Help me understand---Why Autonomous Cars?

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Manual transmissions are much more engaging even though they are slower than automatics these days (autos can shift faster than a human). I had an manual sports car back in the day, but I'd never get another manual. There really is no point.

What I actually like is when you can choose. I had a BMW sedan where it was auto, but when I wanted to shift, I could throw the stick around without the clutch. It was the best of both worlds. I could hit the redline flying down the on ramps but then not have to worry about clutching and shifting in stop n go traffic or stalling.

You can barely buy a legit sports car nowadays with a stick. I also hate paddle shifters.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Yep , and you get about 100k more out of a manual gearbox ! Maybe the googs want to make a megafortune out of this ridiculous idea , as well as nicking our autonomy , or that is , our rights to self government , because they'll be using crappy auto boxes for sure !
Besides , there's nothing quite like booting a v6 in 2nd and 3rd , kick down , what is that anyway ?!

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: enlightenedservant

It's about feeling that engine, knowing that clutch.
I'd be gutted if it became all self driving cars, I'd miss the connection between human and machine.

Hmm... I don't think I've ever felt a connection between myself and the machine itself. Maybe it's because I've ridden in so many different forms of public transportation and planes, so it's no big deal to me if I don't control the vehicle? My idea of a great vehicle is one that gets me to my destination quickly, safely, & with the least amount of effort possible. So even stops to refuel are a mild nuisance to me.

The only time I really enjoy driving is when I'm going to or through a secluded area or national park. Then I can stop on the side of the road at will and take pictures of any animals or landscapes I see. Other than that, meh.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: enlightenedservant

UK here. Drivers prefer manual compared to the 'stick shift' niche in the USA.

I don't know why but I always thought you were in America lol. I guess you're an honorary American now, muahahaha!

a reply to: enlightenedservant
Driving a stick shift is one of those things that you will never understand until you become proficient at driving one.

I am an old broad and I learned to drive a stick shift out of desperation. About 40 years ago I came across my first manual transmission. My back was against the wall and I had to get that car on and off the Interstate, and had to go around ramps with steep inclines, in the middle of the worse rush hour traffic you could imagine. I went from novice to a pretty good driver in about three hours of terror.

I have loved driving a manual ever since. It is hard to explain. It is more of a feeling of connectiveness that you have with the car when you are driving. I can't explain it. You have to experience it.

There's nothing wrong with electric bicycles , as long as you buy a good one , why aren't the media pushing (or pedalling!) these? Probably because home grown industries can't afford the fees

Cause I want to sleep while my car dives me to work.

~Morpheus

a reply to: TonyS

I drive here around Dearborn, Ford World Hdqrts, and their test track and surrounding public roads and NPS (New Product Developement), R and E(Research and Engineering) all day.

It is odd to look next to you and see no one driving, but a guy in the back seat with a laptop mounted...or see no one driving and a guy sitting only in the passengers seat. They stop, turn, signal, backup...its really cool...and disturbing at times.

We've become a "Hey, Siri? Turn on the Lights", voice activated, instagram, Blue-toothed, twittering society of convenience...and we're not going backwards. Ever.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

It is most definitely a feeling of connecting with a machine, knowing it's limits, something you never experience with an automatic.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Meh. I learned how to drive with a manual. I found it tedious and tiring - especially in stop and go rush hour traffic. I was excited to get my first automatic and have never gone back to manual since. It is good to know how when you're in a pinch though. Several years ago my husband needed me to drive his car somewhere for him and it was a manual. I was a little rusty at first, but it's like riding a bike...

a reply to: kaylaluv
I am sure my preference for a manual transmission has something to do with, what some may call, control issues, but I am convinced that on two occasions, I would not be here today if it where not for the fact that I was driving a stick shift. The ability to down shift to get the engine speed I needed to pull off some fancy maneuverability skills in a tight spot, I believed saved my life twice. Of course there were times, way too numerous to count, that the ability to jump start my car came in handy when driving a stick.

For me it was an acquired taste and I definitely agree that it is not for everybody. But then I am a little weird because I prefer trucks. My first truck, back a bunch of years ago, I used to call the "Little Girl". No one seems to understand my love for trucks, because I am a woman. My children loved my truck and they always asked to ride in the "Little Girl" truck. I still have her, though she needs a lot of work and I don't put her on the street. I still drive a truck.

After working in a job where I put 800-1400 miles a week on my car/truck for over 20 years, I can see giving up the wheel for must do travel, but for pleasure, give me a big old truck with a stick shift and I will be happy.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: TonyS

Check out the graph on this page (HERE). It shows that since 1945, a whopping 30,000 to 50,000+ Americans died every year from car crashes. If self driving technology can cut that number in half, that would be enormous! Even if it only decreased the number of car crash deaths by 10%, that would still save more lives every year than the number of people killed in the 9/11 terror attacks.

OK. I checked out the graph. It shows a HIGH of 26.48 deaths per 100,000 in 1969. By 2015 the death rate was down to 11.324. Now, how about the death rate per miles traveled? The first year we see is 1924 with 24.09 deaths per 100 million miles traveled. By 2015 that is down to 1.12.

Your own statistics show the vast improvements that have been made. In terms of miles driven, we've gone from 24 deaths to ONE.

I'd say that's progress.

a reply to: TonyS

Would you make the change over to AV if it could save 35,000 lives and prevent over 2,000,000 injuries?

more than 32,000 people are killed and 2 million are injured each year from motor vehicle crashes

a reply to: schuyler

???

Are you saying we shouldn't do automated cars if they can reduce deaths even further? Because it reads like you're implying that we've made enough progress as is.

Both my car and my truck are sick shift. The car is a sports car from Japan back in the 80s when things were built to last.
The connection between man and machine will never be known by most.
I've rebuilt this car- every body panel, suspension bit, engine, transmission, brakes... You name it, I've had it in my hands.

And she drives like a dream... If not a bit loud. Thirty pls year old cars rattle around like my thirty plus year old bones.
Worth every mile.

There are an enormous, enormous amount of reasons for the tech. Plenty of which I am sure have been covered already.

For me, and others in similar health situations, it would enable me to travel significantly more easily than currently. Having to constantly keep my arms raised, the uneven forces required when turning, and the slight shift when using the peddled all add up to a very painful experience. I never would have thought about it before, but it all adds up quite quickly even just in normal driving.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: schuyler

???

Are you saying we shouldn't do automated cars if they can reduce deaths even further? Because it reads like you're implying that we've made enough progress as is.

I'm saying we've done a tremendous amount already and that we can't live in a risk-free society if the only way to do it is take away what little freedoms we have left. You used your graph in an apparent attempt to show how things were getting much worse when the fact is that the graph shows things have gotten much better. It shows the opposite of what you intended it to show. I'm pointing that out. You are being deceptive.

You are claiming that the reason to move toward driverless vehicles is to "save lives," a time-honored reason, to be sure. "It's for the children" has been the battle cry for every draconian measure enacted into law by dictatorships all over the world. It twangs the heart-strings. I'm saying the reason to move to driverless cars is to assert control. It's a method to control the populace. You can bet your bottom dollar that if driverless cars were implemented, there will come a time when they not only relieve of your driving duties, they will also tell you where you can go and when. If the government does not want you in a certain area, the driverless car will take control and take you away from where you want to go--whether you like it or not.