The General Car Thread - The Facelift.

[Elwher]

I love cars but they need to stop getting more complex

I know right? Henry Ford was a witch! He made it too complicated!

This a real car

But in seriousness, all I want is a car that I can play my phone's music through either bluetooth or apple carplay, and most cars until very recently do not have that. Having a good sounding engine, smooth ride, good brakes, and comfortable leather seats are all nice. It'd be nice to not die.

I agree about the sound systems. Beyond that, however, I like the fact that I can lift the hood of my '78 Midget, listen to the engine, and figure out what needs to be adjusted. Then, with a few simple tools, I can make the necessary adjustments or repairs. I do not need a degree in Electrical Engineering and a computerized diagnostic system more complex than the computers on the Space Shuttle to do so.

I do not need my car to tell me when the tire pressure is low, my eyes can do that perfectly well. I do not need the car to warn me that ice is possible, drive with care; I just got into the car so I know it is cold out. Every one of these gadgets is just one more thing to break down, and with the way they are interconnected, probably take something important down with it.

[Petrolheadia]

I know right? Henry Ford was a witch! He made it too complicated!

This a real car

But in seriousness, all I want is a car that I can play my phone's music through either bluetooth or apple carplay, and most cars until very recently do not have that. Having a good sounding engine, smooth ride, good brakes, and comfortable leather seats are all nice. It'd be nice to not die.

I agree about the sound systems. Beyond that, however, I like the fact that I can lift the hood of my '78 Midget, listen to the engine, and figure out what needs to be adjusted. Then, with a few simple tools, I can make the necessary adjustments or repairs. I do not need a degree in Electrical Engineering and a computerized diagnostic system more complex than the computers on the Space Shuttle to do so.

I do not need my car to tell me when the tire pressure is low, my eyes can do that perfectly well. I do not need the car to warn me that ice is possible, drive with care; I just got into the car so I know it is cold out. Every one of these gadgets is just one more thing to break down, and with the way they are interconnected, probably take something important down with it.

A cool thing about new cars is that those new diagnostic system allow for the car to send error messages to OBD readers, meaning that you can check out what broke in the error code guide.

Also, reliability still boils down more to the specific car model than to its complexity.

---

What do you think about getting an R50 Mini with either the 1.4 Toyota diesel or the 1.6 Tritec? I'm talking about one with less than 150 kkm/95k miles on the odometer.

[Elwher]

I agree about the sound systems. Beyond that, however, I like the fact that I can lift the hood of my '78 Midget, listen to the engine, and figure out what needs to be adjusted. Then, with a few simple tools, I can make the necessary adjustments or repairs. I do not need a degree in Electrical Engineering and a computerized diagnostic system more complex than the computers on the Space Shuttle to do so.

I do not need my car to tell me when the tire pressure is low, my eyes can do that perfectly well. I do not need the car to warn me that ice is possible, drive with care; I just got into the car so I know it is cold out. Every one of these gadgets is just one more thing to break down, and with the way they are interconnected, probably take something important down with it.

A cool thing about new cars is that those new diagnostic system allow for the car to send error messages to OBD readers, meaning that you can check out what broke in the error code guide.

Also, reliability still boils down more to the specific car model than to its complexity.

Back in the day, a good mechanic didn't need an OBD reader or an error code guide, he had eyes and ears to diagnose a problem. I cannot count how many times the problem with newer cars turns out to be a sensor error rather than anything actually wrong.

[The Two Jerseys]

A cool thing about new cars is that those new diagnostic system allow for the car to send error messages to OBD readers, meaning that you can check out what broke in the error code guide.

Also, reliability still boils down more to the specific car model than to its complexity.

Back in the day, a good mechanic didn't need an OBD reader or an error code guide, he had eyes and ears to diagnose a problem. I cannot count how many times the problem with newer cars turns out to be a sensor error rather than anything actually wrong.

And when there's actual problems, they don't fix it because they "can't replicate" the problem when you take the car to the shop and the OBD says that everything's normal.

[Petrolheadia]

A cool thing about new cars is that those new diagnostic system allow for the car to send error messages to OBD readers, meaning that you can check out what broke in the error code guide.

Also, reliability still boils down more to the specific car model than to its complexity.

Back in the day, a good mechanic didn't need an OBD reader or an error code guide, he had eyes and ears to diagnose a problem. I cannot count how many times the problem with newer cars turns out to be a sensor error rather than anything actually wrong.

How many mechanics are so good that they can beat the sensors?

[Elwher]

Back in the day, a good mechanic didn't need an OBD reader or an error code guide, he had eyes and ears to diagnose a problem. I cannot count how many times the problem with newer cars turns out to be a sensor error rather than anything actually wrong.

How many mechanics are so good that they can beat the sensors?

Today, with the increased complexity of the systems, very few. That is one of the factors, in my opinion, for the dearth of good mechanics today. Too many of them have no idea how to diagnose a problem without their electronic Bibles.

[Elwher]

A recent study shows that manual transmission cars lead to safer driving than automatic trannys.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17085632

Not only are they more fun, but safer as well!

[Novus America]

A recent study shows that manual transmission cars lead to safer driving than automatic trannys.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17085632

Not only are they more fun, but safer as well!

It says the sample size is too small to actually be sure, so further studies are needed.

But still, manuals are dying.
Soon they will be all but gone in the US.

Fun is not enough for most people.

Now that automatics can perform better than humans, their primary reason for still existing died.

Electrification will make them completely useless as well.

I get why people like them. They certainly can be fun. But that is not enough for most people.
And they cannot keep up with the match of technology.

[Elwher]

A recent study shows that manual transmission cars lead to safer driving than automatic trannys.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17085632

Not only are they more fun, but safer as well!

It says the sample size is too small to actually be sure, so further studies are needed.

But still, manuals are dying.
Soon they will be all but gone in the US.

Fun is not enough for most people.

Now that automatics can perform better than humans, their primary reason for still existing died.

Electrification will make them completely useless as well.

I get why people like them. They certainly can be fun. But that is not enough for most people.
And they cannot keep up with the match of technology.

But if, and I emphasize if, technology leads to a more efficient but less safe car, should it be adopted?

[Petrolheadia]

A recent study shows that manual transmission cars lead to safer driving than automatic trannys.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17085632

Not only are they more fun, but safer as well!

It says the sample size is too small to actually be sure, so further studies are needed.

And the sample for automatics is likely to be more interested in cars and driving, and willing to improve it.

Also, fun is subjective. I'd rather have a good automatic than manual.

[Petrolheadia]

After riding my bicycle around the block recently, I've noticed that the MY 2018 sales have brought quite a few German premium cars to the neighbourhood.

We've now got a new A4 Allroad, A6 wagon, GLE 250d and a pair of GLAs.

[Novus America]

It says the sample size is too small to actually be sure, so further studies are needed.

But still, manuals are dying.
Soon they will be all but gone in the US.

Fun is not enough for most people.

Now that automatics can perform better than humans, their primary reason for still existing died.

Electrification will make them completely useless as well.

I get why people like them. They certainly can be fun. But that is not enough for most people.
And they cannot keep up with the match of technology.

But if, and I emphasize if, technology leads to a more efficient but less safe car, should it be adopted?

Possibly. After all if all cars were built like tanks but and limited to 10mph, they would be safer.
But horribly inefficient.
Safety does not overuse all other concerns.

[Elwher]

But if, and I emphasize if, technology leads to a more efficient but less safe car, should it be adopted?

Possibly. After all if all cars were built like tanks but and limited to 10mph, they would be safer.
But horribly inefficient.
Safety does not overuse all other concerns.

We mandated seat belts, airbags, and now rear cameras because of safety concerns. If further study found that manual transmissions increased safety by lessening distractions, would it be a problem to similarly mandate them?

[Cannot think of a name]

Possibly. After all if all cars were built like tanks but and limited to 10mph, they would be safer.
But horribly inefficient.
Safety does not overuse all other concerns.

We mandated seat belts, airbags, and now rear cameras because of safety concerns. If further study found that manual transmissions increased safety by lessening distractions, would it be a problem to similarly mandate them?

The difference would have to be considerable. Especially given how entrenched at this point the automatic is. I'm a manual or go home guy myself, but I get why like everyone else isn't. Especially in my city where stop and go is the norm.

[Auzkhia]

I'd like a manual transmission without a clutch pedal, it's the worst part for me, and it nearly puts me off. I'd get one, if I didn't always have to use a clutch pedal.

And no I do not mean flappy paddle gear boxes, I mean something that is like a regular manual but you do not use a pedal.

[Cannot think of a name]

I'd like a manual transmission without a clutch pedal, it's the worst part for me, and it nearly puts me off. I'd get one, if I didn't always have to use a clutch pedal.

And no I do not mean flappy paddle gear boxes, I mean something that is like a regular manual but you do not use a pedal.

There's a Beetle for you.

[Auzkhia]

I'd like a manual transmission without a clutch pedal, it's the worst part for me, and it nearly puts me off. I'd get one, if I didn't always have to use a clutch pedal.

And no I do not mean flappy paddle gear boxes, I mean something that is like a regular manual but you do not use a pedal.

There's a Beetle for you.

Neat, always liked the Beetle.

And I was also thinking of Saab's sensonic transmission, it was a semi-automated manual with a computer engaged clutch with a regular 5 speed lever.

[Novus America]

Possibly. After all if all cars were built like tanks but and limited to 10mph, they would be safer.
But horribly inefficient.
Safety does not overuse all other concerns.

We mandated seat belts, airbags, and now rear cameras because of safety concerns. If further study found that manual transmissions increased safety by lessening distractions, would it be a problem to similarly mandate them?

Because those things added a large amount of safety at limited cost. None involved the actual mechanical operation of the vehicle.

It is always a cost benefit analysis.

The amount of safety added would have to be enormous to offset the costs of such a mandate.

[Cannot think of a name]

We mandated seat belts, airbags, and now rear cameras because of safety concerns. If further study found that manual transmissions increased safety by lessening distractions, would it be a problem to similarly mandate them?

Because those things added a large amount of safety at limited cost. None involved the actual mechanical operation of the vehicle.

It is always a cost benefit analysis.

The amount of safety added would have to be enormous to offset the costs of such a mandate.

I feel like this kind of phrasing got a lot of people at Ford in trouble in the early seventies...

[Novus America]

Because those things added a large amount of safety at limited cost. None involved the actual mechanical operation of the vehicle.

It is always a cost benefit analysis.

The amount of safety added would have to be enormous to offset the costs of such a mandate.

I feel like this kind of phrasing got a lot of people at Ford in trouble in the early seventies...

Not sure what you are trying to say here.
But obviously all business use cost benefit analysis in making business decisions.

If you get in trouble you did your analysis wrong, usually by underestimating the costs.

[Cannot think of a name]

I feel like this kind of phrasing got a lot of people at Ford in trouble in the early seventies...

Not sure what you are trying to say here.
But obviously all business use cost benefit analysis in making business decisions.

Gather round kids and let's tell the tail of that other car Ford named after a horse...

[Novus America]

Not sure what you are trying to say here.
But obviously all business use cost benefit analysis in making business decisions.

Gather round kids and let's tell the tail of that other car Ford named after a horse...

Yes, they did a bad cost analysis by greatly underestimating the costs.

This does not make cost benefit analysis bad. You cannot successfully run a business or government without it.

They did a shitty cost benefit analysis by only looking at estimated settlement costs.
As if no other costs would be incurred.

That was of course stupid. They did it wrong.

[Elwher]

We mandated seat belts, airbags, and now rear cameras because of safety concerns. If further study found that manual transmissions increased safety by lessening distractions, would it be a problem to similarly mandate them?

Because those things added a large amount of safety at limited cost. None involved the actual mechanical operation of the vehicle.

It is always a cost benefit analysis.

The amount of safety added would have to be enormous to offset the costs of such a mandate.

How many deaths are related to distracted driving as opposed to backing over people?

[Novus America]

Because those things added a large amount of safety at limited cost. None involved the actual mechanical operation of the vehicle.

It is always a cost benefit analysis.

The amount of safety added would have to be enormous to offset the costs of such a mandate.

How many deaths are related to distracted driving as opposed to backing over people?

This is asking the wrong question. Deaths are not the only things considered.
Back up accidents cumulatively cause a lot of damage, and preventing most of them via cameras is cheap and easy.

If manuals would prevent most distracted driving deaths, and no other method could do so for a lesser cost, maybe.

But nobody is claiming they can do that.

[Cannot think of a name]

Yes, please.