RE: BMW 5 Series: Review

[Patrick Bateman]

Vroom101 said:

Something to do with the fact that you are expected to return to that lane, so the use of the indicator is spurious. Anyway, don't BMW drivers shun the use of indicators as a rule as it is?

Speaking of BMW drivers, has anyone seen the TV advert for this car? The driver 'Scott' (it says his name on the dash display ) appears to be a stereotypical PH company director type. As soon as I saw it, the word 'Tw*t' entered my head.

Doing it after overtaking on a single carriageway is even more odd, especially when there's oncoming traffic.

[telecat]

mcbook said:

VGTICE said:

Oh how snowflake of you. Just because it's your opinion doesn't mean you're right. Tell me what would happen if you tried changing lanes without indicating during driving test?

My driving instructor told me (granted, this was 15 years ago) that indicating was not required when returning to the left lane of a dual carriage way, following an overtake. Completed the same manoeuvre on the test with no mention of it on the results sheet.

If you are indicating to Pull back in after an overtake you shouldn't be pulling back in!!

[tankplanker]

Vroom101 said:

Don't say that on the Advanced Driving forum - they managed to have a whole thread discussing the matter . Some said you didn't need to indicate if the maneuver doesn't affect another road user, others disgreed. From what I've observed, traffic police rarely indicate if returning to the lane to their left, so perhaps there is something to it. Something to do with the fact that you are expected to return to that lane, so the use of the indicator is spurious. Anyway, don't BMW drivers shun the use of indicators as a rule as it is?

Speaking of BMW drivers, has anyone seen the TV advert for this car? The driver 'Scott' (it says his name on the dash display ) appears to be a stereotypical PH company director type. As soon as I saw it, the word 'Tw*t' entered my head.

I'm not debating if its required, millions of lane changes must be made everyday with out indicators that do not result in accidents, just that it is safer to indicate than not, even if it is only marginally safer. Also when using adaptive cruise, when indicating right the car will speed up and close on the car in front, making the overtake safer/quicker.

[telecat]

Too many "autonomous" systems that try and guess what you want to do. None of which are intelligent enough to do the job. As for a Gearbox that uses GPS to change gear ask Cal Crutchlow how well that works when it loses your position. No wonder Driving standards are declining. Too many decisions are being off loaded to half baked "systems" unable to handle the job.

[HighwayStar]

Vroom101 said:

Don't say that on the Advanced Driving forum - they managed to have a whole thread discussing the matter . Some said you didn't need to indicate if the maneuver doesn't affect another road user, others disgreed. From what I've observed, traffic police rarely indicate if returning to the lane to their left, so perhaps there is something to it. Something to do with the fact that you are expected to return to that lane, so the use of the indicator is spurious. Anyway, don't BMW drivers shun the use of indicators as a rule as it is?

Speaking of BMW drivers, has anyone seen the TV advert for this car? The driver 'Scott' (it says his name on the dash display ) appears to be a stereotypical PH company director type. As soon as I saw it, the word 'Tw*t' entered my head.

Lol... I've seen the ad... Scott Eastwood, spawn of Clint no less.
Some of the things that wind people up do amuse me.

Edited by HighwayStar on Friday 17th February 12:44

[cidered77]

je777 said:

CoolHands said:

je777 said:

I don't know how the tech works, but 'steering for itself on a motorway', apparently for up to 30 seconds - aren't a lot of people going to see that as 'just enough time to check that text'?

Most modern VAG etc now have lane assist. They read the white lines and keep you in lane by automatically adjusting the steering.

So, yet another thing that will encourage the stupid not to concentrate on what they're doing.

I am a very average driver, but I can't think of a time when I have accidentally strayed out of my lane.

I think a lot of people will use this as a 'reason' not to have to look where they're going.

Maybe this should also only be available if linked to auto-braking as well - after all, that worked out fine for that guy in the Tesla.

The less hyperbolic/daily mail way to look at autonomous driving are the number of miles completed with it switched on without a fatality, vs. that stat for "normal" driving.

Autonomous cars make perfect sense, will be safer, and are an inevitability. Doesn't mean we can't still drive for pleasure - but I'd happily let the car drive for me on a boring commute just as I happily trust an autopilot to carry me the majority of any flight.

Otherwise this just looks a very good car to me - lots of chat about weight but isn't it 100kg lighter? and - 1635kg *including* driver? Not bad at all.

[telecat]

cidered77 said:

je777 said:

CoolHands said:

je777 said:

I don't know how the tech works, but 'steering for itself on a motorway', apparently for up to 30 seconds - aren't a lot of people going to see that as 'just enough time to check that text'?

Most modern VAG etc now have lane assist. They read the white lines and keep you in lane by automatically adjusting the steering.

So, yet another thing that will encourage the stupid not to concentrate on what they're doing.

I am a very average driver, but I can't think of a time when I have accidentally strayed out of my lane.

I think a lot of people will use this as a 'reason' not to have to look where they're going.

Maybe this should also only be available if linked to auto-braking as well - after all, that worked out fine for that guy in the Tesla.

The less hyperbolic/daily mail way to look at autonomous driving are the number of miles completed with it switched on without a fatality, vs. that stat for "normal" driving.

Autonomous cars make perfect sense, will be safer, and are an inevitability. Doesn't mean we can't still drive for pleasure - but I'd happily let the car drive for me on a boring commute just as I happily trust an autopilot to carry me the majority of any flight.

Otherwise this just looks a very good car to me - lots of chat about weight but isn't it 100kg lighter? and - 1635kg *including* driver? Not bad at all.

But it's only Semi autonomous, the worst of all worlds. And why are Vehicles in this sector getting so big? They should be the same size with more room available inside due to better packaging and better safety materials. It seems to me that some car makers are getting lazy. The comments on the size of the Transmission tunnel indicate that rather than design a solution they have increased the size of the car to accommodate it for some safety or packaging reason. BMW have a reputation. Built on enthusiasts recommendation. From that they can build Sporty Small to Large cars and Limo like barges. Move away from that too far and you become a one trick pony and vulnerable to a market shift.

[je777]

Even if you have neglected to indicate, surely it's far more dangerous to have steering that does things that you don't expect it to do - e.g. forcing you back the other way.

We know that people don't drive perfectly, so we know that these systems will cause problems to 'normal' drivers.
How many people indicate when coming back into the lane on their left - if they're leaving a reasonable gap to the car behind?

(My girlfriend's currently learning to drive and the current teaching is to only indicate when there's someone to indicate too.)

All of these 'auto-driving' modes will cause people not to pay attention - and, as someone pointed out here, they only look one car ahead.

They are meant as emergency assistance, but that's not how many will use them.

Also, I've read many other forums where people have complained of auto-steering not letting them look round corners, overtake, etc. - and them being shocked at suddenly being forcibly steered in the other direction.
Then you have stories of cars automatically slamming to a halt when going through a narrow gap, etc. and so on.
How many people forget to turn on their lights because their dashboard lights up without the lights being on?
How many learner drivers now have to learn without hill start assist?

[je777]

Fully autonomous (inevitable one day) is one thing; semi-autonomous will cause people to use them as if they're fully autonomous.

[tankplanker]

je777 said:

Even if you have neglected to indicate, surely it's far more dangerous to have steering that does things that you don't expect it to do - e.g. forcing you back the other way.

They do not force you back the other way, it is nothing like: you are steering right and the car decides to steer left as it thinks you are drifting out of the lane. What it does is increase the resistance of the wheel to turn right and simulate a mild rubble, rather like you are driving over the raised white line that separates the hard shoulder rather than a flat white line.

[cidered77]

would love to see the actual data on all of that, rather than speculation. Semi-autonomous as safety devices - yes please. Crack on. No problem with it. I can see the theoretical risk of people switching off concentration- but I also see things like use of mobile whilst driving growing into a stigma not dissimilar to drink driving in 80s - phone use in particular doesn't feel like a trend that will be reversed by smarter cars for as long as it's 6 points for being caught, and many very public horror stories out there.

And yeah the car is getting bigger although not heavier - but the level of marketing sophistication and big-data driven insight that organisations like these have on what people like and buy is colossal. Might not be a popular choice for pistonhead forums, might not be popular within the UK even with our garages sized for Ford Cortinas - but if they made that choice, you can be very sure many smart people with lots of hard fact made that decision because they reckon it'll shift more global units than the competition. And they aren't doing badly, are BMW in fairness.

Remember the furore when Porsche announced the Cayenne... turns out smart auto execs knew more than us.

[je777]

tankplanker said:

je777 said:

Even if you have neglected to indicate, surely it's far more dangerous to have steering that does things that you don't expect it to do - e.g. forcing you back the other way.

They do not force you back the other way, it is nothing like: you are steering right and the car decides to steer left as it thinks you are drifting out of the lane. What it does is increase the resistance of the wheel to turn right and simulate a mild rubble, rather like you are driving over the raised white line that separates the hard shoulder rather than a flat white line.

An awful lot of people say differently - on these pages (when they did an article on this stuff). Me, I've never tried one so I can't say.

[je777]

cidered77 said:

The less hyperbolic/daily mail way to look at autonomous driving are the number of miles completed with it switched on without a fatality, vs. that stat for "normal" driving.

Autonomous cars make perfect sense, will be safer, and are an inevitability. Doesn't mean we can't still drive for pleasure - but I'd happily let the car drive for me on a boring commute just as I happily trust an autopilot to carry me the majority of any flight.

Otherwise this just looks a very good car to me - lots of chat about weight but isn't it 100kg lighter? and - 1635kg *including* driver? Not bad at all.

Saying someone is being ‘Daily Mail’ is very much 2012’s Standard Internet Insult of Choice. Everyone’s boring us with ‘You’re like Trump’ these days.

[Agent XXX]

'Aspiration...........raised'

Design................hideous.

Image.............s*it

[cidered77]

je777 said:

cidered77 said:

The less hyperbolic/daily mail way to look at autonomous driving are the number of miles completed with it switched on without a fatality, vs. that stat for "normal" driving.

Autonomous cars make perfect sense, will be safer, and are an inevitability. Doesn't mean we can't still drive for pleasure - but I'd happily let the car drive for me on a boring commute just as I happily trust an autopilot to carry me the majority of any flight.

Otherwise this just looks a very good car to me - lots of chat about weight but isn't it 100kg lighter? and - 1635kg *including* driver? Not bad at all.

Saying someone is being ‘Daily Mail’ is very much 2012’s Standard Internet Insult of Choice. Everyone’s boring us with ‘You’re like Trump’ these days.

If an individual sensationalist exception case is used to counter argue something with a wealth of supporting data and fact then it felt like the most appropriate metaphor, to be honest. Will resolve to be less boring next time then.

[tankplanker]

je777 said:

An awful lot of people say differently - on these pages (when they did an article on this stuff). Me, I've never tried one so I can't say.

Having driven several different cars and owning one with the feature I would suggest anybody finding it that it forced them not to change lane would have difficulty pulling the skin of a rice pudding.

[je777]

cidered77 said:

je777 said:

cidered77 said:

The less hyperbolic/daily mail way to look at autonomous driving are the number of miles completed with it switched on without a fatality, vs. that stat for "normal" driving.

Autonomous cars make perfect sense, will be safer, and are an inevitability. Doesn't mean we can't still drive for pleasure - but I'd happily let the car drive for me on a boring commute just as I happily trust an autopilot to carry me the majority of any flight.

Otherwise this just looks a very good car to me - lots of chat about weight but isn't it 100kg lighter? and - 1635kg *including* driver? Not bad at all.

Saying someone is being ‘Daily Mail’ is very much 2012’s Standard Internet Insult of Choice. Everyone’s boring us with ‘You’re like Trump’ these days.

If an individual sensationalist exception case is used to counter argue something with a wealth of supporting data and fact then it felt like the most appropriate metaphor, to be honest. Will resolve to be less boring next time then.

Perhaps I was being 'snowflake', to use 2016's SIIoC.
Time will tell how people use this tech. and whether or not it improves safety - me, I have little faith in people.
I reckon drivers' over-reliance and decreased concentration will roughly negate any improvements the systems make.
God help them if/when the technology breaks down, though.

Edited by je777 on Friday 17th February 13:45

[RumbleOfThunder]

Fantastic looking machine. Completely unsuited to my needs but would love one.

[Vroom101]

HighwayStar said:

Vroom101 said:

Speaking of BMW drivers, has anyone seen the TV advert for this car? The driver 'Scott' (it says his name on the dash display ) appears to be a stereotypical PH company director type. As soon as I saw it, the word 'Tw*t' entered my head.

Lol... I've seen the ad... Scott Eastwood, spawn of Clint no less.
The things that wind people up always amuse me sometimes.

I don't let it wind me up, but it amuses me how BMW have fallen on the stereotypical thrusting executive example. The 'Tw*t' remark was aimed more towards the PH company director, rather than BMW drivers

I didn't realise it was Clint Eastwood's son though.

[Muzzer79]

HardMiles said:

Looks nice. If it had only Bluetooth, sat nav, ABS, cruise control & parking sensors, dump the rest of the electro shyte, it'd be contemplated. I simply can't abide new cars. They are predominantly overweight due to the masses that have no idea how to use them...

Perhaps they should also ditch that new-fangled key-thing and give you a handle that you insert into the front grille and turn to start it up?

Lovely car, shame they have kept the 2010-year interior design....