sputnik Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Not quite what I expected. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimjimbo Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 What a terrible waste of a perfectly good Bel Air..... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max2 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Meh, it was a '59 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptorman Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Very interesting. The old guys are always saying…."they don't makem like they used to" I'm glad they don't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet_Hollow Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) Not quite what I expected. With one major exception... The Bel Air driver can see out greater than 180 degrees, nearly unabated...can't see crap from inside the Malibu. Watch the video again and see. I'm not endorsing either car, and yes the improvement in impact technology is clearly demonstrated. I just don't like the compromises in outward visibility that manufactures are taking in favor of fashion and crash performance. Safely driving a car is foremost a visual affair. Edited January 26, 2016 by Quiet_Hollow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I'm not in the least bit surprised. Engineering is miles ahead of 1959 in every area except ONE (touch screen radios are far more dangerous than knob radios). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I'm not in the least bit surprised. Engineering is miles ahead of 1959 in every area except ONE (touch screen radios are far more dangerous than knob radios). How? Because they are gadgets which take the driver's attention away? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I'm not in the least bit surprised. Engineering is miles ahead of 1959 in every area except ONE (touch screen radios are far more dangerous than knob radios). How? Because they are gadgets which take the driver's attention away? Yes. I just got a car with a touchscreen. In the old car with knobs you just moved your hand to the area of the knob and your hand will find it without you looking at it. With the new touchscreen you have to land tour finger in a precise place. That means you must look, and look hard until the finger is on the exact spot.Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBPK402 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I remember seeing an accident of a 1980s Camaro and a 1940s car... 1940s car won, but driver, and passenger were sent in an ambulance to the hospital, but the Camaro driver, and passenger were not injured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 There are many safety innovations which have saved millions of lives. Electronic Stability control was touted as most important safety device since seat belts. Also, braking has much improved. Being able to stop or avoid the accident in the first place has to be paramount. I heard a speaker say brakes aren't for stopping, they are for going faster. Otherwise you would need to roll to a stop. HAHA I feel a lot better that my kids are driving safer vehicles than I did. I am still reluctant about drive by wire technology. What exactly happens if you lose power? Is there no steering? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Is there no steering? If you lose all electricity and you have an electric steering then yes. It's extremely rare to lose your alternator and battery at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) All current examples of SBW use redundant systems and are very unlikely to completely fail. Edited January 26, 2016 by Don Richard 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBPK402 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 When I had an electric rack...it would just get hard to drive if the power was removed (like drive a hydraulic power steering rack without the hydraulics...def a lot harder to steer for parking, but not a problem while you are moving). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) Jeff Matthews, on 25 Jan 2016 - 8:59 PM, said: jo56steph74, on 25 Jan 2016 - 8:15 PM, said: I'm not in the least bit surprised. Engineering is miles ahead of 1959 in every area except ONE (touch screen radios are far more dangerous than knob radios). How? Because they are gadgets which take the driver's attention away? Yes. I just got a car with a touchscreen. In the old car with knobs you just moved your hand to the area of the knob and your hand will find it without you looking at it. With the new touchscreen you have to land tour finger in a precise place. That means you must look, and look hard until the finger is on the exact spot. Yes, and I'd add that the touchscreen is likely to require sequences of multiple steps, and to require added thinking between each one. Each of these add potentially cricital fractions of a second of distraction that, IMHO, a driver in a fast-paced situation can't afford to spend while driving. Besides, this video shows how devoted research and engineering have produced the dramatic reductions in highway fatalities, from almost 55,000 to 32,000, that we've seen over the past several decades. Contrast that benefit with the failure to reduce gun deaths through the almost complete absence of the research and implementation in gun safety. Gun deaths now exceed auto crash fatalities, whereas it used to be the other way around: http://aresarmor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/guns-vs-car-deaths-2015.jpg Edited January 26, 2016 by LarryC 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Morbius Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Who knows how much rust was in the Chevy's chassis. Inquiring minds, you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty Favog Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Who knows how much rust was in the Chevy's chassis. Inquiring minds, you know. Look at about 1:05. You can see all kinds of rust/dust coming out of the bottom of the right-front quarter panel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CECAA850 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 All current examples of SBW use redundant systems and are very unlikely to completely fail. It's certainly not uncommon. I've seen non responsive throttles several times. It's also possible to have can bus failures and take out multiple systems. If the bus goes down, you lose everything on it. Heck, we had an air conditioning transducer (pressure sensor) take down the bus and cause a no start. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJkizak Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I wonder if they allowed for 57 years of rust and metal fatigue. JJK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Jeff Matthews, on 25 Jan 2016 - 8:59 PM, said: jo56steph74, on 25 Jan 2016 - 8:15 PM, said: I'm not in the least bit surprised. Engineering is miles ahead of 1959 in every area except ONE (touch screen radios are far more dangerous than knob radios). How? Because they are gadgets which take the driver's attention away? Yes. I just got a car with a touchscreen. In the old car with knobs you just moved your hand to the area of the knob and your hand will find it without you looking at it. With the new touchscreen you have to land tour finger in a precise place. That means you must look, and look hard until the finger is on the exact spot.Yes, and I'd add that the touchscreen is likely to require sequences of multiple steps, and to require added thinking between each one. Each of these add potentially cricital fractions of a second of distraction that, IMHO, a driver in a fast-paced situation can't afford to spend while driving.Besides, this video shows how devoted research and engineering have produced the dramatic reductions in highway fatalities, from almost 55,000 to 32,000, that we've seen over the past several decades. Contrast that benefit with the failure to reduce gun deaths through the almost complete absence of the research and implementation in gun safety. Gun deaths now exceed auto crash fatalities, whereas it used to be the other way around: http://aresarmor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/guns-vs-car-deaths-2015.jpg I've experimented a good deal with our new touchscreen. It takes on the order of two seconds of concentrated visual focus to change the channel on the radio. Other operations, like the fader, would require multiple of that time. Effectively, one can't use the touch screen while driving, and that means it is a retrograde technology and misapplied to auto engineering. It's dangerous.Of course the company knows it is deadly dangerous and even asks you to agree to a TOS, reciting the danger, each time you start the car. Of these were not so integrated into the car, I would remove it in favor of a analog button radio. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wvu80 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) I'm not in the least bit surprised. Engineering is miles ahead of 1959 in every area except ONE (touch screen radios are far more dangerous than knob radios). I did not know that but that makes good common sense to me. I confess to being "old school" in most things, so I like touching knobs and buttons and such. I know the modern stuff has remote controls and touch screens, and I have wondered if they might not be distracting due to variables, such as trying to find a remote control that is lost in a seat. With a fixed variable such as a knob, it's always in the same place. Edit: I just saw where you and others addressed that is subsequent posts. I need to learn to read everything first, then respond. Edited January 26, 2016 by wvu80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.