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

Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

mercedesbenzofnatick.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 263 posts

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#251

Post by leetcrew »

pryce wrote: post #62
ascar wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mercedes is actually known for their engine longevity, reliability and serviceability. Yes they have more issues with technology than other cars, but that's because they use more and newer technology than cheaper brands. [1] [1] https://www.osv.ltd.uk/are-mercedes-benz-reliable/

I would find this more compelling if i hadn't had a Mercedes written off because of their "smart" technology choices. Apparently with their vehicles (in this case a C180/2004) the tensioner is power-dependent and requires the vehicle to be used somewhat frequently to work at all. This means that simply by not using the car for 4-5 months, my dad returning to it and turning it on for I don't have much automotive exper…

it's disappointing that the tensioner of all things would fail in that situation, but long intervals between use is a problem for all cars.

if your dad regularly lets a car sit for five months without driving it, he's going to have a lot of car troubles. ought to at least take it out a couple times a month, just for 20-30 minutes (ie, long enough to get fully warmed up).

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#252

Post by leetcrew »

jakevn wrote: post #128
gmueckl wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you own an exceptionally complex car which still retains the form factor of a limousine. All the hardware for these features has to go somewhere and that usually means the space around the engine. There is not a lot the engineers can do to improve things. They are struggling to find usable space.

I suppose Toyota / Lexus is black magic, then?

why would you compare Toyota to Mercedes? they have almost nothing in common. I don't think Lexus is a good comparison either but that's more a matter of opinion.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#253

Post by dllthomas »

dijit wrote: post #178
mikestew wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then go buy the toilet lids that don’t drop with the acceleration of gravity, i. e., “soft close”. Hearing loss or not, I don’t want to hear anyone dropping the toilet lid in the middle of the night.

I don't believe we're talking about the same thing. The ceramic lid usually goes over the water tank. (also, you can't control all the toilets in the world)

> (also, you can't control all the toilets in the world)

But imagine if you could!

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#254

Post by kbutler »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #235
kbutler wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some technical disciplines use "safe" as a transitive verb meaning "to make it safe", either from damage or from damaging other things. I've seen it most often in rocketry contexts - you "safe the rocket" in an aborted launch scenario so it won't go off accidentally, etc. "It is a good idea to add a safety release valve to your launcher. Sometimes it is important to abort a launch and safe the rocket after it has bee…

But for that definition it's not "pre" anything. It's either a safing sound, or a pre-collision sound.

The event is the collision.

It's safing in advance of the event (pre-safe), rather than after the event (post-safe), which would be too late.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#255

Post by tempestn »

NikkiA wrote: post #231
moftz wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should replace the smoke detector after 10 years anyway so buying the disposable ones is probably safer.

!! even the hard-wired ones are supposed to be replaced after 10 years, and new hard-wired ones will automatically brick themselves after the 10 years is up !!

For anyone reading this wondering how that's safe, I believe they make noise regularly once they reach this state, to encourage you to replace them, rather than just silently failing to operate!

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#256

Post by skeletonjelly »

QuixoticQuibit wrote: post #141
skeletonjelly wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wish I knew this back when I worked in bars, emptying big bins of glass into the outdoor bins. Learnt quickly to look up when I did it.

How would looking up help, though? Unless I’m misunderstanding, the sound would still be coming up straight towards your face/ears.

What the other kind commenters said. I just found it worked. I like the analogy of the funnel, pointing it 90 degrees from where it usually is. OH&S wasn't such a thing back in my day (and I'm not even that old), smoking inside was still a thing (banned in that Australian state I was in a long time ago now). I'd use the air conditioners as a break to get some fresh air.

But anyway, a big bin full of glass being emptied was damn loud, but all the concerts I went to wouldn't have helped.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#257

Post by NikkiA »

tempestn wrote: post #255
NikkiA wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

!! even the hard-wired ones are supposed to be replaced after 10 years, and new hard-wired ones will automatically brick themselves after the 10 years is up !!

For anyone reading this wondering how that's safe, I believe they make noise regularly once they reach this state, to encourage you to replace them, rather than just silently failing to operate!

Yep, blip every 30 seconds for 6 weeks, until they go silent.

It'll drive you nuts, especially if your handy builder put them in out-of-reach places.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#258

Post by jquery »

kingnothing wrote: post #234
jquery wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the C-class is pretty impressive (I got one and optioned it up because the E class is a bit too big for my city garage). I really, really appreciate just how freaking quiet it is inside when I’m driving downtown and how road noise is low even at freeway speeds. That’s got to be good for one’s hearing. And the safety record is impressive, not a single recorded fatality according to US government records despite i…

The EQC is set to launch as a 2020 model, meaning it should be available soon.

Won't be in the market for a new car until at least 2021 but it's great to see this, getting all-electric experience under their belt will really help them polish it (although I have a feeling they've been polishing the EQC for a while).

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#259

Post by brokenmachine »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #181
gambiting wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that they obviously use cars that are modified and certified for use with foot controls(at least here in EU they are, I wouldn't be surprised if US didn't require any certification whatsoever). You also get a restriction on your licence saying that you can only drive such vehicles. A deaf person doesn't have any restrictions - my point is that there is no functional or legal difference between a dea…

The law doesn't have to require something to make it not a good idea. My point was, I'm not deaf, but I'm fairly sure that on average deaf people are much better adapted to life with limited hearing than you or I would be when wearing ear buds. It doesn't logically follow that because a deaf person is allowed to drive we should be able to artificially reduce our hearing ability while driving.

By that same logic, if someone wears ear buds every time while driving they also become adapted to driving with ear buds.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#260

Post by hunter2_ »

taneq wrote: post #126
hunter2_ wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not normal? Not sure about that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor_tympani_muscle#Voluntar... " Some individuals can voluntarily produce this rumbling sound by contracting the tensor tympani muscle of the middle ear." (Emphasis mine.)

"Some individuals can voluntarily produce this rumbling sound by contracting the tensor tympani muscle of the middle ear. The rumbling sound can also be heard when the neck or jaw muscles are highly tensed as when yawning deeply."

That is: there are 2 methods. The first method only "some...can" and the second method "[all people] can". The second method seems to be exactly what I voluntarily do; unfortunately the second method's description omits mention of voluntariness ("as when" means that yawning is not mandatory) though. Thus, the "all people" method and doing it voluntarily might overlap much of the time.

Aside: I also have a hardly-traumatic "ear popping" (I say it that way because pressure-caused popping is called barotrauma) as a very early precursor to my voluntary rumbling. I wonder how typical that is...

Post reply on HN