is the tech in autos a good idea?

Daytime running lights are not to make your car more visible in broad daylight. It's the boundary conditions, where many people will not use headlights*, that they make a difference. I'm talking dawn/dusk, odd shadow conditions, cloudy/rainy days. DRL laws started in Scandinavian countries, and originally only applied in wintertime.

I've never really understood why some have a vehement opposition to DRL.. but I guess I also don't understand opposition to seat belts, helmets, etc..

* What's up with those drivers who seem to be playing a game of "how dark can it get before I have to turn the headlights on?"

 

Good points. Imagine flying the new airliners that are all fly-by-wire.

Although it would be a hassle, they should also require road tests when renewing licenses and a refresher written test every other renewal.

 

Some advances are good - others no so good.

Hi-tech allows engines half the size to do what engines did 30 years ago...anti-lock brakes, airbags, easy diagnostics.

Standard transmissions in all non HSD hybrids would be the best thing for fuel economy and reduce distracted driving.

 

Of course, the OP indicates that people today pay attention to the road and know how to drive. The number of times each week i get cut off, tailgated, avoid people who can't stay in their lane, or have to deal with people going 40 merging into 65 MPH traffic is staggering.

Why rail against technologies designed to make driving safer for everyone? Most of the cars on the road currently don't have adaptive cruise control or lane change avoidance. Those are relatively new technologies... And without them I see people doing stupid stuff that puts my life in danger. With them, those same people would still do stupid stuff, but it makes things safer for me, which is really what matters.

 

I'm onboard with priuscritter that drivers should be focused and not need tech to be safe.

On a related topic, passive auto safety is mature - we need to concentrate on getting reckless and DUI drivers off the road....I see time and time again a serial drunk finally kills someone.

 

The problem with trying that, Prisucritter, is that society, as a whole, sees driving as a right, not a privilege. We've been taught from birth that everyone has a car and uses it every day. It's expected in our society that kids get their learners permit and license as soon as they are capable - waiting so much as a month earns you ridicule amongst your peers. Further, a vast majority of people won't see any reason for additional training in order to do something they do every day - after all, no one gets in their car thinking "I know I'm an unsafe driver, but to hell with it." A vast majority think they drive perfectly safely.

So, if you tried to implement some sort of system to take the bad drivers off the road (probably 25% of the population, based on personal experience) and increase mandatory educational requirements for the rest, you'd have outrage from the population as a whole. Trying to impose these new requirements on people who have spent decades driving without a problem just won't be accepted.

 

At least 33,000 Americans die on the roads annually - 2/3 of them reckless, drunk, or on drugs. That's 10x the war causalities in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Why is this acceptable?

 

I first saw DRLs used on motorcycles, which people apparently have trouble seeing most times of the day, sunny or not. Improved visibility equals improved safety. So if they work for motorcycles, why not for cars? There are plenty of lighting and weather conditions, not involving darkness, where headlights increase safety.

For an alert, skilled driver, I agree; not necessary. For the other 99% who might be talking or texting or falling asleep or just plain not paying attention, it's another safety feature.

Where do you draw the line here? Power steering, power brakes, climate control, starter motors instead of hand cranks, one of those little thingies on the steering column that advances the timing? You wouldn't really prefer a Model T over a Prius, would you?

And I think we'd all be safer, more courteous drivers if we learned the rules of the road as pedestrians and cyclists first, then graduated to a car.

 

If you must take away always on headlights, (I turned mine on at the dealership, so far I have not turned them off) at least quit making cars the same color as the road.
Sandy Beach, Winter Gray, Cocoa Bean, Cypress Pearl, Blizzard White; what were they thinking?

 

But don't power windows affect the way we drive just as much as those other items? Without power windows, the driver has to manually crank the window, which (in most cars i've been in) is positioned to low too allow easy cranking from a full upright position. So the driver hunches over to crank, taking his eyes off the road and putting himself in a position where he can't react to changing conditions quickly.

The power window, in addition to being a convenience, allows for safer operation of the windows while operating the vehicle. In this case, you're relying on the car to perform an action for you so you can focus your attention elsewhere.

 

In the early 90's, a person I knew in Utah who restored T's and A's - he did NOT turn them into hot rods, he restored them to factory original - taught me how to start and drive a T.

Since I'm very strong, I had no problems whatsoever firing her up. Driving was another matter: the left pedal is sometimes the clutch, the middle pedal is Reverse, and the right pedal is the brake

Remember, the throttle is on the steering column

The floor shifter is used to select either neutral or second

So, once fired up, right foot on brake, left foot on clutch, shove shifter forward, release brake, and away you go in first. You KEEP the clutch pedal depressed to keep her in first. Release the clutch pedal and you're in second and really moving along

Backing up is almost impossible the first time

But once you get the hang of it, you really tend to appreciate the outright simplicity of such a machine. It was designed to work in an environment where almost 100% of roads back then were gravel, if you were lucky.

We actually did take my "driver test" on a rarely used BLM road, and I was surprised at how that thing soaks up bumps and washboardy roads. I was encouraged to drive over obstacles that would have ripped the oil pan off a modern car.

Great fun. But not my idea of a daily driver

 

*They have Gen II Prius with HID headlamps. Each strike of the lamps is another step closer to an expensive replacement.

Tom

 

I think learning to drive an original Model T is really cool. I've heard stories about the good old days, and how modern cars are 'too easy' and 'all the same'. Still, I think your story helps illustrate how far technology has brought us.

 

The driving technology is not what bothers me. It's all the other features and options of making cars into a moving office and multimedia entertainment center. If it requires taking your eyes or mind off the road, it's bad news in my book.

 

Hi priuscritter...

There are may shadowed situation, where a car can emerge and was previously undetectable by human vision. Especially if the car is a dark color, such as the dark blue of the car in your icon. With DT Running lights, such a car is detectable. You see the lights in the shadow.

The reason motorcyles are nearly invisible on occaision is they have no broad patches of sheet metal. Its all handlebars and tire up front. Put a driver on in a black, and dull jacket, and the thing will disappear amoungst the backgrond 100 yards out in many locations on the road. If you had a flat piece of sheetmetal perpendicular to the road, the size of the motorcyle and driver, it would be readily detectable in such situations.

 

One thing is for sure: it's pretty damn funny.