Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Motoring Future

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Anaconda
    replied
    You are all presuming the decision makers have some sort of common sense!
    Smart motorways, for example, are also a decision made by someone sat behind a desk and probably never driven on a motorway nevermind broken down on one, it's a scary place to be.
    Never underestimate the stupidity of intelligent people!

    Leave a comment:


  • richard
    replied
    You're absolutely correct.
    Mass use of driverless vehicles will be as successful as the introduction of the flying car or personal jetpacks. They'll need to be so safe they'll never move. Pedestrians and cyclists doing their own thing will keep them stopped and gridlocked. The best you can hope for is some sort of segregated lane or track to keep them seperate from everything else.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daz-RSK
    replied
    Here we go. Let's put your minds at rest that autonomous driving is for someone else's lifetime. In the link attached, you'll find:-

    "Thatcham Research and the Association of British Insurers (ABI) have said they have serious concerns about this and warned that the plans threaten road safety"

    "The technology builds on existing lane-keeping systems that provide nominal assistance and will actually take over control of vehicles at low speeds, keeping them in lane on roads such as motorways."

    "Thatcham has found that Automated Lane Keeping Systems only meet 2 of 12 key principles to guarantee safety and has identified motoring scenarios in which lives will be put at risk, as Automated Lane Keeping System-equipped cars are bound by legislation that will not allow them to change lane autonomously."


    Bear in mind that this is only a lane keeping system that enhances on the lane keeping aid in vehicles today. We have not yet wandered into autonomous driving in totality yet!


    Great - so there are serious concerns in safety, yet more middle lane morons that won't get out of the way and stay in the wrong lane and the system only meets 2 of the 12 key principles based on safety!! The system doesn't understand that people walking on the highway (what they would be walking there, no one knows) and would just mow them down!

    Autonomous driving is for someone else's lifetime. Not mine!!

    https://fleetworld.co.uk/government-...lives-at-risk/

    Leave a comment:


  • ALLAN R
    replied
    Originally posted by Daz-RSK View Post
    Unfortunately, Mick, I think that is a self perpetuating circle that you have landed on.

    I am not saying that holding onto a 55 yr old is not better for the environment than the ever churning cycle of new cars. New car production has a massive footprint.

    But you have to go back through a lot more time before you get right down the green credentials. A 65 Mustang probably replaced a car someone else driving at the time and those with inter war period motors probably were cursing new Mustang production then as not very green - if such a concept existed. Perhaps it didn't.

    What I am saying is that the greenest way forward is to buy a car at 16/17 and drive it to your grave, not its grave. That would be the cleanest way for sure. More people would look after their motor and make sure that it is able to withstand time. Car production would lower because demand would be lower. That is a good thing.

    We sell about 2.5mil new vehicles in the UK, give or take, per year. There are about 40/45 million drivers. So in 15/20 years we sell more vehicles than population that can drive. That's the issue.
    When my daughter was in school we composed an essay explaining how a 4.7 litre 65 Mustang was one of the greenest vehicles on the road based on through life considerations. For one thing it has not been scrapped and rebuilt three times. Its not got a lot of plastic in so there is little waste with scrapping. We mentioned that "zero emission" cars are not zero emission. they still deposit tyre and brake dust (and being on average heavier probably more than an ICE car). The teacher came back saying we were taking the micky but it only showed up the dangerous polarised views of some people.

    I kind of agree with Anaconda about driver less vehicles. Here we need to be more definitive between vehicles and cars. We do what we do because we enjoy driving our cars and appreciate the mechanical side of things. Autonomous vehicles are not cars to me they are just vehicles that look after themselves. For instance autonomous vehicles could make a lot of their journeys without people in them. If I had one and went shopping I would send it home after it dropped me off rather than pay a parking fee. It could then collect me when I required.

    Leave a comment:


  • Anaconda
    replied
    Originally posted by richard View Post

    We have contemplated just inserting an old fashioned bulb but that is incredibly risky with these modern canbus systems, you risk damaging some fancy control box and then it's more hundreds of pounds down to you.

    The plain simple fact is the manufacturers seem to be designing in ever shorter planned obsolescence times. They want you to sign up to lease a new car for a fortune and then scare you into another one as the warranty runs out. It's working too so in a way I take my hat of to them!
    Exactly this. Can you imagine the risk of owning a Range Rover after the pathetic 3 year warranty has run out! They are always at the bottom of any reliability chart.
    5 year complete fully comprehensive warranty should be min on any car.
    New Defender engine is obsolete in less than a year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daz-RSK
    replied
    Unfortunately, Mick, I think that is a self perpetuating circle that you have landed on.

    I am not saying that holding onto a 55 yr old is not better for the environment than the ever churning cycle of new cars. New car production has a massive footprint.

    But you have to go back through a lot more time before you get right down the green credentials. A 65 Mustang probably replaced a car someone else driving at the time and those with inter war period motors probably were cursing new Mustang production then as not very green - if such a concept existed. Perhaps it didn't.

    What I am saying is that the greenest way forward is to buy a car at 16/17 and drive it to your grave, not its grave. That would be the cleanest way for sure. More people would look after their motor and make sure that it is able to withstand time. Car production would lower because demand would be lower. That is a good thing.

    We sell about 2.5mil new vehicles in the UK, give or take, per year. There are about 40/45 million drivers. So in 15/20 years we sell more vehicles than population that can drive. That's the issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • mick the hat
    replied
    So, to sum it all up in a short phrase, the majority of car manufacturers are more interested in economic growth than ecological reduction? So much for carbon footprint. It’s not just the mpg that improves the green credentials of motoring, it’s the whole life cost per mile that is the true measure. I personally think that a ‘65 289 mustang that is still roadworthy and largely original has a far smaller carbon footprint than the vast majority of modern cars, despite their much vaunted fuel economies. “The Emperors New Clothes” comes to mind!

    Leave a comment:


  • richard
    replied
    Originally posted by mick the hat View Post

    Thanks for posting this. I feel validated..... at least about the lights. There’s an old saying, “Be careful what you wish for”. The 50p bulb would still work as a position lamp. Utter madness!
    We have contemplated just inserting an old fashioned bulb but that is incredibly risky with these modern canbus systems, you risk damaging some fancy control box and then it's more hundreds of pounds down to you.

    The plain simple fact is the manufacturers seem to be designing in ever shorter planned obsolescence times. They want you to sign up to lease a new car for a fortune and then scare you into another one as the warranty runs out. It's working too so in a way I take my hat of to them!

    Leave a comment:


  • Anaconda
    replied
    Originally posted by Daz-RSK View Post

    Right then - that's it!! The final words - no future.

    Fear not - autonomous driving is decades away. We won't see autonomous vehicle in a generation. Fortunately, my autonomy will probably involve a Zimmerframe before self driving vehicles.

    I know I said above 15/20 yrs. There might be more significant trials by then. But frankly, when you think about it all more deeply, we are a world away. There are a minefield of issues. It can't happen just like that.

    Placing H&S aside and the injuries / fatalities that result, just vehicle speed is providing a hazard to these things. How would the vehicle accurately know the speed ?

    Speed signs ? No chance! Don't exist in many places.

    GPS positioning and then reading the speed by matching your location to known source that gathers speed info ? Possibly.

    What happens when the speed changes and Jim forgets to update the positional change ? The autonomous vehicle continues along at the same speed as before, completely disregarding the new slower speed. If there was an accident or plod checking the speed, who is at fault ?

    We are so far behind this technology and there are at least 30 years of faff before anything resembles an autonomous vehicle is let loose amongst the public.

    We can't even have a decent security system in motors today to stop tea leaves stealing them.
    The ability for cars to recognise speed limits and speed signs already exists along with the ability for the car to automatically drive to the limits. Of course it doesn't work properly, in some cases picking up limits on side roads, not the road you drive on. Same as auto braking, with reports of braking by itself when overtaking another car.
    I don't agree with all this unnecessary tech we all have to have on modern cars and exactly why I have no intention of buying one. The repair cost on modern cars is astronomical.
    I admit a reverse camera is quite useful, most of everything else is just tech for the sake of it to try and out do the next manufacturer, oh and the latest EU dictat.

    Leave a comment:


  • mick the hat
    replied
    Originally posted by richard View Post
    LED car lights should either be banned or warrantied fo ten years. This week we had a customer's car fail for a poition lamp {mini although as big as a maxi) instead of 50p for a bulb it was 200 for an led.
    Thanks for posting this. I feel validated..... at least about the lights. There’s an old saying, “Be careful what you wish for”. The 50p bulb would still work as a position lamp. Utter madness!

    Leave a comment:


  • Daz-RSK
    replied
    Originally posted by Anaconda View Post
    There is no future in motoring, having autonomous cars is not motoring.
    Right then - that's it!! The final words - no future.

    Fear not - autonomous driving is decades away. We won't see autonomous vehicle in a generation. Fortunately, my autonomy will probably involve a Zimmerframe before self driving vehicles.

    I know I said above 15/20 yrs. There might be more significant trials by then. But frankly, when you think about it all more deeply, we are a world away. There are a minefield of issues. It can't happen just like that.

    Placing H&S aside and the injuries / fatalities that result, just vehicle speed is providing a hazard to these things. How would the vehicle accurately know the speed ?

    Speed signs ? No chance! Don't exist in many places.

    GPS positioning and then reading the speed by matching your location to known source that gathers speed info ? Possibly.

    What happens when the speed changes and Jim forgets to update the positional change ? The autonomous vehicle continues along at the same speed as before, completely disregarding the new slower speed. If there was an accident or plod checking the speed, who is at fault ?

    We are so far behind this technology and there are at least 30 years of faff before anything resembles an autonomous vehicle is let loose amongst the public.

    We can't even have a decent security system in motors today to stop tea leaves stealing them.

    Leave a comment:


  • richard
    replied
    LED car lights should either be banned or warrantied fo ten years. This week we had a customer's car fail for a poition lamp {mini although as big as a maxi) instead of 50p for a bulb it was 200 for an led.

    Leave a comment:


  • mick the hat
    replied
    Originally posted by richard View Post
    Just shows the designers today have lost the plot. There are certain weather conditions (mist, very light drizzle, snow etc) where the last thing you want is super powerful headlamps bouncing their light back at you.

    That's when you need the low set driving lights to illuminate just the edge of the road and centre line.

    Don't get me started on the stupid key fob idea clearly designed to promote vehicle theft to boost sales.
    Completely agree with all of this . Those of us who have been driving long enough, know instinctively that a lot of these “improvements“ in cars simply result in poorer driving standards. Giving stronger headlights doesn’t inherently make driving “ safer”, it just boosts the drivers confidence to drive faster where perhaps they wouldn’t on “ordinary strength” lights. Some of them are already far too bright for road users facing them at night, or as Richard states, any time there is excess moisture in the air.
    The “safer” modern designers make cars, the more risks are being taken by certain drivers. Also, the more expensive they are to buy/ repair,the easier to “write off” otherwise useable cars, etc. I’m not sure the “benefits” outweigh the downsides but that’s just my opinion. It makes money for business!!

    With proper classic motoring, no electronic “enablers” to break down, pretty easy to fix the majority of mechanical issues, change lightbulbs in a couple of minutes, not “written off” just because the bumper is a bit bent!
    Don’t get me wrong, there are some beautiful cars out there these days....but there is just so much that either makes you lazy or overconfident and “toys” that bite you when they go wrong.
    Last edited by mick the hat; 23-10-2020, 11:29 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • mad4v8
    replied
    I started driving in 1967 and the fog / smog then, as Geoff says, was more frequent and far worse than anything we've seen in recent years.

    Re the Headlamp Foglamp issue.

    The general development of LED lighting was going on for years before most became aware of it.

    I'm certain as we speak the car lighting manufactureres will have been working on multi output LED headlamps, or front lighting solutions, for years.
    Maybe narrower or split beams or variable light levels etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • richard
    replied
    Just shows the designers today have lost the plot. There are certain weather conditions (mist, very light drizzle, snow etc) where the last thing you want is super powerful headlamps bouncing their light back at you.

    That's when you need the low set driving lights to illuminate just the edge of the road and centre line.

    Don't get me started on the stupid key fob idea clearly designed to promote vehicle theft to boost sales.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X