Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Collision Warning Systems Get Thumbs Up With Consumers, With A Catch

    William Maley

    Editor/Reporter - CheersandGears.com

    May 29, 2012

    Last fall, the Department of Transportation and eight automakers began a study to assess drivers' acceptance of accident-avoidance technologies. The study, called the Connected Vehicle Safety Pilot Program put people on closed roads in cars that were equipped with the technologies and asked what did they think about it.

    Out of the 688 participants in the study, 92% wanted the technology in their vehicles and more than 90% believed it would improve the safety of driving in the real-world. These numbers covered most age ranges.

    But there is a catch. A majority of drivers said they wouldn't pay a modest amount for the technology. When asked if they would pay “more than $250” for a suite of accident-avoidance tech, all of the participants say that was too high.

    The study isn't finished yet - the next phase involves 3,000 test cars trying out the features on open roads in Ann Arbor, Michigan starting this fall.

    Source: New York Times Wheels

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    They better have an off switch. I do not want or need this techno bable crap.

    They must have used Lemmings as those are the people who are more interested in playing with themselves/ their toys than to actually drive and enjoy the driving experiance.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Most people would rather NOT pay extra for what they consider safety features than actually pay for them. I suspect that there will be a mandate for these systems sometime in the next 5-10 years for free.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Most people would rather NOT pay extra for what they consider safety features than actually pay for them. I suspect that there will be a mandate for these systems sometime in the next 5-10 years for free.

    Yes the Gov thinking they know best for the population as they cocoon with so called safety and blandness that kills off the drive to reach for the unknown in the name of safety.

    The Gov can piss off, there better be an off switch for these stupid nanny devices, otherwise I will never be buying a new auto again.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    While I agree that I don't want/think I need these things...I wouldn't mind about 85% of the other idiots on the road having them...everytime I see someone texting, or not even looking when they change lanes during my ~80 mile daily commute it makes me wonder how there aren't a lot more accidents...Unfortunately for enthusiasts, the government is concerned with keeping them and the people around them safe from their own stupidity...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Common sense says texting while driving is stupid. The problem is is that those who text and drive need public transportation so that they can avoid harming others. A simple ban on texting while driving at state level should suffice.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • Interesting read The bright spot for EVs nobody is talking about
    • I am saddened. Loved him as an actor.    There was also a crime thriller movie with Wesley Snipes and Sean Connery that he did.  Rising Sun.       
    • For sure. 100%  I have a personal anecdotal story involving insurances. Although my aunt's and uncle's insurance story from Boston didnt affect me personally, its a story that makes me very indifferent regardless what kind of monster Luigi Mangione could really be. If the story is that the CEO that got murdered was truly a sweet man, then I will have empathy for him. If not...indifference it will be for me.     I have lost a lot of my humanity these last few years I must admit. And you would be correct, indifference is almost always NOT the correct emotion to wield no matter what the circumstances.    Most probably was.  I am curious to know Luigi's motives.  Although I am not too fond of Luigi either. I dont like murderers. But...innocent until proven guilty. And Luigi's Miranda Rights allegedly were not given to him. And...a search warrant was not present when the officers went through his backpack.  I will hate it if Luigi does not stand trial because of incompetency. Justice needs to be served. For the deceased as well for the charged as well for society.  Any murder is creepy, I will agree.  We discussed my indifference so I wont get into that again.  This would be a second time I would be indifferent to horrific public murders in a year's time.  My indifference to both murders does not negate that I also sense and feel the creepiness of it all. Good guy or bad guy, indifference to his murder or not, and we will add Charlie Kirk to this...NOBODY should be murdered.   I agree with your assessments:  indifference is not the right answer and vigilantism is a very dangerous road to follow.  human beings are strange creatures.  Psychology has proven that human beings are more lenient and more favorable towards pleasant physical human attributes than to humans that are less lucky to be blessed with beautiful genetics.   Reality is though... that ALL human beings are capable of murder.   THAT is the scary part.  
    • Thanks for this link.  Very well written, detailed, chronological enough, and interesting.  This is about how I understand it. The psychological twists and turns are going to be important.  There will be a lot for psychological experts to chew on that we're not (yet) privy to.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search