The 2016 prices are adjusted for inflation (using this website, which lists the rate of inflation from 2016 to now as 7.2%), which means the actual numbers listed at the time were smaller than they are now, but they're worth about the same due to how inflation works. Remember, the reason I crunched those numbers was to prove to you that all the new technology (such a backup camera) does not effect the sale price, which is what they reflect. Precisely. Not only is the Seven classified as a kit car by US standards, but it IS ACTUALLY SOLD IN AMERICA (and has been since 2014) as a rolling shell with a consumer-installed drivetrain (and they're street legal). So not only is Chuck wrong, his evidence is wrong too.
I'm well aware that you could build your own, wasn't aware of its availability as a rolling shell. But in any case I was referring to being able to buy it as a complete, turnkey car, just as with any other car. Maybe the Lotus Exige would be a better example; that one has become track-only because of airbag regulations (and maybe cameras too who knows), and is complex enough that you can't just build one in your driveway.
I think backup cameras are great but I don't like the mandate. Automatic emergency braking doesn't bother me. It seems to be done pretty well in most cars. Very rarely activates when it shouldn't. I don't like the added complexity. What bugs the shit out of me, though, is automatic "parking assist" braking. Especially Mopar's ParkSense. Brakes automatically if it detects an impending collision while parking. Extremely annoying; constantly jams on the brakes when there's no need. The sound and sensation of the ABS pump suddenly pressurizing the brakes at a low speed is also like nails on a chalk board to me. Another feature that I think is complete bullshit is automatic high beams. Absolute garbage, extremely annoying on every car I've driven fitted with them.
Be happy we even get it at all. You sound like a six year old who just spent twenty minutes begging his mommy for a LEGO set, then cried about having to assemble it himself. (Or more accurately, cried about having to assemble like 5% of it himself.)
Agreed. They seem to take forever to turn off for an actual car but if a road sign reflects too much then they insta off. Also the ones I've dealt with don't turn on until a fairly high speed, which makes sense driving around a well lit urban area but is stupid when driving on backroads. Luckily all of this can be taken care of by simply manually turning the headlights on instead of using the auto headlights, at least that's how it works in the rig I've driven.
I've only tried to disable the auto high beam function in one car, a 2020 Toyota Corolla. The auto function persisted regardless of the headlight switch position. I was on a gravel road and I couldn't get the high beams to turn on while stopped to survey my surroundings, short of digging through the settings. It pissed me off. The feature is bearable while cruising down the road but really, really sucks while driving off road in poorly lit, low speed areas.
Auto high beams are garbage. That's a feature that should be removed, granddad's car with them they were hyper prone to not dipping for incoming drivers. I've been getting high beamed by oncoming drivers far more often recently and I'm sure it's automatic systems that just suck. My car has automatic headlamps on/off, but not high beams, that's still manual. That system seems to work quite well and also requires it to be dark/light for a reasonable amount of time before switching so doesn't just turn the headlights on for driving under a bridge
my car also has them and i never use them. But my dad has a somewhat Matrix LED system and that works beautifully its the way forward there.
Maybe it's banned because, oh I don't know, a single-ton tin can with zero safety features is unsafe? Whodathunkit. IIRC the IIHS had a field day with one of these.
It was a 14 Ram that I was driving so I would guess that most of the Mopar vehicles are set up the same way.
SuperAusten64, That is one of the best posts you've written. You are very funny, informative, and good at giving people constructive criticism. By the way, I would be unaware of this thread if it weren't for you Okay then :/
It wasn't "unsafe" until someone decided to change the rules. Same thing outright killed the Dodge Viper; it suddenly became mandatory to have side curtain airbags and they couldn't do that without a complete and costly redesign. Why not just let the buyer decide for themselves whether they want a side curtain airbag? Like the "War on Terror", the fight against traffic fatalities is endless by design; a war which will never be won, but will simply stay on and mutate into an excuse for whatever the self-serving careerists and worse in the bureaucracy feel like demanding.
Using arsenic in Victorian era wallpapers wasn’t “unsafe” until some babies decided to die from it. 1950’s cars weren’t “unsafe” until someone decided that people getting their heads impaled on bare metal steering wheels wasn’t a great idea. Your point? A few years ago, my dad drove through an intersection (in his 2003 BMW 325xi wagon) and a driver that was going too fast and didn't see him in time t-boned him in the driver's side. The side curtain airbags saved his life, and he was able to walk away (and drive the totaled car home) without a scratch. Had the car not had the airbags, he most likely would have recieved severe head injuries or even died. As far as I'm concerned, side curtain airbags are rightfully mandatory. If FCA is too cheap to find a way to implement them (Ford and GM’s performance cars have them), then that’s their problem.
SuperAusten64, That was a very informative post. You make some really good points, especially about the driver airbags =)
These anti features are BS because real driver don't need them. So what will happen if they become mandatory? It'll discourage real driver to drive because automatic braking is unintended deceleration, like unintended acceleration, reduce vehicle handling. And it'll encourage idiots to drive because idiots think they just have to hit the gas and automatics will do the rest. Thus road will become more dangerous due to more idiots and less real drivers. The more computerized and smart (against the driver's intention) the more the drivers being driven by their vehicles. Unintended deceleration and unintended turning reduce vehicle handling, leading to more unintended acceleration (to compensate deceleration). The vehicles will be more expensive to buy. Before the mandation, vehicles with those anti-feature are cheaper because of market competition, after the mandation people have to buy vehicles with those anti-feature, so car manufacturers will skyrocket the price of their assists. Note the assists are to assist manufacturers to earn more money, not to assist driving (because they reduce vehicle handling)
And you can. If you want 15 air bags in a car I won't grudge it to you. What I resent is being forced to have the stupid things, in the process getting some cars discontinued and others kept out of the market entirely. It's like people on this forum can't distinguish between opposition to a mandate and opposition to the thing being mandated.
