Thank God! I first experienced a backup camera when I bought a 2015 Mazda 3. At first it was difficult to use. I kept wanting to take my eyes off the dashboard and turn my head around to look back, which becomes harder with each passing year. It felt unsafe not to have direct visual contact with my surroundings. There was this gadget between me and my driving. Two years later, I bought a 2017 Miata. Even the most loaded Miata doesn't come that way, and I miss that camera. It provides a rear and side view that the human eye is not capable of.
But as of May 1st this year all new cars are required to have them. Hurray for regulation!
https://carbuzz.com/news/your-next-new-car-will-almost-certainly-have-a-backup-camera
QuoteAccording to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, backup cameras have reduced backup-related crashes by 17%. This is a significant figure considering 12,000 people are injured every year in backup incidences, and 200 are killed. Fortunately, if you buy a car after this year, it will definitely come with a backup camera.
Granted backup crashes are seldom fatal and happen a low speeds, but who wants to knock down an old lady in the parking lot and break her hip? And safety issues aside, they are big help in maneuvering in close quarters. You can actually see when your back bumper is within an inch of an obstruction. Backing into narrow spaces is simplified greatly. I'll take the backup camera before the sunroof any day. My brother-in-law says he'd like to have a forward camera too, although that seems like overkill.
Good damned nanny state!
(http://rationalia.com/z/cranky.gif)
I used to work for a "major US insurance company". One of the accidents I handled involved a Dodge Ram 1500 backing over six kids. One fatality, one kid permanently wheelchair-bound. The dead kid belonged to the driver. We couldn't pay anything for that child, the policy protects you from third party claims.
Its going to make vehicles more expensive by forcing people to pay for something they don't want.
Quote from: _Xenu_ on September 01, 2018, 09:13:35 AM
Its going to make vehicles more expensive by forcing people to pay for something they don't want.
Same with airbags, passive restraints, rear view mirrors, turn signals, headlights...
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 01, 2018, 09:16:28 AM
Same with airbags, passive restraints, rear view mirrors, turn signals, headlights...
One thing ... the extra rear light in the middle of the rear window ... is for morons who can't see your brake lights otherwise. That was nanny-state. The other things are good inventions. But yes, only the wealthy should be allowed to drive .. no car less than $50K. Takes all the peasants off of the highways ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on September 01, 2018, 09:23:16 AM
One thing ... the extra rear light in the middle of the rear window ... is for morons who can't see your brake lights otherwise. That was nanny-state.
That light prevents YOUR car from getting damaged. I can see how that's an issue for people who don't think about it.
QuoteThe other things are good inventions. But yes, only the wealthy should be allowed to drive .. no car less than $50K. Takes all the peasants off of the highways ;-)
Your hyperbole is consistent.
Quote from: _Xenu_ on September 01, 2018, 09:13:35 AM
Its going to make vehicles more expensive by forcing people to pay for something they don't want.
People don't want others backing into them either, so we have competing wants. It's not so much about what people don't want. It's about what people do want. One person might not want a backup camera because he doesn't expect to back into anyone, and if he does, it's likely to be a fender bender where the car will only be out of commission for a couple of days, and the bill will be less than $1000. But both parties will be inconvenienced.
Never-the-less, statistically it reduces accidents. Yes, it will add to the price of a new car, especially so when it's installed by the maker, and it's annoying that manufacturers charge 5 times more for the same aftermarket features. But I don't mind regulations that save me from the other guy who is willing to play the odds that he won't damage my property and then runs into me.
Coincidentally, I witnessed a backup crash just last week. Well, I didn't actually see it, but I was sitting in a parking lot, and heard the crash just behind me. I don't know who was at fault, I think legally fault is usually assigned to the guy backing up, but that doesn't necessarily mean he was. I drove off while the people were still standing around their cars talking and looking at their bumpers. The cops weren't there yet.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 01, 2018, 09:47:54 AM
That light prevents YOUR car from getting damaged. I can see how that's an issue for people who don't think about it. Your hyperbole is consistent.
Easy to prevent. Make me dictator, only I can drive. Yes, obey the insurance companies, who buy congress-critters like baseball card trades.
Quote from: SGOS on September 01, 2018, 09:58:23 AM
People don't want others backing into them either, so we have competing wants. It's not so much about what people don't want. It's about what people do want. One person might not want a backup camera because he doesn't expect to back into anyone, and if he does, it's likely to be a fender bender where the car will only be out of commission for a couple of days, and the bill will be less than $1000. But both parties will be inconvenienced.
Never-the-less, statistically it reduces accidents. Yes, it will add to the price of a new car, especially so when it's installed by the maker, and it's annoying that manufacturers charge 5 times more for the same aftermarket features. But I don't mind regulations that save me from the other guy who is willing to play the odds that he won't damage my property and then runs into me.
Statistically we are all dead, eventually. Don' quote insurance company statistics ... it only effects their bottom line (and your premiums). Want to reduce premiums ... get the proles off the road. Socrates' answer .. only let experts do what they are expert at, ban all others doing that. Only expert drivers can drive. Definitely ban anyone under the age of 50 ;-)
Quote from: SGOS on September 01, 2018, 10:03:18 AM
Coincidentally, I witnessed a backup crash just last week. Well, I didn't actually see it, but I was sitting in a parking lot, and heard the crash just behind me. I don't know who was at fault, I think legally fault is usually assigned to the guy backing up, but that doesn't necessarily mean he was. I drove off while the people were still standing around their cars talking and looking at their bumpers. The cops weren't there yet.
Came close last night. Backing up, while cross traffic in parking lot by young buck in big red truck in a hurry. Of course we would both be a fault. When I was on vacation earlier this month, drove a 2018 car with the back up camera (and others had told me they liked theirs). Wouldn't have helped in this case, because the truck was crossing-my-T ... peripheral vision was required, and paranoia backing up anytime. Going forward is dangerous enough, going backward may be necessary, but is backward ;-)
You assume I am a Luddite ... you are wrong. I just don't think that laws or technology is G-d.
I was resistant because my husband bought a new truck with one that would beep at you with increasing intensity as you got closer to an object. It gives me for real anxiety, like someone in the back seat yelling at you to stop stop STOP STOP STOP!!!!!!
But apparently you can turn that off, and my new car has one, it's invaluable. When I rent a car without one, I miss it a lot.
When I was about 10, I was riding my bike up the street and a woman backed out of her driveway, right into me (I had stopped to wait) and my bike hooked onto her bumper and she dragged me for a bit before she noticed.
I have convex "bull's eye" mirror on my side mirrors, field of view ~170°. I miss them when I'm in a rental.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 01, 2018, 10:57:34 AM
I have convex "bull's eye" mirror on my side mirrors, field of view ~170°. I miss them when I'm in a rental.
Things are closer than they appear ... like the apocalypse ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on September 01, 2018, 10:58:28 AM
Things are closer than they appear ... like the apocalypse ;-)
In "Jurassic Park" the convex mirror was on the wrong side of the Jeep. It goes on the side opposite the driver.
I think this is stupid.
With all the multitudinous safety features, we are getting to the point where the one thing you don't need to drive is any sort of skill behind the wheel. Now here's why people put up with this sort of nonsense when they shouldn't.
How much does this new system cost? Not that much? How many other safety systems are now installed? Not that much each, but cumulative? It starts adding up, doesn't it? Modern cars are so loaded with safety features that the cost has gone way up and the only reason people don't notice is that car finance loans have extended from two years all the way to seven years.
Modern cars are struggling to do two things - be safer than ever, and be more fuel efficient than ever. These goals are actually contradictory and only some really good engineering has been able to meet the mandates. If we used the fuel efficiency tools that we have now on a car from 1980 we'd be getting over 50 mpg on a standard family car right now.
Also all these systems have to be maintained. A simple fender bender (with what is no longer a bumper) can trigger the 5+ airbags, which must be replaced in order for the car to be considered fixed. At least $300 per airbag, usually more. The insurance company sees a perfectly driveable car but a large repair bill for the airbags and the crack in the fender, and sees that the airbags are worth more than the depreciated value of the car and calls it totaled.
If these rear view cameras are mandated, the one thing you cannot do is say "I don't want that in my car." Someone else decided you wanted it whether you wanted it or not.
Similar arguments for seat belts, etc., on record.
Quote from: _Xenu_ on September 01, 2018, 09:13:35 AM
Its going to make vehicles more expensive by forcing people to pay for something they don't want.
Yeah!---Like seat belts and wipers, and horns, and stupid shit like that !!
QuoteI think this is stupid.
Shocking.
Tbh though, I am not a fan of mandatory electronics in cars because of the massive expense in getting them replaced or fixed as well as the fact that car makers (particularly Americans, but Germans are getting bad about it to) are making cars to be replaceable, short-term products rather than a 10+ year investment and thus skimping on the quality of the parts.
In most civilized countries, this is not as huge of issue thanks to a working public transportation system and much smaller distances between point A and B leading to lower car ownership. As an American however, literally everyone needs a car to do anything (unless you live in a few cities up in New England) thanks to our non-existent public transportation and the massive amounts of distances we have to cover. Rising car prices (and lower quality cars) means that a necessity (almost like healthcare) becomes more and more a burden for the lower and middle class to afford, or even worse means we will go further and further into debt over.
I think the first thing we should make mandatory is finding ways for car companies to both increase the durability of their products while keeping them affordable, then worry about things that will start making car prices increase.
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 01, 2018, 12:16:19 PM
Yeah!---Like seat belts and wipers, and horns, and stupid shit like that !!
There is a large difference between a seat belt or horn, which are relatively simple pieces of mechanical systems and basic electronics, versus rear-view cameras that are integrated into a universal computer system that is responsible for everything from the camera to traction control to ignition to...
Cars are becoming far less about mechanics and more and more about integrated electronics, and that is going to be inherently more expensive. And one one thing goes wrong, it's reaching a point where the entire system has to be replaced, and that is incredibly expensive.
Median car prices (post-inflation) are rising far faster than median income. That is an issue not just for new cars but for "older' cars as well... you have to take out larger and larger loans just to get even a moderately used car, and taking out loans that can be 10, 15, 20, 25% to afford it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmIWwZVE7wc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmIWwZVE7wc)
There is an absolutely brilliant video on why electronics have been a major problem for car costs, but I cant find it now to save my life. If I do I'll be sure to post it here. It really changed my mind on cars a year or two ago, and since then I have not been a fan of advanced electronics in cars, much less mandatory advanced electronics.
"Yeah, but...!"
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 01, 2018, 12:16:19 PM
Yeah!---Like seat belts and wipers, and horns, and stupid shit like that !!
Well, in all fairness, you are talking to a guy with a manual transmission and roll up windows. This is by design to reduce repair costs. A seat belt costs virtually nothing, horns I have no idea but I would want one anyway.
Quote from: _Xenu_ on September 01, 2018, 12:52:30 PM
Well, it all fairness, you are talking to a guy with a manual transmission and roll up windows. This is by design to reduce repair costs. A seat belt costs virtually nothing, horns I have no idea but I would want one anyway.
Same. Stick shift, no electric locks, minimal electronic driving assistance, etc. ... these things saved me several thousand dollars on the car by themselves when I bought it, and I don't have to worry about fixing things my car doesn't even have.
Comparing rudimentary tech like seatbelts to electronica that are integrated into a master computer that is responsible for not just safety but also things like traction control, engine ignition and operation, suspension, etc. Is like comparing chalk to carrots.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 01, 2018, 12:55:57 PM
Same. Stick shift, no electric locks, minimal electronic driving assistance, etc. ... these things saved me several thousand dollars on the car by themselves when I bought it, and I don't have to worry about fixing things my car doesn't even have.
That's exactly how I see it. Adding more features is just more stuff that can break and cost me money. My F150 looks very nice on the outside, solid black paint job with chrome package, but inside its very bare bones.
Another feature I like on both my cars is the blind spot alarm. Even better is the cross track alarm. I'd like to think I'd avoid a cross track accident without it, and I probably would. But backing out of a parking space between two other cars, the alarm goes off before I'm out far enough to see past the cars on either side of me. I'd probably see the cross track vehicle in time, although some are coming very fast. I like the advanced notice. Same for the blind spot alarm.
The one feature I don't like is lane warning. I drive a lot of narrow rural curved roads, which puts me close to the center line and the side lines at the same time. That one was always going off, even when I'm not on a line. I keep that one turned off. Sometimes I turn it on when I'm on a main highway, but usually I forget.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 01, 2018, 12:19:36 PM
car makers (particularly Americans, but Germans are getting bad about it to) are making cars to be replaceable, short-term products rather than a 10+ year investment and thus skimping on the quality of the parts.
Since I retired 20 years ago, I've only bought two new cars, and that was recently. So I haven't had much experience with the latest cars wearing out. But I do remember American cars pre 1980. I would trade them in around 70,000 miles because it was nothing but headache after headache beyond that point. That Japanese started building longer lasting vehicles, and eventually American cars caught up. Now I expect a car to last 200,000 miles, although the only one I ever drove past that was a Toyota pickup that I sold at 225,000 miles. I had replaced a timing belt, but I don't think there were any other problems. I had trundled around 200 loads of firewood down long mountain roads along with the usual work I bought it for, and it still had the original brakes, but it was a manual transmission so I didn't have to use the brakes much.
Cars seem better than ever to me, but I have little knowledge as to what's happened in the last 5 years to quality. And I used to wonder if building longer lasting cars had hurt the auto industry. Building things that last is not the corporate norm, but if one manufacturer does like the Japanese did at one time, the others are forced to keep up.
Quote from: _Xenu_ on September 01, 2018, 12:52:30 PM
Well, it all fairness, you are talking to a guy with a manual transmission and roll up windows. This is by design to reduce repair costs. A seat belt costs virtually nothing, horns I have no idea but I would want one anyway.
That's the way have been most of my life, and quite religious about it. I still drive a manual, but that's just for the pleasure of it. But some of the new innovations seem worth having. Not all of them of course.
https://www.iihs.org/
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 01, 2018, 01:09:20 PM
"Yeah...but I still don't like it!"
I hope your week picks up, because otherwise I don't understand why you are stooping to this level.
I have provided my reasons. Not wanting to be even further in debt for something that will be made poorly and jerryrigged in just to meet regulations without any actual thought of quality or if it actually fits with the design and specs of the cars... that is a little more than, "I don't like it".
A seatbelt is hard to fuck up. Relatively, an airbag is hard to fuck up. A rear view camera that links to the car's computer and display system, which is linked to essentially every major function of the car, is something that companies already fuck up. You think when they are forced to throw it in against their will, they are going to suddenly magically work?
I read 'em. Not impressed. I paid too many death benefits to the beneficiaries of people who found ways around all the safety features that could be found in a car.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 01, 2018, 02:31:38 PM
I read 'em. Not impressed. I paid too many death benefits to the beneficiaries of people who found ways around all the safety features that could be found in a car.
Then you should also know that the overwhelming majority of accidents involve one or both parties being distracted. You can put all the safety features in the world on a car, but if people aren't paying attention to them then they do absolutely jack shit.
The NHTSA has estimated that rear-cameras have had an 8% reduction effect on accidents involving a car in reverse; not people killed, not people injured, but all accidents including fenderbenders. That is not impressive.
Now consider the cost of the camera...
https://www.edmunds.com/car-technology/adding-a-back-up-camera-to-your-vehicle.html (https://www.edmunds.com/car-technology/adding-a-back-up-camera-to-your-vehicle.html)
Edmund's estimates a camera will set you back between $150 and $400. The instillation is another $400-600 and the screens will set you back another $500 to $1500 dollars. Anything a car manufacture does will not be those low end costs but rather mid-to-upper range, so you are looking at a mandatory increase of about $1500 to the car cost.
That is not pocket change, particularly when the average cost of a car is already exponentially rising when compared to the average wage of an American worker, and don't even get me started on people in my age range who are already neck deep in debt. You are asking millions upon millions upon millions of Americans to go further and further in debt for something that has only made an 8% difference.
Nah dude, fuck that. You know damn well I am 100% for the collective paying more to protect the individual, but even I have limits to where that crosses the line. We don't need smarter cars, we need smarter drivers. The cameras do fuck-all when 92% of us still just use our eyes and looking over our shoulders to back out, even when we have the camera right there.
Like, I'm glad you can afford that... but I cant. College students cant. The average working class person cant. We don't buy models of cars that don't have cameras because we hate them... shit, if I could afford the maintenance and initial cost of one, I would probably buy it cause it seems pretty cool.
This isn't about hating new fangled new technology that our Luddite brains cant comprehend, it's about the fact we cant ðŸ' fucking ðŸ' afford ðŸ' it, and it's not effective anyways.
Okay then.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 01, 2018, 02:54:31 PM
Edmund's estimates a camera will set you back between $150 and $400. The instillation is another $400-600 and the screens will set you back another $500 to $1500 dollars. Anything a car manufacture does will not be those low end costs but rather mid-to-upper range, so you are looking at a mandatory increase of about $1500 to the car cost.
That's not just a no in my book, that's a hell fucking no. The system costs more than paying for a fender bender out of pocket. Why the hell would I want one of those? And that's not even taking into account added complexity, and the costs to repair if it breaks.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 01, 2018, 02:56:25 PM
Okay then.
I guess at the end of the day, yeah... okay then. It doesn't hopefully effect me because I don't plan on buying a 2020 or older car. But for the millions of people who get driven deeper into debt so people can feel good (even if it doesn't actually do anything), it's not really "okay then".
(and in before, "Hurr shiranu, but u advocates f4 collecutve healthcure!!!" [edit: Not that I think you would say that Gawdzil]. Yeah, no shit. I also advocate for the prices being lowered through restricting corporations right to charge whatever they want and I also advocate for people paying what they can afford, not everyone having to pay the same amount. To put this car thing into the healthcare analogy, this is like saying everyone has to get insurance... but regardless of if you make zero dollars a year or a million dollars a year, everyone has to pay the exact same price for the insurance.)
Quote from: Shiranu on September 01, 2018, 12:26:36 PM
There is a large difference between a seat belt or horn, which are relatively simple pieces of mechanical systems and basic electronics, versus rear-view cameras that are integrated into a universal computer system that is responsible for everything from the camera to traction control to ignition to...
Cars are becoming far less about mechanics and more and more about integrated electronics, and that is going to be inherently more expensive. And one one thing goes wrong, it's reaching a point where the entire system has to be replaced, and that is incredibly expensive.
Median car prices (post-inflation) are rising far faster than median income. That is an issue not just for new cars but for "older' cars as well... you have to take out larger and larger loans just to get even a moderately used car, and taking out loans that can be 10, 15, 20, 25% to afford it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmIWwZVE7wc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmIWwZVE7wc)
There is an absolutely brilliant video on why electronics have been a major problem for car costs, but I cant find it now to save my life. If I do I'll be sure to post it here. It really changed my mind on cars a year or two ago, and since then I have not been a fan of advanced electronics in cars, much less mandatory advanced electronics.
I understand your point. But I'd say that backup a camera is cheaper than seat belts. I drive a 2005 Sienna. I live in a residential area, and back out of my drive way. A car parked across the street (legally) directly across from my driveway. I backed into him; decided to get a backup system. It cost me $125 and another $75 to install it. Works fine. But it would be better if it was factory installed. I think that is a reasonable amount for what I got. Use it all the time; has saved me backing into cars in parking lots. And even better, I can see whatever is back there in my drive way.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 01, 2018, 03:02:15 PM
I guess at the end of the day, yeah... okay then. It doesn't hopefully effect me because I don't plan on buying a 2020 or older car. But for the millions of people who get driven deeper into debt so people can feel good (even if it doesn't actually do anything), it's not really "okay then".
(and in before, "Hurr shiranu, but u advocates f4 collecutve healthcure!!!" [edit: Not that I think you would say that Gawdzil]. Yeah, no shit. I also advocate for the prices being lowered through restricting corporations right to charge whatever they want and I also advocate for people paying what they can afford, not everyone having to pay the same amount. To put this car thing into the healthcare analogy, this is like saying everyone has to get insurance... but regardless of if you make zero dollars a year or a million dollars a year, everyone has to pay the exact same price for the insurance.)
I recently ran up a $42,000 bill for three days in a hospital.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 01, 2018, 03:21:30 PM
I recently ran up a $42,000 bill for three days in a hospital.
Fuuuuuck, I know how that goes. Sorry to hear that :\.
In the hopes of not derailing my own thread, here's one of my car buying peeves, although probably my smallest peeve in car buying. I remember a time if you wanted a clock on your dash panel, they would put one in. If you wanted a radio, they put it in. This or that, they put it in. Now, taking their cue from TV cable companies, cars come with choices from the manufacturer that come in packages. The Mazda 3 and 6 had these various option models that were given non descriptive names like the Sport, Touring i, Touring e, Grand Touring i and e, and on and on, Each model had a package of options. If you wanted a certain option you had to buy the right model. As you climb the 1k rung of the ladder upwards, the options from the lower models were included. I wanted built in navigation, and in fact, navigation might be the only option the Mazda dealer could install like in the old days, but you had to buy the model with the touch screen big enough to handle it, and it was somewhere up the chain. Had I gone farther up, navigation would have been included. I think the cost for dealer installation was $550.
But the weird thing was that I didn't know that the model with the right sized screen had the technology already in place, I assume I had already paid for that. The dealer said it might take a couple of days to install the navigation, but what this meant was that he would have to slide a little SD card like the one in your digital camera into a slot on the dashboard. He called me the next day to tell me it was now installed and ready to pickup. So it cost $550 for him to insert the SD card.
On the Mazda 3, I was also supposed to get a month's free satellite radio, as the salesman told me, but that was actually an honest mistake (I think), because that never showed up on my system after I bought the car. I asked the salesman about it and after he researched it a bit more, he told me that was only available if I bought the "technology package," and I wouldn't have bought that anyway because the technology package came with a sun roof, and I absolutely didn't want that. But a sun roof? Why is that considered technology? They've been making them for 50 years. I didn't really care about the satellite radio, but I wanted to at least get the included 1 month free trial, so it wasn't a big deal.
A couple of years later I was test driving a 2017 Miata, the premium Grand Touring model that came with navigation. I wanted to try it, but the salesman told me they don't put the card in for a test drive because people were swiping them when no one was looking. LOL
As it turns out, satellite radio was on the Miata that I eventually bought, and I did indeed get the months free trial, but it turned out to be just advertising that told all about the wonders of their product. I never heard a tune or 5 minutes of talk radio. Just a continuous ad that played over and over. Now I get email from Sirrus Radio all the time with special sign up offers, which I ignore.
Good God Almighty. What a bunch of nonsense.
Yeah, next time I'm able to buy new or semi-new, I'm going to be a salesman's nightmare.
"No, I don't want that option. I don't want that one either. Nope, take it out. Nope, not interested in that either."
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on September 01, 2018, 11:59:41 PM
Yeah, next time I'm able to buy new or semi-new, I'm going to be a salesman's nightmare.
"No, I don't want that option. I don't want that one either. Nope, take it out. Nope, not interested in that either."
Like with phone canvasing ... up-selling is where all the profit margin is, not on the base model.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on September 01, 2018, 11:59:41 PM
Yeah, next time I'm able to buy new or semi-new, I'm going to be a salesman's nightmare.
"No, I don't want that option. I don't want that one either. Nope, take it out. Nope, not interested in that either."
They have no problem with you ordering a car, they still get a commission. The salesman's nightmare is the person who walks out without buying a car at all.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 02, 2018, 05:44:41 AM
They have no problem with you ordering a car, they still get a commission. The salesman's nightmare is the person who walks out without buying a car at all.
The last time I bought a car, I did walk out of one place, even after we agreed on a price. I knew what the car was worth and I made a legitimate offer. The salesman wanted to start negotiating, but I held firm. Then he wanted me to "take a chance," and wanted me to cut a deck of cards. If I got the high card, he would take my offer. If he got the high card, he would sell at the "lowest" price he could come down to. I refused to cut the deck, and told him to put the cards away. Then he got the manager who came over and said he couldn't sell it that low, and also wanted to do the card thing. There was also a lot of other stuff going on, rattling of papers, asking personal questions, being told I seemed like a nice guy, pens clicking, distractions, and sudden changes in negotiation tactics. I had got there late, and it had been a long drive. Now the sun was going down, and I was getting tired and wrung out. Finally, he agreed to take my offer, but at this point I had become disgusted and even confused, but lucid enough to recognize the confusion. This is not how it's supposed to feel when you buy a car, so I told them I was going leave. They looked shocked (not an exaggeration), and pointed out that they were taking my offer and that I had "won." I said, "No, I'm leaving now," and I drove home in the dark thinking about how much the experience felt like an LSD trip.
A couple of months later the same model in the right color, with the right options became available 200 miles in the other direction. I drove there, test drove it, made an offer, and spent no more than 30 minutes in the office doing the paperwork, and I was home before the sun went down. They delivered the car to my house a couple days later, since I had driven to the dealership by myself and wasn't doing a trade in.
I walk in.
"I'll give you 75% of the sticker price."
"We can't do that."
"Bye."
"Wait! Would you..."
"I'll give you 75% of the sticker price." And so on. I got a car for what I was willing to pay.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 02, 2018, 06:54:12 AM
I walk in.
"I'll give you 75% of the sticker price."
"We can't do that."
"Bye."
"Wait! Would you..."
"I'll give you 75% of the sticker price." And so on. I got a car for what I was willing to pay.
Today you might try walking in with a big wad of cash (the salesman would probably take your offer) ... and have a cop benefit his department with "civil forfeiture". ;-(
Quote from: Shiranu on September 01, 2018, 02:04:55 PM
A seatbelt is hard to fuck up. Relatively, an airbag is hard to fuck up. A rear view camera that links to the car's computer and display system, which is linked to essentially every major function of the car, is something that companies already fuck up. You think when they are forced to throw it in against their will, they are going to suddenly magically work?
Who says the must be linked to every function of the car? Backup cams are about as dirt simple as electronics can get. My pickup has a backup camera. I've had zero issues with it. None, nada, zip. But work gives me a company vehicle so I don't actually drive my pickup all that much.
The first company vehicle they gave me was an old diesel cargo van. Boy did I miss the backup camera. So I had an aftermarket radio installed with a backup camera. Cost like $300 installed. Worked great for as long as I drove it.
Then they took the van away and gave me the CEO's old Ridgeline. Great vehicle but it too predates backup cameras. So I bought a garmin GPS and a garmin wireless backup camera. Installed it myself and works great. Absolutely reliable.
But back to your argument which is that mandated backup cameras are bad because they're integrated into the electronics and will therefore be expensive to fix when they break. This is a really weak argument and here's why.
1. There is no mandate for the cameras to be integrated with all the other electronics. Yep manufacturers do it that way but they don't have to. And if enough people demand it, they'll do it your way. Start writing letters.
2. There is no mandate that they be maintained. If you buy a car with one and it breaks and you don't want to fix it, don't. No one says you have to. So what's the problem? If the integrated electronics break then a ton of shit that you probably actually want or need will not work. Its unlikely the a backup camera being integrated into the system would cause or contribute to such a failre and fixing the problem in that case will cost $0 more just because the vehicle has a backup camera.
3. There is no mandate that says you must buy a new car. Cars last a long time now. There will be tons of inventory for years to come which are not required to have backup cameras. Buy one of those drive around all day giving the finger to the man.
I've heard people gripe about these things since the mandate was announced and I honestly don't understand what the problem is. I'm kind of envious of those who have a problem with this because I figure they must be leading a seriously trouble free lifestyle if this issue is the thing that gets their blood boiling. I wish I had so little to worry about that I could bother to be upset by something so stupid as a backup camera but I digress.
Oh they add cost you say? Yep they sure do. As I said above, I've installed them using aftermarket parts in two vehicles and the cost was under $500. That's $500 to do it aftermarket. Built into the design and installed at the factory we're talking less than $100. Are you really going to bitch about a $100 item that could save someone from injury or death on a vehicle that's going to cost you north of $20k regardless of whether it has that safety item or not?
Humans crappify everything they touch. So yes, everything must be integrated, and jacked into a chip in your skull, that Google keeps track of ... bwahaha.
Good. I used to work outside, collecting carts for a grocery store. I swear to god, almost nobody checked their mirrors before backing up. They'd get in the car, and before they've even had time to fasten their seat belt, they're already in reverse. I learned to stop and wait when I saw people getting in their cars, because I didn't trust them to be responsible. I'm surprised nobody working out there has been killed or seriously injured yet (to my knowledge).
Also, on a sort of related note, old people just shouldn't drive. I was asked to help one elderly man in the drive-through of the pharmacy, expecting that he was having engine trouble or a flat tire or something. Turned out, he was trying to accelerate while in parking gear. I pointed this out to him, thinking he was just having a brain fart. After all, he'd driven the entire way here without incident, right? But after he shifted into drive, he fucking floored it. I watched in disbelief as he zoomed around the corner of the full parking lot and I heard a loud crash. Amazingly, he didn't hit anyone, but crashed into a sign and some trees, totaling his car. He was uninjured, but shaken. That could have ended very, very badly. My guess is he mistook the gas pedal for the break, which is a common mistake elderly drivers make.
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 02, 2018, 01:46:42 PM
Good. I used to work outside, collecting carts for a grocery store. I swear to god, almost nobody checked their mirrors before backing up.
I recently had a store person who was collecting carts stand behind my Mazda Tribute with her back to me. If I hadn't been looking I would have driven over her. She evidently thought "this old guy won't look, and I'll trade some pain for lots of money." Didn't work.
QuoteWho says the must be linked to every function of the car? Backup cams are about as dirt simple as electronics can get.
The manufacturers. It is of course possible not to do it, but they do it anyways. They cant have it be simple, they have too many people breathing down their necks telling them to "innovate". So they may poor choices like a "cover" on the underside of the car that provides no actual benefit and is annoying to have to remove just to get under the car. Or all the computer systems have to be linked because our cars need to have a smartphone/computer in the middle console that has full wifi capacity and can browse google, and why would you install multiple systems on one car when you can have it all in one place?
Car prices continue to rise quicker than our incomes do, and coincidentally the amount of bells and whistles that need to be added on just happen to be rising as well. You do not need a backup camera to backup safely, as made evident by the literal billions of times people do it a day without hitting a fly. It's one thing to make people pay more for something they can afford to pay more, it's entirely another to be rising the price on something that already drives millions upon millions of people into debt... all for an item with a 8% rate of improvement (of any accident, not even harmful ones).
QuoteAre you really going to bitch about a $100 item that could save someone from injury or death on a vehicle that's going to cost you north of $20k regardless of whether it has that safety item or not?
Yes, because I'm not going to buy a $20-fucking-thousand dollar car that has that safety item. That's the reason it costs $20,000... is because it has to have all the bells and whistles, and what this regulation is doing is trying to turn bare-boned, working class cars into the debt-machines that are a "modern, entry level" vehicles that even the upper-middle class go into debt over.
Even if the manufacture only charges $100 to install a camera that costs $150 and a screen that costs $500, even if they got those in bulk at a lower price, they are losing money. That's not how corporations work, my dude. There is a reason the nicer model of any given car, with only a couple more bells and whistles, has their price go up by several thousand dollars, not several hundred.
That is a mandatory "$100" (likely $400+). That is not pocket change for a college student working an entry level job and paying another $260 on car insurance and a hundred or two more in medical bills, as well as all the other normal expenses.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 02, 2018, 02:22:28 PM
The manufacturers. It is of course possible not to do it, but they do it anyways. They cant have it be simple, they have too many people breathing down their necks telling them to "innovate".
Ok but this situation exists regardless of whether backup cameras are mandated or not. And integrating a backup camera into such a system does not make that system any more likely to suffer a total system failure. Backup cameras change nothing as far this aspect of it goes. So like I said, pretty weak argument.
QuoteCar prices continue to rise quicker than our incomes do, and coincidentally the amount of bells and whistles that need to be added on just happen to be rising as well. You do not need a backup camera to backup safely, as made evident by the literal billions of times people do it a day without hitting a fly. It's one thing to make people pay more for something they can afford to pay more, it's entirely another to be rising the price on something that already drives millions upon millions of people into debt... all for an item with a 8% rate of improvement (of any accident, not even harmful ones).
Power steering is not mandated. Power windows are not mandated. Power door locks are not mandated. But you pretty much cannot find a new car without all of them these days and you cannot order a vehicle without them if you wanted to in most cases. Backup cameras would have been the same way. The only thing mandating them did was speed up the process.
QuoteEven if the manufacture only charges $100 to install a camera that costs $150 and a screen that costs $500, even if they got those in bulk at a lower price, they are losing money. That's not how corporations work, my dude. There is a reason the nicer model of any given car, with only a couple more bells and whistles, has their price go up by several thousand dollars, not several hundred.
That is a mandatory "$100" (likely $400+). That is not pocket change for a college student working an entry level job and paying another $260 on car insurance and a hundred or two more in medical bills, as well as all the other normal expenses.
You weren't listening. I said I've installed cameras aftermarket in two different vehicles and neither was more than $500. That's for the camera, screen and GPS in case and radio in the other. And in the case of the radio, it also includes the cost to have a professional install it. Factored into the design of a new vehicle it will be less than $100 total. Way less. Will manufacturers charge more? Probably. Profit is kind of the idea after all. But the added cost is literally peanuts compared to the overall pre-existing cost of the vehicle. As for college students not being able to afford a new vehicle because of the cost. I've been on this planet for 50 years and I cannot recall a time when your average college student could afford a brand new car so again, your argument is weak. Very weak.
Quote from: Johan on September 02, 2018, 08:53:17 PM
I've been on this planet for 50 years and I cannot recall a time when your average college student could afford a brand new car.
That's sure how it was for me and most of my friends. We all drove junkers, but most of us could only manage that after we had worked a couple of summers. I walked everywhere my first two years. I haven't hung out at a college campus for years. Maybe expectations are different now, and maybe they need to be, although I wouldn't know why that should be. There were a few guys that had cool cars, but none were in my social groups. I never had a new car until two years after I entered the actual work force, and that was a 1968 Volkswagen Bug that required a heavy coat and a cap with furry ear flaps and a plastic window scraper to keep the inside of the windows deiced in the winter. I could scrape and drive at the same time. One scraping lasted about 20 minutes. Granted that was in Montana during especially brutal winter days. Even for the first 10 years of my career buying a car required debt and sacrifice. For the next 10 years it required mostly debt, but debt was always a burden for me.
Quote from: SGOS on September 03, 2018, 01:03:46 AM
That's sure how it was for me and most of my friends. We all drove junkers, but most of us could only manage that after we had worked a couple of summers. I walked everywhere my first two years. I haven't hung out at a college campus for years. Maybe expectations are different now, and maybe they need to be, although I wouldn't know why that should be. There were a few guys that had cool cars, but none were in my social groups. I never had a new car until two years after I entered the actual work force, and that was a 1968 Volkswagen Bug that required a heavy coat and a cap with furry ear flaps and a plastic window scraper to keep the inside of the windows deiced in the winter. I could scrape and drive at the same time. One scraping lasted about 20 minutes. Granted that was in Montana during especially brutal winter days. Even for the first 10 years of my career buying a car required debt and sacrifice. For the next 10 years it required mostly debt, but debt was always a burden for me.
Same here. Only one new car my whole life (less than 500 miles on odometer), and it was a Chevy and a lemon. I was in my late 20s. My first two cars were donated by my parents (I paid insurance, gas etc). I have never owned a Chevy again.
Perhaps since new cars are turning into an iPhone on 4 wheels, people feel that like an iPhone, they need the latest as soon as it comes out? I recently drove a new rental (Nissan Sentra) ... that had the back-up camera. The accessory panel wasn't as advanced as some I have seen. As it was I had to have my daughter ride shotgun (navigator). She was running the accessory panel (for climate control), and running GPS on her smart phone. Too distracting, the newer accessory panels are sufficiently complicated (I use a flip phone for a reason) I would have had to stop, park and manipulate ... couldn't run it while driving. That would have been a challenge on a dark unfamiliar Interstate in the middle of a rainstorm. I don't have that problem with my older model car that uses buttons.
Quote from: Baruch on September 03, 2018, 05:28:04 AM
Same here. Only one new car my whole life (less than 500 miles on odometer), and it was a Chevy and a lemon. I was in my late 20s. My first two cars were donated by my parents (I paid insurance, gas etc). I have never owned a Chevy again.
After I graduated college, I drove the old beater back to Chicago, and stayed with my parents for the summer. The trip from Montana was the last one and it arrived coughing and sputtering. My parents never gave me a car. We didn't have that much money, but my Dad sold me his at the end of the summer. He said it was a good deal. I don't know if it was because everyone says that.
Quote from: Baruch on September 03, 2018, 05:28:04 AM
Perhaps since new cars are turning into an iPhone on 4 wheels, people feel that like an iPhone, they need the latest as soon as it comes out?
I don't have a smart phone either, but I admit I'm sold on the backup camera. Most of the bells and whistles, I don't care about. They're nice, but hardly necessary. The backup camera is the only new option that could get me to step up a model just to have in a car, not enough to trade in the Miata for several years, but enough to insist on it for the next one. Maybe navigation too, but that's it.
Quote from: Baruch on September 03, 2018, 05:28:04 AM
the newer accessory panels are sufficiently complicated (I use a flip phone for a reason) I would have had to stop, park and manipulate ... couldn't run it while driving. That would have been a challenge on a dark unfamiliar Interstate in the middle of a rainstorm. I don't have that problem with my older model car that uses buttons.
The Mazda accessory panel has been criticized for not being easily intuitive, especially the navigation set up, and I'm not sure I've figured it all out yet after using one for three years. It's touch screen, but I find it too distracting to look at the screen and touch while driving (think texting). It does have a control knob built on the console between the seats. It's just an inch from the gear shift and allows a restful position for my arm. Through a combination of turning and pressing, I can direct the accessory panel faster than I can touch, but some things you can't manipulate until the car is stopped. The car won't let you. You can navigate with voice control anytime, and your hands never leave the wheel. Most of the time, I don't even have to look at the screen.
Quote from: _Xenu_ on September 01, 2018, 03:01:50 PM
That's not just a no in my book, that's a hell fucking no. The system costs more than paying for a fender bender out of pocket. Why the hell would I want one of those?
Inconvenience of repairs for one thing. There is also the cost of damage to someone else's property, which you can be held liable for.
I recently got tangled up in a car wash of all things. Nothing serious, but it resulted in an ugly scratch in the lower front panel around the grill. The car wash paid for it; $600.
The backup camera is still cheaper than a minor repair, and few repairs are cheaper than a scratch. The days of the $50 body putty repair are long gone.
Integrated systems ... Tesla drivers recently got into trouble. Their cars are integrated into the Tesla wireless network (like OnStar). Because of how the drivers set things up, when the network went down, they could no longer start the car, or even open the door.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/29/tesla-is-reportedly-having-some-major-network-issues/
Yes, put the CIA in charge of your car, after you put a GPS into your car. Otherwise the Russians under your bed are going to ...
Yes, OnStar ... because you think you are Batman, and drive the Batmobile ;-)) Poor Batman, only has Alfred to help him out, not the spooks at Langley.
Quote from: Baruch on September 03, 2018, 05:28:04 AM
I have never owned a Chevy again.
Friday car. Get over it.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 03, 2018, 01:14:47 PM
Friday car. Get over it.
Had a couple nice Toyotas, and Chryslers.
Driving a Mercury (Ford) now. Grand Marquis, well built, lots of fans love it.
Well, if you're comfortable with the error of small samples...
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 03, 2018, 03:28:05 PM
Well, if you're comfortable with the error of small samples...
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/car-brands-reliability-how-they-stack-up/ (https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/car-brands-reliability-how-they-stack-up/)
Chevy has been consistently dropping in reliability ratings for several years now. Props to Ford though, it looks like they are finally moving back up in the rankings. That said, look at the bottom ranked cars... American, American, American, America, Swedish (what are you doing, Volvo...), American, American... you get the idea.
I
LOVE Italian cars; if I was the type of person who had money to blow, I would love to own an Alfa Romeo and a Ferrari. But my love for these cars does not make me believe they are reliable or "good" cars. Italian cars are notorious for being poorly made in terms of reliability, and I have to accept that.
That stereotype of Italian cars is unfortunately true for American cars nowadays as well... they may have all the bells and whistles, but they are riddled with poor design choices and low reliability. It sucks, but I am not going to tell someone they are wrong for implying that Italian cars are not quality cars, no more than anyone should get mad at saying American cars are not quality cars. A bad experience may just be a bad experience... but a bad experience can also be accurate of a systemic problem, and in this case it is. Americans have forgotten how to make good cars, or rather the CEO's of these companies don't care about making good cars but rather profitable cars.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 03, 2018, 03:28:05 PM
Well, if you're comfortable with the error of small samples...
Yes, I could have a large sample, if I was a Fortune 500 CEO buying fleet cars for the company ... is that how you get a larger sample? In that case, I would lease them all, wouldn't have to own them.
This is what I wanted as a kid ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfa_Romeo_Spider
That's a spicy meatball!
I'm going to OK City tomorrow for work. Got to haul some equipment we built to Tinker for acceptance testing. Picked up a 2018 Ford Expedition rental yesterday for the trip. It's perfectly parked at the end of street about 100 yards from our driveway. I backed it all the way down there. The backup camera made it a no brainer.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on September 03, 2018, 10:03:02 PM
I'm going to OK City tomorrow for work. Got to haul some equipment we built to Tinker for acceptance testing. Picked up a 2018 Ford Expedition rental yesterday for the trip. It's perfectly parked at the end of street about 100 yards from our driveway. I backed it all the way down there. The backup camera made it a no brainer.
Hurricane bringing lots of rain into the Gulf ... all the way to Kansas, 5 days worth of rain. So be safe.
Thanks. I've been tracking that storm. No doubt we are going to catch some of of it.
Quote from: Shiranu on September 03, 2018, 05:19:18 PM
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/car-brands-reliability-how-they-stack-up/ (https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/car-brands-reliability-how-they-stack-up/)
Chevy has been consistently dropping in reliability ratings for several years now. Props to Ford though, it looks like they are finally moving back up in the rankings. That said, look at the bottom ranked cars... American, American, American, America, Swedish (what are you doing, Volvo...), American, American... you get the idea.
I LOVE Italian cars; if I was the type of person who had money to blow, I would love to own an Alfa Romeo and a Ferrari. But my love for these cars does not make me believe they are reliable or "good" cars. Italian cars are notorious for being poorly made in terms of reliability, and I have to accept that.
That stereotype of Italian cars is unfortunately true for American cars nowadays as well... they may have all the bells and whistles, but they are riddled with poor design choices and low reliability. It sucks, but I am not going to tell someone they are wrong for implying that Italian cars are not quality cars, no more than anyone should get mad at saying American cars are not quality cars. A bad experience may just be a bad experience... but a bad experience can also be accurate of a systemic problem, and in this case it is. Americans have forgotten how to make good cars, or rather the CEO's of these companies don't care about making good cars but rather profitable cars.
JD Powers doesn't seem to have a problem with the Chevys. But I suspect Baruch's car was built outside the window you gave us.
Seems to me this is more of a technical and practical problem than a problem in principle/law. I mean, if the costs are low, it's just money out of the wallet that evidentially will make it both easier and safer to back up a car. I'm all for it.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 04, 2018, 08:04:59 AM
JD Powers doesn't seem to have a problem with the Chevys. But I suspect Baruch's car was built outside the window you gave us.
1982 wasn't a good year for Chevy ;-( My Citation had a known defect that the dealer didn't bother fixing, before they sold it to me.
http://blog.safeauto.com/the-6-biggest-lemons-of-all-time/
Quote from: Baruch on September 04, 2018, 01:10:42 PM
1982 wasn't a good year for Chevy ;-( My Citation had a known defect that the dealer didn't bother fixing, before they sold it to me.
http://blog.safeauto.com/the-6-biggest-lemons-of-all-time/
I had a Citation briefly that I bought from a relative. It was a horrible car even with only 12,000 miles on it. A mechanic friend referred to the Citation as a "disposable." Other Chevy cars should not be judged by the Citation. It was a corporate boondoggle, and an anomaly.
Quote from: SGOS on September 04, 2018, 03:54:39 PM
I had a Citation briefly that I bought from a relative. It was a horrible car even with only 12,000 miles on it. A mechanic friend referred to the Citation as a "disposable." Other Chevy cars should not be judged by the Citation. It was a corporate boondoggle, and an anomaly.
Fair enough ... not every Ford is an Edsel. But why should anyone here not hate the auto industry ... because corporate cronyism, because environment. Have you no trees to hug? (sarc).
Yes ... don't judge the Republicans by Trump ... just an anomaly (haha).
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on September 01, 2018, 08:52:19 AM
Good damned nanny state!
(http://rationalia.com/z/cranky.gif)
I used to work for a "major US insurance company". One of the accidents I handled involved a Dodge Ram 1500 backing over six kids. One fatality, one kid permanently wheelchair-bound. The dead kid belonged to the driver. We couldn't pay anything for that child, the policy protects you from third party claims.
Proof that car insurance isn't worth having except that it legally required. And, I suppose, only kill your own kid.