Automotive safety features

Hello there,

I have always had this question in mind:
Why don't all the car manufacturers provide all the safety features at their disposal, in all of their trim-levels/variants? And are there any car manufacturers which do?

Cost of the car versus the demands of the customer.

There are small manufacturers that even get safety equipment exemptions to sell their cars in certain market places. Their propective customers don't have a high priority for safety.
Howver,
in my opinion, the people who care the most about safety, are the least skilled drivers, or the least confident in their own abilities.
These are the people that regard the automobile as an appliance--like a refrigerator, or a wash machine. These people have no ambition to improve their skills as a driver, nor do they keep their own vehicles in top mechanical condition. These are the people that buy the cheapest tires, don't worry about the brakes, never fix that crack in the windshield.
Consequently, they WILL get into accidents.
And they KNOW that eventually they will get into an accident.
And they will be the ones that worry most about their safety.
Just my opinion.

These safety features cost money to produce and install, so equipping them to a car is going to make that car more expensive. What it boils down to is that car companies need to turn a profit in order to stay alive, just like any other business. Especially in this economic climate.

Driving a vehicle, even if you use it as an appliance or are emotionally involved in its nuances, brings with it numerous permutations when things can go wrong. A stray dog might come in your way or you might lose control of the vehicle while taking a seemingly innocuous turn on a wet day. As car manufacturers, it is one of their responsibilities to do whatever they can to equip the vehicle to reduce the consequences of such mishaps or prevent them entirely; the least of which is, to provide all the safety features at their disposal, in all their trim levels.

By providing all the safety features only in their higher variants, car manufacturers are putting a price on life. This might be a hyperbole, but they are essentially saying, "If you want to protect yourself from accidents, you need to pay more (often significantly more) and buy our top variant."

Even though, Honda is making progress in this regard, by offering the Honda Sensing package in all of Civic’s editions, it is a mere baby step towards universalizing safety systems in cars.

Feel free to comment

Sumanth Nakka wrote: "As car manufacturers, it is one of their responsibilities to do whatever they can to equip the vehicle to reduce the consequences of such mishaps or prevent them entirely; the least of which is, to provide all the safety features at their disposal, in all their trim levels."

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there are a LOT of people, me included, who disagree with you. I generally buy older cars. One of the reasons I do this is so I don't have to deal with all the 'nanny' equipment on newer cars. If you want all the latest safety equipment, fine. Research the cars available in the marketplace and buy the make and model that you feel offers the most protection... just don't try to force me to buy equipment that I don't want.

Black Lotus summed it up nicely when he wrote: "There are small manufacturers that even get safety equipment exemptions to sell their cars in certain market places. Their prospective customers don't have a high priority for safety."

While I understand your line of reasoning, I just can't agree with it. Acceptance of risk is and should be a personal choice. I'll take my vehicles equipped as simply as I can find them!

While I understand that this is probably not going to happen in this profit driven economic world, maybe the middle ground is providing the entire safety package as an option for no extra price; people like me can avail that option and people like yourself, who are not happy with the 'nanny' equipment, can take the stripped down version of the same car.

I know that this is kind of an oxymoron: we can dream about the world where mass production and customization can exist in harmony.

Sumanth Nakka wrote: "As car manufacturers, it is one of their responsibilities to do whatever they can to equip the vehicle to reduce the consequences of such mishaps or prevent them entirely; the least of which is, to provide all the safety features at their disposal, in all their trim levels."

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there are a LOT of people, me included, who disagree with you. I generally buy older cars. One of the reasons I do this is so I don't have to deal with all the 'nanny' equipment on newer cars. If you want all the latest safety equipment, fine. Research the cars available in the marketplace and buy the make and model that you feel offers the most protection... just don't try to force me to buy equipment that I don't want.

Black Lotus summed it up nicely when he wrote: "There are small manufacturers that even get safety equipment exemptions to sell their cars in certain market places.

I'm sort of standing in the middle on this one. In some cases I think car manufacturers should be obligated to install certain safety features as standard equipment. Family cars, for instance (minivans and full sized SUVs) that are usually full of kids should have all the safety equipment that's ever been invented to this day as standard. Unfortunately, due to the cost of developing all of that stuff, that's just not practical. Any car company who tried to do it this way would likely go bust within a year, due to either lack of profit from each model sold, or not selling enough cars because they're just too damn expensive.

On the other hand, say you are a single adult with no kids who just wants a basic and somewhat fun car (like me for instance) I don't want an automatic transmission, so I have a manual. I don't feel the need for traction control on a nice sunny day when the roads are bone dry, so unless it's raining, snowing, or sleeting, I shut the traction control off. I don't feel the need for a lane drift warning, because I don't f*ck with my cell phone while driving, nor do I drive drunk, and if I want to look for a CD to put in or do anything more complex with my stereo than just hitting one of the preset buttons, I pull over somewhere. I don't need an automatic braking system, because I pay attention when I drive. I don't need my car to tell me the speed limit because I follow traffic flow and wind up going over anyway. I wish my car would warn me when there's a cop around so I can slow down, but that's about it.

On the extreme end of this are track day cars. These are cars built for people who aren't professional racers, but would like to hit a racetrack on occasion (it's more common in europe) A prime example would be a car called the Ariel Atom, seriously look this thing up, Google it or whatever. I'm pretty sure the company Ariel has a website, and you can probably find videos of an Ariel Atom on YouTube and it's really interesting. All you get is 2 seats equipped with seatbelts, an engine, 4 wheels, the chassis, and that's it. It has no radio, no cup holders, no glove box, no heat or A/C, no traction control, no ABS, no roof, no doors, no body panels, and it doesn't even have a windshield, so one may want to wear a helmet, or at least some goggles. The amazing thing is it has headlights, taillights, blinkers, and a horn, so technically it can be driven on public roads.

I guess what it comes down to is what you're looking for in a car, and there are millions of different combinations, but the more equipment you want, or the more special you want your car to be the more you'll have to pay. That's capitalism, and that's just how it goes.

While the OP is dealing with a nation with a very high traffic fatality rate for the miles driven, I think he is barking up the wrong tree. A large percentage of people can't afford much of a car, or they drive scooters. Also, the country does not have much of a heritage of driving autos or much in the way of infrastructure. Similar problem in China.
More should be done to change the attitudes toward traffic laws and road discipline, as well as improving the skillsets of the existing drivers and riders.
Were all the safety features known to mankind incorporated into the cars in this case, the impacts would just be at a higher speed.
Kinda like NASCAR.

You can't offer all the safety features at no extra cost because the car manufacturers would all go broke. If a dog runs out in front of you, you hit the brakes to try to avoid it. If you swerve and wreck and get hurt, its your fault, not the fault of the car manufacturer.

I hate all the nanny gadgets myself. ABS is junk and hurts you more than helps you. Traction control is for idiots and can cause more problems than it is worth. Now you have the US Government mandating back up cameras (driving up the cost of cars even more) due to morons who don't know how to properly use their mirrors and check their surroundings.

The only thing the Stealth in my signature has as safety features is dual air bags (and of course seat belts). When I finish "restoing" it the airbags are going to be gone.

yea and the first time you get into the frontal collision and smash your chest into the steering wheel and smash your chest you may wish you left those bags in the car. they may put a mark on your face for a few days but your chest will be feeling much better. can't say much for the rest. but i have found the abs helps out when it works. can't speak for the traction control either. but as far as putting all the safety features on new cars. like has been posted most people don't want them and besides if the manufacturer installs only a small amount each year that gives them more selling points every year. why put all your eggs in one years basket.

Seat belts will keep you from hitting the steering wheel. I would be glad to never have another airbag equipped car ever again.

As for abs it absolutely does not help. It is a hindrance and in fact increases stopping distance in ice and snow. I'd rather be without.

Seat belts will keep you from hitting the steering wheel. I would be glad to never have another airbag equipped car ever again.


Try what I did and remove the bag wheel and leave the airbag operational for the passenger.
Corvair Bob is concerned because Corvairs have a steering box connected to a forward mounted steering linkage. So in a serious frontal accident, the non collapsable column could be pushed back. This is before the days of shoulder belts and safety columns.

yea and the first time you get into the frontal collision and smash your chest into the steering wheel and smash your chest you may wish you left those bags in the car.

Corvairbob

I can't agree with your position. Just because the government says that something is better for you doesn't necessarily mean that they know what they're talking about in every situation. Take airbags, for example. I've been involved in stage rally (ProRally) in the U.S. for years, both as a competitor and worker/organizer. One of the requirements when you're building a rally car is that ALL airbags have to be REMOVED (not just disabled) because the sanctioning organizations deem them to be too dangerous for use in competition.

ABS is another myth. Many, if not most, performance cars in Europe are sold with ABS 'defeat switches' already installed so that drivers can override that feature when driving on snow or other slick surfaces.

BTW - does your Corvair have air bags and ABS? Does that keep you from driving it??

SL

Dave B is a man of reason. :thumbsup:

I actually think ABS does have pros as well as cons. For example, say you're driving fast on a bone dry track. You come off a long straight and have to brake hard for a corner. I know the last thing I want is wheel lock.
Also on a road that's just a little slick. I do like the ABS on a rainy day, I've had a car without it, and it surprisingly easy to lock up the wheels on wet roads. I also like it in snow, at least the wet fluffy type that still has just a little grip, although I've never raced in snow, mud, dirt, or any other sketchy surface one might find on a rally stage. I can see where ABS and rally racing don't get along.
Now on super slick surfaces, like smoothed over and packed snow, or ice, NOTHING is going to help you there, not ABS, AWD, 4WD, TCS, there is no way to make that safe (apart from maybe heavily studded tires) just don't drive on that sh*t.