Nannies won't neccessarily save you

[PatentLaw]

What I would do is design the components into the new vehicle, but have an exemption put in to the government for the car. If you get it, then you don't need to install the parts. If the attempt fails, then you already have the design completed and install the parts. You could have an option, as well, that allows the manufacturer to ask the customer if they want it. If you do, you pay more. If not, then you don't. It really revolves around wheel speed sensors, acc. meters, yaw rate meters and some processors. The technology already exists. It is just fine tuning the system to the dynamic capability of the car.

The statistics show, at least on the other thread, that the amount of liability looks low. The statistics show that unlicensed drivers are a much bigger risk. We could all have our way here. The people who don't want the stuff can get their way, and the people who do want the technoloogy can get theirs.

My whole point in all of this is to continue to produce the car. I don't want any restrictions on drivers licenses or other things to impede me on purchasing and driving my car. If everyone can win, then why not. If Chuck does not want the device, and it is possible under the rules to do that and it won't cost too much, then that would be great.

My gut tells me that the lowest cost option will be to just install it. The bean counters may just say do it because everyone is nervous about lawsuits. We will see.

Dodge has done a great job in the past. Ralph and company seem to "get it". I am positive they are monitoring these posts. Lets see what they come up with.

 

[GR8_ASP]

Chuck please define sports car in a manner that is absolutely clear cut. Because if a regulation were to provide a deviation for one I would bet a most vehicles would become a "sports car." It is for that reason that you will not have regulations aligned with specific classes of vehicles. That is a class definitition is never clear.

For example is a Porsche 911 a sports car? Has 4 seats. How about a Panamera? Then how about a Cayenne?

You see I still remember when Datsun (Nissan) shipped in pick-up trucks with the bed separate and assembled here in the US and Suburu placed seats in the pick-up truck bed. That allowed the trucks to be classified as a car for import duty purposes. Make a regulation that provides an advantage and companies will find ways to take advantage of it.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Chuck please define sports car in a manner that is absolutely clear cut.

Great. We're starting from scratch so here goes...

Two doors.
Two seats.
x cubic liter max limit of covered trunk space (anybody know the trunk size of Vipers, Vettes, Ferrari?).
No uncovered trunk space (eliminates trucks).


That's a start.

 

[GR8_ASP]

Great. We're starting from scratch so here goes...

Two doors.
Two seats.
x cubic liter max limit of covered trunk space (anybody know the trunk size of Vipers, Vettes, Ferrari?).
No uncovered trunk space (eliminates trucks).


That's a start.

So a Mclaren is not a sports car (3 seats). Need to widen the requirements. How about the Porsche 911 (4 seats). And how about a hatchback (like the GTS/coupe)? No covered trunk space. And when you start saying a covered trunk is the requirement how about the Honda pick-up with a ... covered trunk, and only 2 seats. Not sure but the new Dodge pickk-up with the side storage bins would probably qualify as well. I really do not think you can come up with something that really permits all that we think of as sports cars while not allowing a vehicle very much not a sports car. That is why requirements such as you desire are near impossible to create. And no matter how well you do someone will find a way around if there is financial advantage to do so.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

So a Mclaren is not a sports car (3 seats).

Under the new guidelines, correct. If Mclaren wants to continue to build high performance three seaters more power to them. Same with Porsche. There are lotsa great performing four-seaters. But they will not meet the new guidelines and will be subject to minivan regulations.

Next.

And how about a hatchback (like the GTS/coupe)? No covered trunk space.

I used the word trunk. We can change or add the word storage if you like. It really isn't that difficult.

Next.

Not sure but the new Dodge pickk-up with the side storage bins would probably qualify as well.

I addressed that already. A pickup truck as open storage. Sports cars don't have open storage.

Next.

And no matter how well you do someone will find a way around if there is financial advantage to do so.

And when they do then it will be addressed. What is so difficult about that? Racing series update rules and homogenize cars all the time. It's no different than what the NHTSA does year after year. Jeeze, even our own U.S. Constitution has amendments, you can't possibly think it's impossible to define a sports car category.

We can hammer this out and then send it to Washington. What else you got?

 

[GR8_ASP]

Well this is an interesting *** for tat, but meaningless in terms of actually affecting change. The way the system works is this: First the regulatory authority (NHTSA in this case) defines a need, then they create proposals. They may bring in OEMs, major suppliers or other experts to help refine the proposal. They then issue a rule making proposal with a planned phase in date and request manufacturers to comment on it. Once that phase is complete they adjust the proposed regulation as needed and formalize it. During the process the OEMs generally have adequate time to plead their cases.

In this case we are well passed that point. To go back I would expect that something substantial would have to occur. Something well beyond the philosophical. So you could create what you believe to be the best proposal possible and no one would listen. The time period for that has passed.

Note there are very few people that would agree with you that a sports car is not endangered through an unusual incident such as tire failure, and that in that circumstance an ESC system would help prevent or minimize the impact of the failure. It matters not how good the driver is. The computer can be made to be better. Blow out a tire and the computer can apply the adjacent tires brakes to balance the vehicle. A human cannot do that. It is that type of argument that would preclude an OEM in winning an argument with the regulatory agency. They do not care about the on-track performance. But they do care about statistics and Viper and sports car statistics are not very good when it comes to avoidable accidents. Every year when it gets cold we read about them here.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Note there are very few people that would agree with you that a sports car is not endangered through an unusual incident such as tire failure, and that in that circumstance an ESC system would help prevent or minimize the impact of the failure.

People's perceptions change. 30 years ago a second ice age was believed to be true. They think just the opposite today.

But they do care about statistics and Viper and sports car statistics are not very good when it comes to avoidable accidents.

That's exactly what I'm trying to find. Does the NHTSA keep stats on specific vehicle models? I haven't been able to find them.

 

[J&R3xV10]

Just to stir things up for you guys...... a friend of mine came over tonight and we naturaly got to talking cars. He is a vette guy (has a nice 700hp NA Z06) but in regards to track performance he agrees that the viper is hands down a better car. His wife was in a very bad wreck last year in a new vette because the ETC locked up one rear tire while driving down the freeway. Still want nannies??

 

[SaturnVUEguy]

I was working as a porter at a used car lot associated with a Ford dealer. At the time, they had a C6 convertible with a dead battery. Because of the dead battery, we had a HARD time just getting in the car to pop the hood so we could jump it with a box. I still don't remember how we did it since the "door handle" is operated electrically

 

[gofastr]

I was working as a porter at a used car lot associated with a Ford dealer. At the time, they had a C6 convertible with a dead battery. Because of the dead battery, we had a HARD time just getting in the car to pop the hood so we could jump it with a box. I still don't remember how we did it since the "door handle" is operated electrically

It opens with a key under the rear hatch.

 

[J&R3xV10]

I was working as a porter at a used car lot associated with a Ford dealer. At the time, they had a C6 convertible with a dead battery. Because of the dead battery, we had a HARD time just getting in the car to pop the hood so we could jump it with a box. I still don't remember how we did it since the "door handle" is operated electrically

the key works well not sure what your getting at

 

[eucharistos]

the key works well not sure what your getting at

hi robert