follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook.
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Speed By Design
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB > Off-Topic Discussions > Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions

Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions Discuss all other cars and automotive news here.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-29-2020, 06:46 PM   #155
Spuds
The Dictater
 
Spuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Drives: '13 Red Scion FRS
Location: MD, USA
Posts: 9,399
Thanks: 26,057
Thanked 12,400 Times in 6,129 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0 View Post
The physics doesn't change in 10 years. Either we store energy directly, or we convert it to ammonia/hydrogen then convert it to hydrogen (if ammonia) then convert it to energy for use or storage. That process is inherently less efficient and would require more utilities to generate power to do the same job. The only reason to do that is so hydrogen could do a job batteries alone couldn't do, but this is a shrinking proposition year by year.

With batteries, we have the system in place to already fuel these cars at home. Adding supercharger stations is incredibly easy in comparison to hydrogen fuel stations. Even if ammonia takes off, we would need to have maybe hundreds of 2m sized 'cracking' reactors at each fuel station, or something bigger, to process the ammonia, or we are left with shipping liquid hydrogen from a 'cracking' plant to the fueling stations, which ammonia avoids shipping large quantities of liquid hydrogen in transoceanic tankers, but is still not ideal at the local level.

With batteries, all we need is more, green utilities, and we need batteries. Tesla has laid the groundwork for other manufactures to follow where they can greatly reduce the factory footprint and carbon footprint of generating batteries, while increasing battery production rates, all from local resources.

Right now, we lack the infrastructure to produce ammonia or hydrogen in a carbon neutral way, nor do we have the fuel stations in place, nor do we have the means to rapidly scale these systems and some of them might be economical, as described below:

https://www.carboncommentary.com/blo...carbon-economy
Every time you charge and discharge a battery you lose ~40% (~20% each) of the energy to heat generated by internal resistance. And that's not including fast charging, which is far less efficient. It's not "direct" storage of electricity, it's still storing it by chemical means, and there are still significant losses.

Then you need the cooling/heating circuits when the vehicle is not even running to maintain the batteries in certain conditions.

We also lack the infrastructure to produce electricity to produce batteries or the energy to put into them in a carbon-neutral way. The electricity we do make needs to be used on production. If you were to store that in battery banks you are accepting yet another ~40% loss.

Adding a supercharger station is not incredibly easy btw, and you need significantly more of them compared to fueling stations to service the same number of vehicles. I think we talked about this in another thread.

Then you have to look at the whole car. Batteries are heavy, and in order to get good range/performance you need a lot of them. Heavier cars cost more energy to build, use more consumables like tires (which take energy to produce) and put more stress on roadways (which take energy to maintain). The total energy needed to move a heavier vehicle is greater therefore absolute losses from discharging or regenerative braking are going to be higher than a lighter vehicle.
Spuds is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Spuds For This Useful Post:
Dadhawk (10-05-2020), WildCard600 (09-29-2020)
Old 09-29-2020, 06:58 PM   #156
Spuds
The Dictater
 
Spuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Drives: '13 Red Scion FRS
Location: MD, USA
Posts: 9,399
Thanks: 26,057
Thanked 12,400 Times in 6,129 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0 View Post
There are no extra stops. You wake up and the car is in the driveway. It takes you to work and home. The car is autonomous, so it'll park itself back at the garage. I just said it could be made more efficient, but it isn't necessary.
Have you ever worked with autonomous machines? Fun fact, the smarter the machine, the less likely it is to do exactly what you want it to do. It's essentially like perpetually having a teenager that has the ability to make decisions without really thinking through the consequences. One day, your car just doesn't show up, because it forgot to wake up, or drove into a ditch because it didn't see that ice on the road, or broke down and sat in the middle of the road crying for help. Now you gotta go find your car, pay for the damages it caused, get it fixed up, and scold it while it sits there staring at you blankly because it's a car and it don't GAF.
Spuds is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Spuds For This Useful Post:
WildCard600 (09-29-2020)
Old 09-29-2020, 08:16 PM   #157
serialk11r
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Drives: '06 AM V8V Coupe
Location: United States of America
Posts: 5,279
Thanks: 285
Thanked 1,074 Times in 759 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spuds View Post
Every time you charge and discharge a battery you lose ~40% (~20% each) of the energy to heat generated by internal resistance. And that's not including fast charging, which is far less efficient. It's not "direct" storage of electricity, it's still storing it by chemical means, and there are still significant losses.
The typical efficiency for lithium ion batteries is WAY higher than that. At constant temperature, the loss is proportional to current, and charging a usual LiFePO4 at 0.5C (so 2 hours to a full charge) is something like 97% efficient at the battery. Last time I rented a Tesla and sat at a supercharger, it peaked at around a 1C rate, so you could expect something like 93% efficiency (even faster charges are dependent on lower internal resistance chemistries, so this is approximately the minimum). If you charge it with the slow charger at home that takes many hours, it's over 99% efficient.

The actual charger is also >93% efficient, and cruising on the highway the battery is around 99% efficient (closer to 90% if you're "giving it the beans"), so the round-trip efficiency is easily over 80% on average. That's why grid storage with them is considered viable.

Now of course, if your car needed to drive itself far away to be stored and charge itself, then all of that is wasted and drops the efficiency, and if you live in a less populated area that would be a very significant proportion of the total miles the car has to do.

Hydrogen is fundamentally difficult to work with because it diffuses through stuff and needs ultra-high-pressure storage. Luckily, we already have hydrogen stored at room temperature! It's called LPG and gasoline I personally think liquid dinosaur fuel will survive for a long time, but in the form of range extenders that can only be switched on in rural areas since they'll probably ban combustion in cities for pollution reasons.

The excuse electric car enthusiasts make for charging time is "come on waiting 20 minutes isn't that bad!", except that's directly at odds with the promise of autonomous driving, where driver fatigue stops being a problem. Fast charging 1MWh of batteries in a long haul truck is no joke...you would need several MWh of grid storage to support that kind of transient load. if the truck drives itself, the trucking company is gonna want that thing on the road, not sitting around charging.

If all city cars become electric, then there should be plenty of cheap oil for rural and long distance vehicles to burn.

Last edited by serialk11r; 09-29-2020 at 08:27 PM.
serialk11r is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to serialk11r For This Useful Post:
Irace86.2.0 (09-29-2020), Spuds (09-29-2020)
Old 09-29-2020, 08:27 PM   #158
Irace86.2.0
Senior Member
 
Irace86.2.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,882
Thanks: 5,665
Thanked 5,802 Times in 3,297 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildCard600 View Post
I look forward to hearing how much the monthly rent to one of these autonomous parking garage spaces would be to make it economically viable to whoever built it.

Considering how much it currently costs to rent a "dumb" space I imagine it's going to be hilariously absurd.
It depends on a lot of factors. Many parking garages in towns and cities are empty at night, so they go unused. The owner of the garage could charge for charging by taking a fraction of the recharging cost.

Again, this is a potential solution for people without garages in cold climates. There are other potential solutions.



__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
Irace86.2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2020, 08:36 PM   #159
serialk11r
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Drives: '06 AM V8V Coupe
Location: United States of America
Posts: 5,279
Thanks: 285
Thanked 1,074 Times in 759 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Garage
@Irace86.2.0
The problem with Freevalve is actually more about power consumption. All of the energy compressing the valve spring is lost, whereas with a cam drive you can recover a good portion, which becomes significant as the engine speed and valve lift increase. This is made worse by the fact that generating compressed air or pressurized oil is not efficient.

You don't need high valve lift most of the time so it's not that bad, but it still makes a dent on fuel efficiency. Additionally, since valvetrain power becomes a consideration, at moderate to high engine speeds using higher valve lift would reduce pumping losses, but it would increase valve actuator power consumption.

It turns out that fixed cam profiles really aren't as limiting as people originally thought. High EGR dilution ratios are by far the most important technique of improving part load efficiency, and you can cover the near-idle load scenario with cylinder deactivation or a second cam profile ala Honda/Porsche.

While chain driven cams probably are heavier than a Freevalve setup, I imagine a belt or gear driven overhead cam setup is actually lighter than Freevalve including the air pump.
serialk11r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2020, 09:29 PM   #160
Irace86.2.0
Senior Member
 
Irace86.2.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,882
Thanks: 5,665
Thanked 5,802 Times in 3,297 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spuds View Post
Every time you charge and discharge a battery you lose ~40% (~20% each) of the energy to heat generated by internal resistance. And that's not including fast charging, which is far less efficient. It's not "direct" storage of electricity, it's still storing it by chemical means, and there are still significant losses.

Then you need the cooling/heating circuits when the vehicle is not even running to maintain the batteries in certain conditions.

We also lack the infrastructure to produce electricity to produce batteries or the energy to put into them in a carbon-neutral way. The electricity we do make needs to be used on production. If you were to store that in battery banks you are accepting yet another ~40% loss.

Adding a supercharger station is not incredibly easy btw, and you need significantly more of them compared to fueling stations to service the same number of vehicles. I think we talked about this in another thread.

Then you have to look at the whole car. Batteries are heavy, and in order to get good range/performance you need a lot of them. Heavier cars cost more energy to build, use more consumables like tires (which take energy to produce) and put more stress on roadways (which take energy to maintain). The total energy needed to move a heavier vehicle is greater therefore absolute losses from discharging or regenerative braking are going to be higher than a lighter vehicle.
Of course there are losses. There are losses in everything. Hydrogen has greater loses and would require more infrastructure and more utilities to produce electricity. Producing hydrogen from excess energy could be a thing of the future, but I can't see hydrogen being the dominant or even significant format for passenger cars and most other vehicles.

The cost and speed of installing Supercharger stations is considerably cheaper. The cost to just set up a 120V outlet in garages, parking lots, etc is even cheaper. Supercharging will be nice, but the reality is that it just isn't that necessary. Home, overnight charging will be the preferred method. The average person drives 29.2 miles a day, so charging at night can accommodate that use with only 120v. Still, there is already technology for fast charging, but they are waiting for the batteries to catch up. There are companies with chargers that can add 20 miles a minute. That would be 100 miles in 5 minutes. Where will it be in another 15 years?

You say we need a lot of charging stations, but this assumes people will spend more time at charging stations. If most of the charging is done at home or at work or in parking garages then Supercharger stations will be used primarily for anyone who is commuting many miles in a given day. This is very different from how people refuel now. Right now, fueling stations aren't used all throughout the day. They are used at certain peak times like before and after work. At night, most of them are empty. A car could be programmed to drive itself to the nearest charging station in the middle of the night to charge itself. In states like Oregon, a person can't pump their own gas, so having an attendant plug in the car isn't a big deal. In all likelihood, the process will eventually be fully automated.

A Tesla Model 3 standard range weighs 3,550 and the long range weighs 3,800lbs. That is on par with other cars in its class like a Lexus IS or BMW 3 series. Battery weight will only drop from there over time. Most people just won't need a large battery too, once we lose range anxiety. Just like a family may buy a SUV for storage and trips and a small car or sports car, a family may opt for a long range vehicle and a short range vehicle. I commute 2.4 miles to work, so I could definitely live with a car with less range. And as it pertains to hydrogen cars, they are not lighter. The Toyota Mirai is 4100lbs. Batteries will most likely get lighter. I don't think hydrogen fuel cells, fuel tanks, etc will fundamentally be able to get lighter.
__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
Irace86.2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2020, 09:40 PM   #161
Irace86.2.0
Senior Member
 
Irace86.2.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,882
Thanks: 5,665
Thanked 5,802 Times in 3,297 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spuds View Post
Have you ever worked with autonomous machines? Fun fact, the smarter the machine, the less likely it is to do exactly what you want it to do. It's essentially like perpetually having a teenager that has the ability to make decisions without really thinking through the consequences. One day, your car just doesn't show up, because it forgot to wake up, or drove into a ditch because it didn't see that ice on the road, or broke down and sat in the middle of the road crying for help. Now you gotta go find your car, pay for the damages it caused, get it fixed up, and scold it while it sits there staring at you blankly because it's a car and it don't GAF.
Couldn't that same argument be used to suggest autonomous humans are less safe behind the wheel than an autonomous computer? I think the data from Tesla already suggests this is the case.

And anyways, how would any of that be different than if you were in your car? I can tell you that many people would rather be stuck at home trying to sort an issue with their car than stuck on the side of the road.
__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
Irace86.2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2020, 09:59 PM   #162
Irace86.2.0
Senior Member
 
Irace86.2.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,882
Thanks: 5,665
Thanked 5,802 Times in 3,297 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by serialk11r View Post
@Irace86.2.0
The problem with Freevalve is actually more about power consumption. All of the energy compressing the valve spring is lost, whereas with a cam drive you can recover a good portion, which becomes significant as the engine speed and valve lift increase. This is made worse by the fact that generating compressed air or pressurized oil is not efficient.

You don't need high valve lift most of the time so it's not that bad, but it still makes a dent on fuel efficiency. Additionally, since valvetrain power becomes a consideration, at moderate to high engine speeds using higher valve lift would reduce pumping losses, but it would increase valve actuator power consumption.

It turns out that fixed cam profiles really aren't as limiting as people originally thought. High EGR dilution ratios are by far the most important technique of improving part load efficiency, and you can cover the near-idle load scenario with cylinder deactivation or a second cam profile ala Honda/Porsche.

While chain driven cams probably are heavier than a Freevalve setup, I imagine a belt or gear driven overhead cam setup is actually lighter than Freevalve including the air pump.
https://www.freevalve.com/insights/c...opportunities/

Their design seems to include the accessories.

Quote:
For the Qoros 3 engine, the total engine weight savings came out at over 20 kg, while in case studies on other turbo charged 4-cylinder SI engines, we normally see a weight reduction in the range of 10 kg, or more.

Replacing mechanical cam-shafts with pneumatic valve actuators does however require additional auxiliary components, which needs to be incorporated in the packaging. The main components are...

As mentioned initially, even though a number major components have been added, a substantial weight saving can still be achieved...
...as well as packaging.
__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
Irace86.2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2020, 11:11 PM   #163
Spuds
The Dictater
 
Spuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Drives: '13 Red Scion FRS
Location: MD, USA
Posts: 9,399
Thanks: 26,057
Thanked 12,400 Times in 6,129 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0 View Post
Couldn't that same argument be used to suggest autonomous humans are less safe behind the wheel than an autonomous computer? I think the data from Tesla already suggests this is the case.

And anyways, how would any of that be different than if you were in your car? I can tell you that many people would rather be stuck at home trying to sort an issue with their car than stuck on the side of the road.
Yes, absolutely people make just as many if not more mistakes. The difference is that people can be held accountable. If you have a vehicle that is as autonomous as a person (which Teslas are not), it will make roughly the same amount of mistakes. Those will most likely be different mistakes. The optimal goal, which I have no opposition to if it gives me a choice as to whether to buy/use it, is to provide a way where machines can do what they do best and people do what they do best. I personally prefer to have total control of machines that can kill me and others but that's just me.

Additionally, what you are describing in the scenario increases the amount of miles driven significantly, therefore is likely to increase the number of incidents.



I would rather be present in person to make decisions rather than have my $60k property sitting somewhere doing something I don't know about. There indeed are a lot of people who prefer to avoid the stress of responsibility. I guess I just like stress...

It's like when your niece was scammed by that car dealer. You could have told her what to do and let it be. But no, you went in person to handle it.
Spuds is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Spuds For This Useful Post:
WildCard600 (09-29-2020)
Old 09-30-2020, 01:21 AM   #164
Irace86.2.0
Senior Member
 
Irace86.2.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,882
Thanks: 5,665
Thanked 5,802 Times in 3,297 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spuds View Post
Yes, absolutely people make just as many if not more mistakes. The difference is that people can be held accountable. If you have a vehicle that is as autonomous as a person (which Teslas are not), it will make roughly the same amount of mistakes. Those will most likely be different mistakes. The optimal goal, which I have no opposition to if it gives me a choice as to whether to buy/use it, is to provide a way where machines can do what they do best and people do what they do best. I personally prefer to have total control of machines that can kill me and others but that's just me.

Additionally, what you are describing in the scenario increases the amount of miles driven significantly, therefore is likely to increase the number of incidents.

I would rather be present in person to make decisions rather than have my $60k property sitting somewhere doing something I don't know about. There indeed are a lot of people who prefer to avoid the stress of responsibility. I guess I just like stress...

It's like when your niece was scammed by that car dealer. You could have told her what to do and let it be. But no, you went in person to handle it.
I work in the ER. I see the downside of human drivers every day. We are fallible, even on our best days when we have all our attention on road. People have seizures, a stroke, a heart attack, a spider crawls on them, the sun blinds their vision for a moment, they fall asleep, they drive while under the influence, they’re distracted from any number of things, they’re old, disabled, unable to check their blind spot, too hearing impaired to hear the ambulance, to blind to see well at night or at all, etc. I would prefer to have the masses that aren’t interested in being engaged with driving to have a machine to do the driving for them. I’ll deal with my insurance and let the insurance company pursue the faulty car/driver, if they do.

Not if self-driving cars reduce the incidence even more significantly, which it will undoubtedly do. I wouldn’t be surprised if driving was eventually illegal someday on public roads. Live it up while you can; the world will change faster than we think.

It isn’t about stress. It is about access to resources. If you have ever been stuck on the side of the road without cellular reception and far from civilization then you wish you were home with a phone, your toolbox and a second means of getting around.
__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
Irace86.2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2020, 01:31 AM   #165
soundman98
ProCrastinationConsultant
 
soundman98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Drives: '14 Ranger, '18 Tacoma 4Dr LB
Location: chicago-ish
Posts: 11,326
Thanks: 35,214
Thanked 13,661 Times in 6,778 Posts
Mentioned: 98 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
I don't believe we'll see driving outlawed in our life times. But I do believe some of us will see human driving insurance rates become prohibitively expensive in that time frame.

No different than what's already happened with homeownership. You can legally purchase a house for cash with knob and tube wiring, a fuse panel, a hole in the roof, and at triple the going rate of comparable houses.

But no insurance or mortgage company will ever sign off on the deal
__________________
"The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time"
soundman98 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to soundman98 For This Useful Post:
Irace86.2.0 (09-30-2020), Tcoat (10-01-2020)
Old 09-30-2020, 02:04 AM   #166
Irace86.2.0
Senior Member
 
Irace86.2.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,882
Thanks: 5,665
Thanked 5,802 Times in 3,297 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundman98 View Post
I don't believe we'll see driving outlawed in our life times. But I do believe some of us will see human driving insurance rates become prohibitively expensive in that time frame.

No different than what's already happened with homeownership. You can legally purchase a house for cash with knob and tube wiring, a fuse panel, a hole in the roof, and at triple the going rate of comparable houses.

But no insurance or mortgage company will ever sign off on the deal
I think we have to ask ourselves, what is the trend in the automotive world for safety? If we look at the introduction of seat belts, ABS, airbags, back up cameras, etc, the S curve for adoption is extremely fast for proven technologies that reduce fatalities and injuries. Maybe you are older than me, so you can say, 'not in our life time', but for me, I wouldn't be surprised if it happened in my lifetime. There are already so many cars on the road with accident avoidance systems and lane departure warning and blind spot monitoring and brake assist, etc, that we aren't really far off. In fifteen years, a good chunk of cars will have Autopilot-like systems, and all new cars will likely have Autopilot-like systems as a requirement. If units can be retrofit to cars easily then it could happen sooner, which I saw GeoHot had something remedial:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/13/1...r-scam-diy-kit
__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
Irace86.2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2020, 02:14 AM   #167
Irace86.2.0
Senior Member
 
Irace86.2.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Drives: Q5 + BRZ + M796
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 7,882
Thanks: 5,665
Thanked 5,802 Times in 3,297 Posts
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Saw this pop up in the news. I was kind of bummed two cities pulled out. I hope more don't pull out. I think we need to push nuclear more, and this looks promising, and if it pans out, it could revive positive perception and interest in nuclear.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/sci...ar-revolution/

Two Cities Just Pulled Out of the Tiny Reactor Nuclear Revolution

https://www.nuscalepower.com/technol...ology-overview
__________________
My Build | K24 Turbo Swap | *K24T BRZ SOLD*
Irace86.2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2020, 02:18 AM   #168
Spuds
The Dictater
 
Spuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Drives: '13 Red Scion FRS
Location: MD, USA
Posts: 9,399
Thanks: 26,057
Thanked 12,400 Times in 6,129 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0 View Post
I work in the ER. I see the downside of human drivers every day. We are fallible, even on our best days when we have all our attention on road. People have seizures, a stroke, a heart attack, a spider crawls on them, the sun blinds their vision for a moment, they fall asleep, they drive while under the influence, they’re distracted from any number of things, they’re old, disabled, unable to check their blind spot, too hearing impaired to hear the ambulance, to blind to see well at night or at all, etc. I would prefer to have the masses that aren’t interested in being engaged with driving to have a machine to do the driving for them. I’ll deal with my insurance and let the insurance company pursue the faulty car/driver, if they do.

Not if self-driving cars reduce the incidence even more significantly, which it will undoubtedly do. I wouldn’t be surprised if driving was eventually illegal someday on public roads. Live it up while you can; the world will change faster than we think.

It isn’t about stress. It is about access to resources. If you have ever been stuck on the side of the road without cellular reception and far from civilization then you wish you were home with a phone, your toolbox and a second means of getting around.
All of those things can happen to a vehicle that is complex enough to drive itself in the manner you are referring to. Have you considered why humans are so fallible? It's because we are the most complex machines on this planet. Machines that are reliable are quite simple by comparison.

For the lulz, allow me to present this scenario. If an occupant has a medical emergency in a tesla on autopilot, wouldn't the car just keep going? Any other car would come to a stop in some fashion, which would call attention to it and allow medical personnel access. How would you treat somebody in a moving car?

No, I have not been stranded on the side of the road with no cell service. Then again, I don't know of any location within 15 miles of a parking garage where there isn't any cell service or at least somewhere you can use a phone to call for help. How about you?
Spuds is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tcoat banned? Hotrodheart Off-Topic Lounge [WARNING: NO POLITICS] 95 07-06-2019 01:46 AM
Does anyone know why pansontw got banned? Soloside Off-Topic Lounge [WARNING: NO POLITICS] 17 10-26-2018 04:20 AM
Got banned from gf's complex jdmblood Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions 11 07-12-2015 12:46 PM
Why have so many users been banned? xuimod Site Announcements / Questions / Issues 9 03-08-2015 02:23 PM
Banned Toyota GT 86 Advert Banned Nevermore FR-S & 86 Photos, Videos, Wallpapers, Gallery Forum 9 11-16-2012 07:27 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.