My car makes me feel stupid!

DTJB · Post by **DTJB** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 12:40 pm

So I was leaving work yesterday, ready to go to my campus computer lab and do my usual internet browsing. I put the keys in the ignition, turned it on, but it didn't start. At first I figured, hey, it's cold out. Maybe I just need to wait a bit. I tried a few more times, still no luck. Then I realized, every time I turned the key, none of the lights in the display area would come on. Then it dawned on me, I had my lights on when I drove to work, but I NEVER TURNED THEM OFF!

Doh!

In short, my battery ran out of juice. So I had to leave my car in the parking lot all night, thank god no one did anything to it. My dad was nice enough to shlep me to my car this morning, take the old battery out, drive to the store to get a new one and shlep me back to my car to put the new one in. So now the car works and I didn't have to go back to work today. THANK GOD!

The main problem with the car, for me anyway, is that it has no safety features. It doesn't beep when the lights are on, it doesn't beep when the keys are in the ignition (ANOTHER stupid thing I did), it doesn't lock the doors when you put the car into drive and it doesn't beep when you back up. At first I was glad I didn't have a car that would constantly beep at me, but now I realize this means I should pay more attention to what the fuck I'm doing. Well, hopefully I've learned my lesson and yes, I double checked to make sure the lights were off.

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 12:51 pm

Your car makes you feel stupid because it's missing the anti-stupidity features...

All those features help if :

You forgot to turn your lights off idiot!!!
You forgot to lock your doors idiot!!!
You can't tell when your keys are in the ignition you idiot!!!

Safety feature is stuff like seat belts or air bags...

We've left the lights on before in some of our cars and that was dumb. Almost got stranded 11miles from home because of it...

DTJB · Post by **DTJB** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:21 pm

klinky wrote:We've left the lights on before in some of our cars and that was dumb. Almost got stranded 11miles from home because of it...

Ouch. Well, at least you survived to tell about it. Yeah, anti-stupidity feature, that's it. I haven't used the term myself because no one else was clever enough to use it. I'm surprised I didn't.

Toecutter · Post by **Toecutter** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:58 pm

Are you joking? Safety features are for the weak, and I don't just mean your "idiot features". Automatic seatbelts, ABS brakes, Supplemental Restraint Systems (airbags), and crumple zones just take away from the beauty (and simplicity) of a car. Do you realize, if you get in a wreck with a late model Ford, there are two possible reset switches you need to depress before the car will run again? One of these relays automatically eliminates pressure in the fuel lines, while another disables the computer in the event of a front end collision.

Crumple zones are just machining flaws, reducing the rigidity (and therefore, reducing efficient power transfer to the rear wheels). This also puts excess strain on the window glass, weatherstripping, and suspension.

I loved my first car (a 1968 Pontiac GTO), because it not only had plenty of power, but it had none of these pathetic safety systems. For example, '69 was the first year shoulder belts were required by law for front seats. In '68, as a transition phase, most cars came with seperate shoulder belts, which could be used in conjunction with the existing lap belts. I don't think I ever used the shoulder belts while driving on the street. I only applied them when I took the car bracket racing.

StarRaiders]cV[ · Post by **StarRaiders]cV[** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:53 pm

=\ yeah dude u rely on technology too much, next ull be saying
WHY IS IT WHEN I DRIVE AND I PRESS THE GARAGE OPENER IT OPENS TO OTHERS WITH MY BEEPER, AND IT DOESNT CLOSE AT 4543639546 MPH SO WHEN IM RUNNING FROM A HUGE ASS MOB I CAN STILL LIVE!!! TECHNOLOGY SUX!!!!
sorry, im a bit weird today

Vlad86 · Post by **Vlad86** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 8:14 pm

Toecutter wrote:Are you joking? Safety features are for the weak, and I don't just mean your "idiot features". Automatic seatbelts, ABS brakes, Supplemental Restraint Systems (airbags), and crumple zones just take away from the beauty (and simplicity) of a car. Do you realize, if you get in a wreck with a late model Ford, there are two possible reset switches you need to depress before the car will run again? One of these relays automatically eliminates pressure in the fuel lines, while another disables the computer in the event of a front end collision.

Crumple zones are just machining flaws, reducing the rigidity (and therefore, reducing efficient power transfer to the rear wheels). This also puts excess strain on the window glass, weatherstripping, and suspension.

I loved my first car (a 1968 Pontiac GTO), because it not only had plenty of power, but it had none of these pathetic safety systems. For example, '69 was the first year shoulder belts were required by law for front seats. In '68, as a transition phase, most cars came with seperate shoulder belts, which could be used in conjunction with the existing lap belts. I don't think I ever used the shoulder belts while driving on the street. I only applied them when I took the car bracket racing.

What you're not saying is that in the case of a collision, you'd bounce around in your car like one of those metal balls in a pinball machine. Any ways, my car doesn't have airbags, but it does beep if you leave the lights on, or if you leave the keys in the ignition.
However, I thought only large vehicles beeped when you backed up, so do you drive a bus or a dump truck or something similar?

Oh and StarRaiders, that's not weird that's DUMB.

El Banana · Post by **El Banana** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 9:02 pm

Vlad86 wrote:Oh and StarRaiders, that's not weird that's DUMB.

That is correct.

Toecutter · Post by **Toecutter** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:56 am

What you're not saying is that in the case of a collision, you'd bounce around in your car like one of those metal balls in a pinball machine.

In case of a collision, I won't have to pay $6,000 for a bunch of styrofoam and plastic packaging. Hell, those classic all steel chassis-construction cars are safer in a collision because they don't give. Think about this: if it's safer for the passenger to have a car with crumple zones, why does NASCAR, IHRA, NHRA, and the other major motorsports organizations require at least a 10-point rollcage for major competitions? Why do demolition derby experts prefer GM A-body cars with lots of sheetmetal and heavy chassis construction over riceburners with modern safety requirements in mind?

There is nothing safer in a collision than a car with solid, carbon-steel construction, whether chassis or tube-frame. Unibody and even spaceframe construction flex too much, causing excessive shear stress on transmission and engine mounts, which you won't get on a truck or older car. There's also the benefit of having a solid beam to place jackstands under, planting the car firmly in the air for an oil change.

Flint the Dwarf · Post by **Flint the Dwarf** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 2:27 am

It's physics. Impact and impulse. That's why they have crumple zones, to reduce the shock of an accident. Families don't go driving Nascar races or racing in destruction derbies. Those cars are designed specifically to protect the person in the driver's seat.

Still, I won't argue that crumple zones do not work like the manufacturers want them to.

CaTaClYsM · Post by **CaTaClYsM** » Fri Dec 05, 2003 3:53 am

I still can't get past the irony of soemone in a formula 1 racecar walking away from a head on colision with a solid wall while a little girl gets killed in a 15 mph collision by an airbag that's a little to eager to please.

racecar spelled backward is racecar. funny.