SUV for carrying skis

[Bene288]

The more I think about it, modern electronic safety features should be a requirement. Automatic lane keeping, blind spot detection, and emergency braking are really important. The technology is there and they would undoubtedly save lives.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone mobile app

People got on fine without all of that stuff before. I'm sure there would be times it would help and times it would hurt, but when it comes down driving needs to be viewed as a skill that people need to be instructed in. You're behind a 5000 lb hunk of metal surrounded by other 5000 lb hunks of metal and you want to rely on computer algorithms to keep you safe? No thanks, I think I'll just pay attention and be liable. I disable the nanny controls in my truck everyday because they almost got me into a bad accident. I don't need a computer to tell me when to cut power to the rear wheels. What if you HAVE to spin the tires to get out of a jam?

All that aside the blind spot stuff would be nice. I saw a Honda and it seemed to be projecting a side view image on its console. Cool idea for a big truck, seems a little excessive on a small CR-V though.

 

[VTKilarney]

People got on fine without all of that stuff before.

Not at all true. There has been a decrease in serious auto-related injuries due in part to the increased technology in vehicles. Air bags alone have had a measurable impact on reducing serious injuries and/or death.

As an example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21720604

 

[yeggous]

People got on fine without all of that stuff before. I'm sure there would be times it would help and times it would hurt, but when it comes down driving needs to be viewed as a skill that people need to be instructed in. You're behind a 5000 lb hunk of metal surrounded by other 5000 lb hunks of metal and you want to rely on computer algorithms to keep you safe? No thanks, I think I'll just pay attention and be liable. I disable the nanny controls in my truck everyday because they almost got me into a bad accident. I don't need a computer to tell me when to cut power to the rear wheels. What if you HAVE to spin the tires to get out of a jam?

All that aside the blind spot stuff would be nice. I saw a Honda and it seemed to be projecting a side view image on its console. Cool idea for a big truck, seems a little excessive on a small CR-V though.

Yes, people got on fine. If by fine you mean accepted that automotive accidents were the leading cause of death in someone my age.

 

[Bene288]

Yes, people got on fine. If by fine you mean accepted that automotive accidents were the leading cause of death in someone my age.

It's the risk of driving unfortunately. It's nothing a bunch of computer module bs will resolve. Also depends where you live I guess.

 

[Bene288]

Not at all true. There has been a decrease in serious auto-related injuries due in part to the increased technology in vehicles. Air bags alone have had a measurable impact on reducing serious injuries and/or death.

As an example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21720604

Airbags are different. I'm talking about options that try to drive the car for you. (Auto braking and that sort of thing)

 

[deadheadskier]

Airbags are different. I'm talking about options that try to drive the car for you. (Auto braking and that sort of thing)

Air bags and better designed chasis, I'm all for. Those I believe are the true life saving improvements.

All the other stuff I think is a wash. The smart breaking might help you avoid a collision, but you're in that situation because you were fidgeting with some Bluetooth device, talking on cell phone etc.

I think all the technology improvements have made people worse drivers.

 

[yeggous]

It's the risk of driving unfortunately. It's nothing a bunch of computer module bs will resolve. Also depends where you live I guess.

Are you joking? This is exactly what computers are going to solve. Computer don't get drunk. They don't make mistakes. They don't get distracted. They don't fall asleep.

Right now the self-driving cars have an accident rate about twice that of human driver cars. Why? People keep tailgating and rear-ending them while driving the speed limit. They have yet to be at-fault in a single accident. Fatality rates are going to plunge in the very foreseeable future. Imagine being able to dramatically reduce the chances of the leading cause of death for half of your life. It is going to be one of those health revolutions on par with any revolution in contemporary medicine.

 

[VTKilarney]

All the other stuff I think is a wash. The smart breaking might help you avoid a collision, but you're in that situation because you were fidgeting with some Bluetooth device, talking on cell phone etc.

I'm not sure what your point is here. If someone is fidgeting with a Bluetooth device, aren't they safer in a car with auto-braking than without? Therefore, doesn't this technology help prevent injuries? Merely saying that people shouldn't fidget with devices has no bearing at all on whether technology reduces injuries. People do stupid things all of the time while driving. That's why we have technology to keep them safer. You are never going to live in a world where people don't make any mistakes. I'd much rather have people on the road with this technology than without.

 

[deadheadskier]

I'd much rather people not have the distracting technology in addition to having the driving enhancement technology. What we have now is a one step forward, one step back situation IMO.

 

[VTKilarney]

I'd much rather people not have the distracting technology in addition to having the driving enhancement technology. What we have now is a one step forward, one step back situation IMO.

I'm not disagreeing with your premise, but thanks to the safety technology we haven't taken two steps back. Bottom line, technology saves lives.

A few months ago I was speaking with an acquaintance who is a personal injury attorney. They were bemoaning the fact that people don't get injured in automobile accidents like they used to. That ought to tell you something.

 

[Bene288]

Are you joking? This is exactly what computers are going to solve. Computer don't get drunk. They don't make mistakes. They don't get distracted. They don't fall asleep.

Right now the self-driving cars have an accident rate about twice that of human driver cars. Why? People keep tailgating and rear-ending them while driving the speed limit. They have yet to be at-fault in a single accident. Fatality rates are going to plunge in the very foreseeable future. Imagine being able to dramatically reduce the chances of the leading cause of death for half of your life. It is going to be one of those health revolutions on par with any revolution in contemporary medicine.

I'm not arguing with you. I just have my own opinion on the matter. The only time I've ever almost gotten into an accident is because of auto traction control. An acquaintance of mine got into a wreck because his car applied auto breaks on a slick road. Also had someone driving my truck who is used to looking at those little yellow indicators on their side mirrors, almost merged into someone because they look for that light, not the actual reflection in the mirror.

 

[cdskier]

I'd much rather people not have the distracting technology

Way too late for that. It isn't just "technology" that distracts people though. Technology like cell phones and smart phones has simply made more distractions easily available. I still see so many ridiculous things on my commute to work in NJ that have nothing to do with modern technology distractions. I've even seen people driving on the highway while reading a newspaper that they have placed on their steering wheel!

So yea, I'm all for any new technology to help avoid mistakes made by all these other distractions that already exist.

 

[VTKilarney]

I'm not arguing with you. I just have my own opinion on the matter.

Man, does that read like a redneck bumper sticker. ;-)

The only time I've ever almost gotten into an accident is because of auto traction control. An acquaintance of mine got into a wreck because his car applied auto breaks on a slick road. Also had someone driving my truck who is used to looking at those little yellow indicators on their side mirrors, almost merged into someone because they look for that light, not the actual reflection in the mirror.

These incidents may all be true, but it shows the danger of picking outliers to base an entire premise on. It's like the stories I used to hear about seatbelts being more dangerous because someone drowned when they couldn't unbuckle. You have to look beyond single incidents and look at things as a whole. When you do that, there can be no doubt that technology has reduced fatalities and serious injuries.

 

[deadheadskier]

. Ive even seen people driving on the highway while reading a newspaper that they have placed on their steering wheel!

If they were driving a stick, they wouldn't have a free hand to turn the pages.

J/k

 

[VTKilarney]

If they were driving a stick, they wouldn't have a free hand to turn the pages.

J/k

Manual transmissions are so rare these days that I get very nervous when I see a driver with their hand on a stick. ;-)

 

[VTKilarney]

I should point out something that does lend some credence to those questioning the impact of safety technology. One factor that lends support to that argument is that technology can make people believe that they are safer than they really are, which can result in people taking more risks. Anti-lock brakes and all-wheel-drive are a good examples. The studies on anti-lock brakes are mixed, generally showing a reduction of certain types of accidents, but an increase in others. And lots of drivers go faster in snow because they think that all-wheel-drive helps them stop. It doesn't.

So it makes sense to be critical of technology. But it doesn't make sense to dismiss it outright.

 

[SkiFanE]

Recent technology is designed to prevent accidents - not just looking at ways to make you safer from a crash. I laude the efforts. But I also get queasy thinking about people relying on them. I have blind spot indicator in my car - I don't stop turning my head each time I change lanes. But I'm sure some people do rely on it - so for that reason I'd prefer no one has it bc I don't trust it 100%. Mine won't work under <20mph and gives lots of false alarms - alert fatigue.

Edited bc somehow lost part of my very important thoughts on discussion and can't retype lol.

 

[Rushski]

Didn't scan though all the posts, but would like to add my .02.

Either a midsize or half-ton+ Crew cab truck with 4x4 and a tonneau cover. Even my short bed Frontier can handle my 178s (diagonally). Can actually fit longer.

With this setup you get a decent cabin, all weather ability, plenty of cargo space and more utility beyond skiing.

Only drawback and a dealbreaker to some is gas mileage. Diesel options are helping that.

 

[cdskier]

If they were driving a stick, they wouldn't have a free hand to turn the pages.

J/k

Hah! Honestly though I've seen people steering with their knees or elbows while having something in each hand (food, phone, makeup, shaver, etc). MT alone would not discourage some from still finding a way to turn pages on a newspaper somehow :razz: It is crazy what some people will do!

 

[cdskier]

Also at some point in this thread self-driving cars were mentioned...I'm intrigued by the thought of a car being able to drive me at least part way to the mountain. Even if it could only drive on major highways, then it could at least get me the first 3 hours of my trip up the Thruway/Northway and then I could drive the last 2 hours from the Northway to the MRV. That would be pretty cool, although I'm still not sure I could fully trust a computer even on dry, straight highways.