Car safety nanny tech

[AHTOXA]

We've beat this topic before over here, and I know what the general consensus is on here: we don't need no darn safety nannies in our cars. Give us manual everything and we're good to go.

I stated before that I don't really care about the nannies, but I'm also not opposed to them. I've driven a few cars with them, but thought of them mostly as a novelty items.

Since I've started riding a motorcycle a week and a half ago or so, my opinion on them changed somewhat. Will I ever put my life on the line by relying on the other driver to follow the safety nannies? No, of course I will do no such thing, as it is my responsibility to ensure my own safety. But, if they give me a marginally better chance, I'm all for it, without question.

Are these nannies making people more complacent, more isolated from the driving environment and perhaps less safe by being more reliant on technology? Perhaps. But at the same time, most people just need that 'idiot light' to tell them that there's someone about to pass them. Blind spot monitoring is already quite common on many cars and it's going to trickle down to more plebeian cars and trims over the next year, even. Then, adaptive cruise and front-crash auto braking will follow. Sign me up.

[IMBoring25]

I have mixed emotions. Two of the three times I've been hit likely would have been prevented by appropriate nannies...One by backup beeper and one by stop assist.

On the other hand, I've driven some vehicles with very poorly-executed driving aids and some others with malfunctioning ones. I would hate to have a correct control input (or one that is correct in light of considerations the computer can't take into account) overridden by what the computer was programmed to think was correct.

As a further consideration, I think the third time I was hit is a circumstance that will probably become increasingly likely as the driving aids proliferate, until fully-automated driving comes on the scene (and maybe even after, because I'm not sure how you'd get enough inputs for the computer to parse the situation correctly). The road was generally clear, but very obvious un-melted ice remained in the left-turn lane...If I'd had any inkling that the light would stay red three times as long as it usually did I'd have gone straight and taken an alternate route. The driver at fault made some comments afterwards that suggested he viewed an occasional at-fault accident as one of those things that just happens...No, "I can't believe I didn't see that ice," or anything of the sort. I can't help but think that dumbing down the driving process and further separating people from the physics involved in guiding a 4000-pound missile could only exacerbate that [lack of] thought process.

[Rope-Pusher]

Dumbed-down driving is a way of life now for many and there is no going back for them (There may never have been a "back" to go back to)

[theholycow]

Driving is less and less important culturally, though it remains a practical requirement. People aren't interested and don't care. Lots of e-nannies will encourage some complacency, but I think most of the complacency is bound to happen either way.

From a technical standpoint I'm not against most of these technologies. I do want the ability to turn them off temporarily or semi-permanently when appropriate, but I like knowing that other folks have them. I do want to avoid Big Brother technologies, though I'm happy when they're thoroughly under my own control only (Android dashcam app that I use), so perhaps I'm slightly hypocritical there.

Knowing that motorcyclists, the folks who LOVE motorcycles, feel the way that they do about motorcycling among cagers makes me never want to get on a motorcycle (except perhaps off-road). It's just not a sufficiently balanced risk-reward factor for me. I hate getting injured or killed.

[AHTOXA]

Knowing that motorcyclists, the folks who LOVE motorcycles, feel the way that they do about motorcycling among cagers makes me never want to get on a motorcycle (except perhaps off-road). It's just not a sufficiently balanced risk-reward factor for me. I hate getting injured or killed.

I'm not sure I understand that opening sentence correctly. What are motorcyclists feeling among cagers that would influence your decision? Most motorcyclists are very weary about riding among cagers. Am I missing your point?

[tankinbeans]

I have the relatively pedestrian suite of safety nanny tech, ABS, ESC, whatever the acronym Ford use for traction control, and I think an anti-rollover program in my car. I don't have anything that blinks in my mirror if somebody is encroaching on my blind spot (I do have the integrated blind spot mirrors though). I don't have adaptive cruise and I don't have all of the other interesting things that many drivers have.

I'm not stupid enough to test whether the ESC works because my version of safe driving involves plenty of thinking ahead and the novel idea of slowing the hell down when it's snowy or slick out. Many would say that I need to "learn to drive" because I drive slowly more slowly than they would in inclement weather. That's not to say I drive 30 mph just because it's a bit snowy, but I maintain a safe distance and understand what my car is doing more or less. If a safe distance requires 30 mph so be it. There is nothing I do that is so important as to take needless risks.

One "safety item" that encourages stupidity is AWD. I know it has other uses, but it's marketed as a good way to get through winter and theoretically makes for a safer vehicle.

[IMBoring25]

Knowing that motorcyclists, the folks who LOVE motorcycles, feel the way that they do about motorcycling among cagers makes me never want to get on a motorcycle (except perhaps off-road). It's just not a sufficiently balanced risk-reward factor for me. I hate getting injured or killed.

I'm not sure I understand that opening sentence correctly. What are motorcyclists feeling among cagers that would influence your decision? Most motorcyclists are very weary about riding among cagers. Am I missing your point?

It sounded to me like knowing that motorcyclists understand the risks of riding on the road and still enjoy it well enough to do it anyway, he doesn't want to tempt himself. I may be wrong.

[theholycow]

Knowing that motorcyclists, the folks who LOVE motorcycles, feel the way that they do about motorcycling among cagers makes me never want to get on a motorcycle (except perhaps off-road). It's just not a sufficiently balanced risk-reward factor for me. I hate getting injured or killed.

I'm not sure I understand that opening sentence correctly. What are motorcyclists feeling among cagers that would influence your decision? Most motorcyclists are very weary about riding among cagers. Am I missing your point?

It sounds like you understand.

Motorcyclists, in discussions about motorcycling, are naturally defensive of their choice. Even so, they don't try to deny that being a motorcyclist on the road with cagers is dangerous. It is commonly said that it's not a matter of if you will go down, but when. Even if we assume that that is not correct and support that assumption with statistics, there is still a significant level of risk that nobody will even try to deny.

And for what? Open-air enjoyment that can't be had with any other vehicle? Fuel economy that is negated by having another hobby into which I'll be unable to resist pouring money that I don't have? Sounds great, but not great enough to balance the risk for me.

I'm not stupid enough to test whether the ESC works because my version of safe driving involves plenty of thinking ahead and the novel idea of slowing the hell down when it's snowy or slick out. Many would say that I need to "learn to drive" because I drive slowly more slowly than they would in inclement weather.

Apart from certain jerks who are more important than the rest of us, we can wait. Don't feel bad. I'd rather be annoyed waiting behind you than see you crash, and I will keep a safe distance from you so you'll never know that I'm annoyed.

The only thing you might notice is me pulling over at the tops of rolling hills, stopping to wait for you to clear the next hilltop so I can build some momentum and get up the hill with RWD. I had to do that behind one person last winter, he was going 5-15mph on a 35mph road where I would have preferred to go 25 in that storm. With my great winter tires and my awesome skillz yo I have better stability, steering, and braking than others, though I don't push it if anyone other than myself is at stake.

Speaking of which: You absolutely should test whether the ESC works, as well as test and train your own ability to handle various losses of traction, under controlled conditions -- when there's plenty of safe runoff area with no cars or trees or people around. You need to train reflexes so that when things go wrong despite the care that you so patiently and wisely apply, you'll be able to mitigate the results.

One "safety item" that encourages stupidity is AWD. I know it has other uses, but it's marketed as a good way to get through winter and theoretically makes for a safer vehicle.

Well said!

AWD does contribute slightly to safety. It reduces the chance that your drive wheels will spin and cause a loss of stability. It also reduces the chance that you'll be stuck somewhere when someone driving too fast to deal with an unexpected stuck vehicle loses control and crashes into you, or stuck somewhere cold and suffer hypothermia before rescue arrives.

However, for the most part, it reduces people's ability to gauge how much traction they have and adjust their driving appropriately. They accelerate without difficulty to speeds much higher than they ought to. 2WD lets you feel the lack of traction more readily and can even prevent you from accelerating to high speeds or even prevent you from driving when you ought to stay put.

[AHTOXA]

Yes, motorcycling is a very personal choice. It's certainly not justifiable for all. I definitely get that.

[Rope-Pusher]

...it was Cowman's reference to basketball players that had me scratching my head. (3 second window for lewd responses closes in 3 2 1 *)

[Rope-Pusher]

One "safety item" that encourages stupidity is AWD.

Well, that explains a lot -NOT! My Jeep has 4WD, not AWD.

I guess I will remain an enema.

[Rope-Pusher]

U.S. TRAFFIC DEATHS CONTINUE TO FALL
Traffic deaths in the U.S. have dropped by a quarter since 2004 and the trend continued in 2013. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says road deaths fell by 3% last year to just over 32,700. Surprisingly the number of accidents was actually up but the number of people injured or killed fell, which means that cars are truly becoming safer.

http://www.autonews.com/article/2014122 ... -autonews-

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/busine ... /20646877/

Takata Airbag Shrapnel Aside, every day, in every way, things are getting safer and safer.

[theholycow]

which means that cars are truly becoming safer.

...or perhaps we should say, more crashworthy.

[wannabe]

i don't drive much, but when i do, usually its a newer (05-now) car (with the exception of the van currently driving, rant in miscthread). they have all this tech i have no idea what to do with - i've only driven 80/90s vehicles. whenever i get my next vehicle, it will probably have tech i have no idea how to handle - abs, esc(?), navigation, beeping things, whatever. back up cameras are nice, i usually have no idea how much distance i have behind me (the pathfinder had one, dad loved it - rental car). but a beep coming out of nowhere will probably startle me, and become temporarily confused.

[theholycow]

Of course you'll ask when the time comes, but here's advice on a few...

ABS: When you begin to skid the brake pedal will grind or click and push back at your foot. Don't pump the pedal like you would without ABS, just shove it as hard as you can steadily. The 2000 GM full size van you're driving almost certainly has ABS, so if you get some ice you'll get a chance to practice.

ESC: Don't worry about it, it will take care of itself.

Nav: Don't touch it while the car is moving. Pull over to do stuff with it. Or just ignore it.