Todays new cars should come with this: [insert desired feature here]

Nuclear reactor for power so you can have really loooong road trips, just like in "The Big Bus"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Bus

Oh, and the accessories from the ad in Post #25.

EXPjawa said:

My beef isn't what cars should come with, but what drivers bring to the table - the required level of training an preparation for drivers is woefully inadequate. Most drivers are simply not qualified to operate a 4000lb piece of machinery that's rolling down the road at 100 feet per second. Nor do they have any appreciation of the physics at play in allowing them to do that (or the consequences of when it goes wrong).

Click to expand...

Way, way back (FidoNet days), one of the guys I used to regularly correspond with was a cop that had done new driver testing for the DMV. His biggest gripe was "international" students who, although they were quite intelligent otherwise, would read the state driving manual and think they knew how to drive. Knowing E=1/2mv^2 is nothing like having to slam on the brakes and come up two feet short.

How about solar powered AC. Never get into a hot car again.

an automatic gizmo to aim/re-aim the headlights after someone changes a lightbulb would be nice.

Woody's Workshop said:

I want no Tech. FM radio would be the limit. No carpet or headliners in pickup (work truck/farm truck/hunting truck).
No air bags, solid frame and a 6 speed manual tranny.
I can't see a farmer getting lost in his field and keeping a carpet clean with cow crap all over his boots.
Maybe most people want a luxury pickup, but I'm not one of them.
I liked it when cleaning out the cab was the use of a garden hose.

Click to expand...

Thank you! I'm sick of all the extra tech. Heat, AC, FM radio, and maybe a CD player, and I'm good. I don't want glowing screens blinding me at night. I don't need or want to pay for backup cameras, sensors, etc. Just let me have a car that doesn't have a computer under the hood.

Rex R said:

an automatic gizmo to aim/re-aim the headlights after someone changes a lightbulb would be nice.

Click to expand...

Most newer cars don't even have aim-able headlights anymore. The bulbs are replaceable, but the frames and reflectors fit in a "slot", get screwed down, and that's that. For me, that's a vast improvement over drawing a target on my garage door and trying to aim the stupid things in the dark while staring into a headlight.

On a serious note, how about sensors that would alert absent minded parents to remove their kids from their vehicles? This is a serious problem especially here in Texas.

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/h...as-boy-invents-device-prevent-hot-car-n777876

tmacklin said:

On a serious note, how about sensors that would alert absent minded parents to remove their kids from their vehicles? This is a serious problem especially here in Texas.

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/h...as-boy-invents-device-prevent-hot-car-n777876

Click to expand...

Up here too, and with pets! (of course, I do have to seriously wonder as to their parenting skills if they leave THIER child in a car on a hot summer day!!! Or even the family dog. Seriously, how #$%^&^%^$ obtuse do you have to be?!?! )

The other issue we have up here, is mum or dad puts baby in the car, turns it on with air [heater] on full blast, then close the doors while they dig out the car. Baby stays warm while they dig their car out of the snow bank. Problem is, is that the car fills with CO, and baby dies as a result of CO poisoning.. Sad but true..

Rex R said:

an automatic gizmo to aim/re-aim the headlights after someone changes a lightbulb would be nice.

Click to expand...

https://auto.howstuffworks.com/adaptive-headlight.htm

I vote for a 'SMITE' button.

1/2 price tag of MSRP , double priced what I'm looking to spend

Re: Post #11

EXPjawa and I are on the same page! Instead of spending money on new and cool technology for in the car/truck, how about education for the person behind the wheel? What are the ins and outs of managing a multi-thousand pound vehicle without either killing yourself or someone else? After 50 years of experience, I'm convinced that it's all about training and situational awareness. Comprehensive driver training and perhaps some competition driving experience would be a start.

I have a friend who is a private corporate pilot (Challenger 601). He is rated for that aircraft, and I believe 3 or 4 others. He goes down to Dallas for periodic training and evaluation (simulator time with possible "situations")

I'm also a strong believer that people should be trained and their training better verified, and re-certified (if I can use that term) periodically. Also, that the 'car class' should be broken down into sub classes, and you need to certify on those in order to drive as such (I can, currently, drive anything from a Nissan Mica to an F350 under my one "car" classification). That should be broken down to better educate the masses that there is a difference between a truck, and full sized SUV, and a Toyota Echo..

it would also be nice if N. American adopted a UK practice, getting a yearly "MOT". that is, each & every year, your car is subjected to an inspection. SO, anything broken or not right will be fixed within a year..

I also feel that we are allowed too much freedom in choosing what we intend to drive each & every day. There is little /no incentive to get a small economical car for your daily drive. Why not have to pay a bit of a premium for the extra engine size, curb weight, extra HP? I can go to Disney world and pay a bit of a premium to get into shorter lines. I can pay a bit of a premium, to get faster data streaming on my phone. I can pay a bit of a premium for .. This seems to be somewhat expected in various parts of life. Yet, when it's suggested that SUV drivers should pay a bit extra for their privilege of driving a heavier, less aerodynamic car, they all jump & yell..

But of course, governments don't want to rock the boat, for fear of loosing voters. Also, governments want you to drive as big a car you can; the extra $$ in taxes from the larger / more costly vehicle sale, the larger tire sales, the larger gas consumption, etc..

Serious post -

How about USB ports in easily accessible spots for all passengers for power? A couple in between the front seats and a couple behind the console for passengers to get to.

A USB port on the radio to allow music or other sound from a phone over the car speakers is a nice feature, but I HATE that on my radio you're pretty much forced to control the device from the radio face instead of the phone/MP3 player. I rent a lot of cars and most seem to do this and I've never understood why.

Banzai88 said:

Turn signals.

Click to expand...

Absolutely!! Surprised this was not the #1 'feature.'

dr wogz said:

it would also be nice if N. American adopted a UK practice, getting a yearly "MOT". that is, each & every year, your car is subjected to an inspection. SO, anything broken or not right will be fixed within a year..

Click to expand...

I have lived in states that have an annual inspection requirement in order to register/renew car tags. It's nothing but a revenue scam for the state! The "designated" inspection locations only look for obvious things like working lights, cracked windshields in the drivers sight line, working car horns, catalytic converters. I've seen some real POS automobiles on the roads and wondered how in the heck did they pass an inspection? Making it a national requirement wouldn't make it any better.

I don't need or want to pay for backup cameras, sensors, etc.

Click to expand...

Having never had a reversing camera and driven large 4WD vehicles for the past 26 years or more I decided to fit one just to see what it was like. I had no preconceptions about what I was likely to expect. It really was an epiphany, one of those "hallelujah" moments. There are other things on a car that are superfluous or marginal, but I count reversing cameras almost in the necessity class. YMMV.

dr wogz said:

Also, that the 'car class' should be broken down into sub classes, and you need to certify on those in order to drive as such (I can, currently, drive anything from a Nissan Mica to an F350 under my one "car" classification). That should be broken down to better educate the masses that there is a difference between a truck, and full sized SUV, and a Toyota Echo..

Click to expand...

It's worse than that. Most ordinary operators licenses allow drivers to get behind the wheel of bus-sized recreational vehicles simply because they aren't "commercial" vehicles. When I was in the Army we had to be certified and licensed for every class of vehicle we drove and there were separate markings on our license for "light" and "heavy" vehicle drivers that your motor pool had to sign off on. Just because someone can drive a tiny Chevy Neon is no indication that they have any idea what they are doing behind the wheel of a 40 foot long bus. I've driven both, and bigger, and they're pretty darn different.

TangoJuliet said:

I have lived in states that have an annual inspection requirement in order to register/renew car tags. It's nothing but a revenue scam for the state! The "designated" inspection locations only look for obvious things like working lights, cracked windshields in the drivers sight line, working car horns, catalytic converters. I've seen some real POS automobiles on the roads and wondered how in the heck did they pass an inspection? Making it a national requirement wouldn't make it any better.

Click to expand...

Grew up in TX with that requirement. Most places were good about checking for safe brakes and sundry.
But there's always ways tog et around it. I knew a guy that would go to a different guy, pay him double the inspection fee, and get a sticker without the car being looked at.

Here in NY, they have a pretty through safety inspection, though I suppose that the check is only as good as the technician doing it. They not only check lights, wipers, horns, but also tire condition, worn suspension/steering components, brakes, leaks from power steering, etc. And of course, emissions. When its all said and done, the tech plugs the car into the computer and transmits a file off to the DMV office in Albany (which ties back to registration). Frankly, I think its good that this system (mostly) works, as it keeps cars off the road that are glaringly unsafe. Its rare to see a car abandoned on the side of the road due to mechanical fault. OTOH, I've witnessed in other states that don't have similar inspections (like MI) a much higher rate of broken down cars on the shoulder. I do think there is a correlation. But since its state by state, some allow a lot, some only look for emissions, some are quite strict. My understanding is that Maine will fail cars that have rust through the bodywork (not just the frame/chassis). So, I guess YMMV...

EXPjawa said:

I've witnessed in other states that don't have similar inspections (like MI) a much higher rate of broken down cars on the shoulder. I do think there is a correlation. So, I guess YMMV...

Click to expand...

YMMV, means...?
Don't pick on us Michiganders. We're just poor people since the car industry moved...else's wheres...
I got what I can afford. Bought a new Ranger in 98 when I was working. It'll be 19 years old in August and has 349, 800 some miles.
I told the salesman when I bought it, it would have see a half a million miles. Taking a lot longer to get there now I ain't driving 180 miles per day, 5 days a week.
But the friggin roads don't last long hear. Salt & ice in the winter, heat heaving leaves ginormous pot holes.
Many of the break downs are a result of suspension or tire damage.
I get pulled over every so often and blow the breathalyzer test and walk the line (cane and all), thinking my swerving to miss the pot holes is a state of drunkiness.

Woody's Workshop said:

YMMV, means...?

Click to expand...

Your Mileage May Vary

Nothing against MI specifically, just what I've observed personally. I lived there briefly and travel there for work frequently. We have winter here too, BTW. Usually its the exact same front two days later. What I've seen in south east MI is that they simply try to salt the snow away rather than effectively plow, though. Anyway, the point is still the same - MI is an example of a state with no safety inspections, whereas NY does. My conclusion was that this is related to the number of cars that break down on the road, though admittedly there may be other factors involved...

Seems like there are two, almost opposite viewpoints. Some want a very basic vehicle - only the essentials. Others want all the bells and whistles (and battering rams, machine guns, etc.). I'd like a car/truck that is more "open source". That is, if I want to change/repair something, I should be able to do that. No having to trick the car's computer into thinking I'm a dealer. Also, service codes should not be trade secrets. An example of the so-called "walled garden" approach are the upper end John Deere tractors (if that's even the right word for them now). An individual can do little of his own maintenance on one of these now - it all has to be done through a licensed dealer/technician. There are several "right to repair" laws under consideration now (or already in place).

I would call the "open source" vehicle, as you put it, the same as the basic one, essentially. If it doesn't have a computer, nothing to trick, no service codes to decrypt, etc.

for new drivers, a drivers seat only.
accessories and bells and whistles get earned as the new driver acts responsably.
i guess that would be more of a law.


for me
a chauffer.
preferrably not a new driver,though.

EXPjawa...I guess you visit Detroit. That's not a good viewpoint of True Michigan. It's just another Metropolis. A dying one at that...
Come visit us above US10 and will find more like Upstate New York, though I've never been there I've viewed it from Google Earth.

Tech cars have one good aspect, computers do get better performance and gas mileage than the old basic types.
But today's vehicles aren't built like the old ones, so it's really hard to put into figures a true comparison.
I liked the older vehicles that didn't dent, unlike today's tin foil cans that gets dents by leaning against them with your wallet in your back pocket.
I was an auto body tech for nearly 20 years. Insurance would pay less and less to fix ever harder to repair vehicles. So I went into construction.

For about the same money, you can go to desert country and locate an older vehicle and restore it, as you can spend now on all the bells and whistles.
I would prefer the older vehicles. I just don't need, want, or am willing to pay for all the crap they put in vehicles of today.
And as a free country, I think I should be able to buy what I want, not forced to buy what the auto makers "Thinks" I want.

beautiful country north of US 10 for sure.
tunnel of trees is still my favorite roadtrip.

I do visit Detroit. But you may have a preconceived notion that would be someone's only impression of MI. I've spent a bit of time in much of the rest of the state as well. I've also spent considerable time with the yoopers. In fact, I think the only part I haven't been to is the Kalamazoo area. Still, I'm not sure why that's relevant to the discussion.

I think anyone thinking that we should have simple cars without a computer is being unrealistic. With the ever increasing pressure to improve emissions and fuel economy, having some form of computer on board to monitor and adjust as required becomes essential. So, that will never, ever happen in production going forward, at least not for sale in this country. As a side note, fuel injection will only become more refined; folks pining for carburetors are living in the past. The carb is decent device, but it is comparatively crude, inefficient and lacks adaptability. People once feared that the replacement of carbs with EFI meant the end of tuning and modification, only to find that it opened up all sorts of new doors for tuneability.

Now, where that's relevant to the crowd interested in open sourcing, unfortunately, the vehicle manufacturers have come to regard the software in the PCM as theirs (and not the customers). There have been suggestions that they should license the use of it to car buyer, and have been actively trying to find ways to protect the PCM programming from being retuned or "chipped" aftermarket. It would be truly interesting if vehicle PCMs were to go open sourced, but given the cost of the equipment needed to verify the effects of code changes (an emissions testing dyno lab), I doubt something like that would get off the ground too easily. Incidentally, the government regulates standardization of most codes. There are some that are manufacturer-specific, but retrieving codes and looking them up is easy. I'm not sure what the complaint there is.

One other note, regarding the "they don't build them like they used to" sentiment. You're right, they don't. True that some manufacturers have thinned out the sheet metal to save cost and weight, but on the whole, cars are built to be much more survivable then they used to. Yes, that means that collision repairs are maybe more expensive. But the medical bills won't be, in an apples/apples comparison. Which would you rather face? This video is rather telling (sorry, can't seem to embed it):

[video]https://youtu.be/joMK1WZjP7g[/video]

Notice how much more violent things are inside the cabin of the vintage car, compared to the modern one. And its not like both aren't totaled; having a more "rugged" structure didn't save the '59 from being a write off.

Although I do miss the big shiny chrome bumpers front & back. A lot cheaper to replace, and the slightest ding dosen't show (unlike the plastic ones of today..)