Touch screen's in Cars Yes/No?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 26715
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

screenman

Legendary Member
For me, and I suspect many others, the driving enjoyment comes from driving a well engineered car with well tuned suspension with good ride/handling balance, well-weighted steering with good feel and feedback, a slick gearchange and a responsive engine.

Electronic gadgets take a away driver enjoyment for me and I can happily survive without all the rubbish put in modern cars which cause unnecessary distraction and make the driving experience feel very remote and distanced. If people like that sort of thing, fine, but I definitely prefer simple.

Also, if the controls and the touchscreen were as brilliant as you say they are, you would not have needed to connect remotely to set the heated seats or whatever as a well-engineered design would be logical and easy to use. Dare I say it, a simple button with perhaps a rotary dial to control temperature mounted somewhere clearly visible and clearly marked would be more intuitive and also safer and less distracting for the driver?


What would be the car you describe?
 

Salar

A fish out of water
Location
Gorllewin Cymru
Last winter my wife was driving the car by her self but she didn't know how to turn the heated steering wheel on, so she called me via hands free to ask. But rather than try to explain I simply login in to the Tesla app on the phone and turned on the heated seats 'remotely'. :laugh:

You have all that technology, perhaps you need it, as yet you don't seem to know the difference between a steering wheel and a seat :smile:
 

gzoom

Über Member
I think that Boeing said the same about the 737 Max.

And the way Autopilot or any other driver assist system works is nothing like the system deployed by Boeing trying to save money.

Anyone comparing the two simply doesn't are demonstrating what they understand and these systems.

ABS, air bags, power steering, automated driving aids are simply an extension of how cars have developed over the few decades.

As a cyclist I find it hard to understand why anyone would object to systems been developed to make driving safer and take away autonomy from human drivers, which lets face it is the biggest issue for cyclists.
 
Last edited:

Milkfloat

An Peanut
Location
Midlands
What about the accidents actually caused by autopilot, where it has wrested control from the driver? Obviously, cars not fitted with such a system aren't subject to that failure mode, so the correlation there is a solid - one needs to examine the minutiae, because something as simple as the typical buyer of that brand being a more mature, cautious driver (as the is the case with Honda) can have a more significant effect which can be wrongfully attributed to car systems.
Without doubt there has been some accidents caused by autopilot, certainly there was no wrestling control though and the numbers caused by autopilot are significantly lower than by humans. I agree that the figures are not detailed enough to look at the demographics, but you cannot simply say that old people drive Tesla's and therefore were natually safer. In fact there is lots of anecdotal evidence of idiots buying Tesla's and forcing them to do things that they should not which increases the risk.
 

raleighnut

Legendary Member
And the way Autopilot or any other driver assist system works is nothing like the system deployed by Boeing trying to save money.

Anyone comparing the two simply doesn't are demonstrating what they understand and these systems.

ABS, air bags, power steering, automated driving aids are simply an extension of how cars have developed over the few decades.

As a cyclist I find it hard to understand why anyone would object to systems been developed to make driving safer and take away autonomy from human drivers, which lets face it is the biggest issue for cyclists.
Cycling was safer before 'modern' cars with their 'safety' features, I dunno if you've ever been in an Anglia or a Viva but they were truly terrifying at anything over 50mph.
 

tyred

Legendary Member
Location
Ireland
What would be the car you describe?
Absolutely none of today's bland, overweight, bloated SUVs.

Yes, they have much higher overall levels of roadholding and are safer. But safer for whom? The appalling visibility is dangerous for cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists, the added weight mean they use more resources than a lighter car would and causes increased pollution. But who cares if we endanger people and cause even more pollution just so we can impress the neighbours and keep little Jimmy safe on the half mile journey to school.

Technology should have brought us smaller, lighter cars with incredible fuel economy. Instead the advances in engine design and aerodynamics have been swallowed up by bloated overweight cars.

It's not just about tail pipe emissions either as the heavy car will need more energy to manufacture and will wear tyres and brakes more and release dangerous particles.
 

raleighnut

Legendary Member
Absolutely none of today's bland, overweight, bloated SUVs.

Yes, they have much higher overall levels of roadholding and are safer. But safer for whom? The appalling visibility is dangerous for cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists, the added weight mean they use more resources than a lighter car would and causes increased pollution. But who cares if we endanger people and cause even more pollution just so we can impress the neighbours and keep little Jimmy safe on the half mile journey to school.

Technology should have brought us smaller, lighter cars with incredible fuel economy. Instead the advances in engine design and aerodynamics have been swallowed up by bloated overweight cars.

It's not just about tail pipe emissions either as the heavy car will need more energy to manufacture and will wear tyres and brakes more and release dangerous particles.
Try travelling or even driving one of those monstrosities, you'll be back in your 205 in nothing flat.
 
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 26715

Guest
The graph shows the number of miles you can drive before being involved in an accident - so in Q4 2019 you could drive over 3 million miles on autopilot in a Tesla before you had an accident, whilst in a 'normal' car you would only be able to drive 500k before the accident. Basically Telsa on autopilot is considerably safer that a human in a normal car. However, the real figures are somewhere inbetween as autopilot does not work on all roads, only the easier/safest roads. So therefore reality is somewhere between the green line of active safety and the yellow of autopilot.
Are these 'real' numbers or extrapolated numbers? I find it hard to believe that there has been 3 million miles driven by Tesla solely on auto-pilot on public roads or were they on a test track?
the added weight mean they use more resources than a lighter car would and causes increased pollution.
Sorry but that is incorrect our 2.2L Rav4 now 13 years old over 7 years has averaged over 50MPG & when on a run can achieve 57MPG which by todays standard is not brilliant, but compared to when I started driving you had to drive like Miss Daisy to get 30MPG
Technology should have brought us smaller, lighter cars with incredible fuel economy. Instead the advances in engine design and aerodynamics have been swallowed up by bloated overweight cars.
No they haven't there are lots or small cars
It's not just about tail pipe emissions either as the heavy car will need more energy to manufacture and will wear tyres and brakes more and release dangerous particles.
I've not found that, although one of the reasons I won't buy a new car apart from the inflated price is the damage that any new product does to the environment so I prefer to try to get maximum use out of it.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Of course, it Teslas are so safe, how come people do die while travelling in them? No one has died in the UK while travelling an XC90 of either generation since the model was introduced.

Doubtless the Tesla deaths are in large part due to over excitement at how prehistoric the safer models feel in comparison.
 

Milkfloat

An Peanut
Location
Midlands
Are these 'real' numbers or extrapolated numbers? I find it hard to believe that there has been 3 million miles driven by Tesla solely on auto-pilot on public roads or were they on a test track?

They are extrapolated, but not in the way you think. More than 2 billion miles have been driven on autopilot.
 

Milkfloat

An Peanut
Location
Midlands
Of course, it Teslas are so safe, how come people do die while travelling in them? No one has died in the UK while travelling an XC90 of either generation since the model was introduced.

Doubtless the Tesla deaths are in large part due to over excitement at how prehistoric the safer models feel in comparison.

You might want to watch this - the Tesla X outperforms the XC90. Plus you have to think about more than just occupants of the cars.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PO-qeXka8w
 

tyred

Legendary Member
Location
Ireland
Sorry but that is incorrect our 2.2L Rav4 now 13 years old over 7 years has averaged over 50MPG & when on a run can achieve 57MPG which by todays standard is not brilliant, but compared to when I started driving you had to drive like Miss Daisy to get 30MPG

Very true but the point I was trying to make is that your RAV4 would be even more economical if it was 500kg lighter. Cars have generally got to be much, much heavier over the years which has negated a lot of the progress made in designing more efficient engines.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom