A colleague and I were having a theoretical discussion a couple of weeks ago about ideal cars. The first question was the more difficult of the two - if your current car crapped out, was stolen, caught fire or somehow otherwise was taken away from you, what would you replace it with given your financial situation? Would it be a newer version of the same thing or something different? My colleage chose the same 2006 model year Mustang that he has right now, and would opt to do all the same modifications to it again (brakes, suspension, blower etc). I would likely go with an Audi Q3 or another Range Rover Evoque.
The second question was considerably easier. If money and practicality were taken out of consideration, what car would you buy in addition to any that you own? For me the answer started out as a toss-up between an Aston Martin Vanquish, and a Lamborghini Aventador or Gallardo LP560. The Aston Martin has it on looks every time, but the Lambos are both basically Audi technology underneath which ought to be bombproof. In the end it would have to be the Vanquish though. It has that 'x' factor for me. My colleague, by comparison, was a little more grounded and figured next year's all-wheel-drive Tesla S would be more his pace.
So how about it - what would you replace your daily driver with, and what's your money-no-object car?
Monday, September 30, 2013
Monday, September 23, 2013
Finding the right part in a hurry
If you tinker with your own car, you'll know how difficult it can be sometimes to find the right parts quickly. Do you go to the local store? Do you look online? When you're online, how do you know that company A has a better price than company B? Who actually has it in stock?
If you go the internet route, it's easy to waste half an hour or more banging through search sites and dealers trying to get to the bottom of that particular can of worms. But I recently came across a site that's a bit more clever than most. It's like an aggregated list of many online vendors. You put in the part you want (from the list of available vehicles and parts) and the site then shows you a whole load of online vendors who have it in stock, with the price. So you can click through and buy the part pretty easily from there. There might be other sites out there that do the same thing but I've not see one before, so this is still a novelty for me. It's American-market only right now.
The site has an odd name but I think it's worth checking out - OEMcats.com
If you go the internet route, it's easy to waste half an hour or more banging through search sites and dealers trying to get to the bottom of that particular can of worms. But I recently came across a site that's a bit more clever than most. It's like an aggregated list of many online vendors. You put in the part you want (from the list of available vehicles and parts) and the site then shows you a whole load of online vendors who have it in stock, with the price. So you can click through and buy the part pretty easily from there. There might be other sites out there that do the same thing but I've not see one before, so this is still a novelty for me. It's American-market only right now.
The site has an odd name but I think it's worth checking out - OEMcats.com
Monday, September 16, 2013
Living with Ford Sync
Having had Ford Sync in my long-term rental (while my car gets repaired - and yes - it IS a long time because a chunk of the parts were on back-order), I've grown to hate it in the same way that it seems most Ford owners hate it. It seems to offer so much but it is very poorly implemented.
Let's start with something simple : bluetooth audio. In the car I'm in, a 2013 Focus, you cannot default the Sync system to bluetooth audio. It always reverts to Line-In each time you start the ignition. My two previous cars have been able to do this - why can't Sync? So to choose bluetooth, I have to either navigate through 8 key presses (Sync->menu->play options->media options->source select->line-in->Bluetooth audio->enter) or I have to speak to the car. Which leads me to item #2:
Sync can't understand a damn thing I say. And it's not just me - I have an English accent so I always have trouble with voice controls (my iPhone has to be on 'Australia' before Siri can understand even the most basic command). If I have a car full of American friends, it can't understand any of them either. Not even simple commands. "Radio" - "I don't understand. Please speak a command". "RADIO!" - "Bluetooth audio, please speak a command." Ok let's try something else. "FM Radio" - "Phone - do you want to dial?". Erm. "No" - "Which number?"
And so on and so on. My natural bias against all things Microsoft would normally lead me to conclude that it's simply because it's Microsoft's Auto OS underneath that it has so many problems. But I'm not really sure. The bluetooth audio is sketchy at the best of times, so instead I tried a hardwired line-in instead, via the USB connector. At this point, I thought I was a genius. Hey - if it always defaults to Sync Line In, why not just use that? Aha. The Microsoft and Ford engineers are one step ahead of me, it seems, because when I do that, the system then defaults to CD, and it's the same 8 button presses to try to get the line-in to work.
There are other problems too. Sync is the first in-car system I've used where it can't or won't use the phone unless you upload all your contacts (the address book) into Sync. I've no idea why this is necessary - no other car I've owned or driven needs this. VW, Chevy, Audi, Fiat, Renault, Mercedes - all these can simply access the phone book via the bluetooth connection. But Ford Sync insists that your address book must be in it's system before you can use it. So for the most part, phone-syncing appears to be a hobbled system.
Then there's the display. My rental didn't have the full up 'touch' version but instead the version with the little LCD screen in the dash and the second one at the top of the radio stack. What's weird is that the cutout at the top of the radio stack could easily fit a screen the size of a modern smartphone - a Galaxy S4 fits in that hole just nicely. But instead it's a monochrome blue-and white display that is about 3 inches diagonal. This makes it awkward to get info off at a glance, and I find myself looking at it far longer than I should when driving to try to figure out what Sync is doing. Unlike a lot of other cars, these two displays are independent of each other, so for example you can't see the current audio or phone settings on the screen in front of you in the dash - only on the center screen.
I get the impression that Sync is one of those rushed projects that was pushed out the door to meet a deadline, rather than when it was ready. Driven by SAP or process flow, or some other management buzzword, it appears that Ford sacrificed usability in favour of ticking a box that read "project completed".
All this is a very great shame because the Focus is a pretty damn good car, even in neutered rental car form.
Let's start with something simple : bluetooth audio. In the car I'm in, a 2013 Focus, you cannot default the Sync system to bluetooth audio. It always reverts to Line-In each time you start the ignition. My two previous cars have been able to do this - why can't Sync? So to choose bluetooth, I have to either navigate through 8 key presses (Sync->menu->play options->media options->source select->line-in->Bluetooth audio->enter) or I have to speak to the car. Which leads me to item #2:
Sync can't understand a damn thing I say. And it's not just me - I have an English accent so I always have trouble with voice controls (my iPhone has to be on 'Australia' before Siri can understand even the most basic command). If I have a car full of American friends, it can't understand any of them either. Not even simple commands. "Radio" - "I don't understand. Please speak a command". "RADIO!" - "Bluetooth audio, please speak a command." Ok let's try something else. "FM Radio" - "Phone - do you want to dial?". Erm. "No" - "Which number?"
And so on and so on. My natural bias against all things Microsoft would normally lead me to conclude that it's simply because it's Microsoft's Auto OS underneath that it has so many problems. But I'm not really sure. The bluetooth audio is sketchy at the best of times, so instead I tried a hardwired line-in instead, via the USB connector. At this point, I thought I was a genius. Hey - if it always defaults to Sync Line In, why not just use that? Aha. The Microsoft and Ford engineers are one step ahead of me, it seems, because when I do that, the system then defaults to CD, and it's the same 8 button presses to try to get the line-in to work.
There are other problems too. Sync is the first in-car system I've used where it can't or won't use the phone unless you upload all your contacts (the address book) into Sync. I've no idea why this is necessary - no other car I've owned or driven needs this. VW, Chevy, Audi, Fiat, Renault, Mercedes - all these can simply access the phone book via the bluetooth connection. But Ford Sync insists that your address book must be in it's system before you can use it. So for the most part, phone-syncing appears to be a hobbled system.
Then there's the display. My rental didn't have the full up 'touch' version but instead the version with the little LCD screen in the dash and the second one at the top of the radio stack. What's weird is that the cutout at the top of the radio stack could easily fit a screen the size of a modern smartphone - a Galaxy S4 fits in that hole just nicely. But instead it's a monochrome blue-and white display that is about 3 inches diagonal. This makes it awkward to get info off at a glance, and I find myself looking at it far longer than I should when driving to try to figure out what Sync is doing. Unlike a lot of other cars, these two displays are independent of each other, so for example you can't see the current audio or phone settings on the screen in front of you in the dash - only on the center screen.
I get the impression that Sync is one of those rushed projects that was pushed out the door to meet a deadline, rather than when it was ready. Driven by SAP or process flow, or some other management buzzword, it appears that Ford sacrificed usability in favour of ticking a box that read "project completed".
All this is a very great shame because the Focus is a pretty damn good car, even in neutered rental car form.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Target rich environments and breaking the law.
For the last couple of weeks, I've talked about how observation and attentiveness are pretty much dead on the roads today. This week I'm going to talk specifically about pedestrians and cyclists. I don't know what it's like where you live, but where I live they both have very little sense of self-preservation.
In parking lots, for example, it's entirely normal here to see pedestrians just walk out in front of traffic assuming the traffic will stop. For some reason, they can't make the mental association that just because it's the parking lot of a supermarket or big box store, doesn't mean it's not a road. For motorists, these areas have become target-rich environments. I'd like to say it's the old "a few bad apples" analogy but around here it really isn't. It's the majority of pedestrians. It's extremely unusual to see someone stop at the side of the road now, the point where if I'm on foot and I stop at the side of the road, approaching motorists get extremely confused. They stop, causing a blockage in traffic, and then attempt to wave me across the road. I'm not that stupid - a stopped line of traffic around here means someone two cars back is about to decide they shouldn't be waiting for anything.
The other biggie with pedestrians is when they do use the traffic lights, but cross on red. I admit I've nearly hit three pedestrians in the last ten years because of this. I've been waiting at the light and my light goes green, so I set off, suddenly to be presented with a pedestrian who pops out from next to the truck/bus/tram next to me, running across the road on a red light. Sadly, I've also seen people do this and get hit by the car next to me. Darwinism at work.
Speaking of red lights, in Utah they recently passed a change of law that allows cyclists to go through red lights if they first stop and check the intersection is clear. Obviously this has been interpreted by the majority of cyclists as "don't need to stop". Several weeks ago, on my morning commute, a cyclist did this to me when I was on my motorbike. He cruised into the intersection from my right, not looking at me, but looking up the road the other way at the oncoming bus. Seeing this, he stopped right in front of me. I went as far left as possible without going into the lane with the oncoming bus and went around him, clipping his front wheel with my right footpeg and knee on the way past. The next morning, I saw the aftermath of the same thing. Apparently he'd tried to do it again but on that day, there was a silver Subaru Forester instead of me on my bike. The paramedics were scraping him off the road as I went by.
Frankly, allowing one set of road uses to have amnesty when it comes to red lights doesn't make any sense. If we're all using the road, shouldn't we all be using the same rules? Cyclists constantly complain about how they're treated by drivers in general, but then they abuse the law to the extent where people just don't care any more. Hopping on and off kerbs - playing car, then pedestrian, then car, then pedestrian. Not stopping at stop signs. Not stopping at red lights. And then when they do something stupid and get themselves injured, it's the motorist to blame. Because apparently, it's our responsibility to not hit wayward pedestrians and cyclists, but it's not their responsibility to employ common sense, obey the rules like the rest of us, and invoke some basic self preservation.
So do I break road rules? Of course. We all do. Show me someone who says they abide by every rule of the road and I'll show you an outright liar. Like most drivers, I've been known to cruise into an intersection after the light has turned orange. And once out of suburban areas, I regularly break speed limits that are set, in my opinion, unnecessarily slow. Seriously - a 45mph limit on a two lane mountain road with no traffic? Are you kidding? The difference is that I employ observation and self-preservation and I do my best not to get in anyone else's way. I try my best to ensure that when I break the law, I'm the only one affected. Does that make me a bad driver? Maybe, but at least I'm not a liar.
In parking lots, for example, it's entirely normal here to see pedestrians just walk out in front of traffic assuming the traffic will stop. For some reason, they can't make the mental association that just because it's the parking lot of a supermarket or big box store, doesn't mean it's not a road. For motorists, these areas have become target-rich environments. I'd like to say it's the old "a few bad apples" analogy but around here it really isn't. It's the majority of pedestrians. It's extremely unusual to see someone stop at the side of the road now, the point where if I'm on foot and I stop at the side of the road, approaching motorists get extremely confused. They stop, causing a blockage in traffic, and then attempt to wave me across the road. I'm not that stupid - a stopped line of traffic around here means someone two cars back is about to decide they shouldn't be waiting for anything.
The other biggie with pedestrians is when they do use the traffic lights, but cross on red. I admit I've nearly hit three pedestrians in the last ten years because of this. I've been waiting at the light and my light goes green, so I set off, suddenly to be presented with a pedestrian who pops out from next to the truck/bus/tram next to me, running across the road on a red light. Sadly, I've also seen people do this and get hit by the car next to me. Darwinism at work.
Speaking of red lights, in Utah they recently passed a change of law that allows cyclists to go through red lights if they first stop and check the intersection is clear. Obviously this has been interpreted by the majority of cyclists as "don't need to stop". Several weeks ago, on my morning commute, a cyclist did this to me when I was on my motorbike. He cruised into the intersection from my right, not looking at me, but looking up the road the other way at the oncoming bus. Seeing this, he stopped right in front of me. I went as far left as possible without going into the lane with the oncoming bus and went around him, clipping his front wheel with my right footpeg and knee on the way past. The next morning, I saw the aftermath of the same thing. Apparently he'd tried to do it again but on that day, there was a silver Subaru Forester instead of me on my bike. The paramedics were scraping him off the road as I went by.
Frankly, allowing one set of road uses to have amnesty when it comes to red lights doesn't make any sense. If we're all using the road, shouldn't we all be using the same rules? Cyclists constantly complain about how they're treated by drivers in general, but then they abuse the law to the extent where people just don't care any more. Hopping on and off kerbs - playing car, then pedestrian, then car, then pedestrian. Not stopping at stop signs. Not stopping at red lights. And then when they do something stupid and get themselves injured, it's the motorist to blame. Because apparently, it's our responsibility to not hit wayward pedestrians and cyclists, but it's not their responsibility to employ common sense, obey the rules like the rest of us, and invoke some basic self preservation.
So do I break road rules? Of course. We all do. Show me someone who says they abide by every rule of the road and I'll show you an outright liar. Like most drivers, I've been known to cruise into an intersection after the light has turned orange. And once out of suburban areas, I regularly break speed limits that are set, in my opinion, unnecessarily slow. Seriously - a 45mph limit on a two lane mountain road with no traffic? Are you kidding? The difference is that I employ observation and self-preservation and I do my best not to get in anyone else's way. I try my best to ensure that when I break the law, I'm the only one affected. Does that make me a bad driver? Maybe, but at least I'm not a liar.
Monday, September 2, 2013
The results of lack of observation.
Last week I talked about the lack of observation that plagues drivers nowadays. This week, I'll tell you how my own painful experience relates to that. Remember back in February I ordered a new car, and took delivery of it four weeks ago? Well - a week ago, an inattentive driver caused an accident. So I've been waiting for my car since February, and three weeks after taking delivery, had my first traffic accident in 27 years of driving.
So what happened? Pretty simply really. I was driving along a road that exits a mall, with parking lots either side. A lady pulled out from the parking lot on my left without looking, hit the back-left wheel of my car, and that spun me enough to change my direction to cross oncoming traffic (fortunately there wasn't any), and by the time I'd come to a stop, I'd gone over a small flower bed and into a row of parked cars.
Exactly how this happened is a mystery to me, because she didn't start to pull out until I was actually in front of her. It's not like she pulled out early and cut me off - if that had been the case, I'd have been buried in the side of her minivan. No - she literally drove straight into the side of my car while I was in front of her. I know she kept telling me she didn't see me - which is an excuse I'm used to hearing when riding my motorbike - but a big red car? Didn't see me? How is that even possible?
You might ask 'but Chris - what about YOUR observation? Why didn't you avoid the accident?'. Good question. Easy to answer - she wasn't moving when I started past the intersection, so I didn't see anything to avoid. It came as a hell of a surprise when she ran into me - to start with I had no idea what the hell had happened. That took a moment to sink in, I got on the brakes, and by that time, I was already over the flower bed and that's all she wrote.
So far, the insurance companies aren't willing to write off my car, probably because of the cost of a new one. But the repair bill is now up over $10,000 just for my car alone. Being a brand new model, and being from Europe, I now have to wait at least a month for parts - likely more. I face the spectre of being without it largely until Christmas now. Her insurance company admitted liability for the whole thing, probably because she actually admitted liability on the police report.
So what's next? The airbags didn't go off, so as far as the current inspection and teardown goes, it looks like everything is repairable. The unibody seems untwisted and the crash frame at the front appears untouched. The most damage was to the wheel where she hit me - it destroyed the suspension naturally. But all the stuff up front needs replacing too from where I ended up buried in the parked cars. Bumper, radiator, lights, support structures, rebar etc. But what about diminished value? The car was 3 weeks and 1 day off the lot, with 700 miles on it. I didn't even have a registration plate for it - it was still on delivery tags. At the very least I'm going to pursue her insurance company for some financial compensation there, because I'll never get market value for this car if I have to sell it now it has a crash on it's history. Then there's the special circumstances. A custom-built car, to my specification, that I had to wait four months for? Potentially another three months without it now? I'd like to know what her insurance company has to say about that too.
So what happened? Pretty simply really. I was driving along a road that exits a mall, with parking lots either side. A lady pulled out from the parking lot on my left without looking, hit the back-left wheel of my car, and that spun me enough to change my direction to cross oncoming traffic (fortunately there wasn't any), and by the time I'd come to a stop, I'd gone over a small flower bed and into a row of parked cars.
Exactly how this happened is a mystery to me, because she didn't start to pull out until I was actually in front of her. It's not like she pulled out early and cut me off - if that had been the case, I'd have been buried in the side of her minivan. No - she literally drove straight into the side of my car while I was in front of her. I know she kept telling me she didn't see me - which is an excuse I'm used to hearing when riding my motorbike - but a big red car? Didn't see me? How is that even possible?
You might ask 'but Chris - what about YOUR observation? Why didn't you avoid the accident?'. Good question. Easy to answer - she wasn't moving when I started past the intersection, so I didn't see anything to avoid. It came as a hell of a surprise when she ran into me - to start with I had no idea what the hell had happened. That took a moment to sink in, I got on the brakes, and by that time, I was already over the flower bed and that's all she wrote.
So far, the insurance companies aren't willing to write off my car, probably because of the cost of a new one. But the repair bill is now up over $10,000 just for my car alone. Being a brand new model, and being from Europe, I now have to wait at least a month for parts - likely more. I face the spectre of being without it largely until Christmas now. Her insurance company admitted liability for the whole thing, probably because she actually admitted liability on the police report.
So what's next? The airbags didn't go off, so as far as the current inspection and teardown goes, it looks like everything is repairable. The unibody seems untwisted and the crash frame at the front appears untouched. The most damage was to the wheel where she hit me - it destroyed the suspension naturally. But all the stuff up front needs replacing too from where I ended up buried in the parked cars. Bumper, radiator, lights, support structures, rebar etc. But what about diminished value? The car was 3 weeks and 1 day off the lot, with 700 miles on it. I didn't even have a registration plate for it - it was still on delivery tags. At the very least I'm going to pursue her insurance company for some financial compensation there, because I'll never get market value for this car if I have to sell it now it has a crash on it's history. Then there's the special circumstances. A custom-built car, to my specification, that I had to wait four months for? Potentially another three months without it now? I'd like to know what her insurance company has to say about that too.
Monday, August 26, 2013
A little observation goes a long way.
It never ceases to amaze me how many drivers can't see any further than the end of their own hood. Observation and adaptation, it seems, are dying art forms when it comes to the act of driving. It's become a regular occurrence now for me to see people pull up behind a car that is stopped with its hazard lights on, and then wait through two or three changes of traffic light before they realise that the stopped car isn't going anywhere. Honestly I'm not sure if it's a lack of observation or a lack of common sense. Either way, what normally happens is that they get tired of waiting and then reverse into the traffic behind them, or pull out to go around without looking in their mirrors first. Again - observation.
The same thing happens with target-fixated motorists too. I regularly see drivers follow buses to the side of the road and stop behind them (because the bus is stopping to pick someone up). I've even seen cars follow a bus into a proper bus stop before.
When I'm travelling along a largely empty road with no traffic behind me, it's now quite normal for people to pull out from the side roads in front of me, instead of waiting the extra two seconds to go behind me where there's no traffic. In Utah this is doubly bad because around here people are deathly afraid of acceleration. So when I say "pull out" what I mean is they take their foot off the brake and let the automatic gearbox and idling engine slowly amble them out into the main road, thus becoming an obstruction.
The natural progression of this inattentiveness normally leads to accidents. The most common one around here is people who can't see or hear (apparently) the large red, white and blue trams with bright headlights and loud horns that operate in our streets. The evening news is regularly filled with stories of people trying to turn left in front of moving trams, or trying to race them across intersections. OK in a car it's a little harder to see out and hear the tram maybe, but you'd think that most people would see them as they drive past, before turning in front of them. You'd be wrong. Similarly, pedestrians and cyclists also seem to have a great deal of trouble with trams too. One thing's for sure - the tram never loses.
Finally of course, observation when it comes to pedestrians using phones and iPods isn't a dying art. It's just dead. You just have to assume, as a driver, that these morons are going to step into traffic in front of you without looking. They don't need pedestrian crossings - anywhere will do. And coupled with the increasing inattentiveness of the drivers, you can see where that normally ends up.
The same thing happens with target-fixated motorists too. I regularly see drivers follow buses to the side of the road and stop behind them (because the bus is stopping to pick someone up). I've even seen cars follow a bus into a proper bus stop before.
When I'm travelling along a largely empty road with no traffic behind me, it's now quite normal for people to pull out from the side roads in front of me, instead of waiting the extra two seconds to go behind me where there's no traffic. In Utah this is doubly bad because around here people are deathly afraid of acceleration. So when I say "pull out" what I mean is they take their foot off the brake and let the automatic gearbox and idling engine slowly amble them out into the main road, thus becoming an obstruction.
The natural progression of this inattentiveness normally leads to accidents. The most common one around here is people who can't see or hear (apparently) the large red, white and blue trams with bright headlights and loud horns that operate in our streets. The evening news is regularly filled with stories of people trying to turn left in front of moving trams, or trying to race them across intersections. OK in a car it's a little harder to see out and hear the tram maybe, but you'd think that most people would see them as they drive past, before turning in front of them. You'd be wrong. Similarly, pedestrians and cyclists also seem to have a great deal of trouble with trams too. One thing's for sure - the tram never loses.
Finally of course, observation when it comes to pedestrians using phones and iPods isn't a dying art. It's just dead. You just have to assume, as a driver, that these morons are going to step into traffic in front of you without looking. They don't need pedestrian crossings - anywhere will do. And coupled with the increasing inattentiveness of the drivers, you can see where that normally ends up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)