Yes, it would be nice if we could go back cars without power steering, weak headlights, no airbags, no AWD, recap tires and no seat belts. I just hate this new technology.
Do not ever forget that these new fang dangled electronic devices are only aids to assist you, not for you to be totally reliant on them to stop you from having or causing an accident.It is such a signature system for them, and you aren't far out of warranty, so I would definitely talk to SoA.
Wouldn't be good for business (or us!) if these things started failing early and frequently.
Thanks DragonSubie. :thumbsup:Difficult to add to what has become a now ridiculous conversation, but there is a difference between relatively simple tech improvements and reliance on complex computer controlled systems which add a great deal of expense, many additional points of failure and result in unintended consequences when they fail, and they do.
I think that was the intended point that @Subyroo was trying to make.
BTW - for those that bother to read their owner's manual - It tells you that you can't rely on the system to do what you should be doing - Driving the car.
Just yesterday I saw a female driver with a full blown set of headphones on obviously listening to her ipad - cell or car phone at 100db, there was no way known she would hear the siren of an emergency/police vehicle or a car horn.There are some results - lots of bad drivers out there who are playing with their cell phones or admiring their kids in the back seat instead of watching what they are doing...
I used to ride a Trail Bike to work and use it off road on my days - weekends off. I got hit by by a Priest on the way to work one day, I was in between 2 cars, he saw the gap and turned in front of me. I swerved left and lifted my right leg out of the way of the car as I didn't want it crushed or cut off by the car. I was in Army polyester shirt - shorts and long socks on my way to work, lots of gravel rash, but I survived.@Subyroo -
Your wife's take on "always going off at me for take too much notice of other drivers around me" is off base.
I spend a lot of time on a motorcycle and it is ESSENTIAL that you monitor other drivers.
I generally agree with you.I absolutely endorse and practice the principle that driving requires 100% of the driver's attention, and that advanced safety systems can and should never be relied upon to save you...…
Moreover, I want the 17-year old "uncontrollable circumstance" with the cell phone and 9 other kids in his car to have the same benefits, even if it took a government mandate to make it happen.....
Personally, I would prefer a government mandate to keep her from getting behind the wheel in the first place, but this is America.
I just prefer to make choices based on statistical data and laboratory testing, when I can, rather than speculation, anecdotes, and "common sense" (which is usually another term for "specious logic")....The point I was attempting to make is that unfortunately, human nature being what it is, allows drivers to become dependent on safety systems.,,
I’m in agreement with you.I just prefer to make choices based on statistical data and laboratory testing, when I can, rather than speculation, anecdotes, and "common sense" (which is usually another term for "specious logic").
During my police days, we were told to drive the patrol car as if everyone else on the road was insane. For motorcycle officers, this advice was modified: "Drive as if everyone else on the road is insane, and looking for you personally."@Subyroo
My rule for motorcycle riding is that I'm invisible to everyone, except for the people trying to kill me.
What a safe bet...I just prefer to make choices based on statistical data and laboratory testing, when I can, rather than speculation, anecdotes, and "common sense" (which is usually another term for "specious logic").
What a safe bet...
I guess the point of "there are lies, damn lies and statistics" was lost on you.
Statistical data issued by a group that has a vested interest in an outcome... Sure - We can rely on that.
It appears that "specious logic" may be at play here...
Laboratory testing? Really... Like Yogi Berra said, "In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice they aren't."
There is a big difference between lab and real world.
As far as the real world goes, there have been many advancements made which have saved lives.
Crush zones, interior ergonomics, air bags, anti-lock disc brakes, dramatic tire adhesion capabilities...
As far as attributing increased safety by some gimmicky features versus the sum total of automotive advancements and equating that with a dramatic decrease in deaths or accidents is complete BS. In most venues that leap would qualify one as an unreliable source.
There can't be stats to show how many accidents were avoided, because they didn't happen, but I'm sure that speculation can fill in for the lack of available data. Or perhaps you in your infinite wisdom can tell us how anything other than speculation can create that information...
For example:
How many times has your system prevented an accident? How many of those did you report?
Oops. Information source unavailable for your "statistic".
You can keep telling yourself that you know what you are talking about... but maybe you don't.
All of which you vehemently opposed no doubt because being a superior driver you don't need all that newfangled nonsense, huh? Have you disabled the airbags and anti-lock brakes on your Forester so you don't get lulled into a false sense of security? What about tyres? Crossplys good enough?As far as the real world goes, there have been many advancements made which have saved lives. Crush zones, interior ergonomics, air bags, anti-lock disc brakes, dramatic tire adhesion capabilities...
Once so far while doing the equivalent of a l/h turn in the U.S. when a guy ran a stop sign from my right. The system stopped my car about a paint thickness short of his.For example:
How many times has your system prevented an accident?
Report to whom?How many of those did you report?