will they ever be a push back on car technology?

[maxdustington]

Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
Agreed, but at the same time people start relying only on the technology. When I was in insurance, backup cams caused all sorts of problems. People in parking lots would look through the backup cam when backing out of a spot, and fail to see the car coming from the side behind them.

We had a person who caused a three car accident admit they were looking through their backup cam when they backed out of their driveway onto a busy street.

A lot of this is driver training. Drivers should be trained to use the technology as an aid, not something they completely rely on.

You can try to train it out of the drivers, but you will never be able to train it out of people who grew up walking around staring at a smartphone. New cars have brake assist aka apply brakes for you when you are too busy trying to coax nudes out of someone to drive your car.

 

[compratio10_5]

I don't know who "they" are, but if YOU want to push back against unneeded, expensive, unreliable technology, select good used vehicles with the level of sophistication that you desire. Then fix the things that are wrong, and keep it until some manufacturer gets the message. With current environmental and safety legislation, it might be forever. That is why we read BITOG, right?

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
Originally Posted By: PimTac

No need to shout.

Consider this, the first time this “new technology” saves you from hitting another vehicle or object or worst case, a person, it has just paid for itself many times over.


Agreed, but at the same time people start relying only on the technology. When I was in insurance, backup cams caused all sorts of problems. People in parking lots would look through the backup cam when backing out of a spot, and fail to see the car coming from the side behind them.

We had a person who caused a three car accident admit they were looking through their backup cam when they backed out of their driveway onto a busy street.

A lot of this is driver training. Drivers should be trained to use the technology as an aid, not something they completely rely on.




I agree. Technology is a tool and everything should be verified by the Mk-1 eyeballs we were all issued with.

 

[bullwinkle]

Originally Posted By: compratio10_5
I don't know who "they" are, but if YOU want to push back against unneeded, expensive, unreliable technology, select good used vehicles with the level of sophistication that you desire. Then fix the things that are wrong, and keep it until some manufacturer gets the message. With current environmental and safety legislation, it might be forever. That is why we read BITOG, right?
This is the reason I can't give up my old GMC IDI, the extra truck-hand crank windows. mechanical injection, only control electronics on it are the DRAC, TPS, and transmission controller (and voltage regulator in the alternator)-that's it. If I can keep the body from rusting off, it'll likely outlive me and every other (MUCH more expensive) vehicle I own!

 

[maxdustington]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
Originally Posted By: compratio10_5
I don't know who "they" are, but if YOU want to push back against unneeded, expensive, unreliable technology, select good used vehicles with the level of sophistication that you desire. Then fix the things that are wrong, and keep it until some manufacturer gets the message. With current environmental and safety legislation, it might be forever. That is why we read BITOG, right?
This is the reason I can't give up my old GMC IDI, the extra truck-hand crank windows. mechanical injection, only control electronics on it are the DRAC, TPS, and transmission controller (and voltage regulator in the alternator)-that's it. If I can keep the body from rusting off, it'll likely outlive me and every other (MUCH more expensive) vehicle I own!

Mechanical 6.2s are beastly!

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: compratio10_5
I don't know who "they" are, but if YOU want to push back against unneeded, expensive, unreliable technology, select good used vehicles with the level of sophistication that you desire. Then fix the things that are wrong, and keep it until some manufacturer gets the message. With current environmental and safety legislation, it might be forever. That is why we read BITOG, right?


With all due respect, it's not used car buyers that the manufacturers are targeting. It's the people that buy new cars. The new car market is about 1/4 the size of the used car market.

That's like saying that the homeless are protesting the high price of new homes and wait til the home builders get the message.

 

[JeepWJ19]

Since I work in the vehicle industry:

1. Software isn't free.

2. It's harder to perform a software update on embedded modules. Certain specialized tools are needed to update embedded modules. Most of which are proprietary and are not distributed. Since there are oodles of modules at the engineering facility and part distibution warehouses, and tools abundant there, it's both cheaper and faster to send a new module.

3. You would not believe how [censored] a lot of the legacy code is for vehicles (legacy = old software from early 2000s and prior). We need not reminded of the Toyota accelerator issue. Poor software design, not designing to safety critical standards (MISRA spec), poor process management can lead to a lot of issues. Pair that with computing and memory limitations and hacky optimization techniques and now you have a highly complex, coupled, brittle system. Every time I look at old legacy code I cringe.

 

[aquariuscsm]

What should be criminal and illegal are "non-diy serviceable fluids".

 

[Vern_in_IL]

Originally Posted By: PimTac
We should go back to hand cranked engines. How many people will break their arms ?


You crank with your left arm to prevent this.

 

[EA82]

Originally Posted By: maxdustington
I would love to get my hands on a simple car made for rugged third world environments. That's where they are building simple cars, North Americans are wayyyyyyyy too decadent for crank windows and LCD displays.

They still make them and you can find them in north America by the name of Toyota 4runner.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: compratio10_5
I don't know who "they" are, but if YOU want to push back against unneeded, expensive, unreliable technology, select good used vehicles with the level of sophistication that you desire. Then fix the things that are wrong, and keep it until some manufacturer gets the message. With current environmental and safety legislation, it might be forever. That is why we read BITOG, right?


Well put. If you want to push back, there are plenty of old vehicles still out there. Got to put your money where your mouth is.

 

[raytseng]

you are in a catch22.

the reason there wont be pushback is people who buy cars that are getting made will be enjoying them under warranty and not having to care or pay should stuff break for the first 3 or 4 years.

If you're complaining about stuff failing and having to pay for it that implies you're a used car buyer. The 2nd or 3rd owner doesnt get to set the market. It's nonsensical to manufacture extra used cars.

As a used car buyer you factor in the potential for failures, or bad parts into the Price and savings you pay compared to new. If a used car is exactly as good as a new car Why should a used car cost less than a new car?

If you want your used car to be as reliable as a new car, then you need to pay new car pricing, (or at least cpo or other insurance/warranty product)

 

[AVB]

Originally Posted By: jeepman3071
Originally Posted By: PimTac

No need to shout.

Consider this, the first time this “new technology” saves you from hitting another vehicle or object or worst case, a person, it has just paid for itself many times over.


Agreed, but at the same time people start relying only on the technology. When I was in insurance, backup cams caused all sorts of problems. People in parking lots would look through the backup cam when backing out of a spot, and fail to see the car coming from the side behind them.

We had a person who caused a three car accident admit they were looking through their backup cam when they backed out of their driveway onto a busy street.

A lot of this is driver training. Drivers should be trained to use the technology as an aid, not something they completely rely on.
I had to install a back up camera in a Wrangler the other week. It came with a new rear view mirror with a built in display. When I was testing it I realized how ironic it was to look at the mirror for the back up camera when you could just look in the mirror to see what was behind you.

 

[raytseng]

the backup camera often has a better angle especially if you have a long car. it may also pick up a low angle or blind spot that are not visible from the drivers seat or rearmirror

 

[AVB]

I do realize that but this was a cheap aftermarket kit and you can't disable it, so it creates a blind spot if you actually wanted to use the mirror.

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: AVB
I had to install a back up camera in a Wrangler the other week. It came with a new rear view mirror with a built in display. When I was testing it I realized how ironic it was to look at the mirror for the back up camera when you could just look in the mirror to see what was behind you.


Haha that's pretty funny.

 

[NYEngineer]

When I bought my Suburban, the dealer handed me one key and fob. I asked where was the other one? He replied you only get one. Another one will be 180 dollars. I dropped the key on his desk and said call me when you have the other one and left. I was out at the curb getting in my old truck when he ran out and said gimme five minutes. In ten, he produced two keys and two fobs.

 

[brages]

Features I like:

• Power windows
• Power locks
• Keyless entry
• Cruise control
• Bluetooth aux in
• Heated mirrors
• Auto headlights (why not?)

Features I think I would like:

• Adaptive cruise control
• Lane assist
• Rain-sensing wipers
• Auto dimming mirrors

Features I could live without:

• Dual zone climate control
• Automatic climate control
• On-board GPS
• Onstar type service
• Homelink garage openers
• Power seats

Features I don't like:

• Integration of audio system that makes aftermarket head units problematic
• Super expensive keys that can only be programmed by the dealer
• Electronic modules that must be reprogrammed by the dealer to be replaced
• Automatic transmissions

In short, I think "modern" (which to me is circa 2006) cars are great and I like most of the features. The only thing that bugs me is the proprietary programming that makes it more likely that some dumb accessory failure can "total" the value of the car to repair.

 

[Cujet]

There is something to be said for a car that performs very well, without tons of unnecessary electronics. Unfortunately, few cars are made this way. Possibly a base model corvette comes close.

My beloved Miata “R” package with DIY turbo was probably the last generation of truly basic cars. 11 sec 1/4, zero nanny electronics and a very capable track car. Even had an aftermarket stereo that actually sounded great. Such a pleasure to drive.

 

[MCompact]

I tended to avoid a lot of features such as navigation and voice recognition; the CPO M235i I wound up with had those options, but I went with it anyway since it was RWD(even in the Ohio Valley ore and more nitwits think AWD is necessary- even for driving in the rain). Anyway, I've come to appreciate the systems and I especially like being able to send destinations to the car from my phone.
On the other hand, I'd pay extra to delete most all of the Helen Keller "driving aids"- the only "aids" I find useful are the front/rear proximity sensors.