Slashdot Mirror
In-Car Technology Becoming More Important Than Horsepower
Gunkerty Jeb writes "It seems, and I think a lot of people have prophesied this for some time, that in-car features like internet radio and assisted driving technologies are surpassing horsepower, handling and design as automotive selling points. I just hope manufacturers have put in the time to consider all the security dangers that exist in owning internet synthesized cars."
Well that explains why Acuras suddenly became so damned ugly.
"I disagree with you" does not equal "flamebait."
And what's wrong with assisted driving technology? It saves lives!
The technology that assists the driver of a modern car drive it safely is amazing. Radar assisted cruise control helps avoid driver frustration because their speed doesn't match the speed of the car ahead of them. Blind spot systems that watch the corners of your vehicle you can't see out the windows and in the mirrors. Backup cameras to avoid running over your children in the driveway. Collision avoidance warning indicators flash a simple red light bar and sound a tone to startle the driver in the event of an impending collision. Head up displays help to keep eyes on the road. Traction control helps avoids spinouts. Stability control helps avoid rollovers. Antilock brakes help stop shorter and quicker. Pre-charged brakes help stop suddenly if the driver isn't assertive enough when attempting to avoid a collision. Voice control to operate the technology without removing your hands from the wheel or eyes from the road.
And then there are the tech features designed to improve survivability of an accident. Pretensioning seat belts. Adaptive airbags. Autodialing 911.
All those mean much more to Soccermom Sally than the difference between 225HP and 235HP. Yes, the gearheads want their superchargers, and they're available too. But the market sells to everyone, not just the Top Gear enthusiasts. And a lot more paying customers value safety and comfort over raw horsepower numbers.
John
In the short run, this leads to distracted drivers, which is bad... ...but in the long run, this takes us ever closer to self driving cars and removing humans from behind the wheel.
Whoever wants to drive manually in my utopian future can do so on a track, for what I care. People kill too many innocent other people by being stupid behind the wheel.
.: Max Romantschuk
You think a normal person cares about horsepower? Or top speed for that matter? Even handling is a bit borderline. You're going to be as driving as fast as you feel comfortable in that situation. If I live in a built up area I don't need an engine that could accelerate a car to lightspeeds.
But the 'techy' stuff is cool.
The first car to add Farmville support will become the best selling car in the country.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I want to see the sources of all mobile phone use within 100 ft of my car. Of course, ideally I would want a head's up type projection on the windows, showing all the morons using their phone (texting or voice - hands free or regular), in red. But I would settle for a 30 ft warning telling me that the guy in the next lane was doing stupid, dangerous stuff.
One simple way to know which idiots to be extra careful of.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Having recently purchased a car, I can't tell you how many really nicely equipped, horribly underpowered tin boxes I got to drive. Most of them had the option to upgrade the gizmos, but did not even offer a usable engine size. I don't know if this will keep up for long, though -- they sell you "keyless entry" for $1000 (when you can clearly see that the "base model" has everything needed except the remote already built in), a nav system for $2000 ($1000 actually, but it ONLY comes with the leather seats), and the ever insulting "alloy wheels" (like anyone has ever cared) etc. The electronics can't be _that_ expensive to produce, and I think a couple of the Asian manufacturers will end the game and call everyone's bluff by giving these features out for free (Hyundai seems to be going this route).
Horsepower used to be a big deal, when people didn't have nearly as much of it. Nowadays even a tiny 4 banger will get you to highway speeds in reasonable time (barring some exceptional cases) so it's not much of a concern. Our speed limits aren't going to go up anytime soon. That's why car makers are now scrambling to differentiate themselves some other way.
I read the internet for the articles.
Manufacturer automotive electronics are a ripoff. For example, look at an OEM GPS unit. On a new car, it will cost you $1000 - $3000 vs. $200 for a top-end Garmin aftermarket (external) unit. Even the in-dash aftermarket units are substantially less.
Now that cars have aluminum VVT engines, heated seats, anti-lock, and traction control, car manufacturers are running out of shinny new mechanical features to market. Solution? Cram shit like Microsoft Sync into cars.
I don't want any more infotainment technology in vehicles; I deal with enough assholes tapping at their smartphones during my commute.
I spend 2 hours a day in my car getting to and from work, thats a significant time of my life and I sure like it to be a nice place to be.
For what it's worth, most people have no idea how well their brakes work under normal conditions, and yet are surprised by how limited their brakes are when they have to slow from 35 miles per hour to zero in the distance of 50 feet.
I talked to my insurance company about this, and they said it's a wash. Fewer cars going out of control in a skid is pretty much directly balanced by cars rear-ending the ones in front because of increased stopping distance
That's not a wash if it trades front-end collisions for rear-end ones. Of course, from the standpoint of the evil fucker bastard insurance companies it's a wash because either way they have to pay. Actually for them it's probably a problem because people who survive can cost more than dead people.
I took it to a parking lot after we got about 4 inches of snow, and did some panic stops with the ABS on and with it off. Stopping distances with ABS off were consistently shorter, although the car tended to stay in a straight line with ABS on and tended to yaw with the ABS off.
Yep, that's what they're for.
Some ABS systems are worse than others. In general, the more the channels, the better.
Yes, that's very true. However, anything is better than nothing.
Four channel four wheel systems are optimal for cars of course. This type of system used to be only found on luxury cars.
When was that?
I don't know what's being sold now days but I suspect that low end cars still have low end single channel ABS systems, which significantly increase stopping distance because the brakes for all four tires cut out if any one tire loses traction.
Vehicles with only one channel of ABS almost uniformly have ABS only in the rear, and the ABS is run from the vehicle speed sensor. This is the case in my 1992 Ford F250, which has a Kelsey-Hayes Rear Wheel Antilock Brake System (Kelsey-Hayes RWAL System for short.) Most vehicles which have more than one channel have three or four channels. Four channel ABS is amazingly common today and you'll find it on most anything with ABS.
The most advanced ABS can detect pretty well if you're on snow or gravel, and it locks up the brakes for a moment to build up a pile of the appropriate medium in front of the wheel to assist in stopping, so modern fancy-schmancy ABS is capable of outbraking you in pretty much all conditions. You'll only find that on luxury and super cars for the most part, with a few exceptions.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"