Technophobia - are new cars TOO much?

[trinacriabob]

OK, this thread is based on what repair bills for this stuff costs ...we've seen where ABS bills can go.

With Series III 3800s came electronic throttle control; thus, there is NO accelerator cable. Now, VVT is on board...reading about it indicates it's somewhat complex and it runs on a powerful microprocessor. Even more interesting/foreboding is DOD/AFM which is available on the 3.9 V6s and on the 5.3 V8s.

I'm sorry, but I'd rather do without most of this stuff, but I think I will have to get used to it. At least, I can buy-in after it's been around for about 3 years.

What are your thoughts?

[rosserman]

I have done a pretty good amount of reasearch on the AFM and how it works. From what i can tell, it is not a system which will require a lot of maintanence. The lifers will be more expensive, but if you need new lifters, you have a bigger issue. The VVT is something i need to do more research on.

[z28luvr01]

I think we're at the point where GM knows it better not release any new technology unless it's absolutely perfect. Note the delay in putting AFM on the 3900. The last thing they want is to have another 8-6-4 or Crossfire Injection situation on their hands.

[Drew Dowdell]

For me it's not the engine technology but the interior bits that are annoying. iDrive, NAV, Bluetooth, etc.

[capriceman]

I do not trust VVT!! Seems to complex. AFM/DOD seems less complicated.

I hate when I pop the hood and look around and see all these pointless electronics. Its like they don't want you to work on your car anymore.

I have yet to see the point in Navigation tho in cars. whats wrong with a map?

Edited December 28, 2006 by capriceman

[Paolino]

For me it's not the engine technology but the interior bits that are annoying. iDrive, NAV, Bluetooth, etc.

I'd love NAV and Bluetooth... I could do without iDrive.

[K.C.]

The technology is new cars is only too much when you have a system like iDrive or some other system where there are menus to toggle through while driving. As if its not bad enough to have people on their cell phones, now we have people toggling through menus. Great! As far as AFM/VVT and stuff like that, I think the progress here is good because it provides more power and efficiency in engines. I like NAV. We have NAV and the usefulness of it is great when you are going somewhere you've never been and are unsure of the location. The voice directions are useful too, especially if you've ever driven behind some slow poke looking for something only to have them slam their brakes on ahead of you and you almost rear end them. Unfortunately, common sense is not so common and those who follow the directions exactly can do stupid things like drive into a river or go the wrong way down a one way street. No fault of the NAV, fault of the driver.

[Cremazie]

I am not at all scared of new technology, warranty generally fixes it and I rarely own vehicles when they are out of warranty!

[rosserman]

For me it's not the engine technology but the interior bits that are annoying. iDrive, NAV, Bluetooth, etc.

absolutely. cars today do everything they can to be mobile offices. just give me a radio and A/C and i am happy

[Camino LS6]

For me it's not the engine technology but the interior bits that are annoying. iDrive, NAV, Bluetooth, etc.

My feelings exactly.

[MyerShift]

In general, yes. Modern automotive technologies are just headaches waiting to happen. Especially if it involves any sort of computer. I mean, haven't we all dealt with a cumbersome and enraging machine??? Just think what their malfunctions could cause in automobiles, especially if somehow a virus got into the system if the car for happens to have access to the internet. Otherwise, things like i-Drive are unbearable as well.

[Sixty8panther]

For me it's not the engine technology but the interior bits that are annoying. iDrive, NAV, Bluetooth, etc.

TRUE.

I voted "Yes, most of the new technologies are offputting"

BUT... I think DOD & AFM are fantastic.

Smart Airbags? Sure!

Fly-by-wire for simple functions like throttle: NO!

Coil packs: YES.

Camshaft-LESS timig systems: NO!

Navigation & XM: Sure...

iDRIVE: NO.

Also another thing that annoys the $h! out of me: idiot driver aids

that can not be turned off. My STS has traction control & stabilitrack

but if you want these systems off all it takes is the push of a button.

[Flybrian]

I want Lane Departure Warning and Adaptive Cruise because I'm too busy using the mirrors to look at how handsome I am.

[MyerShift]

Definitely camshaftLESS valve drive.

I hear Mercedes-Benz's next four cylinders (and probably all following engine families if it doesn't sky-dump on them like that brake-by-wire system they used) are going to feature it. Now that's frightening!

[pow]

iDrive/MMI/COMAND - great for secondary controls like programmable options (auto locks, cabin pre-heat, spotlight duration, valet mode, etc.) and car data (brake pad life, service history, recalls, etc.)

Bluetooth - wonderful; can't think of a shortcoming

NAV - voice command cures all; real-time traffic data is useful, too

VVT - been available since the '80s; proven to be reliable

[Drew Dowdell]

Camshaft-LESS timig systems: NO!

I'm going to point out that you might just have an issue with BMW's system. Honda came up with a camless, valveless "valve train" that looks astounding. Instead of the traditional valves and camshaft, Honda placed a single ceramic tube above each cylinder bank. Through this tube was carved holes. As the tube rotated the hold would line up with the intake hole or exhaust hole in the top of the cylinder. The result was the complete elimination of all reciprocating mass from the valve train. This made the engine capable extremely high RPM <a Honda favorite>. The downside was that eliminated the possibility of using VVT, another Honda favorite. I believe in the end, emissions issues killed the project for production car use, but Honda is/has still pursued this technology in racing.

[Cory Wolfe]

You guys are definitely technophobes. I love it all. The more utterly useless gadgets and gizmos, the better.

[Camino LS6]

Bloody gadget-pansies!

[Ravenfreak13]

I love it all...accept it should stop at the point where menus are involved...it causes a huge distraction!

buttons should only have one function

[CARBIZ]

It's all good - and inevitable. I am sure there were people who railed against electric starters when they came out 90 years ago, too! LOL. Remember: there was a time when the spark had to be manually adjusted by the driver!

It costs a fortune to be state-of-the-art, but many a decent new car can be had for well under $20k. Gadgets that are expensive and exotic today are going to come down in price and complexity. The revolutions in the ignition system of vehicles today means we can go (in some cases) 100k miles before a tune up is necessary! My dad used to work on his cars every damned weekend when I was a kid! Yeah, those were the good ol' days!

[regfootball]

as long as its not a VW you should be ok. VW's can't even seem to maintain combustion.

[Robert Hall]

You guys are definitely technophobes. I love it all. The more utterly useless gadgets and gizmos, the better.

Works for me...I'm a technophile---I love gadgets, esp. useful ones...working in the tech industry, I'm always interested in products and technologies that push things forward..... I'm not interested in staying in the past.

[2005 EquinoxLS]

I like some things better tha others. Fuel Injection and the modern ignition systems are the best things they ever came out with. I like the AWD setup in the Equinox also. I m not sure about drive-by-wire. Though I cant tell the difference that the Equinox doesnt have an accelarator cable until I engage the cruise control and the gas pedal doesnt go down that tiny bit like it does in the Bonnevile. I wish you could just order a car without a radio with the thought that you would put your own in like I used to do and have done with the Bonneville. If you want a different radio other than factory removing the factory radio also disables other things. That I dont like. As for reliability I keep the Bonneville because it is somewhat simple. I like my new cars like my Equinox and the 2000 Monte Carlo but I dont want to keep them for more than 4-5 years and 48,000-60,000 miles. Thats why I leased my Equinox.

Edited December 29, 2006 by 2005 EquinoxLS

[CARBIZ]

That is an entirely separate issue: toys effecting resale value. Leasing is an attractive alternative BECAUSE it isn't wise to stick around when all the toys (Nav, sensors, electronics, etc.) start breaking down. The second or third owner of the vehicle becomes the victim. Anyone remember the touch screens on the old Riviera? Digital dashes on New Yorkers? Technology does eventually become more reliable and cheaper, but the transitional process can be expensive and painful for those who want to be the first kid on the block to have one.

I had a customer freak yesterday on a $250 service visit after 2 1/2 years of driving his Impala. Other than 4 oil changes and one tire rotation, this is the first money he has spent in 2 1/2 years, yet he was pissed. I wonder what he would think of driving a BMW or VW with servicing and maintenance. Someone who spent $60k for a new luxury car may be willing to spend $500 on a service visit, but the new immigrant who stretches his budget to hell to buy a used Lexus (so he can show off to his friends in Russia) is not going to be happy with a $600 sensor replacement, is he?

[trinacriabob]

Technology does eventually become more reliable and cheaper, but the transitional process can be expensive and painful for those who want to be the first kid on the block to have one.

YES! Exactly. So it isn't about being a technophobe, it's about being caught in that "transition process" you speak of. Unfortunately, I am one of those people who keeps cars as long as possible (92 Regal coupe, 231,000 mi / 375,000 km) so having too much gadgetry worries me. Except for the computerized engine management system, my car has none of the other things and very few power accessories. Thus far, I have replaced 2 oxygen sensors and 1 MAP sensor. When I see that a particular type of technology seems to be working, at that point I will accept it.

Edited December 29, 2006 by trinacriabob

[Robert Hall]

That is an entirely separate issue: toys effecting resale value. Leasing is an attractive alternative BECAUSE it isn't wise to stick around when all the toys (Nav, sensors, electronics, etc.) start breaking down. The second or third owner of the vehicle becomes the victim.

Exactly..that's why I won't keep a modern car past 100k miles. 8-9 years is more than long enough for me to keep a car..(my old cars are pretty simple by comparison and are only driven a few thousand miles a year). With my next new car purchase, I'll probably go to a 4-5 year trade cycle.

[CARBIZ]

It's ironic, really - while all the guts of the vehicle are vastly superior than even 10 years ago (engine, trannies, etc.) and will allow the typical vehicle to reliably sail past 200,000 miles, it will be the complexity and expense of the ancillary items that will cause the car to end up behind the wrecker's ball.

I have already seen decent luxury cars (a Grand Marquis, recently) being traded in (for next to nothing, I might add) that are mechanically sound, but broken power windows, expensive power steering replacement, failed seat belt couplings ($600) are the reason the vehicle is being dumped!

[76ChevyTrucker]

I don't mind the engine technology, although I don't get the removal of an accelerator cable, that one kinda befuddles me, but I do mind all the other stuff, stability controls, tire monitoring systems, abs, navigation, idrive, whatever. How about just teach people how to DRIVE the damn things and stop trying to rely on technology to save your bacon. I enjoy driving my Impala, which has TPMS (tire pressure monitoring system), ABS, and on-star, but do I really need all of them? No, I learned how to drive a 76 Chevy pickup, a big huge brick without any options other than 3/4-ton truck rear springs. The engine technology makes a lot of sense, just like having DI on an engine, which allows pretty substantial power increases, although it does it by running an extremely, extremely (i'd call it dangerously) lean mixture to attain those power and efficiency numbers. I guess you could say that I understand the engine tech more than the other (in my personal opinion) useless crap.

[CARBIZ]

Look, there was a time when a car was an engine and 4 wheels, not much else. When my father factory ordered his '69 Chrysler 300, he loaded up on performance goodies (HD battery, TNT pkg, etc.) and the only "luxuries" he paid for was the FM radio (didn't even want "multi-plex") and a rear speaker. No a/c, no power windows, nothing. The car came with front discs (new technology then) and it had radial tires, something he was insistent upon. Having grown up with manual shift vehicles, he loved the Chrysler automatic. My father was pretty up with all the latest gadgets and tech features on cars back then and he was a die-hard Chrysler man because he believed that Chrysler was the best in engineering available at the time.

Today, I see 18 year olds who believe it is their divine right to have a car with keyless remote, power everything, a/c and they will expect all of that in the cheapest car possible. Times have changed. Even in the 9 years I have been selling cars, I have seen sales of vehicles without toys (Cavalier, base Malibu a few years back) tumble while sales of more equipped vehicles take off.

A lot of newer technologies are poorly understood by sales people and are not properly explained. I've had people dismiss Stablilitrak out of hand - even after they've just said they need AWD because it is "safer." Look at the Intigue: GM made a valiant attempt at making Stabilitrak all but standard on that car and yet it did nothing to help sales. Locking differential is another item that people don't understand - if they did Ford and Dodge wouldn't sell a single truck.

There are a lot of stupid people out there and there are a lot of people who are just overwhelmed with technology, which is why I laugh at iDrive and other high end luxury cars. I am willing to bet that 90% of the people that buy those vehicles don't have a clue how to use them!

I consider myself to be technically inclined, but three months ago when I bought a 42" plasma TV and a Yamaha surround system it took me two weeks to get everything straightened out. I literally had about 8 manuals to read (even one for the sub woofer!) and at one point, I threw them on the coffee table in despair! I used to sell VCRs and TVs for a living! (Mind, that was 20 years ago.)

I applaud GM for OnStar, for trying to make safety simple and relevent. I sit in a BMW or Mercedes and just shake my head. The Space Shuttle would be easier to figure out.

[daves87rs]

I'd have to agree with the engine, trans and such..

I want my cars to last (so I can afford a few "toys" :AH-HA_wink: ), so I like to keep em' simple...

Heck, I was all excited when my s-10 had power everything....

Expect for their last few cars, my parents kept their cars simple as well. Then again, they kept them 8-12 years...

I more want my car sporty and fun to drive, I could do without nav and such...

Though I love power sunroofs...