What improvements would you make?

[boxerTen]

The ability of the car to assess whether I am driving safely or not, and the consequent removal of speed limits as being no longer necessary, so I can, when conditions permit, then run at 130 mph on the motorway.

[DiscoColin]

CrgT16 said:

Any start/stop tech should be disabled when indicators are on. On my Merc it annoys me when in a junction the car just stops and pulling out it has to restart. I know I can disable the system all together but I don't mind the silence when standing still in traffic it's in the junctions that bothers me.

Stop/Start should be chucked in the bin in its entirety IMHO. Extra load on the starter and battery system means that you are either increasing component costs or losing reliability or both by having it, and for a benefit which I strongly suspect serves only to benefit those discredited standardised CO2 emissions test figures (so nothing much in the real world) while irritating anyone who is actually paying attention to what their car is doing. If you are in a proper non-moving jam, you turn it off yourself...

[Evanivitch]

Steviesam said:

mph.52 said:

Have often thought that using a combination of lenses and mirrors it should be possible to get the image from the wing mirror to appear on the inside of the car without having to see through a wet, misty or mucky side window - or do I need a camera or two?

Already on test cars. Small camera in place of the external wing mirrors, with displays in the car. Currently in various locations, from top of the doors to the instrument panel!

I'd be surprised if we see that anytime soon. The safety implications are huge and the cameras will still struggle to balance light conditions as well as the human eye.

Unlike reversing cameras, there's no benefit to having wing-cameras and wing mirrors. So we might be stuck with those aerodynamic parasites for some time yet.

[DiscoColin]

Evanivitch said:

Steviesam said:

mph.52 said:

Have often thought that using a combination of lenses and mirrors it should be possible to get the image from the wing mirror to appear on the inside of the car without having to see through a wet, misty or mucky side window - or do I need a camera or two?

Already on test cars. Small camera in place of the external wing mirrors, with displays in the car. Currently in various locations, from top of the doors to the instrument panel!

I'd be surprised if we see that anytime soon. The safety implications are huge and the cameras will still struggle to balance light conditions as well as the human eye.

Unlike reversing cameras, there's no benefit to having wing-cameras and wing mirrors. So we might be stuck with those aerodynamic parasites for some time yet.

Erm - it has been done and you contradicted yourself as to the justification : aerodynamic reasons are why the VW XL1 had cameras instead of mirrors. It isn't the only car thus far, but was the first that I know of from a mainstream volume manufacturer (rather than concepts or bespoke one-offs) and thus it is potentially a matter of time until it comes from the niche model to a volume product.

[lestiq]

I think if you are improving the car, you need to improve the road it's on as well.

It would need a law first that meant all cars had to have it, but I would retrofit flywheel recovery systems to all cars. The idea being, on the main roads when congestion happens, your speed would automatically be taken care of using that kinetic energy, maybe with the help of a battery, the system would calculate the ideal speed to get the road moving again as quick as possible. Lets face it humans just aren't efficient, we get distracted, lazy, take matters into our own hands. You can see it if you land at Heathrow, the long traffic jams with nothing at the front of them, its ever so frustrating. They've tried it with motorway gantry signs advising you of the speed to travel, which everyone ignores as they want to get as far up the road as possible to get ahead of the traffic, which of course compounds the problem. Sadly, the roads that we use the most have gotten so busy at the times we mostly use them, that most journeys are sat in traffic. It would need a lot of careful thought to make a system that could marry both manual and automatic control seemlessly and safely, but I think our kids will have that all figured out for us.

This of course doesn't take care of the drivers that just, don't get, flow, observance, common sense, patience etc etc. I'd like to think that the population that really do see the car as just a method of getting from A to B would be better off in autonomous cars in the future.

Who knows, we might one day have really decent public transport and the roads might be quieter again!

[Luther Blisset]

Standardise things like wheel centre bore/pcd, caliper bolt spacing amongst other things.

[aka_kerrly]

Luther Blisset said:

Standardise things like wheel centre bore/pcd, caliper bolt spacing amongst other things.

Excellent point. It would make swapping wheels a whole lot easier, cheaper to manufacture, would also apply to brake discs as well so they'd be cheaper and more standardised to.

[Evanivitch]

DiscoColin said:

Evanivitch said:

Steviesam said:

mph.52 said:

Have often thought that using a combination of lenses and mirrors it should be possible to get the image from the wing mirror to appear on the inside of the car without having to see through a wet, misty or mucky side window - or do I need a camera or two?

Already on test cars. Small camera in place of the external wing mirrors, with displays in the car. Currently in various locations, from top of the doors to the instrument panel!

I'd be surprised if we see that anytime soon. The safety implications are huge and the cameras will still struggle to balance light conditions as well as the human eye.

Unlike reversing cameras, there's no benefit to having wing-cameras and wing mirrors. So we might be stuck with those aerodynamic parasites for some time yet.

Erm - it has been done and you contradicted yourself as to the justification : aerodynamic reasons are why the VW XL1 had cameras instead of mirrors. It isn't the only car thus far, but was the first that I know of from a mainstream volume manufacturer (rather than concepts or bespoke one-offs) and thus it is potentially a matter of time until it comes from the niche model to a volume product.

You misunderstood what I said. There's no point having wing-mirrors and wing-cameras at the same time. And currently no manufacturer has the safety cases to implement a wing-camera only setup.

Technically it's not difficult, but using cameras as your soul means of vision is fraught with safety implications. Even military vehicles aren't driven using cameras alone.

[VeeFource]

mgian2 said:

More of a design thing than safety, but I'd remove rear spoilers from front wheel drive cars,, can't stand them!

But why? You do know the spoiler's there to improve high speed cornering stability rather than improving traction for the driven wheels don't you?

[Dr Jekyll]

Instrument and sat nav displays that your eyes focus on as if they are 100 yards down the road, rather like head up displays. Would make life easier for ageing eyes.

[Bodo]

Conscript said:

Regiment said:

OLED transparent windscreen, all navigation information is overlaid onto the windscreen.

I came back in here to post another idea....heads up displays. But I guess you've covered it.

They've existed in many premium (but not necessarily particularly exotic) cars for quite a while now. Given the obvious safety benefits of being able to display crucial information directly in the driver's eyeline, I'm not sure why such technology hasn't become a lot more widespread.

Edited by Conscript on Friday 7th October 14:23

I believe that we will see more cars with a HUD in future. Eventually, I can imagine that Augmented Reality projections in the windscreen will become standard.
Here's an explanation from 2014: https://youtu.be/3uuQSSnO7IE - developing a car takes four years today, so I guess the first AR HUD might be in a dealer showroom near you in 2018.

ambuletz said:

most of mine would seen as steps back.

>I'd take a step back and put NORMAL instrument guages that don't have

1- LCD screens with lots of information on them. go for analouge
2-backlit soon as you turn the ignition.

dials should be easily read during the day, if there's low light/night time you should have to turn your side lights/headlights on to be able to see them.

Fully agree! Analogue instruments are not only well readable, but also very decorative - what looks more boring than the black surface of a display instrument, when ignition is switched off?
As above, with AR HUDs, the chances of getting back analogue instruments are rising, as all electronic and dynamic information will be passed over the windscreen. For now though, I believe we will see more Free Programmable Instrument Clusters in the next years.

On a side note: three cars with FP IC:







All feature an analogue clock in the centre of the dashboard! The same fate that digital wristwatches had in the late seventies - the novelty wore off and analogue watches took over again...

[je777]

Moonhawk said:

If you could design any feature into all cars - what would it be. Not looking for hover cars or anything like that - but small, practical changes that could make a car safer, easier to use etc. Some of these features may be things you have seen on existing cars and which you think are a good idea. Others may be new ideas.

A few of mine:

1. Hazard lights. I would make them double flash instead of flashing the same rate as a turn signal. My reasoning. On a few occasions I have seen a car with hazard lights at the side of the road with another car parked behind. Due to the fact that the car behind is blocking visibility of the left indicator light - you can't actually tell whether the car in front has hazards on or whether they are indicating to pull back out into traffic. Adding a double flash would make it obvious it was hazards and not a turn signal.

2. Brake force indicating brake lights. A brake light bar that illuminates from the ends towards the middle as braking force increases. Would help you judge whether the brake lights that just came on in front of you were a gentle tap or dropping the anchors. I guess it could work on a similar principle to the animated turn signals that have started appearing on Audi's etc.

3. Blacklight headlights. Beam could be set higher to cast farther, but it wouldn't dazzle like white light does. It would however make anything day-glo, white or anything washed in washing powder with optical brightners glow, making pedestrians far more visible and if the correct paint is used - road markings and signs too.

I really like no. 1, but especially no. 3. If that's possible (I've no idea) that's one of those ideas where you think 'Why would we NOT be doing that?'

[Steve vRS]

VeeFource said:

mgian2 said:

More of a design thing than safety, but I'd remove rear spoilers from front wheel drive cars,, can't stand them!

But why? You do know the spoiler's there to improve high speed cornering stability rather than improving traction for the driven wheels don't you?

Most of them are for styling.

[dxg]

Switches and knobs for air con, volume, etc.

Basically, I would outlaw touchscreens - I can't think of a better way of distracting a driver that gets their eyes off the road than these things.

Switches and dials offer high design affordances; so much so that you can learn where they are and reach for them without looking away from the road ahead.

I even refuse to buy an aftermarket headunit with volume buttons, preferring a dial for its improved usability.

[Aaron_W]

I'd have those speaker amplified exhausts outlawed, good for Essex, not so good for the rest of the UK

[je777]

gsavill90 said:

Also - and this one wont be popular - but why don't we have GPS speed limiters yet?

Because it would be dangerous. Sometimes you need to speed up in order to be safer (e.g. overtaking - of course, speed cameras are a problem there).

Still, only a matter of time before it happens.

[VeeFource]

Steve vRS said:

VeeFource said:

mgian2 said:

More of a design thing than safety, but I'd remove rear spoilers from front wheel drive cars,, can't stand them!

But why? You do know the spoiler's there to improve high speed cornering stability rather than improving traction for the driven wheels don't you?

Most of them are for styling.

But not on rear or all wheel drive? It's the fwd part of the original statement I don't follow.

[je777]

PHMatt said:

Conscript said:

Whilst sitting in slow moving traffic on the A2 a while ago, and witnessing a line of cars attempting to merge from a slip road into lane 1 which was full of other cars that were moving slow, but sitting bumper to bumper, I thought about something - how about a warning buzzer (a bit like a seat-belt warning chime) that sounds all the while you are maintaining less than a 2 second gap to the car in front whilst moving.

Only way to disable it is to maintain a safe distance to the car in front. Checked as a mandatory MOT requirement. It seems to me that a huge amount of problems on our crowded motorways are actually caused by people sitting too close to each other rather than anything else.

Going bumper to bumper helps no one. BUT - people who go all the way down and then try and cut in cause those at the front to go bumper to bumper.
The real problem is with those that don't filter in soon enough to keep traffic flowing.
I let plenty of people in at the back of the lane where people are filtering in. But when I've seen the signs warning of lane closures etc, got in the lane at a safe point and trundled along, like fk am I going to let 37 toss pots that ignore the sign, drove freely down the empty closed lane and then indicate in at the very last concievable second. You wouldn't get a razor blade in the gap I'll leave to the car in front in those situations.

Empty cars of people who make up their own rules and then assert these as if they were the law.
If everyone leaps into the lane half a mile before the merging point, a whole lane is wasted for half a mile.
Just merge in sensibly and let others in. No aggression required.

[The Surveyor]

Moonhawk said:

2. Brake force indicating brake lights. A brake light bar that illuminates from the ends towards the middle as braking force increases. Would help you judge whether the brake lights that just came on in front of you were a gentle tap or dropping the anchors. I guess it could work on a similar principle to the animated turn signals that have started appearing on Audi's etc.

This was used on the Aston Martin Ogle prototype back in 1971 so nothing new, and fairly simple to replicate using a series of in-line hydraulic drake-light switches with different ratings. The Aston had a series of brake lights which came on in series as the brake pedal force increased. It was also a 3 seater and not particularly pretty.

[Captain Answer]

Proper fitted front, rear and side cameras running into a HDD in the car would be so useful for crashes etc

Proper bulbs in cars that can be swapped out in under 5 mins without tools

Binning of touch screens for things like heater controls, it's just crap and distracting