Reverse Park Assist

[Norm Peterson]

For me the real terror is that the tech that's being tested on us now is geared towards the very real and very near reality that soon, we will all be required to sit in auto driving cars "for our own safety." Tech for better handling, better engine management, better quality control...fabulous. The commercial where the guy is thinking about work, his poodle girlfriend, did he turn off the coffee pot, and then the car "saves" him because he's an idiot driver...makes me weep.

This ↑↑↑ . Thank you.

The technology that has permitted my 4.6L 2008 GT even in its bone-stock form to post performance numbers comparable to the original Boss 302 is amazing. All while being easier on both fuel usage and the environment.


Norm

Sponsored

 

[RB510]

This ↑↑↑ . Thank you.

The technology that has permitted my 4.6L 2008 GT even in its bone-stock form to post performance numbers comparable to the original Boss 302 is amazing. All while being easier on both fuel usage and the environment.


Norm

Norm, I bet you absolutely adore the tech. BMW is testing out where you can remotely call for your car, Batman-style, and it'll retrieve itself from the parking garage, curb, whatever.

 

[Norm Peterson]

I wouldn't want to give up even those little bits of driving or the exercise I would get just walking to where my car was parked . . . never mind that something like that would never be compatible with any conventional manual transmission that uses a clutch pedal.

Pass.


Norm

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

I don't think that having fewer needs really counts as having special needs. To me, a special need is one that is attended to by having assistance provided, not by not having it.

Special, adj., 1: of a distinct or particular kind or character.

So, if your needs are distinct or particular -- which they are if they're different from other people's -- then they are, indeed, special. Regardless of whether they're fewer or greater.

If you can, please explain to me why I would ever need a backup camera or reverse park assist, if I choose to never live where parking is as bad as it is where you live, never own an SUV, for as long as I can effectively use my car's mirrors and/or turn my head. I'm not saying that you shouldn't have it, only that in the absence of similar needs I should be able to opt out. Yes, I know I could probably arrive at some DIY work-around (just as you might in order to get a rear window defogger to work the way you prefer it to work). But should we have to? I don't think so.

Unfortunately, there is no infinite variety in the world where we can choose to only participate in those things which we approve of or desire and "opt out" of those we which do not. Somebody living in Dubai could just as easily say "please explain to me why I would ever need heat in a car? Why should I have to find a work-around to not have heat in the car?"

Basically, your question is "Why should I, a member of a small minority, have to be mildly inconvenienced, rather than a vast majority be put in a more dangerous situation which they may or may not know how to save themselves and others from?" And, again, the answer is that the safety of the public at large is more important than your convenience or whims.

Just as a passing thought, I wonder how thoroughly the concept of BLIS was really thought through. How long in heavy traffic might it take for people to get annoyed with its constant warnings to the point of learning to ignore it completely. How valuable will it be then?

I actually thought I'd hate BLIS and was planning to get the mirrors replaced with the regular spotter mirrors, but I've discovered that it's completely unintrusive and invisible unless I'm actually looking at the side mirrors -- that is, it only gives me information when I'm specifically looking for that information. I drive in heavy traffic all the time and it hasn't been intrusive or bothersome at all; I thought I'd hate it but I actually really don't. It is certainly in no way "annoying," because it's so invisible.

You really should be concerned about any reduction in average driving skill levels. Nannies and such do have their limitations, and it'll be those least able to cope who will be most likely to be "caught out" in a big and unpleasant way.

And I'll put it to you again... why should I be concerned about that? Ninety years ago, in order to drive any significant distance, you had to be a pretty fair automotive mechanic, because parts on your car were guaranteed to break on a road trip, and the only person around to fix it would be you. As time has gone by, cars have gotten a LOT more reliable, and the average person's mechanical skill has, consequently, gone down vastly. That doesn't make the roads less safe.

If, ten years from now, somebody is absolutely ATROCIOUS at driving in snow, but autonomous car controls have improved to the point where the car physically prevents people from driving too fast or cornering too hard to prevent the stability control and ABS from safely keeping the car from hitting things... well, that's a whole lot safer than a somewhat better snow driver using current technology, n'est ce pas?

Food for thought. Any "society" that refuses to acknowledge a range of needs among its members - however lofty and well-intended their aims might be - is little more than a dictatorship.

>BLINK<

I'm not gonna touch that one, because that statement sounds to me like an embrace of Marxist ideology, which is a vibe I normally totally don't get from you, so I have a feeling that what you meant there was something completely different.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Special, adj., 1: of a distinct or particular kind or character.

So, if your needs are distinct or particular -- which they are if they're different from other people's -- then they are, indeed, special. Regardless of whether they're fewer or greater.

Sounds just like "adding lightness" to make a car weigh less. Semantics.

Unfortunately, there is no infinite variety in the world where we can choose to only participate in those things which we approve of or desire and "opt out" of those we which do not. Somebody living in Dubai could just as easily say "please explain to me why I would ever need heat in a car? Why should I have to find a work-around to not have heat in the car?"

Basically, your question is "Why should I, a member of a small minority, have to be mildly inconvenienced, rather than a vast majority be put in a more dangerous situation which they may or may not know how to save themselves and others from?" And, again, the answer is that the safety of the public at large is more important than your convenience or whims.

The guy in Dubai at least has the option of not turning the heat on, which would be the default setting most anywhere in the world. I'm not getting that option on most of the things I neither want nor have demonstrated any need for. If they can be turned off, and they don't suddenly wake up and intrude, I can at least co-exist with them. But I've been through a couple of incidents that I think was some Bluetooth thingie pestering me because I accidentally hit some steering wheel button in my hurry to get to the car's horn. So I'm not convinced that they will be content to stay asleep in the background under all likely conditions - if nothing else this means that the interface wasn't thought through well enough. Like I said before, it really disturbs me to be distracted by unexpected occurrences within the cabin while I'm driving, and I strongly urge you to avoid underestimating the importance of that factor.

I actually thought I'd hate BLIS and was planning to get the mirrors replaced with the regular spotter mirrors, but I've discovered that it's completely unintrusive and invisible unless I'm actually looking at the side mirrors -- that is, it only gives me information when I'm specifically looking for that information. I drive in heavy traffic all the time and it hasn't been intrusive or bothersome at all; I thought I'd hate it but I actually really don't. It is certainly in no way "annoying," because it's so invisible.

Point taken. Though it begs the question of how useful it is to the people who don't use their mirrors to begin with.

And I'll put it to you again... why should I be concerned about that? Ninety years ago, in order to drive any significant distance, you had to be a pretty fair automotive mechanic, because parts on your car were guaranteed to break on a road trip, and the only person around to fix it would be you. As time has gone by, cars have gotten a LOT more reliable, and the average person's mechanical skill has, consequently, gone down vastly. That doesn't make the roads less safe.

Improved reliability has only eliminated the need to be able to deal with mechanical issues, which you'd have to be stopped for in order to correct. I suppose as a component of a "can-do" attitude, we've probably lost a step, though mechanical reliability in and of itself has no bearing on a driver's ability to improve his driving skill set.

If, ten years from now, somebody is absolutely ATROCIOUS at driving in snow, but autonomous car controls have improved to the point where the car physically prevents people from driving too fast or cornering too hard to prevent the stability control and ABS from safely keeping the car from hitting things... well, that's a whole lot safer than a somewhat better snow driver using current technology, n'est ce pas?

Better than a "somewhat better snow driver", almost certainly. Better than a much better snow driver . . . maybe not. Experience will teach you how to be a "smoother" driver and what not to try better than hammering into any arbitrary electronically enforced limits ever can (stomp and steer however you like until nothing more happens isn't a very good idea, but there will be people who will drive in exactly that fashion). Never mind the all-or-nothing nature of things that are dependent on electricity.


Philosophically, I just don't care to have all the little details of how my life works defined by somebody else. I am fully capable of making good choices and staying well within what my skill set can support in my street driving, and I have at least 40 years worth of evidence in support of that notion. Incidentally, this attitude isn't confined just to cars and driving, but I know there'd be people all ready and willing to slap my hands over more than a few other things if I wanted to see how much further off-topic this thread could be taken.


Norm

 

[JohnDoe]

I find the reverse park assist pretty useless, because by the time it beeps red, if you go out and look, you still have a whole football field left between your bumper. I wish there was a way to calibrate it so it would only turn red when you have 2-3 inches left to go. Plus the way our camera is angled, it not much help either.

 

[Jeeden]

Not sure on the mustang but on the explorer it beeps faster. When it is a flatline tone you have exactly 6 inches from the bumper to the object

 

[JohnDoe]

Not sure on the mustang but on the explorer it beeps faster. When it is a flatline tone you have exactly 6 inches from the bumper to the object

On the Mustang when it flatlines, there is still like a foot left

 

[Jeeden]

Yea page 147 of the manual it looks like 12 inches is the setting. Like other cars with tighter thresholds you can probably get used to giving it a little more after it flatline especially with the camera. Actually maybe they opened up the distance because they know you now have the camera

 

[JohnDoe]

I parallel park daily in NYC, and that camera is useless, because when your bumper in the camera covers the vehicle's bumper behind you, there is still a ton of room left to back up, which is why I thought the reverse sensors would help in that situation, but it's just as bad.

 

[Spartan]

Anyone who has the reverse park assist...think it's worth it?

 

[JohnDoe]

Anyone who has the reverse park assist...think it's worth it?

It's pretty pointless when you can see how close you are with the CAMERA

 

[tsunami]

I own two other vehicles: a Toyota and a Chevy Pickup. They both came with back cameras and back up assist standard. They were standard vehicles...not premium versions. All vehicles now come with back up cameras standard...ticked me off that the Mustang back up assist was optional for a fee.

 

[Clink]

I have them and they don't bother me at all, if it saves me once down the road from hitting something they've paid for themselves.

Yeah sure I have a camera to look at, but when I back out my garage at an angle to avoid my Focus in the driveway it helps a lot.

Plus they're cheap as shit

 

[peetucket]

I've only had my car for a few days and have both BLIS and the reverse assist. I like them both and find them useful. Our other car has only the backup camera and I find the addition of reverse assist is very useful, particularly in really tight spots.

Sponsored