. I must admit that Henry Ford was wrong when he said that the Model T was the ultimate in automotive technology but I will also say that we can’t throw money at every perceived evolutionary breakthrough in technology. I will do my best to stick with the proven technology, letting others do the proving.
No it wouldn't, and it's a bad idea. 1) People ALREADY pay $1000s extra for decent-performing cars, it would be no deterrent whatsoever. 2) That is a LOW standard. 3) This blanket "too much horsepower" or "too much acceleration" thing is not sensible, some people tow, some people load down their cars, some people live at high altitudes, all of which sap performance out of a vehicle that would obviously be too fast for you. 4) I see FAR more trouble here with people that wheeze up some onramp and cut into 70MPH traffic at like 45MPH (*failing* to yield at the yield sign) than I do with people gunning er' up to speed.
Just to be ornery, I'm going to say I think cars that go 0-60 in MORE than 10 seconds should be taxed! (Actually I don't, I'm a libertarian, taxing things like that is wrong.)
Cars without these electronics DO sell well that perform as well, are as safe, and more reliable than ones with the equipment. The problem is, these SUVS *some* people insist on buying are inherently poor in handling, poor braking (which they try to cover up by making heavily boosted brakes --- which then lock easily), easily flipped, and easy to lose directional control. So, instead of making some handling standards, "they" are pushing through extra equipment that will NEVER be useful on a lot of cars that are actually designed to have some kind of handling.
I agree with most of the posters here about safety-nannyism run amok.
Here’s one: 5-point belts in place of air bags. Cheaper, lighter, less prone to failure to work when needed (and working when not needed), and will do a better job of protecting everybody who cares to be protected.
Also, traction control is a crutch for those who never learned how to drive on snow/dirt. (Take the beater out to the sticks and use the e-brake for a few hours. You’ll be dustier, happier, and you’ll have learned a thing or two about driving!)
I say to everyone who says that the government is overstepping its bounds, to everyone who says these things cost too much and do to little, to everyone who says cars were safer when they didn’t have electronics, and to anyone who thinks they can drive better without the safety systems available today: "Go back in your hole, and live out your days cranky and ignorant without the rest of us.
On the government overstep: The whole reason we NEED government intervention is because society is largely resistant to change. Don’t believe me? Take a look at NASCAR. Dale Earnhardt, remember him, and the Hans device he led the group opposing? You may remember that safety device that prevents too much forward movement of the head in a crash. He opposed it because he could “drive better without it” and we may remember that in 2003, he faceplanted a wall and died from a broken neck due to severe whiplash. The governing body of the races then mandated the device with uproarious applause from everyone, they should have done it sooner, but they didn’t.
On cost: It is a commonly known fact that with increased use, advances in technology, and general flooding of the market with a given product or feature, price will drop. I remember getting my first DVD player at Circuit City for what seemed like a steal for such amazing technology. I could have a movie on something the size of the 5?" floppy disk my old 286 PC used. To top that off, such an amazing thing was only $500 for the player, and $30 for movies! Now, two years ago, the last DVD player I bought cost me less than the first DVD I bought. This argument too, holds no salt. Sorry, try again.
On your driving ability: This may not be you, but maybe it is, and it serves as an example. In the mid 1970’s, my father had a friend. We’ll call him Joe for purposes of this discussion. Joe liked grain alcohol, a lot of grain alcohol. Joe also liked to drive. He thought he was a fantastic driver. He thought a pint of Everclear was not enough to make him a bad driver. So he’s driving home one night, in a rural area… We’ll say near Bimidji, for purposes of this discussion, and he drives his car into a ditch near a farmhouse. Joe is also good at hot wiring cars. He goes over to the farmhouse, and he steals a car, comes out of the long driveway, and runs into a ditch, as well as the back of his car. So, he goes back, and he gets another car, and again, you guessed it, hits the first stolen car. THEN he goes back to the farm a third time, and tries to steal a tractor. By this point, the farmer is outside holding a gun to his head. But this would have NEVER happened with a new car today. Why? Because new cars have an RFID transponder in the key with a code that’s got somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 billion possible permutations, and if the car doesn’t detect an assigned code, it’s not going to start. It can be over-ridden by a professional with some time to kill, but not in the time it took Joe to wreck three cars and nearly get his head blown off with a 10 gauge.
On living in a hole: This really isn’t such a bad option when you come right down to it. If it’s dug out well and deep enough, there are a lot of benefits. Geothermal climate control for one; The dirt at good depths below the surface maintains relatively constant temperature. Ready supply of food; It’s easy to build a Burmese Tiger Pit in your new home. Just be sure it’s marked well enough to be visible to your human guests, and use an electronic fence to keep pets out… S*#%! That’s technology. That’ll skyrocket the cost. Guess Fido is gonna be steak tonight. Early Warning; Be the first to know a new volcano is forming in your neighborhood when the house suddenly warms a few hundred degrees. Low maintenance; Dirt is free and easy to work with. Fitness; That’s a hell of a workout, digging your new home. Feeling a bit flabby? Maybe it’s time to add a guest suite, or that in-law apartment for Phyllis. If you don’t like her, just don’t warn of the pit. Then you can turn it into a man-cave in your cave. Safety; Nobody who’s become overly brash and aggressive from new safety standards is going to leave the road on purpose with that shiny new 4WD truck. Build behind some big trees to act as a natural guard rail. Trees protect better than technology ever could, anyway, and a good privacy fence technology will make the price of this home skyrocket. I could go on and on, but with all the features you get, you’re probably hopping in your screaming metal deathtrap and heading to the home depot to stock up on shovels and propane lanterns already. Do let me know how this goes once technology has spread the internet to your neck of the woods!
Catalina, you do believe in basic economic theory, right? That if safety is a desired good, it should be “bought” as cheaply as possible: most live saved/$1mil spent.
Well then, note that features 1,2,3,7 are all compensatory devices for poor driving skills/habits. Given that the cost of these features is recurring with every car bought, wouldn’t it be more cost-effective to upgrade “the nut behind the wheel?”
As for the “ideologic” factor: I still remember driving a car with those awful “automatic” seat belts. As a stopgap measure before mandatory ABS, a car could be fitted with such a belt. These belts were LESS effective and LESS safe than the standard 3-point, but the gov’t decided (for me, TYVM) that I “can’t be trusted” to operate a seatbelt.
I ran into the same issue when tuning up a chainsaw: it needed a carb adjustment, but first I had to drill out the silly EPA “covers” over the jet adjustments. When a gov’t demonstrates such a shockingly low opinion of its own citizenry, something’s wrong.
I call BS on this one. I'm not dissing having a computer compared to mechanical hardware. BUT, ABS: 4 wheel speed sensors (on my car over $80 apiece, or $320 for 4 -- well, $240 to be fair, there's no vehicle speed sensor so I'd need *one* of them -- but, they're integrated to the wheel hubs, so when I had to replace my front ones it was like $1000 to replace the pair, since the hubs had to be replaced in their entirety...). An ABS master cylinder is like $1000, versus about $100 for a conventional brake master cylinder. Traction control is basically a freebie *IF* you already have the wheel sensors. Stability control adds pitch and roll sensors, but the software is expensive (probably due to liability). The radar sensors for the "no following too close" stuff is quite expensive.
Anyway, assuming 10 addons at $100 apiece (which again I think is dubious), that still is $1000 added to the price of the car, not much for some $30,000 car, but this adds a lot for someone just trying to get a basic $10,000 car. But in reality if you added everything on the list it'd probably add closer to $3,000 to the car cost.
I was especially happy to see the Safe Distance Technologies as #2 on the list. The number of pile ups on the highway could be greatly reduced with this idea - and I believe it will be someday. Most people don’t realize how dangerous it is to follow closely at 70 mph. At that speed you need reflexes beyond human capability if you follow to close.
P.S It would also be great if the aggressive tailgaters would get a loud buzz in their car every time they ride up on your bumper.
Improving driver skills is a state responsibility, while car design safety is mostly federal.
Cars don’t vote and the executives of car companies have far less influence than all those incompetent drivers, most of whom have the vote.
In countries with federal driving standards, such as the UK, Germany, Holland and others, driving tests are really tough, and in England it is usual to fail several times before you finally pass! Those drivers are far more skilled in both the operation as well as the care of cars.
European countries believe that cars cannot be made idiot-proof, but they do legislate many safety items to ADD to the overall safety, not REPLACE the driver’s judgement.
A virtual ‘No Cost’ safety addition would be to link the headlights to the windshield wipers.
Many (most?) states REQUIRE the lights to be on when the wipers are going but MANY bozos refuse to do this.
What is the downside to electrically linking these features? A simple relay would do it.
back in the day, my folks bought life insurance for us kids, and then let us get in all kinds of scrapes. But on the other hand there were 6 of us, and if one got killed it was not such a big deal I guess. somehow or other we all made it into old age without all the safety equipment that is standard now or will be tomorrow.
One very desirable safety feature is missing from the list, a cell phone jammer that would prevent all operation of such devices unless the car is parked.
I’d like a laser cannon that scorches the paint on the rear of a car that cuts in, a half car length in front of me on the highway… and one in the back for tailgaters. OK, so a laser cannon might be excessive. How about an EMP cannon to fry the electronics in the jerks car?
The safety tax idea is interesting, but it shouldn’t be based on arbitrary factors like torque and horsepower, or even vehicle weight. A more scientific approach, i.e. based on evidence, is to “tax” the vehicle based on its safety track record. Oh yeah, that’s exactly what insurance companies do when pricing premiums. So if all states require car insurance, there’s no need for the safety tax.