Sony Honda Mobility Afeela 1

[Famine]

So I had to specify I was asking about new cars, right.

No, I was pointing out that the very existence of secondhand cars also demolishes the idea that autonomous systems will become/are becoming mandatory to own/drive; you cannot legislate old cars off the road.

As for them all being in trash condition, all of my cars ever have been secondhand...

lane assist ... ESP ... stability management

You're now arbitrarily changing the requirements - moving the goalposts.

ESP/stability control is no more an autonomous system than ABS is. Lane assist is an autonomous system only if it provides corrective steering: LDW is not, LKA is. I included the SAE definitions in my post, why did you ignore it? Oh, right, convenience.
And, lest we forget, the fact that any of these systems is fitted is manufacturer prerogative because they want to have lots of stars and high marks in (optional, independent) safety tests, not because they're mandated by law.


In fact, if you want to be daft about it, every British LVM keen on "pure" driving experiences can (and does) supply road-legal cars to all of the EU. How does the Ariel Atom, Caterham Seven, or Noble M600 factor into your imaginary regulatory framework?

 

[eran0004]

Directly they 're not, but step by step they are.

Which brings us back to the question of where you've heard that.

It seems like you're trying to make the case that since some driving assists have become mandatory for new cars in some markets, it will soon become mandatory for new cars to be autonomous too.

There's no evidence that mandatory driving assists is going to lead to mandatory autonomy.

 

[McLaren]

No, I had already bought the car. I went there to get it serviced (else the warranty would be void) and he just happened to have a couple minutes for a chat before the mechanic began working on it.

None of that changes what I said, though. Just telling you something is “sadly mandatory” could still be an answer tailored to you nor does it specify who mandated what options.

 

[M Stark]

Keep in mind that too much comfort is bad for health.

Sure, but it’s not only about comfort really. Most people -in European cities- drive cheap manuals and these things are a chore to drive. There’s literally nothing fun or exciting in driving a manual Honda Jazz or a Peugeot 208 for example. That’s what the vast majority drives. If these people had the opportunity to buy an EV for the exact same price, I bet they’d be much, much happier.

 

[05XR8]

Sure, but it’s not only about comfort really. Most people -in European cities- drive cheap manuals and these things are a chore to drive. Theres literally nothing fun or exciting in driving a manual Honda Jazz or Peugeot 208 for example. That’s what the vast majority drives. If these people had the opportunity to buy an EV for the exact same price, I bet they’d be much, much happier.

We can argue the bold part for years.
Depends on the individual. My wife works in the automotive industry(multi brand dealership: VW, Ford, Jaecoo, Hyundai, Honda, Mitsubishi, Suzuki, Nissan, BMW, MINI, ZEEKR) and dislikes all that come with the EVs. She enjoys the rumble of her AU Tickford V8. To say people would be happier for EV vehicles the same price as the ICE daily would probably also depend on what’s going in the market. If the USA wasn’t at war for example.

I still stand by my post and hope Honda take this time to concentrate on doing what they’ve done best in the past. Bring back the enthusiasm from the brand that made young folk look at their parents grocery getters and saw potential to make them enthusiast dream cars.

 

[FaithJonesFEM]

No, I was pointing out that the very existence of secondhand cars also demolishes the idea that autonomous systems will become/are becoming mandatory to own/drive; you cannot legislate old cars off the road.

As for them all being in trash condition, all of my cars ever have been secondhand...

You're now arbitrarily changing the requirements - moving the goalposts.

ESP/stability control is no more an autonomous system than ABS is. Lane assist is an autonomous system only if it provides corrective steering: LDW is not, LKA is. I included the SAE definitions in my post, why did you ignore it? Oh, right, convenience.
And, lest we forget, the fact that any of these systems is fitted is manufacturer prerogative because they want to have lots of stars and high marks in (optional, independent) safety tests, not because they're mandated by law.


In fact, if you want to be daft about it, every British LVM keen on "pure" driving experiences can (and does) supply road-legal cars to all of the EU. How does the Ariel Atom, Caterham Seven, or Noble M600 factor into your imaginary regulatory framework?

1)Maybe things are different where you live compared to where I live. I have repeatedly tried looking into the second-hand market, but none of the cars I was interested in could be brought to a dignified condition.

2)You 're wrong about the ESP, as it operates autonomously (without a conscious command by the driver), whereas the ABS can only operate when the driver chooses to press the brake pedal. As for manufacturers wanting to have lots of stars and high marks in "optional and independent" safety tests, perhaps those safety tests are seen as a marketing opportunity and that 's precisely the cheese in the trap? Things can very well become mandatory without the law ever directly saying so - I wonder why you 'd argue they can't.

3)The Atom, Seven and M600 are not available in Greece AFAIK. So again our disagreement is probably because you live outside the EU and I 'm trapped inside it - lucky you...

Which brings us back to the question of where you've heard that.

It seems like you're trying to make the case that since some driving assists have become mandatory for new cars in some markets, it will soon become mandatory for new cars to be autonomous too.

There's no evidence that mandatory driving assists is going to lead to mandatory autonomy.

Actually I don't need to "have heard" anything, since yesterday I did my own research (manually visiting the official greek websites of Skoda, Dacia, KIA and Hyundai as per the models Famine had named) and found out that all of them have some sort of autonomous systems. And, as I 'm explaining to Famine, things can become mandatory even if the law does not directly say so (I even provide the example of the "optional and independent" safety tests). We humans are generally afraid of danger, so those who decide for us without us will typically try to use this to their advantage - do you doubt this? See for example how the ESP was made mandatory: it was presented as a "safety system", but often it makes the car unnecessarily unpredictable, therefore more dangerous. So the companies that make its sensors make money they don't deserve.

None of that changes what I said, though. Just telling you something is “sadly mandatory” could still be an answer tailored to you nor does it specify who mandated what options.

You 're most likely ignoring the context of the EU market though.

Sure, but it’s not only about comfort really. Most people -in European cities- drive cheap manuals and these things are a chore to drive. There’s literally nothing fun or exciting in driving a manual Honda Jazz or a Peugeot 208 for example. That’s what the vast majority drives. If these people had the opportunity to buy an EV for the exact same price, I bet they’d be much, much happier.

How it shows you 've never driven a manual Honda... Unless they 've dropped the quality of their levers on the latest models. Pugs on the other hand do have bad levers as far as I 've heard from other drivers. So I 'd say it 's a mixed bag of who 'd be happy and who would not. I drive a cheap manual Toyota, yet the lever is super easy and precise and the clutch is not heavy enough to justify looking at automatics or EVs. From the sounds of it, you most likely haven't driven much besides some sort of PSA or VAG thing, and mind you those things actually have feather clutches, preventing all the necessary feel from reaching the driver's foot. And just as it goes for sound, haptic feel isn't just for fun. This feedback is primarily there for more precise control of the car. Precision is safety. Fun is simply a bonus.

 

[Famine]

You 're wrong about the ESP, as it operates autonomously (without a conscious command by the driver)

It's literally listed by the SAE as a L0 system: it is not capable of operating a control independently of driver input.

The Atom, Seven and M600 are not available in Greece AFAIK. So again our disagreement is probably because you live outside the EU

Then update your knowledge; Ariel at least maintained an official dealer in Greece.

They are all supplied, new, with full type approval, to the entire EU, as I said in my post. That's due to the fact they had to be, as all predate Brexit. One predates the EU in its current form.

Additionally their mere existence, whether sold to the EU or not (and they are), flies in the face of the notion that ADAS devices are in any way mandatory fit in law.

 

[FaithJonesFEM]

It's literally listed by the SAE as a L0 system: it is not capable of operating a control independently of driver input.

Then update your knowledge. They are supplied, new, with type approval, to the entire EU, as I said in my post. That's due to the fact they had to be, as all predate Brexit. One predates the EU in its current form.

Additionally their mere existence, whether sold to the EU or not (and they are), flies in the face of the notion that ADAS devices are in any way mandatory fit in law.

1)You should have understood by now that official listings don't mean as much as practical reality. The ESP has autonomous control on the brakes, and iirc in some cases also on engine power.

2)Oh yes they 're available only in Athens, as far as Greece is concerned. And what prices do they go for? Clearly a privilege for the few. You might accuse me of "moving the goalposts" again, but the few have always been free to have whatever they want, even when the law says certain things are mandatory. The few have always been above the law, this is actually the root of several problems all the rest of us are facing. So here I 'm talking about everyday cars. I 'm talking about cars the average person who works non-stop 13-hour shifts for a joke of a wage can actually afford. And even if you don't care how the job markets in the EU are, how many of these Atoms, Sevens and Nobles do you think I 've seen in the flesh? Exactly zero. Of course this is also in part because of the appalling reputation of british cars in Greece, with about 90% of Greeks genuinely believing the best brand on earth is Mercedes-Benz

 

[TheCracker]

2)Oh yes they 're available only in Athens, as far as Greece is concerned. And what prices do they go for? Clearly a privilege for the few. You might accuse me of "moving the goalposts" again, but the few have always been free to have whatever they want, even when the law says certain things are mandatory. The few have always been above the law, this is actually the root of several problems all the rest of us are facing. So here I 'm talking about everyday cars. I 'm talking about cars the average person who works non-stop 13-hour shifts for a joke of a wage can actually afford. And even if you don't care how the job markets in the EU are, how many of these Atoms, Sevens and Nobles do you think I 've seen in the flesh? Exactly zero. Of course this is also in part because of the appalling reputation of british cars in Greece, with about 90% of Greeks genuinely believing the best brand on earth is Mercedes-Benz

The point isn't whether you've seen them on the road or if anyone in Greece actually buys them, the point is that the fact that they are available means that the systems you are talking about can't possibly be mandatory.

The cheapest Caterham Seven is also the same price as the cheapest Mercedes-Benz (base A-class hatch) in Greece.

 

[Famine]

You should have understood by now that official listings don't mean as much as practical reality.

You should have understood by now that the SAE - originally the Society of Automotive Engineers - defines the concepts you're misusing.

To qualify as L1 or greater, a system has to be capable of "prolonged control" of at least one of braking, power, or steering (higher levels have to be capable of more than one and, eventually, all three) independent of driver input. A system that can exercise brief control over any input in response to driver commands is not that.

You asked for cars without L1 systems. ESP is, by the definition of L0-L5 from the people who define it, not an L1 system. Thus rejecting a car as meeting your standards for not-L1-to-L5 by arbitrarily reclassifying an L0 system as an L1 is moving the goalposts.

2)Oh yes they 're available only in Athens, as far as Greece is concerned. And what prices do they go for? Clearly a privilege for the few. You might accuse me of "moving the goalposts" again, but the few have always been free to have whatever they want, even when the law says certain things are mandatory. The few have always been above the law, this is actually the root of several problems all the rest of us are facing. So here I 'm talking about everyday cars. I 'm talking about cars the average person who works non-stop 13-hour shifts for a joke of a wage can actually afford. And even if you don't care how the job markets in the EU are, how many of these Atoms, Sevens and Nobles do you think I 've seen in the flesh? Exactly zero. Of course this is also in part because of the appalling reputation of british cars in Greece, with about 90% of Greeks genuinely believing the best brand on earth is Mercedes-Benz

That's a lot to say "Yes, I'm wrong and this undermines my broader point too."

Handily, if you don't like British LVMs, Donkervoort - an EU manufacturer - also supplies across the EU and also has LVM homologation exemptions that include an absence of ESP.

 

[eran0004]

Actually I don't need to "have heard" anything, since yesterday I did my own research (manually visiting the official greek websites of Skoda, Dacia, KIA and Hyundai as per the models Famine had named) and found out that all of them have some sort of autonomous systems.

I didn't question your statement that some driving assists are mandatory on some markets, I questioned your statement that it's going to lead to autonomous cars being mandatory. So that research is irrelevant.

And, as I 'm explaining to Famine, things can become mandatory even if the law does not directly say so (I even provide the example of the "optional and independent" safety tests).

How could autonomous cars become mandatory without legislation that says so?

We humans are generally afraid of danger, so those who decide for us without us

Who decides for us without us?

will typically try to use this to their advantage - do you doubt this? See for example how the ESP was made mandatory: it was presented as a "safety system", but often it makes the car unnecessarily unpredictable, therefore more dangerous. So the companies that make its sensors make money they don't deserve.

ESP was made mandatory by law. According to this article it significantly reduces the risk of being involved in a fatal accident:

What is ESP, and ESC on a car? | Auto Express

Since 2014, every new car in Europe has been fitted with Electronic Stability Control – but what is ESC, and what is ESP for that matter?

www.autoexpress.co.uk

In which situations do you think ESP makes the car unpredictable? How often do they occur?

 

[McLaren]

You 're most likely ignoring the context of the EU market though.

What context? AFAIK, @Famine already said earlier that something you said was mandated by EU was not a page or so ago.

Beyond that, nothing you’ve replied with has really changed my point.

 

[VXR]

@Famine I was always under the impression that Donkervoort were Dutch?

 

[M Stark]

I hate to be that guy but autonomous driving would possibly do more good than bad for the Greeks 👀

Top 3 in road deaths within EU https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topi...5/road-death-statistics-in-the-eu-infographic

 

[FaithJonesFEM]

The point isn't whether you've seen them on the road or if anyone in Greece actually buys them, the point is that the fact that they are available means that the systems you are talking about can't possibly be mandatory.

The cheapest Caterham Seven is also the same price as the cheapest Mercedes-Benz (base A-class hatch) in Greece.

Thing is, the cheapest A-class hatch in Greece is still non-attainable for more than 90% of the population. So your idea of the point aligns with the view of less than 10%.

You should have understood by now that the SAE - originally the Society of Automotive Engineers - defines the concepts you're misusing.

To qualify as L1 or greater, a system has to be capable of "prolonged control" of at least one of braking, power, or steering (higher levels have to be capable of more than one and, eventually, all three) independent of driver input. A system that can exercise brief control over any input in response to driver commands is not that.

You asked for cars without L1 systems. ESP is, by the definition of L0-L5 from the people who define it, not an L1 system. Thus rejecting a car as meeting your standards for not-L1-to-L5 by arbitrarily reclassifying an L0 system as an L1 is moving the goalposts.

That's a lot to say "Yes, I'm wrong and this undermines my broader point too."

Handily, if you don't like British LVMs, Donkervoort - an EU manufacturer - also supplies across the EU and also has LVM homologation exemptions that include an absence of ESP.

I see where my mistake was. I should have asked for models that don't even contain L0 systems. I just happened to not remember L0 existed when typing that request to you. But no, this does not undermine my broader point. Try living in Greece, you 'll see the sweetness. You 'll see how all the cars without those systems are only available on paper for the average worker. And how many people in Greece do you think have even just heard of Donkervoort? Like I said, the overwhelming majority of Greeks thinks Mercedes-Benz is the best brand in the world. And if you 're going to ask what about Ferrari, they think it 's only in F1

I didn't question your statement that some driving assists are mandatory on some markets, I questioned your statement that it's going to lead to autonomous cars being mandatory. So that research is irrelevant.

How could autonomous cars become mandatory without legislation that says so?

Who decides for us without us?

ESP was made mandatory by law. According to this article it significantly reduces the risk of being involved in a fatal accident:

What is ESP, and ESC on a car? | Auto Express

Since 2014, every new car in Europe has been fitted with Electronic Stability Control – but what is ESC, and what is ESP for that matter?

www.autoexpress.co.uk

In which situations do you think ESP makes the car unpredictable? How often do they occur?

1)No, my research is absolutely relevant if you also consider all the context.

2)I 'm trying to explain exactly this thing to Famine as well. Things can become effectively mandatory through social and financial situations - for the average worker, of course.

3)Lobbies and cartels decide for us without us. At least this is what I get from living in Greece. You in Sweden might be luckier.

4)Articles very often are disguised advertisements. The one you 're citing is indeed an example of that.

5)First of all, regardless how safe a driver you may be, you never know beforehand when some other car will somehow go wrong, so you never know beforehand what you 'll have to do at the last moment to avoid a crash (and all the associated waste of it, mind you). And, judging by the map posted by M Stark, these situations occur quite often. It is best to be attentive and have full manual control of the car, rather than slacking off and relying on computers whose sensors can fail without a warning. But, let's assume that the ESP sensors don't fail. The system suddenly causing a weight transfer by selective brake application without a conscious command by the driver can very well make the car unpredictable, usually to the point of catastrophic understeer. And, with the weights of most currently available "cars", this sudden weight transfer can easily go out of control. The heavier the vehicle, the harder it is for the tyres to restore grip. Manufacturers do use wider tyres to compensate, this however directly leads to increased tyre particle pollution even if you do manage to avoid the collision.

What context? AFAIK, @Famine already said earlier that something you said was mandated by EU was not a page or so ago.

Beyond that, nothing you’ve replied with has really changed my point.

On paper it isn't fully mandated, but as I 've said cars are not driven on paper. Likewise society doesn't run on paper. EU policies have destroyed Greece's economy by funding the bank cartel and letting the society effectively die. Certain Greeks have embezzled and abused a lot of money (see for example OPEKEPE scandal), the EU however knew full well this would happen and basically encouraged it with its policies, only to come now and pretend the saviours. There 's good reason why a certain singer sings "I don't like saviours, I don't wanna be saved".

I hate to be that guy but autonomous driving would possibly do more good than bad for the Greeks 👀

Top 3 in road deaths within EU https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topi...5/road-death-statistics-in-the-eu-infographic
View attachment 1526133

Sounds like you haven't been through driver's ed in Greece. Man, it 's tragic. Maybe on purpose, as an additional way to push for autonomous vehicles. But I 'll say it again, autonomous vehicles in Greece won't last long. First of all, roadworks happen all the time and they completely mess up the lanes, so lane-related systems can even cause otherwise avoidable accidents. And sure enough the people who are actively against autonomous vehicles existing even as an option will find ways to fool those things. You don't know well the Greek driver. (I 'm not going to do that sort of stuff as I actually respect other people's personal choices, but most others are apparently incapable of such respect.)

 

[eran0004]

1)No, my research is absolutely relevant if you also consider all the context.

It isn't relevant because it relates to a point that's uncontested. Your task is to demonstrate that autonomous cars are going to become mandatory. The fact that some driving assists are mandatory does not mean that autonomy is going to become mandatory.

2)I 'm trying to explain exactly this thing to Famine as well. Things can become effectively mandatory through social and financial situations - for the average worker, of course.

Okay, so explain how that would happen. For example, what would be the incentive for automakers to make autonomous cars mandatory?

3)Lobbies and cartels decide for us without us. At least this is what I get from living in Greece. You in Sweden might be luckier.

How do they make decisions for you?

4)Articles very often are disguised advertisements. The one you 're citing is indeed an example of that.

That opinion is based on what?

5)First of all, regardless how safe a driver you may be, you never know beforehand when some other car will somehow go wrong, so you never know beforehand what you 'll have to do at the last moment to avoid a crash (and all the associated waste of it, mind you). And, judging by the map posted by M Stark, these situations occur quite often. It is best to be attentive and have full manual control of the car, rather than slacking off and relying on computers whose sensors can fail without a warning.

It's a good point that having plenty of safety systems can give you a false sense of security and make you take more risks. But I doubt that these systems do more harm than good, the net effect is probably still positive. Studies from the early 2000's showed a significant positive effect of ESP.

But, let's assume that the ESP sensors don't fail. The system suddenly causing a weight transfer by selective brake application without a conscious command by the driver can very well make the car unpredictable, usually to the point of catastrophic understeer.

What is this assessment based on?

And, with the weights of most currently available "cars", this sudden weight transfer can easily go out of control.

There's no reason to assume that the effects of weight transfer is worse just because one car is heavier than another. What's important is the center of mass, a car with a higher center of mass experience proportionally greater weight transfer than a car with a lower center of mass.

Have you ever heard of ESP causing a driver to lose control? If it so easily happens there should be plenty of recorded cases.

The heavier the vehicle, the harder it is for the tyres to restore grip.

Friction is proportional to the normal force, so heavier vehicles have more grip than lighter vehicles.

Manufacturers do use wider tyres to compensate, this however directly leads to increased tyre particle pollution even if you do manage to avoid the collision.

Sure, heavier cars have a bigger environmental impact. But I don't see how a car without ESP would have a smaller impact than a car with ESP.

 

[Famine]

I should have asked for models that don't even contain L0 systems.

No car has ever contained no L0 systems. L0 is when the driver has anywhere from no assists to single-axis assists and/or assists capable of only responding to driver input. Everything since horses has been L0.

And, to reiterate, popularity is irrelevant. The fact you can buy any new cars without the assists you say are mandatory destroys the whole concept.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

No car has ever contained no L0 systems. L0 is when the driver has anywhere from no assists to single-axis assists and/or assists capable of only responding to driver input. Everything since horses has been L0.

And, to reiterate, popularity is irrelevant. The fact you can buy any new cars without the assists you say are mandatory destroys the whole concept.

Wouldn't horses be L5 though? Seems like we took a step back.

 

[McLaren]

On paper it isn't fully mandated,

Then, you've effectively proven my assumption; "sadly mandated" must be mandated by the manufacturer since you went on some tangent by going, "Well, not on paper, but society.....".

I don't need the lore of your grievance with Greece & the EU.

 

[FaithJonesFEM]

It isn't relevant because it relates to a point that's uncontested. Your task is to demonstrate that autonomous cars are going to become mandatory. The fact that some driving assists are mandatory does not mean that autonomy is going to become mandatory.

I 'm not a fortune teller. Just assessing how things are looking so far.

Okay, so explain how that would happen. For example, what would be the incentive for automakers to make autonomous cars mandatory?

By the looks of it so far, cost-cutting. Because it costs more to develop a proper chassis than to dress up a bad chassis with an array of bells and whistles.

How do they make decisions for you?

One example is they have plugs of theirs in the state. How do you think POS systems became mandatory for all shops in Greece?

That opinion is based on what?

I 've read several "articles" that felt too much like advertisements, and I 'm not alone in observing this. Maybe I am alone on this forum in that regard, I don't know.

It's a good point that having plenty of safety systems can give you a false sense of security and make you take more risks. But I doubt that these systems do more harm than good, the net effect is probably still positive. Studies from the early 2000's showed a significant positive effect of ESP.

I wouldn't blindly trust "studies" that don't tie well to what I myself see.

What is this assessment based on?

There's no reason to assume that the effects of weight transfer is worse just because one car is heavier than another. What's important is the center of mass, a car with a higher center of mass experience proportionally greater weight transfer than a car with a lower center of mass.

Weight does play an important part though, and so does polar inertia moment. Sure the centre of gravity is also key, but what makes you think currently available ICE cars all have the lowest centre of gravity they could have? Some of them have glass roofs, most of them have adjustable seats, also most of them are wet-sump...

Have you ever heard of ESP causing a driver to lose control? If it so easily happens there should be plenty of recorded cases.

I was a passenger in such a case. Didn't think to record it as I 'm not that much of a dumbphone person. The reason control was not completely lost is the good car underneath that ESP. Good chassis, good setup, light weight, manual transmission (because an auto could shift at that time and make things worse)... Most cars nowadays are not so well engineered.

Friction is proportional to the normal force, so heavier vehicles have more grip than lighter vehicles.

"More grip" that is immediately cancelled out by that weight itself as soon as you begin trying to steer. There 's a reason lightweight cars are faster and safer around corners. If you feel safer in a heavier car just because it "feels stable" on a straight, you 're gonna have a bad time as an actual driver.

Sure, heavier cars have a bigger environmental impact. But I don't see how a car without ESP would have a smaller impact than a car with ESP.

Without ESP, there 's no place for a bad chassis to hide. I see in practice thanks to my own car that having a good chassis and a good setup isn't just fun or fast, but also helps with momentum management, therefore I need less acceleration than with a worse chassis, therefore I need less fuel. Then, tyre particles and brake dust. A good chassis will better preserve its tyres and brake pads than a bad chassis hidden behind a reactive autonomous system such as the ESP. And it just so happens that a good chassis does not need any sort of ESP. My own car doesn't need its ESP.

No car has ever contained no L0 systems. L0 is when the driver has anywhere from no assists to single-axis assists and/or assists capable of only responding to driver input. Everything since horses has been L0.

Then SAE haven't done a very good job defining this stuff, have they. L0 should have strictly been no assists.

And, to reiterate, popularity is irrelevant. The fact you can buy any new cars without the assists you say are mandatory destroys the whole concept.

Popularity is absolutely relevant. At least as far as cars go, most people will only consider buying from brands they already happen to know of. Many even buy without test-driving nowadays. Could be different where you live, but I don't live there to know.

Then, you've effectively proven my assumption; "sadly mandated" must be mandated by the manufacturer since you went on some tangent by going, "Well, not on paper, but society.....".

I don't need the lore of your grievance with Greece & the EU.

So you give more significance to what happens on paper than in society. If you don't like this conversation, quit it.

 

[Famine]

Then SAE haven't done a very good job defining this stuff, have they.

Ah, I was wondering when we would reach the "I know more about automotive engineering than the society of automotive engineers" stage.

L0 should have strictly been no assists.

No. The L0-L5 classification system is for categorising levels of autonomy. L0 systems cannot operate autonomously, only in response to driver input, and they cannot control more than one axis or for prolonged periods.

By your... own personal set of definitions, "L0" would have to incorporate no torque vectoring, no traction control, no standard cruise control, no anti-lock braking, manual gearboxes only, and potentially even things like electronic fuel injection (which is computer-controlled).

ESP is L0 because it cannot control more than one axis and can only operate when conditions are met. The same applies to ABS and TCS. Cars with anything from none of these systems to all of them are L0.

Lest we forget about the purpose of this goalpost move and diversion, it undermines your argument that autonomous systems are mandatory and was created to exclude several small hatchbacks (and crossovers) from a list of cars without autonomous systems that you can buy, as new, in the Greek market.

Popularity is absolutely relevant.

It is not. You do know what "mandatory" means, right?

You are positing that X is a condition of Y (in this case, autonomous driving aids is X, being a new car eligible for sale in the EU is Y). If any Y demonstrates not-X, your posit is incorrect.

I've already shown several mainstream cars that are Y but not-X, which you rejected based on a personal definition of X that is not correct, and followed it up with several other cars that are Y but not-X. You are rejecting this latter category based on them not being very common, but that's not required: any Y that is not-X destroys the posit.


Now is the time to quit being dishonest.

 

[eran0004]

I 'm not a fortune teller. Just assessing how things are looking so far.

Sure, but the question is what that assessment is based on.

By the looks of it so far, cost-cutting. Because it costs more to develop a proper chassis than to dress up a bad chassis with an array of bells and whistles.

What do you mean "so far"? Can you think of any case where a car manufacturer has chose to cut costs by developing an autonomous car instead of a proper chassis?

One example is they have plugs of theirs in the state. How do you think POS systems became mandatory for all shops in Greece?

It seems plausible to me that it was done as an effort to reduce tax evasion.

It seems like you believe that any decision you don't personally endorse has to have been the result of lobbying or cartels or other forms of corruption. Why is that?

I wouldn't blindly trust "studies" that don't tie well to what I myself see.

You haven't studied the effects of ESP, so what exactly is it that you think you "see"?

Weight does play an important part though, and so does polar inertia moment. Sure the centre of gravity is also key, but what makes you think currently available ICE cars all have the lowest centre of gravity they could have? Some of them have glass roofs, most of them have adjustable seats, also most of them are wet-sump...

The relative change of weight is what matter the most, because that influences how the handling and balance changes.

The polar moment of inertia of an EV is hardly worse than that of a front-engined ICE car.

I was a passenger in such a case. Didn't think to record it as I 'm not that much of a dumbphone person. The reason control was not completely lost is the good car underneath that ESP. Good chassis, good setup, light weight, manual transmission (because an auto could shift at that time and make things worse)... Most cars nowadays are not so well engineered.

No need to have recorded it. Just describe in your own words what happened and why you think ESP was to blame for the incident and why you think it was a good chassis that saved the situation rather than the ESP.

"More grip" that is immediately cancelled out by that weight itself as soon as you begin trying to steer.

Yeah, that's what proportional means.

There 's a reason lightweight cars are faster and safer around corners.

Citation needed.

If you feel safer in a heavier car just because it "feels stable" on a straight, you 're gonna have a bad time as an actual driver.

What does "feels stable on a straight" have to do with anything?

Without ESP, there 's no place for a bad chassis to hide.

Sounds like ESP is a good thing then.

I see in practice thanks to my own car that having a good chassis and a good setup isn't just fun or fast, but also helps with momentum management, therefore I need less acceleration than with a worse chassis, therefore I need less fuel. Then, tyre particles and brake dust. A good chassis will better preserve its tyres and brake pads than a bad chassis hidden behind a reactive autonomous system such as the ESP. And it just so happens that a good chassis does not need any sort of ESP. My own car doesn't need its ESP.

Any car can lose control. Perhaps you swerved to avoid an animal, or you hit an ice patch on the road, or an unexpected bump sent you flying, or you were busy fiddling with the radio and inadvertently had a tyre off the road and in the loose gravel, or you had an explosive puncture, or you overestimated your own ability to control the car. Just because it hasn't happened to you yet doesn't mean it won't in the future. And perhaps it's not even your car, but a car in the oncoming lane.

Do you have any reason to believe that mandatory ESP has made chassis worse?

 

[McLaren]

So you give more significance to what happens on paper than in society. If you don't like this conversation, quit it.

Lol, that’s not what I said.

You made a claim and used a vague statement from your sales person as proof to back it up. I pointed out “sadly mandated” could go multiple ways bc manufacturers mandate options even without the government telling them to. You then just said those features are not mandated “on paper” implying that they’re not required by your government therefore, your sales person likely meant the manufacturer puts them on the cars, the exact assumption I made.

I don’t have to quit this conversation, either. You’re making statements on a public forum, the rules allow us to engage them.

 

[tankuroded]

Away from back-and-forthing about EVs in general, Japanese media are reporting that employees within Honda are calling for their CEO to resign after the failure of 0 Series and RSX EVs (and ofc, Afeela project): (News in Japanese)

「いまの社長ではヤル気が出ない」巨額赤字で内部分裂のホンダ社員の不満

ホンダは2026年3月期決算で6900億円の赤字を計上すると発表した。原因はEV需要の減少で、先行投資の損失が影響している。社長の三部敏宏氏に対する社内の不満が高まっており、新社長の選任が迫られている。後任候補には秋和利祐執行役が挙げられている。ホンダの四輪事業は新たな環境規制に対応する必要があり、復活には困難が予想される。

gendai.media

 

[FaithJonesFEM]

@Famine: We go by different books. Perhaps you 'd want to respect that.

Sure, but the question is what that assessment is based on.

In the same way, I can ask about the results of the studies you trust so much.

What do you mean "so far"? Can you think of any case where a car manufacturer has chose to cut costs by developing an autonomous car instead of a proper chassis?

Yes, VAG for starters.

It seems plausible to me that it was done as an effort to reduce tax evasion.

The cartels do even more tax evasion than before, so "to reduce tax evasion" is just a cheap excuse.

It seems like you believe that any decision you don't personally endorse has to have been the result of lobbying or cartels or other forms of corruption. Why is that?

Because lobbies and cartels always end up benefitting from those decisions I don't "personally endorse". A repeated coincidence ceases to be a coincidence, I think.

You haven't studied the effects of ESP, so what exactly is it that you think you "see"?

I gave you a real-world example. Also, I do know enough to realise when the car I 'm in is affected by its ESP.

The polar moment of inertia of an EV is hardly worse than that of a front-engined ICE car.

It is worse though, so paired with the much larger weight it does make for an overall worse car.

No need to have recorded it. Just describe in your own words what happened and why you think ESP was to blame for the incident and why you think it was a good chassis that saved the situation rather than the ESP.

I have also been in that same car with the ESP deactivated, on the same road. I also have quite a lot of driving experience of my own and am an attentive driver. I always pay attention to how exactly the car reacts. I 'm not that good at detailed descriptions, but I do understand when for example there 's a centrifugal force affecting the car.

Citation needed.

Wait until you get your licence and start driving around. Try driving cars of different weights, on roads with as little traffic as possible and with some nice corners to go around. That 's all the citation I needed anyway.

What does "feels stable on a straight" have to do with anything?

It is the main way of how most people are fooled into thinking that "heavy cars are safer". German manufacturers are largely to blame for this, especially VW with its trademark "larger-segment feel".

Sounds like ESP is a good thing then.

No, it 's a bad thing. Without ESP, we 'd have ended up in a world full of cars that always handle how they should, so it would be safer and less wasteful. Manufacturers need to somehow be incentivised to build better platforms, ESP acts as an excuse for the opposite.

Any car can lose control. Perhaps you swerved to avoid an animal, or you hit an ice patch on the road, or an unexpected bump sent you flying, or you were busy fiddling with the radio and inadvertently had a tyre off the road and in the loose gravel, or you had an explosive puncture, or you overestimated your own ability to control the car. Just because it hasn't happened to you yet doesn't mean it won't in the future. And perhaps it's not even your car, but a car in the oncoming lane.

Correct. That 's why I never use the radio. When I 'm driving, I am strictly only driving.

Do you have any reason to believe that mandatory ESP has made chassis worse?

Yes, the ESP provenly acts as an excuse for chassis cost-cutting. Not all manufacturers necessarily use it that way, but apparently most of them do. And they might also try to cover it up by claiming "customers asked for these features". Reminds me of junk food companies claiming stuff like "More sauce - YOU asked for it" because they actually find sauce is cheaper to make than the other part of the junk they offer.

Lol, that’s not what I said.

You made a claim and used a vague statement from your sales person as proof to back it up. I pointed out “sadly mandated” could go multiple ways bc manufacturers mandate options even without the government telling them to. You then just said those features are not mandated “on paper” implying that they’re not required by your government therefore, your sales person likely meant the manufacturer puts them on the cars, the exact assumption I made.

The thing is, certain systems such as the ESP are indeed mandatory on paper (only with a special exception that doesn't mean much in practice), so the salesman was actually correct and not as vague as I apparently made him sound previously.

 

[Famine]

@Famine: We go by different books. Perhaps you 'd want to respect that.

Nope. Yours is arbitrary, redefines established concepts that are standardised across the industry, and ignores data, in order that you can make yourself correct about your incorrect position.

That's disingenuous, and absolutely not worthy of respect. It's not possible to have a rational conversation with someone who lies to themself.


Edit: Given the intellectual dishonesty displayed so far there's little shock that you use two forms of "respect" interchangeably and launch into an abusive tirade.

 

[McLaren]

The thing is, certain systems such as the ESP are indeed mandatory on paper (only with a special exception that doesn't mean much in practice), so the salesman was actually correct and not as vague as I apparently made him sound previously.

If my sales person tells me certain features are "sadly mandated" without specifying which features are mandated by the manufacturer or government, & I go around telling people afterwards that those features aren't mandated "on paper" by the government, well, except for one, ESP which is mandated "on paper (but only with an exception that doesn't mean much)", do you know what that is?

The definition of vague.

of uncertain, indefinite, or unclear character or meaning

This is also becoming goal post moving:

On paper it isn't fully mandated,

The thing is, certain systems such as the ESP are indeed mandatory on paper (only with a special exception that doesn't mean much in practice)

The thing is, you've contradicted yourself now. To quote the person above.

It's not possible to have a rational conversation with someone who lies to themself.

 

[eran0004]

In the same way, I can ask about the results of the studies you trust so much.

What do you want to know?

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15389580490269164?scroll=top&needAccess=true

Yes, VAG for starters.

VAG what?

The cartels do even more tax evasion than before, so "to reduce tax evasion" is just a cheap excuse.

If the cartels don't need POS systems then it has not been made mandatory.

Because lobbies and cartels always end up benefitting from those decisions I don't "personally endorse". A repeated coincidence ceases to be a coincidence, I think.

It's not a "repeated coincidence" that you repeat the same old conspiracy theory over and over again.

I gave you a real-world example. Also, I do know enough to realise when the car I 'm in is affected by its ESP.

No, you claimed that you had been involved in a incident caused by the ESP without providing any description what so ever of what happened or what makes you believe that the ESP had anything to do with it.

It is worse though, so paired with the much larger weight it does make for an overall worse car.

Relative to the weight of the car, the polar moment of inertia is typically better for electric cars than for ICE cars.

https://www.mdpi.com/2032-6653/15/6/266

I have also been in that same car with the ESP deactivated, on the same road. I also have quite a lot of driving experience of my own and am an attentive driver. I always pay attention to how exactly the car reacts. I 'm not that good at detailed descriptions, but I do understand when for example there 's a centrifugal force affecting the car.

Try to describe what happened. Now you're just trying to claim authority without having anything to back it up with and that's not helping your case at all.

Wait until you get your licence and start driving around. Try driving cars of different weights, on roads with as little traffic as possible and with some nice corners to go around. That 's all the citation I needed anyway.

So basically you don't have anything to back up that claim, but your own subjective and biased experience.

It is the main way of how most people are fooled into thinking that "heavy cars are safer". German manufacturers are largely to blame for this, especially VW with its trademark "larger-segment feel".

What's the relevance of any of that?

No, it 's a bad thing. Without ESP, we 'd have ended up in a world full of cars that always handle how they should, so it would be safer and less wasteful. Manufacturers need to somehow be incentivised to build better platforms, ESP acts as an excuse for the opposite.

What is that opinion based on?

Correct. That 's why I never use the radio. When I 'm driving, I am strictly only driving.

So now that we have established that even cars with a good chassis can lose control we can conclude that loss of control can be the cause of fatal accidents for those cars as well, meaning that ESP is not redundant just because you have a good chassis.

Yes, the ESP provenly acts as an excuse for chassis cost-cutting.

How has that been proved?

Not all manufacturers necessarily use it that way, but apparently most of them do. And they might also try to cover it up by claiming "customers asked for these features". Reminds me of junk food companies claiming stuff like "More sauce - YOU asked for it" because they actually find sauce is cheaper to make than the other part of the junk they offer.

Do you have any examples of that?

 

[DCLUDE]

Does this mean I can finally delete it from my garage?

 

[Blade_Rudder]

Does this mean I can finally delete it from my garage?

What if there’s a modern reboot of Back to the Future, only this time they substitute the Delorean with an Afeela? If it was adorned with a flux capacitor the value would increase and you’d regret having deleted it…