Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 660 posts

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#261

Post by magicalhippo »

Vecr wrote: post #128
magicalhippo wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> gas pedals in many modern EFI vehicles feel more like foot-operated potentiometers than throttle linkages. In my EV it literally is a potentiometer. I really miss the feel of a physical throttle linkage on the snow and ice, I feel it's much more difficult to judge grip. Also, since it's just a pot, I don't know why there's not a speed mode for it, it to make it operate the cruise control speed set-point rather than…

Multiple cross-checked hall effect sensors, hopefully. Same concept though.

That's what I had thought, but mechanic that replaced the throttle pedal assembly called it a potentiometer (had a weird pulsing in the force feedback).

Of course, could be he was wrong.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#263

Post by fecker »

tom_ wrote: post #90
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are there really cars where the horn is not a physical button/ring on the steering wheel? Yes: https://antiquecarmuseumofiowa.org/wp-content/uploads/1913-F... Well ... "are" is kinda stretching it...

My 1995 Renault Clio had it as a button on the indicator stalk. Worked very well, in my view. Much easier than pressing the centre of the steering wheel. There's often no need to even move your hand!

My Dacia Sandero has it on the tip of the left stalk

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#264

Post by puzzlingcaptcha »

tom_ wrote: post #90
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are there really cars where the horn is not a physical button/ring on the steering wheel? Yes: https://antiquecarmuseumofiowa.org/wp-content/uploads/1913-F... Well ... "are" is kinda stretching it...

My 1995 Renault Clio had it as a button on the indicator stalk. Worked very well, in my view. Much easier than pressing the centre of the steering wheel. There's often no need to even move your hand!

Although it seems to have changed, my 1990's Twingo also had the horn on the indicator stick but a 2000's Megane already has it in the steering wheel proper.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#265

Post by gnegggh »

I’ve had the model 3 highland since it came out and still not used to it. Definitely a safety issue.

Turn signals and vipers including speed should be physical and not a non tactile button.

Love the car otherwise but kinda just want it with a screen that’s 1/3rd the size, CarPlay and speed and such in front of the wheel.

Never used Netflix or any of that stuff. Controlling music via your phone app is easier anyway, since you’re used to that interface.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#267

Post by magicalhippo »

cuu508 wrote: post #252
kedikedi wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The throttle feeling of a cable operated throttle is more about how much air the engine wants to breathe. I’d say it’s kinda still related to rpm, but it might be a completely different feeling on a turbo engine, that I haven’t experienced.

Right, but how does the changes in engine wanting to breathe manifest through the throttle pedal feel? Changes of vibrations? Changes of resistance? Changes in lag from pushing the pedal to the engine responding? Perhaps on the direct throttle car you could simply hear the engine better?

It was probably sound and vibration in combination with less lag.

We had an older non-turbo car before the EV.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#268

Post by stby »

oven9342 wrote: post #236
iforgotpassword wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But even then, how do you find the A/C or volume control on a touch screen without taking your eyes off the road, without accidentally touching something else? You just can't feel your way to the volume knob. Sure, you are a responsible driver and would only do that at a traffic light or other completely safe situation, but I don't know how many accidents touch controls in cars already caused with less responsible dr…

People have already died because of the screens “The ship's user interface [touch screen] was found to have contributed to the sailors' confusion.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_John_S._McCain_and_Alnic_M...

Seems to be a US Navy thing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655#Potential_...).

On a more serious note, there's a big difference between a vehicle like a car that is operated by one person, and a ship with a large crew with dedicated tasks.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#269

Post by knorker »

I rented a fully specced out Tesla Model S, once. That's not a cheap car. But the turn signal controls were shitty no-feedback buttons.

I don't understand how anyone plowing six digits into a car finds that acceptable. It's a dealbreaker for me.

On top of that there were other "virtualizations" of controls, that just made the car feel like a cheap shitty plastic toy.

Re: European crash tester says carmakers must bring back physical controls

#270

Post by avar »

gamepsys wrote: post #126
dzhiurgis wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obvious limitation is something like Maps and media. My guess ones that use mechanical dials (i.e. Lexus until ~ year ago) cause more distraction than touchscreen by simply being harder to use and taking more time to solve your problem. Given how well chatgpt's voice recognition works - why not just put it on all cars!

> Obvious limitation is something like Maps and media I would love to see some data to see how dangerous it is to operate Maps and Media apps on a touch screen while operating a moving vehicle. This is data modern automakers should have access to. I suspect the answer is that it does reduce safety.

Nobody has access to that data, even if you're excluded it to extreme cases like "an at-fault crash happening as the user was manipulating the map software directly". We can't bridge the gap between that and accident reports.

And that doesn't get into the more subtle cases, e.g. a crash that happens later due to an earlier loss of situational awarenesses.

It's also hard to quantify the opposite. E.g. I sometimes have to manipulate the map while driving, and resent the distraction. But afterwards I'm more likely to be in the right lane earlier, not be distracted because I'm trying to read a traffic sign in the 1-2 second window I might have etc.

Post reply on HN