The P5: What Would You Change?

[Ekh]

As a reoccurring issue, this kind of thing frustrates the purist in me. There is always the common desire for more, where as to efficiently accomplish anything, you need to have less, or rather nothing more than the minimal.
So in classic automobile engineering this is called, "Minimal Motoring - the least car to do the job", a conflicting concept being the land-yacht.

Really? will a required back-up camera do that much good in the world? The net effect of that will be to relieve designers of the need to provide good visibility. So for the extra money and complication we end up at status quo, or worse, when the camera breaks down, worse than before. One of the many things that makes you car useable after only the first two years. I'm just say'in.

I love the idea of an optional camera. I loth the idea of a required camera. In the case of the Elio I think it has good enough visibility, but I love the idea of optional back window plus optional camera(s).

Elio - options (love it: win-win) -and admittedly I want one if the price is right.
Gov - requirements (hate it: fail)

The problem, Ari, is where do you draw the line? Auto makers fought tooth and nail agains seatbelts, airbags, emission controls, safety glass, and numerous other safety-related items. Without government regulation we would have none, zero, of these improvements. Of course you can over do it, have too much regulation, gild the lily, so to speak -- but where do you draw the line?

 

[Sethodine]

The problem, Ari, is where do you draw the line? Auto makers fought tooth and nail agains seatbelts, airbags, emission controls, safety glass, and numerous other safety-related items. Without government regulation we would have none, zero, of these improvements. Of course you can over do it, have too much regulation, gild the lily, so to speak -- but where do you draw the line?

But like back-up cameras, all of those features were created by the industry before they were made mandatory. And mandates, while seeming good, can have an adverse effect on innovation. How can you create and market a better safety restraint if the car MUST be equipped with an NHTSA-approved seat belt? Or make a better airbag, if the vehicle MUST come with an existing technology airbag? While innovation isn't impossible, cutting through the red tape increases costs and slows development of potentially superior technology.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

 

[AriLea]

The problem, Ari, is where do you draw the line? Auto makers fought tooth and nail agains seatbelts, airbags, emission controls, safety glass, and numerous other safety-related items. Without government regulation we would have none, zero, of these improvements. Of course you can over do it, have too much regulation, gild the lily, so to speak -- but where do you draw the line?

Yes, it's hard to define. The camera is easy, that's new equipment and functionality. Same with autonomous driving.
I'd call seatbelts just part of making existing seats safer. A controversial view, but defensible.
Now airbags, that was a judgment call, yes based on results, necessary when speeds went above 45mph, so that was a good call.
Requiring chassis and bodies that survive a crash, just needed adjustments to allow safe operation, I accept that as well.
If they ever try and require situation warning systems with police ability to shut your engine off in pursuit, I'll veto that one.

The 5 mile-per-hour bumper, oh hell no.

 

[Ekh]

About those 5 mph bumpers (that really weren't), if you have a car whose nose you can't see, because it droops off below your line of sight, how DO you know how close you are to the bumper in front of you or the garage wall? I don't want to use the braille system to find out! Snoot repairs are really expensive, just ask any plastic surgeon, I mean body shop guy.

If in addition you have iffy depth perception, the problem is made worse (as is my situation). Now that they're available, I'd be interested in a small proximity sensor that sounds off when you get to within 1 foot of an obstacle and shrieks at 4 inches. Are they available? Anyone have experience with them?

 

[NSTG8R]

About those 5 mph bumpers (that really weren't), if you have a car whose nose you can't see, because it droops off below your line of sight, how DO you know how close you are to the bumper in front of you or the garage wall? I don't want to use the braille system to find out! Snoot repairs are really expensive, just ask any plastic surgeon, I mean body shop guy.

If in addition you have iffy depth perception, the problem is made worse (as is my situation). Now that they're available, I'd be interested in a small proximity sensor that sounds off when you get to within 1 foot of an obstacle and shrieks at 4 inches. Are they available? Anyone have experience with them?

A buddy of mine's wife was real bad about taking her car too far into the garage, so he hung a tennis ball from a string right at eye level (sitting in the driver's seat). When the ball touched the windshield, hit the brakes. Works good, couldn't be cheaper.

 

[Sethodine]

Thousands of lives could be saved every year if we had a nationwide speed limit of 35 MPH. It would be easy and cheap to impliment, too! But we as a society have decided that the value we get from going 55+ MPH outweighs the lives of those who die going those speeds. This is the nature of the Safety vs Free Agency debate, and unfortunately I don't see it going away anytime soon :/

 

[floydv]

The minute someone backs an Elio over a child, Elio will be slapped with a defective product lawsuit for lacking a rear view camera and having no ability to look directly behind the car, especially given Elio's framing of the vehicle as a "car." Such a lawsuit could cripple or bankrupt the company. I'd rather they include one in as a standard feature than risk losing it all.

 

[Gizmo]

I know this is not on your list, BUILD THE THING NOW

Hell no don't build it now. They still have things to work out, tests to perform, etc.

 

[JEBar]

Thousands of lives could be saved every year if we had a nationwide speed limit of 35 MPH. It would be easy and cheap to impliment, too! But we as a society have decided that the value we get from going 55+ MPH outweighs the lives of those who die going those speeds. This is the nature of the Safety vs Free Agency debate, and unfortunately I don't see it going away anytime soon :/

I lived through that great experiment during the "gas crisis" .... 55 mph speed limits work fine in highly developed areas where population pressures demand such a speed .... for folks who live in a large part of our country where it can be 50 , 75, or more miles to the nearest hospital or significant shopping such a limit inflicts hardship ... no way I want to go back to that .... if preventing deaths by motor vehicle accidents is the goal, the speed limit would have to be dropped to the speed of a slow walk .... I don't hear anyone advocating doing that

 

[Frim]

A buddy of mine's wife was real bad about taking her car too far into the garage, so he hung a tennis ball from a string right at eye level (sitting in the driver's seat). When the ball touched the windshield, hit the brakes. Works good, couldn't be cheaper.

I have two tennis balls. One for the wife and one for the daughter. Of course, I get to park in the rain.