For nearly 2 years I've been driving a car with a rear view camera. At 1st I really didn't get on with it, preferred the old fashioned way, but eventually I decided I liked it, used in conjunction with wing mirrors it's a great tool. Last Friday the car went into the garage and for 3 days I had a replacement car without a rear view camera. Jeez, I've forgotten how to reverse! It was terrible, felt lost without the camera and I found it really difficult to judge the distance of objects behind me. Luckily this resulted in nothing worse than bumping the kerb a few times when doing 3 point turns. Don't really have a point to make, I'm not a Luddite, but it was scary how quickly I'd come to rely on this technology and how hopeless I felt without it.
I’m the same but with parking sensors. Will never have another car without frost free windscreen and DAB too
Try living a life without the internet; a point made as I've been cursing my connection for falling over all day until a nice chap on the end of a phone sorted it out for me.
But yes, we do come to rely on some technologies very quickly and it's often not the big things we're aware of relying on, such as an internet connection or a mobile phone signal, but the smaller things like your reversing camera. The right thing in the right place often goes unremarked until it's absent.
T.
Cruise control!! I know it's seem ludicrous but it's on my list now.
Now DAB in my car I'd love to get used to, 6music on the go!
My car would be even harder to reverse without those. Mind you, it's the future, flying cars will be along soon...
I have that but never use it.
I have an automatic with cruise control and love both features but on trips across Europe I have to keep reminding myself that I still have to steer
Al
me too! You wanna put a banging donk on it
Ah, a fellow radmac listener
Calculators.
How many of us use one even for very simple arithmetic like addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, rather than use our brains?
It's great for driving though average speed camera sections of road works.
It's also useful for "reading" other drivers psychological states on motorways.
When you know you're doing a constant speed you can see other speed up when you pull out and conversely slow down when you pull-in. It's very interesting.
And it's supposedly better for fuel consumption.
One downside is that I sometimes find myself getting too close to the car in front because I don't want to disengage the cruise control. To counter that I tend to switch it down to decrease speed rather than brake and disengage it.
Al
> One downside is that I sometimes find myself getting too close to the car in front because I don't want to disengage the cruise control. To counter that I tend to switch it down to decrease speed rather than brake and disengage it.
> Al
Mine was like that on my old Skoda but I've got a Fiat now and it's on a stalk like the windscreen wiper, so it easier.
I had a car with basic reversing sensors, 2013-2014 (a 2004 MG ZTT).
At first I kind of laughed at them, thinking "pah, too sensitive, of course we always overrun them and still have space etc etc" and THOUGHT that I was pretty much ignoring them and just reversing using mirrors as my guide.
Then one day one of them went wrong, so they didn't do that increasingly frantic bleeping as you get closer to something. So I was merrily reversing and obviously subconsciously using the lack of frantic beeping as an instruction to "keep going"....until I reversed into a solid metal fence that I would never have reversed into without any audible aid from sensor.....
Look at antibiotics, such is tha reliance is that barely anyone living can remember a time where a bad cut, tooth infection or similar innocuous health problem could result in a slow and painful death.
oh I meant to add that my reversing into a metal fence did deform my rear bumper in which the reversing sensors lived, so one of them ended up pointing in the wrong direction and they were forever frantically bleeping.....and THAT is the point at which i disabled them and contrary to the point of the thread, I have not missed them (3.5 years and two cars later)
> When you know you're doing a constant speed you can see other speed up when you pull out and conversely slow down when you pull-in. It's very interesting.
Also interesting how many people will overtake and then slow down as soon as they get in front of you, so you then have to pull out and overtake them, at which point... rinse and repeat.
I use my brain for arithmetical calculations all day every day.
> I have an automatic with cruise control and love both features but on trips across Europe I have to keep reminding myself that I still have to steer
Give it a few years and you might not have to. Well, actually, several cars are already available that would handle the whole business for you on motorways but they don't exactly come cheap at the moment.
Damn right we are.
And we're also becoming more and more reliant on people to fix it for us. Look at Dave the Rave with his motor. Hell knows what we're going to do with autonomous vehicles bristling with high tech? More expense!
Sadly, the days of Joe Bloggs doing his own DIY are numbered.
Heard today, FM is doomed, more unnecessary spending, again.
Pirate radio
True.
> I use my brain for arithmetical calculations all day every day.
I use my brain about 85% of the time but rely on a calculator for the remaining 45,256,321%.
> Heard today, FM is doomed, more unnecessary spending, again.
It's not unnecessary the RF spectrum is limited and already busy, bloated signals like FM radio use far more of it than is now necessary.
jk
"And it's supposedly better for fuel consumption."
it isn't, it is quite a bit worse believe it or not and I have noticed it myself.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/caradvice/honestjohn/9027863/Does-crui...
"On a descent the opposite happens. When you could increase speed without burning extra fuel, the cruise control slows the car and economy suffers"
How? If you're not feeding fuel to the engine, rather than a little, how can this be less economic?
Cruise control doesn't put he brakes on it simply backs off the accelerator.
I'll give it a test to find out.
How much is quite a bit, by the way?
> How? If you're not feeding fuel to the engine, rather than a little, how can this be less economic?
There are so many variables that in reality its quite difficult to definitively say how much, or even that it does or doesn't. The older systems were basically a PID controller so that part is simple. But its the driver that the cruise control replaces that is variable. For example: If you tend to unconsciously go slower up hills for where the PID controller will just open the throttle and do whatever it takes to retain speed then clearly there is going to be a fuel cost. Likewise an unconscious driver may speed up downhill rather than back off the gas where the PID will cut fuel possibly to zero so CC wins. Some people get tired and end up sat behind trucks because CC isn't moving them on so they get there slower but they save a lot of fuel without realising.
You'd have to do a lot of runs comparing your own driving to CC to work out how much you could save, but in reality life is just too short, I'd rather arrive much fresher. If you want to save fuel buy a more economical car and walk to the shops.
> Now DAB in my car I'd love to get used to, 6music on the go!
I just bring my dab radio and plug it into the stereo. Works fine as you don’t get the interference that you would from a normal fm radio
> There are so many variables that in reality its quite difficult to definitively say how much, or even that it does or doesn't. The older systems were basically a PID controller so that part is simple. But its the driver that the cruise control replaces that is variable. For example: If you tend to unconsciously go slower up hills for where the PID controller will just open the throttle and do whatever it takes to retain speed then clearly there is going to be a fuel cost. Likewise an unconscious driver may speed up downhill rather than back off the gas where the PID will cut fuel possibly to zero so CC wins. Some people get tired and end up sat behind trucks because CC isn't moving them on so they get there slower but they save a lot of fuel without realising.
All true, I tend to have a heavy foot, so end up going faster them I need / want to, so it's great for me, on cruise I usually set it around 75, rather than the 85 I would drive at so it's a no brainer for me.
I still don't see how going downhill, using a little fuel rather than none is less economical.
My P of my PID is a little harsh to be honest, in most cars I've driven they accelerate more than I would if I was driving, though this is only an issue when your set speed is some way off you actual speed.
> All true, I tend to have a heavy foot, so end up going faster them I need / want to, so it's great for me, on cruise I usually set it around 75, rather than the 85 I would drive at so it's a no brainer for me.
Which country do you drive in?
I end up in a right mess when I drive my wife's car and not mine.
Lots of clever stuff, but the one that catches me out when I change cars is that you press a button to switch the engine off and just open the door - it puts the brake on and puts it into park. Try that in my wife's car and it all starts rolling backwards.
Open/close the tailgate by putting your foot under the bumper. Waste of time, that, I thought, until it was pissing down and I had my arms full. That, and the bloke thing of trying to carry all the shopping in one go.......
> Also interesting how many people will overtake and then slow down as soon as they get in front of you, so you then have to pull out and overtake them, at which point... rinse and repeat.
Worse than that IMO are the idiots that you follow at a respectful distance as they perform a tortuously slow overtake in lane 3 at 68mph, and who then speed up to 80-odd after pulling back in to lane 2. I just don't understand what can be going on in their brains. It can't possibly be: "Ha ha! I'm front and you can't pass so I can do whatever speed I like and you can't get past me!! ... Oh no, now that I've pulled in (because I'm such a great and considerate driver) you can get past so I must go faster in order to stay in front of you, otherwise my manhood will shrivel up and fall off, or something..." Can it?
I'd guess because the system is braking using the engine which won't cost fuel but you'll need it to get up the next hill starting having given up energy, where when i drive I let the cars speed increase down hills so loosing less energy and taking it into the flat or next hill.
A pure guess though.
Cheers
Toby
> Also interesting how many people will overtake and then slow down as soon as they get in front of you, so you then have to pull out and overtake them, at which point... rinse and repeat.
Exactly,There's all sorts of weirdness I pick up on during my trek to work, I've noticed people will either speed up or slow down depending on what lane I'm in!
I pointed one out to my son the other day, which did exactly this for 40 miles.
Maybe I used to do it too
> I'd guess because the system is braking using the engine which won't cost fuel but you'll need it to get up the next hill starting having given up energy, where when i drive I let the cars speed increase down hills so loosing less energy and taking it into the flat or next hill.
Sounds reasonable most of my driving is reasonable flat, but I see you point, and would probably do that myself sometimes.
They often put the speed cameras at the bottom though to catch you out, the road to Cornwall is notorious for that trick.
> Maybe I used to do it too
Very probably, I'm sure it's not something we do consciously. I often notice that I'm doing it, but I never intend to.
> Very probably, I'm sure it's not something we do consciously. I often notice that I'm doing it, but I never intend to.
Not everyone does it though, only the odd one, I wouldn't have thought it was a conscious thing though, not unless your a bit a wanker. I'm sure you meant unconsciously
> I'm sure you meant unconsciously
Not only meant it, said it as well: "I'm sure it's not something we do consciously"
must be my lisdexyia playing up Soz.
Read it as, "I'm sure it's something we do consciously"
Modern trucks are packed full of electronic assistance. Cruise control, stability and traction control, lane warning, reversing camera, proximity sensors, weight readout, collision avoidance.
I can never find the fuses for all of them!!
Reversing cameras are great. Weight readouts always helpful. However, most of these are just a pest. I have had dozens of false activations from collision avoidance systems, some of which have been quite dangerous.
I absolutely detest collision avoidance systems. Some can be switched off but others can't. Some don't like roundabouts in cities. Some don't like hairpin bends in the mountains.
Reliance? Well yes. Lane warning systems are for people who are half asleep on cruise control. A level of automation necessary to combat the disadvantages of another level of automation. Aaaaaarrrggghhh!
> I use my brain about 85% of the time but rely on a calculator for the remaining 45,256,321%.
Very clever
Never driven a vehicle with sensors but thanks to an irresponsible motorist I found myself driving with only one wing mirror this morning. SCARY!
Kind of primative technology, but whilst I can happily adjust to no rear view mirror this really threw me and had a massive impact on my driving as I tried to minimise the risk of taking out cyclists or bikers.
I had a similar experience when using a rental car without the camera. Looking back with an arm over the passenger seat had to have been the cause of many neck strains once upon a time.
The second BMC Members Open Forum webinar took place on 20 March. Recently-appointed BMC CEO Paul Ratcliffe, President Andy Syme and Chair Roger Murray shared updates on staff changes, new and ongoing initiatives, insurance policy changes and the current...