Quality Control

Hey! I have an idea, why don't you slow down and avoid the accident?

give me liberty or give me....... GAS MILEAGE......at any cost.......

All cars and trucks after model year 2010 weighing over 3000 pounds off the assembly line should have GPS controls that limit speeds to legal speed limits; if not everywhere at least in densely populated areas.

All highways with speed limits over 50mph must have "Jersey" barriers unless they have a minimum separation distance between lanes with opposite directions of travel.

It's absurd that we have to have living rooms on wheels that weigh 10 times as much as the people and stuff they carry.

Ed Weldon

Hi Ed,

Here in the UK all new cars will be equipped with GPS speed controls, as logic does tell us to slow down so as to avoid accidents in the first place!

As for asking anyone to relinquish fuel economy in this day and age is totally irresponsible!!

Spencer.

Unfortunately, there are a whole bunch of Americans and I am sure others that will use that as the excuse they "need" to buy a huge vehicle. Of course, a number of the males are using their BIG cars & aggressive highway behavior to compensate of lack of other things. What else could justify the large number of vehicles on our roads named after a submissive sex act? 8o)

As for the automatic brake currently being marketed by Volvo and soon by other manufactures, I can't wait until someone whines about the violation of their civil rights by the inability to tailgate or hit someone. Remember, there are recorded accidents of people driving purposely into each other while merging 'cause they had to prove who was the "better" man....

I agree with the posts here. Why is safety put totally on the vehicle? The environment in which we drive should be controlled and made to be safe as well. We could drive around in giant soft bubbles but be injured by the first sharp stick we go near.

Driving the freeway along side massive transport trucks is absolutely unsafe. No matter how big your vehicle is. If our governments really wanted to keep us safe they would build transport lanes and have them separated by concrete barriers.

Also the fact that any vehicle on the road can travel at speeds up to 200 kph is just crazy. The Ontario government has instituted severe fines (10's of thousands) for speed limits exceeded by 50 km. Why haven't they just legislated speed governors. (I know.... it's a money grab)

As I see it, it's only in the last decade (or less) that we have seen strict safety designed into vehicles. Even the mini-cars are safer than what was driven 20 or 30 years ago.

And what about motorcycles? I don't think I've ever seen so many motorcycles on the road. Compared to riding a motorcycle, a mini-car is like a tank.

I think we still ought to have some choices. I don't like the idea of electronic governors in all situations.

What I fear the most are the drivers who are irresponsible. The worst ones are those that drive around city streets at 45 mph constantly distracted by something other than their driving. Or the ones that drive when they are genuinely physically impaired, i.e. 0.2 and up blood alcohol level, overwhelming fatigue to the point of falling asleep at the wheel, physical incapacity due to advanced age or chronic medical conditions. Or the young ones who refuse to accept their own lack of skill and experience.

I've long felt that intensive driver training leading to advanced and graduated licenses for passenger and light truck drivers would be a great thing. There are lots of safe driving practices that can be taught early in one's driving career rather than be learned the hard way or not at all. Perhaps if you keep current with the training and keep a clean driving record your electronic key in the slot on the dashboard will reset the car's computer to allow you to drive a bit faster or gain other liberties in the use of your vehicle.

Ed Weldon

Hi Ed,

You are right in every aspect, but as you yourself admit, there are many dangerous lunatics driving about these days and the only way to stop their idiocy is to restrict their speed electronically!

Here in the UK there a many who have already reacted to the idea of GPS speed controls, and as we have more cars pr. km. of road over here something has to be done to stop the road slaughter that is increasing every year!

As for civil or human rights, we all have a right to live, not to be killed by crazy speed merchants, so those who don't like the idea of electronic speed limiters can do one of two things......either slow down volantery, or accept speed limiters, they can't have it both ways.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Spencer.

Lets see--original Forbes article posted 4/14; finally makes it into this blog site 4 weeks later???? Most telling reply to that article was the first one on 4/14.

When analyzing the data, many assumptions are not explicitly stated. The most prominent one is that the safety fault lies in the existence and use of the small car. Looking at this from a long-term view, cars have gotten larger, heavier, and less fuel-efficient in the last 20 years. The American automobile industry has successfully lobbied to have fuel efficiency standards reduced and to have loopholes in the fleet standards large enough to drive an SUV through. Since the unstated assumption is that small cars carry the blame for the injuries of their occupants, the article in a prominent journal can be cited again and again as a justification for continuing the same trends that have gotten us where we are today.

Quality control sees the problem--a higher level of injuries to a certain subset of drivers. A truly competent quality control investigation would look for the root causes of the problem. The article fails to truly look for this. The implied fix does eliminate the documented problem of a high rate of injuries, but it does nothing to eliminate the root causes (excessively larger and higher-powered cars, multiple temptations and opportunities for speeding and carelessness, etc.). Therefore, the quality control blog has been delinquent and even incompetent in its extrapolated suggestion of softening the currently "tough stance on fuel economy".

--John Mueller

Yeah, Give me bigger government, more regulations and higher taxes, fewer choices I can make and let someone else decide what is best for me. .

Did I say bigger government? Well make it even bigger!

Gotta to love it

Paddler -- Would you let a child go play with a loaded gun without any more instruction than "pull the trigger to make it shoot"?

That is what we do in effect with automobiles. Driver training and licensing is a big joke in the USA. And law enforcement is an equal joke. It's about raising revenue and turning cops into hated and feared fine collectors. It's about coddling incompetent and/or irresponsible people who believe that they have no driving problems; only getting caught problems.

I am a strong advocate of a graduated licensing program with the costs of largely computer based training to be born entirely by the licensee. (I do envision a somewhat costly hands on driving school for A and B categories) An "E" license means you get to put the key in the lock and tell the computer where you want to go. "D" would be the next step, etc. An "A" license would mean you could treat highways like the autobahn long as you have absolutely no violations and complete on all periodic training. In other words the "A" license says you are an expert driver and can be trusted to drive safely in all situations.

A tamper proof display on the front and rear of the vehicle would mark the license status of the person in the driver's seat. (We have the technology to do all that). There also are high tech ways older vehicles without all the computer stuff could still be used by people with higher level licenses by suitable license plate markings or RFID gadgets and wireless displays that talk to the special driver's key.

Ed Weldon

Paddler, you are definitely not alone, I agree with your way of thinking and so do most people where I come from.

I too feel insulted when someone treats me as if I'm too stupid to protect myself from myself, and when someone feels they need to decide what is best for me.

My father logged countless miles on the road and never was involved in an accident or traffic violation his entire life. Most of this was before seat belts, airbags, 55mph speed limits or the energy crisis. He used common sense for safety and fuel economy because it was just common sense to do so. I treat driving with a great deal of respect and my children have learned to drive with safety and fuel economy promoting habits, as well.

Gee, there seems to be a pattern here! Maybe these type of values can be instilled through parenting? No, can't be. We are not allowed to have values anymore because that interferes with tolerance and we may be belittled as a conservative. We need the government to decide what should and shouldn't be our values and rather than promote values through parenting, we need Obama or some radical liberal from California to decide what will be best for us.

BTW, I learned gun safety as a young child and have never shot myself or anyone else. Back then guns and knives were tools, not weapons.