Sponsored
OP
OP
Bikeman315

Bikeman315

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Threads
520
Messages
15,243
Reaction score
19,261
Location
Myrtle Beach, SC
First Name
Ira
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT/CS, 2021 Volvo XC60
Some of the reasons vehicles are coming with all these nannies year after year isn’t because “we” want them - it’s because it’s being crammed down everyone’s throats by the NHTSA and the Feds. They are mandating that Vehicle Manufacturers must have ABC and XYZ safety features in place for year X.

Whatever happened to metal dashboards, non-collapsible steering wheels and nearly shatter resistant glass that would knock some sense into someone after hitting (insert object here).... LMAO

My prior 2016 S550 that was a Buy Back didn’t have the reverse sensing nannies; when I had my 2018 replacement built to the same specs as my prior 2016, due to what was now “current mandated” safety features, the 2018 came with those reverse sensing nannies in the same option package that never had it prior years. I could care less about the features - sure it’s there, but not for my liking.

The one thing I’m not liking about newer vehicles becoming more software/hardware oriented is that we are not getting any systematic updates as users. Meaning, sure if you have a “computer” or a mobile device, the manufacturer of that device is obligated to send out software revisions every so often - where “we” accept the updates so our computer or devices run as efficient as possible or so that glitches are repaired. This is not true with a vehicle (exclude Tesla) unless the Owner happens to bring it in because of XYZ complaint.

Why Automotive Manufacturers are not obligated to do the same - even AFTER a Warranty period has expired is behind me.

I’m not talking about “SYNC” updates... I’m talking about actual necessary module updates during an owner’s lifecycle of that vehicle that affect performance, functionality and other aspects of the vehicle related to DRIVING (not music or user friendly shit).
Interesting thought CJ. Obviously we get updates from software manufacturers but rarely do we get them from hardware manufactures. Part of this had to do with a delivery system. TV's are now getting updates because they can be connected to the internet. Before that happened no matter what change was made to a set, users were never informed. There was just no way to update them.

Now as far as cars I'm betting the reason is the same. You do not want there to be a way for users to access the systems in our cars. Because if we could so could a hacker. The problems that could arise from that, well you can just imagine.

So, that said, could you give us an example of a module that could change sufficiently enough that a user would want to update it?
Sponsored

 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,720
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
So still discussing a technology whose modern roots started before any of us were born (late 1940's).
Not before all of us were born . . .


Norm, my seating position is just fine. On a long trip I will make occasional adjustments but it has nothing to do with CC/ACC of any other technology in my car.
Seating comfortwise overall I’m sure it is. But like I said before, if it positions you up high enough that you have to flex your ankle too much for you, that will provide subliminal encouragement to use CC - even if it’s not uncomfortable to the point where you're consciously aware that it is. Ever stop to consider that might be one of the reasons that you like to use CC?


It doesn't negatively impact my abilities as a driver. Not one iota. If i felt it did, I would stop using it.
Everyday street driving isn’t demanding enough often enough that you would notice it. For the average street-only driver, the times it might be clearly noticeable, he’s going to be too busy otherwise to notice.


You believe that the use of some of this new tech makes one less of a driver and would prefer cars not to have them.
It’s less about whether cars come with these technologies as it is about people being too willing to shed as many of the basic tasks that make up driving as possible. And this is coming from forums (not just this one) that are nominally populated by enthusiasts. Too many people seem to be more proud about saying they use these technologies than they would be of saying they could do without them just fine.

I know that due to this Covid thing my own ability to maintain a constant speed on the highway has lost a step. I can feel it. But I refuse to let that skill slip any further by using CC, I'll just work on getting me back to where I was.


Well, for whatever its worth, that is not happening. Our vehicles are virtually computers on wheels and that is only going to get worse and not better. That's why I bought my V8 when I did. :) :like: :)
You just made a better argument for me keeping my ’08 than I’ve been making myself.


Norm
 
Last edited:

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,720
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
The one thing I’m not liking about newer vehicles becoming more software/hardware oriented is that we are not getting any systematic updates as users. Meaning, sure if you have a “computer” or a mobile device, the manufacturer of that device is obligated to send out software revisions every so often - where “we” accept the updates so our computer or devices run as efficient as possible or so that glitches are repaired. This is not true with a vehicle (exclude Tesla) unless the Owner happens to bring it in because of XYZ complaint.

Why Automotive Manufacturers are not obligated to do the same - even AFTER a Warranty period has expired is behind me.

I’m not talking about “SYNC” updates... I’m talking about actual necessary module updates during an owner’s lifecycle of that vehicle that affect performance, functionality and other aspects of the vehicle related to DRIVING (not music or user friendly shit).
I suspect that as an OEM, once you've certified an ICE-powered car that you're pretty much stuck with its originally-certified ECU calibration unless you get caught like VW did with its Diesels. Anything else would require the mfrs run the car through another round of emissions and CAFE testing, which they aren't likely to do on their nickel unless legally forced to. Obviously, Tesla isn't subject to the emissions side here (not sure about the MPGe).


Norm
 

Cobra Jet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2015
Threads
705
Messages
16,235
Reaction score
17,947
Location
NJ
Vehicle(s)
2018 EB Prem. w/PP and 94 Mustang Cobra
Interesting thought CJ. Obviously we get updates from software manufacturers but rarely do we get them from hardware manufactures. Part of this had to do with a delivery system. TV's are now getting updates because they can be connected to the internet. Before that happened no matter what change was made to a set, users were never informed. There was just no way to update them.

Now as far as cars I'm betting the reason is the same. You do not want there to be a way for users to access the systems in our cars. Because if we could so could a hacker. The problems that could arise from that, well you can just imagine.

So, that said, could you give us an example of a module that could change sufficiently enough that a user would want to update it?
Sure can:

6R80, 10R80 and future auto trans reflashes due to Ford updates that can only be gained (today) via a Service visit for a complaint. IF Ford Engineers discovered a reason that the trans software needed to be updated, why do owners only have the access by needing a Service Center to do such updates (software only)? Why not “push” the update to the users (car owners) as SYNC updates are readily available?

I mean, after all, “operating system” updates are pushed for a reason... and if Ford Engineers are finding the need to create a new software revision (for a trans module in this example), then IMO, that revision should be pushed globally.

There have been multiple TSB or SSM docs released for a variety of BCM reflashes (not just Mustang). Another example is a while back, there was a reflash for the seat heating/cooling TEDs in the Ford/Lincoln product line where the software reflash actually upped the speed of the TED fans.

I’m sure I could rattle off a boatload more, but at least the above conveys the ideology with more clarity. We as vehicle owners with newer “as built” technology (just as a computer or mobile device) should be be able to get any module update that was released for a revision by Engineering that improves drivability, performance or function during the ownership and life cycle of the vehicle... NOT only during the factory Warranty periods.

Think of the above as your mobile device, whatever it may be, Apple or Android. Many of us spend upwards of $600-$1k+for that phone or tablet. Or even a computer that can exceed $2500-$3k. During that ownership period we all know we get operating system updates or App updates. These updates aren’t always for “security” purposes, but contain at times new revisions or features (as long as the hardware can handle it). And for as long as the hardware exists or until it’s lifecycle is eventually terminated by the Manufacturer, because the software requirements exceed the hardware’s capabilities, the users receive those auto-pushed updates without question or the “need” for it until hardware retirement.

So now look at your vehicle - anywhere from $30k to in excess of $100K+ and that modern day vehicle is now equipped with similar tech as a mobile device or computer... A Vehicle Manufacturer should be obliged to send similar “operating system” or App updates to us (the owner) where it’s a simple install. Why is it we can get such updates on mobile devices or tablets, but can’t on a $30k-$100K vehicle?

Afterall, it wasn’t me or you who decided there was a better engineered software revision during Mid-build for XYZ reasons, or an improved feature for an existing module or App, but we’re not entitled to any such vehicle updates UNLESS we’re experiencing a problem... or find out about it on a forum, then have to essentially “beg” the Service Dept. to go either check for it or find a *possible* issue that required a module reflash as part of the diagnosis.

——

I also agree with Norm’s sentiments. Too many people are becoming more and more adept to safety nannies and honestly do NOT know how to handle a vehicle in a real situation that requires not only driver reaction, action and input - but THOUGHT as to how one might react to a certain situation that could result in property damage, injuries or death - OR the prevention of it.

It’s one thing to have the safety nannies in place as audible “reminders” (lane change assist, reverse assist and things such as auto-braking for drivers who just don’t pay attention when in motion, but it’s another to have such systems where it’s removing the entire thought process from reality.

It’s like seeing commercials for Volvo where a little girl is walking in a cross walk and the lady driver isn’t paying any attention - but all the sudden the commercial shows that Volvo auto braking within inches of the little girl’s body - thus saving the day. It’s gives the public misguided perception that “hey, I can buy that Volvo and if I’m a fool not paying attention, it’s ok, my Volvo is gonna auto stop for me and not kill anyone”...
 
OP
OP
Bikeman315

Bikeman315

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Threads
520
Messages
15,243
Reaction score
19,261
Location
Myrtle Beach, SC
First Name
Ira
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT/CS, 2021 Volvo XC60
6R80, 10R80 and future auto trans reflashes due to Ford updates that can only be gained (today) via a Service visit for a complaint. IF Ford Engineers discovered a reason that the trans software needed to be updated, why do owners only have the access by needing a Service Center to do such updates (software only)? Why not “push” the update to the users (car owners) as SYNC updates are readily available?
So we have the exact opposite thoughts from the "pull the fuse" crowd. They do not want any connection between their cars and Ford due to privacy issues and you're saying that we should give Ford access to every electronic system in the car. Now I'm not one of those "1984/Big Brother" folks but even I would draw the line on allowing these types of over the air system updates. Rather than chance a system hack that could create all sorts of chaos I'd rather just bring my car to the dealer.

I also agree with Norm’s sentiments. Too many people are becoming more and more adept to safety nannies and honestly do NOT know how to handle a vehicle in a real situation that requires not only driver reaction, action and input - but THOUGHT as to how one might react to a certain situation that could result in property damage, injuries or death - OR the prevention of it.
I would guesstimate that 95% of the driving public fits into the group you describe. The nannies are there expressly for them. If you want to drop that number then be prepared to spend tens of millions of dollars to properly educate the public on how to drive. We both know that's not going to happen. If people are too stupid to protect themselves than it unfortunately has to be left to the government and the auto industry.

It’s like seeing commercials for Volvo where a little girl is walking in a cross walk and the lady driver isn’t paying any attention - but all the sudden the commercial shows that Volvo auto braking within inches of the little girl’s body - thus saving the day. It’s gives the public misguided perception that “hey, I can buy that Volvo and if I’m a fool not paying attention, it’s ok, my Volvo is gonna auto stop for me and not kill anyone”...
I think your take on this is a little severe. I do not think that Volvo is looking to create that impression nor do I think that most drivers would actually believe that. Of course you do have the "I have all wheel drive and can go anywhere" crowd but that is what it is.

At the end of the day, none of us, including you, me, or Norm are perfect, especially as we get older. All you need is that one split second instance in which one of the government mandated safety nannies save your bacon that you might change your tune.
 

Sponsored

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,720
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
Sure can:

6R80, 10R80 and future auto trans reflashes due to Ford updates that can only be gained (today) via a Service visit for a complaint. IF Ford Engineers discovered a reason that the trans software needed to be updated, why do owners only have the access by needing a Service Center to do such updates (software only)? Why not “push” the update to the users (car owners) as SYNC updates are readily available?

I mean, after all, “operating system” updates are pushed for a reason... and if Ford Engineers are finding the need to create a new software revision (for a trans module in this example), then IMO, that revision should be pushed globally.

There have been multiple TSB or SSM docs released for a variety of BCM reflashes (not just Mustang). Another example is a while back, there was a reflash for the seat heating/cooling TEDs in the Ford/Lincoln product line where the software reflash actually upped the speed of the TED fans.

I’m sure I could rattle off a boatload more, but at least the above conveys the ideology with more clarity. We as vehicle owners with newer “as built” technology (just as a computer or mobile device) should be be able to get any module update that was released for a revision by Engineering that improves drivability, performance or function during the ownership and life cycle of the vehicle... NOT only during the factory Warranty periods.

Think of the above as your mobile device, whatever it may be, Apple or Android. Many of us spend upwards of $600-$1k+for that phone or tablet. Or even a computer that can exceed $2500-$3k. During that ownership period we all know we get operating system updates or App updates. These updates aren’t always for “security” purposes, but contain at times new revisions or features (as long as the hardware can handle it). And for as long as the hardware exists or until it’s lifecycle is eventually terminated by the Manufacturer, because the software requirements exceed the hardware’s capabilities, the users receive those auto-pushed updates without question or the “need” for it until hardware retirement.

So now look at your vehicle - anywhere from $30k to in excess of $100K+ and that modern day vehicle is now equipped with similar tech as a mobile device or computer... A Vehicle Manufacturer should be obliged to send similar “operating system” or App updates to us (the owner) where it’s a simple install. Why is it we can get such updates on mobile devices or tablets, but can’t on a $30k-$100K vehicle?

Afterall, it wasn’t me or you who decided there was a better engineered software revision during Mid-build for XYZ reasons, or an improved feature for an existing module or App, but we’re not entitled to any such vehicle updates UNLESS we’re experiencing a problem... or find out about it on a forum, then have to essentially “beg” the Service Dept. to go either check for it or find a *possible* issue that required a module reflash as part of the diagnosis.
It makes some sense for certain reflashes to be available as over-the-air updates, but I'm firmly opposed to the idea of them being "pushed" - automatically installed without specific car owner acceptance and approval.

OTA updates can be (and have been) used to limit what an owner can do with his car, or lock him out completely from doing something. There's no reason to assume that such tactics would not become more widespread and intrusive. For example, would you care to lose the ability to turn TC off, lose the louder exhaust sound portion of track mode, or have your tune automatically reflashed back to OE if it was found to differ?


Norm
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,720
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
It’s like seeing commercials for Volvo where a little girl is walking in a cross walk and the lady driver isn’t paying any attention - but all the sudden the commercial shows that Volvo auto braking within inches of the little girl’s body - thus saving the day. It’s gives the public misguided perception that “hey, I can buy that Volvo and if I’m a fool not paying attention, it’s ok, my Volvo is gonna auto stop for me and not kill anyone”...
That's exactly where the 'like' came from. That ad, and the Nissan (?) one where the car stops itself from reversing into a concrete barrier, are poster-boy examples of sending the wrong message.


Norm
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,720
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
More to the matter of ACC. It's not something I'm likely to ever use simply because it's there (which shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody following this thread). However, if the time ever comes where I actually might consider using it, that in itself would constitute reason for me to seriously consider whether I should be driving at all. Right up there with consistently misjudging the line through a curve or corner and not being immediately aware that I was getting it wrong.


Norm
 

Cobra Jet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2015
Threads
705
Messages
16,235
Reaction score
17,947
Location
NJ
Vehicle(s)
2018 EB Prem. w/PP and 94 Mustang Cobra
Good discussion...

So we’re opposed to auto updates for certain vehicle modules - but we’re not opposed to Manufactures XYZ pushing operating system and App updates to our phones, computers and/or tablets? Devices that hold well more than enough personal data that is at the mere reach of any hacker.

So let me try again where reading on a forum may get misconstrued (it happens).

I’m not discussing the ability for XYZ Vehicle Manufacturer pushing their agenda via a software update or locking out folks from having fun with their vehicles. All I’m saying is, IF there was an internal Engineering change in the software algorithms, coding OR necessary updates founded on the basis of a prior “whoopsy” that is causing fits with vehicles owners ABC module - then why can’t that fix be pushed out over the air, like SYNC - instead of:

1) Owners who are not aware of a software update their vehicle may need having to suffer through multiple diagnosis until an “ah-ha” moment is found.
2) Owners having to find out second hand on a forum that their “issue” may be being caused by older software code that now has a revision to either fix or improve their experience.
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Threads
11
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
4,720
Location
On a corner barstool not too far from I-95
First Name
Norm
Vehicle(s)
'08 GT #85, '19 WRX
Good discussion...

So we’re opposed to auto updates for certain vehicle modules - but we’re not opposed to Manufactures XYZ pushing operating system and App updates to our phones, computers and/or tablets? Devices that hold well more than enough personal data that is at the mere reach of any hacker.
I really wasn't going to go there . . . but one of the more recent Win10 updates cost me functionality in Excel (in particular, a chart feature that I was using). So yeah, I'm opposed to having things pushed on me outside of the automotive realm as well. Including push notifications from forums (which I've at least been allowed to turn off).


So let me try again where reading on a forum may get misconstrued (it happens).

I’m not discussing the ability for XYZ Vehicle Manufacturer pushing their agenda via a software update or locking out folks from having fun with their vehicles. All I’m saying is, IF there was an internal Engineering change in the software algorithms, coding OR necessary updates founded on the basis of a prior “whoopsy” that is causing fits with vehicles owners ABC module - then why can’t that fix be pushed out over the air, like SYNC - instead of:
So where do you draw the line between what would be an update pushed solely on sound technical grounds and an update pushed at least in part in accordance with an agenda? How would you even enforce it?


1) Owners who are not aware of a software update their vehicle may need having to suffer through multiple diagnosis until an “ah-ha” moment is found.
2) Owners having to find out second hand on a forum that their “issue” may be being caused by older software code that now has a revision to either fix or improve their experience.
There's no reason that any pushed update couldn't be handled in much the same way as recalls are handled currently. Minus any pressure from regulatory interests, which wouldn't apply below recall level. Notification by mail (and possibly by email as a redundant communication avenue) that an update for system/module ABC is available, with reasons, known consequences, and instructions on how to proceed included. Individual owners would then get to choose whether to do the update themselves or let a dealership or independent shop do it for them. Or not do it at all.


Norm
 
Last edited:

Sponsored
OP
OP
Bikeman315

Bikeman315

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Threads
520
Messages
15,243
Reaction score
19,261
Location
Myrtle Beach, SC
First Name
Ira
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT/CS, 2021 Volvo XC60
Cobra Jet said:
Good discussion...
So we’re opposed to auto updates for certain vehicle modules - but we’re not opposed to Manufactures XYZ pushing operating system and App updates to our phones, computers and/or tablets? Devices that hold well more than enough personal data that is at the mere reach of any hacker.
I really wasn't going to go there . . . but one of the more recent Win10 updates cost me functionality in Excel (in particular, a chart feature that I was using). So yeah, I'm opposed to having things pushed on me outside of the automotive realm as well. Including push notifications from forums (which I've at least been allowed to turn off).
CJ, take a look at the tread in the GT500 forum. A number of our members have some very interesting things to say about OTA data. Personally, I use FordPass so it doesn't bother me. But that said have you seen the SYNC threads? What a freaking disaster for some. What would happen to a transmission update that went wrong? Or some other important module that if corrupted could cause a failure or worse. Forget about who initiates the update, they can still go wrong. Do you update your phone the second a new OS update becomes available? I used to back when Apple updates were rock solid, but no more. I wait for the dust to settle. Also what about an update that, because of size like our maps, couldn't be done OTA. As a manufacturer, would you allow a user to update a module using a USB stick. I know that I wouldn't.

So could it be done? Sure, but be careful what you ask for.

I’m not discussing the ability for XYZ Vehicle Manufacturer pushing their agenda via a software update or locking out folks from having fun with their vehicles. All I’m saying is, IF there was an internal Engineering change in the software algorithms, coding OR necessary updates founded on the basis of a prior “whoopsy” that is causing fits with vehicles owners ABC module - then why can’t that fix be pushed out over the air, like SYNC - instead of:

1) Owners who are not aware of a software update their vehicle may need having to suffer through multiple diagnosis until an “ah-ha” moment is found.
2) Owners having to find out second hand on a forum that their “issue” may be being caused by older software code that now has a revision to either fix or improve their experience.
So where do you draw the line between what would be an update pushed solely on sound technical grounds and an update pushed at least in part in accordance with an agenda? How would you even enforce it?
So long as your given the choice to accept the update this shouldn't be an issue. That said, a help line would need to be established for those who run into an issue or have others questions.

There's no reason that any pushed update couldn't be handled in much the same way as recalls are handled currently. Minus any pressure from regulatory interests, which wouldn't apply below recall level. Notification by mail (and possibly by email as a redundant communication avenue) that an update for system/module ABC is available, with reasons, known consequences, and instructions on how to proceed included. Individual owners would then get to choose whether to do the update themselves or let a dealership or independent shop do it for them. Or not do it at all.
I'm with Norm on this one. There are numerous way Ford could let an owner know if an update were available. Maybe if it is something simple go ahead and allow an OTA update. Anything more serious that could either disable the vehicle and/or be a safety issue would need to be handled directly..
 

Silver Dragon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
104
Reaction score
87
Location
North Wales
First Name
Richard
Vehicle(s)
GT 5.0 mannual
Really interesting if wide ranging thread.

I am with Norm on this one ,though we are all entitled to our separate views and opinion.

As Steve McQueen so memorably said “You work your side of the street and I’ll work mine.”

Isn’t it amazing that we are still allowed manual gearboxes??
 

okfoz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Threads
8
Messages
223
Reaction score
102
Location
Doghouse
First Name
John
Vehicle(s)
2016 Roush Stage 3
What they don't liike...
Small back seat

Who buys a mustang to use the back seat? What are you going to do back there anyway?

oh! nevermind.
 

Gregs24

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Threads
23
Messages
4,499
Reaction score
2,831
Location
Wiltshire UK & Charente FR
First Name
Greg
Vehicle(s)
Mustang V8 GT, Ford Kuga PHEV
Really interesting if wide ranging thread.

I am with Norm on this one ,though we are all entitled to our separate views and opinion.

As Steve McQueen so memorably said “You work your side of the street and I’ll work mine.”

Isn’t it amazing that we are still allowed manual gearboxes??
Mercedes are dropping all manual gearboxes in the next 3 years - virtually no demand now.
 

blt-4739

Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
Location
NSW Australia
First Name
Tim
Vehicle(s)
Bullit Mustang, Ranger XLT
Vehicle Showcase
1
As Steve McQueen so memorably said “You work your side of the street and I’ll work mine.”
Love that quote, and have dropped it into a few conversations now and again.

I've held a licence for somewhat over 30 years and driven lots of very manual cars indeed (I notice no complaints here about electric windows, air con, syncromesh, etc.) plus motorbikes and trucks. I love my Bullitt because its retro styling evokes a kind of golden era of motoring - the romantic sense of the open road, the rush of some serious performance, the coolness of cruising in a special car, that were all such big aspirations for me as a young feller (not so much for the Uber generation) - whilst also having the convenience of modern-car ownership - the reliability and the tech - that I've come to appreciate.

Cruise control makes a lot of sense on Australian freeways. We are limited to 110kph and there are plenty of mobile speed traps - on a long cruise, not having to think about throttle control all the time does ease fatigue, and on the stretches with more traffic the adaptive CC really helps reduce the load. The thing I like about the Mustang CC is that you can change gear manually and still hold speed, so can switch down from 6th and use throttle to accelerate into a gap (and let's be honest to hear the motor do a bit of work) then release throttle to return to cruise speed and switch up again when settled in.

Lane assist is a bit "meh", but it's there if you want it on long freeway stretches and is so easily enabled and disabled that you can easily flick it on or off depending on mood.

Same with auto high-beam and wipers, can easily be flicked on and off with the light selector knob and the wiper stalk.

I wish the same were true of the Rev Matching. I like this feature in the twisties - manually rev matching and braking at the same time requires mid-air footwork with the standard pedal layout and I'm not up to that as I always use heel on the floor as a pivot. If you could link Rev Match to Sports Mode that would be perfect.

As someone else mentioned, the most distracting of technologies is the big touchscreen in the middle, but the Mustang at least has manual controls for audio, climate, drive mode etc. which are much safer and more tactile. And Google voice sometimes gets the right music to play.

My Bullitt is an entirely subjective pleasure. There's really no rational reason to own a Mustang at all other than sheer what-the-hell enjoyment of it. I reckon they've got the mix right. Oh, and the Bad Point mentioned in the original article (10 pages ago) - no more Bullitts being made - suits me fine, I got mine!
Sponsored

 
 




Top