261–270 of 392 posts
? If you don't want it don't buy the car? I fail to see the issue.
Why shouldn't people write articles that clearly communicate what makes a specific feature a deal breaker?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All pickups I've seen have reverse lights built into the third brake light which is behind the cab above the bed. And with that it makes sense as a safety feature - if the only way to turn those on is go into reverse, people would be tempted to throw the truck in reverse and leave the parking brake on while they jump in the back to look for something. Unfortunately it seems not all of them are locked out as I've seen…
I think you may be confusing things. There is a separate switch for turning on the bed lights which has typically been above the rear window in the center. The reverse lights are part of the rear brake lights. It is absolutely possible to leave the bed lights on while driving. The concept you propose is absolutely preposterous to the point I feel I'm feeding a troll
> Include Reverse Lamps This setting turns the reverse lamps on when you switch the rear lighting zone on. Switch this setting off if you have a backup alarm installed to prevent the reverse lamps from turning on and sounding the alarm when using zone lighting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am very surprised the regulations are not more stringent than that. Requiring a manual door release on every door should be the bare minimum.
At a height that is reachable by anyone with the myriad of disabilities that would prevent you from being able to lean down and search the floor near your seat in the middle of the night on an unlit road. Not even bringing in damage to the car.
This is a gem (emphasis mine): "The touch-screen-actuated glove box is terrible because it’s one of those examples where carmakers have found that they have the technology to do something, so they do it, without considering literally anything about what they’ve done . Did anybody want this? At all? It takes something that has never been a problem, opening a glove box, and added cost and complexity to the construction…
It's much more secure. Electric locks can be stronger and you can't jimmy them like you can mechanical locks. Plus it makes the dash look better and it's kind of cool. People are coming up with all sorts of ridiculously contrived scenarios to make this look bad. But I haven't seen anything that's more than a 1 in a million type problem with an obvious solution. Is it kind of dumb? IMHO yes. Are there people who like…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The round knob to increase / decrease sound volume is simply the best UX in the car. Why do I have to navigate to a submenu to push a button repeatedly to change the volume. The less I look at the road the higher the risk of an accident.
Worth noting that that round knob, where it exists, has lost a lot of functionality: 1. Setting volume to 0 will pause the recording, even though I sometimes want to silently forward through some unwanted parts (intros or ads in podcasts). 2. These knobs are also infinity knobs, I liked to have fixed start and end position with an indicator how loud it's going to be when I switch on. That last part has been taken ove…
This is going to cost lives. Most people I know have their safety vests in the glovebox. Imagine if your car breaks down and you can't get the darn thing open/on the side of a highway?
People keep safety vests in their cars?
The reason they do this is simple, money. It is much easier for a manufacturer to produce a single screen that contains all the functionality that can be adjusted on the fly using software. The alternative (and the way it has always been) is early in a car conception, to design the cabin with the buttons layout, design the switches, find a manufacturer, test the switches, test the layout, repeat, etc… Plus if they fi…
A traditional, mechanical, glove-box contains all the same components as this one (a latch, hinges, door, etc) but this adds a new wire harness, new connection points, new software, and an electro-magnetic servo to unlock it.
I can think of no argument at all for how this decreases cost. It only increases them and increases failure points, all for what? Nobody knows exactly for what.
I continue to be genuinely shocked that we don't treat touch screens in cars the same way we do as phones in cars (that is to say, it is literally illegal to use them while the vehicle is moving in most places because the distraction is such a danger). Moving away from tactile in-car controls has to be among the more boneheaded things we've allowed that industry to do.