What technology are we still waiting for ?

[kambites]

lbc said:

A flashing light and alarm on the dashboard to warn drivers they don't need fog lights on.

I've never understood why fog lights don't simply default to "off" whenever you turn the ignition off. Many other car systems do and it would stop people driving around with them on for six months just because there was a slight mist one morning.

[glasgowrob]

ZOLLAR said:

Not sure, maybe due to the side windows being required to move up and down on a regular basis means they can't find a viable solution?

yup

that said rear windows (i.e. in the boot) are heated in my Mondeo estate

[xRIEx]

lbc said:

Another one to warn that headlights are off when they should be on.

Or I suppose there should be a technology that automatically switches headlights on when they need to be on. Like the likes of Qashqais have had for at least 4 years, and Jaguars for at least 14 years.

[Johnnytheboy]

100% effective rust-proofing.

[Craikeybaby]

lbc said:

A flashing light and alarm on the dashboard to warn drivers they don't need fog lights on.

Another one to warn that headlights are off when they should be on.

If you're going to have the sensors to detect fog etc why use them to turn on/off a light on the dash when they could just control the lights themselves?

[Craikeybaby]

kambites said:

lbc said:

A flashing light and alarm on the dashboard to warn drivers they don't need fog lights on.

I've never understood why fog lights don't simply default to "off" whenever you turn the ignition off. Many other car systems do and it would stop people driving around with them on for six months just because there was a slight mist one morning.

The rear fog light on my MR2 does this, although for some reason, the front fog lights need to be turned off manually. Of course there should be a light on the dash, or at least the switch, to show that the lights are on.

[shakotan]

kambites said:

T0MMY said:

I can't help thinking that rear view cameras are a slightly pointless innovation though

Removing wing mirrors would be of significant benefit to aerodynamics and hence fuel economy.

Significant benefit? Hardly.

[Clivey]

Johnnytheboy said:

100% effective rust-proofing.

THIS!

My Discovery 2's currently undergoing a mini-restoration before the underside's treated with Dinitrol (big job; takes a week to do properly with bumpers etc. coming off). Hopefully, this will prevent the chassis rot that they commonly suffer from. My chassis was solid anyway but I've seen some utterly shocking cases in other D2s - even other late 2004 models.

[crosseyedlion]

jonah35 said:

The average home to catch up with the average car.

Heated sofa, automatically opening and closing doors and setting alarm, your phone to work via the home electronic system etc.

I mean, a key to open your home?! Yet a £2k mondeo has a fob. I know homes have it but most don't.

Absolutely this.

Bothers me that I cant unlock/dealarm my home with a press of a fob.

[ging84]

kambites said:

Removing wing mirrors would be of significant benefit to aerodynamics and hence fuel economy.

I looked into this
and it wouldn't they are too small and close the the body to make almost any difference if they have been design with even a small amount of streamlining.
if it would make a differnce, then it would have been done long ago

[kambites]

shakotan said:

kambites said:

T0MMY said:

I can't help thinking that rear view cameras are a slightly pointless innovation though

Removing wing mirrors would be of significant benefit to aerodynamics and hence fuel economy.

Significant benefit? Hardly.

I suppose it depends on what you consider "significant" but I'd be surprised if removing the wing mirrors from the average family hatch didn't amount to at least a 1% improvement on the NDEC cycle and probably a 2% improvement at a constant motorway-speed cruise?

Relevant to he average driver? Perhaps not, but it's certainly enough for manufacturers chasing ever more stringent CO2 emissions targets.


As I understand it, the reason no manufacturer has removed them is because they're a requirement for type approval. Tesla have applied for an exemption and if they get it, I'm sure other manufacturers will follow suit. ETA: VW appear to have done it with the XL1 (which presumably isn't fully type approved?).

Edited by kambites on Monday 22 December 10:25

[ging84]

kambites said:

I suppose it depends on what you consider "significant" but I'd be surprised if removing the wing mirrors from the average family hatch didn't amount to at least a 1% improvement on the NDEC cycle and probably a 2% improvement at a constant motorway-speed cruise?

Not a chance
some fairly big mirrors on a small car might represent 2% of the frontal area, but that does not mean they add 2% more drag
they are close to the body, so they are in air which is already turbulent, they are not going to add much more to the problem
they are also generally very streamline so create much less drag than some of the main offenders, such as the wheels, the grille, the base of the windscreen and the under body

[xRIEx]

ging84 said:

kambites said:

Removing wing mirrors would be of significant benefit to aerodynamics and hence fuel economy.

I looked into this
and it wouldn't they are too small and close the the body to make almost any difference if they have been design with even a small amount of streamlining.
if it would make a differnce, then it would have been done long ago

I don't know about 'long ago' - reversing/parking cameras have only really made it into mainstream production vehicles in the last 4 or 5 years.

[FeelingLucky]

4K Flat OLED TV

[Conscript]

amusingduck said:

2L bottle of warm (35-40c i'd guess) water, 30 seconds to pour on all windows, windows completely clear. If it's particularly freezing i'll use a lukewarm bottle first, then a warm bottle. I'd be interested to know the temperature differential to cause a screen to crack.

Pouring water on the screen to clear frost isn't particularly onerous, but the point of the thread was questioning technology that does't exist yet; yet this is a technology that not only exists, but is already well established for the front/rear screens. Surely it's not a massive leap to incorporate it to the side windows?

ZOLLAR said:

Not sure, maybe due to the side windows being required to move up and down on a regular basis means they can't find a viable solution?

I thought this, but I can't see why it would prevent it. The window elements are embedded inside the screen for Quickclear screens aren't they? And surely sliding electrical contacts aren't outside the bounds of human capability?

The only thing I can think of is cost:benefit, but using that argument surely heated windscreens wouldn't have been developed either as you can just pour water on that too

[Magic919]

kambites said:

Removing wing mirrors would be of significant benefit to aerodynamics and hence fuel economy.

They did that years ago.

[irocfan]

pigeonskirt said:

We had a fella from a company come to show us a hydrophobic coating that could be applied to windscreens. Apparently, it's stuff that's used on Yachts that don't have wipers. He assured me you could drive on the motorway without the wipers on and that the rain would just blow off. I tried it and it worked quite well.

wasn't that what rain-x was meant to do?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/221300324152?limghl...

kambites said:

lbc said:

A flashing light and alarm on the dashboard to warn drivers they don't need fog lights on.

I've never understood why fog lights don't simply default to "off" whenever you turn the ignition off. Many other car systems do and it would stop people driving around with them on for six months just because there was a slight mist one morning.

I'm quite surprised that this is an issue- I don't recall having driven a car in the last 15/20 years which doesn't turn off the fogs when you turn off the lights

[JonnyVTEC]

Muddle238 said:

Boeing 787 window shades are electrochromatic jobbies I believe, in 20 years we will probably see this technology applied to the tops of windscreens and side windows as a replacement for the sun visor.

Or in roofs of Mercedes cars today ?

The issue is powering as discussed. Sliding contacts would work for about 6months /one winter I imagine. A decent tether coiled of wire could be used to enable conection to the glass i guess.

Edited by JonnyVTEC on Monday 22 December 11:52

[OldSpice]

McLaren are already working on sonic technology instead of wipers...

[JonnyVTEC]

ging84 said:

Not a chance
some fairly big mirrors on a small car might represent 2% of the frontal area, but that does not mean they add 2% more drag
they are close to the body, so they are in air which is already turbulent, they are not going to add much more to the problem
they are also generally very streamline so create much less drag than some of the main offenders, such as the wheels, the grille, the base of the windscreen and the under body

Drag on a vehicle is a function of CdA.... yep 2% more A IS 2% more drag. Removal also probably assist Cd reduction by a point or two aswell. That piece of glass is pretty samn bluff and the streamlining you think its present is massively compromised to ensure you can see across the front of the mirror housing for front corner visibility around the A pillar.

Im guessing the boat tail and tumble home of the XL1 allows the mirror cameras to work quiet well. A Squarer car will need cameras further out, just like shed draggers have extension wingmirrors.