Unpopular Opinions- Cars in General
- Thread starter Turbo
- 1,718 comments
- 167,809 views
It's easy to disable ABS, traction control, and stability control on most (all?) cars by pulling the ABS fuse. A painless temporary procedure for @Neddo's hypothetical driving lessons.
As it is, it's like training someone to play a sport just by explaining the rules and showing them how to put on a helmet, tie their shoes/cleats, and find their way between the locker room and the field/court. Enough to play the game, but not to play it well.
That's nothing like the closed course environment or skill-based evaluations you commonly find in motorcycle instruction, as @AlvaroF said. Ever since I completed my MSF class I've thought general driving instruction should be more like that.
As it is, it's like training someone to play a sport just by explaining the rules and showing them how to put on a helmet, tie their shoes/cleats, and find their way between the locker room and the field/court. Enough to play the game, but not to play it well.
- 4,897
- UK
It is better if the person learnt with everyday drivers rather than a closed environment to help them learn how to interpret abnormal situations and how to deal with pressure and pace but it is normally that the first few lessons is around a closed area to help the learner get used to the car. If the person wants to drive around a closed environment then again they can find a secluded area like a car park then proceed to set up cones or do whatever suits, they really don't need to go to a 'driving school' for that.
- 40,750
I see him note that most people have cars with ABS:
And that he doesn't want completely assist-free cars:
And you're still arguing as if he wants teens to take driving tests in 1960 Ford Falcons. Yeah, that would be a bit silly; but that only seems to be what you're claiming he's saying rather than what he is actually trying to get across. So no, teaching kids to drive in cars with safety equipment comparable to the cars they would be actually likely to drive themselves (which likely means no stability control, possibly no traction control and certainly no form of parking assist) doesn't seem like a particularly outrageous notion to me.
Saying that someone can just teach themselves specific driving scenarios if they are so inclined instead of learning them in a controlled environment is quite an about face from someone who has spent the last page shouting people down about how certain driving practices would be unsafe.
- 4,897
- UK
Do I really need to clarify that the person has to be supervised as well..... Because it doesn't take exactly a genius to know that the person isn't going to drive independently with a provisional.
Let's get this right, all/most driving lessons are on public roads to which the instructor wants to reduce risk posed to other drivers hence why most instructor cars have pedals on the passenger side but it is up to a point where they don't want to hinder the persons driving skills and most importantly by law in this country the learner is fully responsible if they damage, speed or even harm others no matter if the instructor is with them so it is right that they have these 'aids' to reduce liability because they had assumed responsibility once they drive on the public roads as they have the same level of rights to a person who has driven for 30 years or so. That is why I don't think having these 'limited aids' lessons is much use.
Last edited:
Joey D
Premium
- 47,364
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
To me an assist free car means no autonomous mode, no active cruise control, no lane departure warnings, and no self parking. Those are actual assists on a vehicle. ABS, traction control, stability control, and the like are something I would consider safety features of a vehicle. This isn't Grand Turismo, something that prevents a serious accident isn't something I would consider a driving aid.
I do think driver's education needs to be better and they should teach car control in in-climate weather because unless you live in that desert in South America, it's going to at least occasionally rain while you're on the road. Night driving is also something that should be taught because it requires a vastly different set of sensory skills than daylight driving. I think if you taught that sort of stuff, it wouldn't matter what car you have since you'd at least have a vague idea of how to perform in those situation.
I also fully support the tied license approach in the US too, although I'm not sure what the best way to do that would be. Horsepower could work but so many pick-ups have 300+ horsepower and aren't remotely fast and that's going to be some of the cheapest and easiest to acquire vehicles.
I do think driver's education needs to be better and they should teach car control in in-climate weather because unless you live in that desert in South America, it's going to at least occasionally rain while you're on the road. Night driving is also something that should be taught because it requires a vastly different set of sensory skills than daylight driving. I think if you taught that sort of stuff, it wouldn't matter what car you have since you'd at least have a vague idea of how to perform in those situation.
I also fully support the tied license approach in the US too, although I'm not sure what the best way to do that would be. Horsepower could work but so many pick-ups have 300+ horsepower and aren't remotely fast and that's going to be some of the cheapest and easiest to acquire vehicles.
- 4,897
- UK
Taken into consideration of the differences in size and cost of between bikes and cars it would be just not economically possible for some of these driving schools also it would be hard to replicate these real-life situations as the big difference between a closed area and public roads is undulations where it plays major role in how situations occur and how the car reacts.
@lxmmy it looks like you want to make me look like I hate assists. I think that driving schools should just at least theoretically explain all systems. But true lesson is experiencing the differences and IMPORTANCE of them. And the driver would adapt to wider array of cars. Isn't that the purpose of schools? So far I driven three cars and I am beginner.
Well, if a car can have its safety systems off, even better since there is no need for more vehicles. I may be a bit extreme but learners should have at least one hour with no ABS, TCS, esp and so on. But still, it's my opinion. Obviously when they got used to driving, not the first day.
Well, if a car can have its safety systems off, even better since there is no need for more vehicles. I may be a bit extreme but learners should have at least one hour with no ABS, TCS, esp and so on. But still, it's my opinion. Obviously when they got used to driving, not the first day.
- 40,750
Weren't you the one who suggested new drivers should just buy newer cars instead of drive cars that don't have all the most modern safety equipment like the ones they might have been instructed in?
Of course. Anything that's too hard isn't worth doing at all. After all, road safety is something to take lightly.
Let me regale you with a story. I learned to drive in a car remarkably like this:
FWD. Traction control. Set it and forget it automatic. Stability control. Park-assist door mirrors. Variable assist steering. Adaptive suspension. Parking sensors. Turn signals in the mirrors. ABS. Cornering lamps. Night vision. I did almost all of the required 40 hours of driving in that, because it was easy and my grandpa was happy to let me drive him around when he needed to run errands.
That was fantastic driving experience to put to use for when I bought this:
But not so much use for the six year interim that I owned this:
Which had... uh... ABS and power steering.
I took the test in the Deville, because of course I did. Nowhere in the test did I do any night driving. Nowhere in the test did I do any wet weather driving. Nowhere in the test did I do any advanced driving maneuvers, like emergency lane changes or panic stops. And the only thing I had really done before I took my test was night driving, because it was required as part of the forty hours. In fact, the test was pretty much this:
So, ignoring your laughable suggestion that potential future drivers setup their own gymkhana course to learn advanced driving techniques instead of having them taught to them, where exactly are these students supposed to learn these things, and learn them in the cars that are similar to the cars they will actually be driving? Since there's no point in that actually being taught, because it would be too expensive and too hard.
Because, no, doing a 2 mile driving loop before parallel parking a car on a sunny day in the middle of summer doesn't really show you know dick about how to drive; even if you read a book and sat through a four hour class telling you how to adjust your mirrors and what street signs mean.
Just in case it need to be any more clear that you were incapable of arguing this topic without constructing strawmen...
If you're going to try and make someone look foolish, usually its best to actually read what their posts are saying before you try and pull a "gotcha!" Neither of those posts actually say what you're trying to force them to mean.
Last edited:
Firstly, the context was that the one who can drive assistless car, that one can easily get used to them. But, for a person who is used to assists, a situation where assist breaks down, it could be lethel for that driver.
Secondly, I should have said that schools don't need new cars and old cars when first are enough.
- 23,902
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
At the end of the day, a driving test should be about judging if a driver understands the theory of how to drive on the road and the practical aspect of whether or not they have the ability to do everyday driving without being a danger to themselves and everyone else. Anything other than that can be covered under advanced driving courses. If you can't safely stop a car with no abs (how many of those are still on our roads?), then you're driving either too quickly for the conditions, not properly concentrating, or driving beyond your abilities. You can't teach people not to be stupid.
- 4,897
- UK
Did I say you shouldn't do it...no. But again I have to say that an obstacle course is possible under supervision.
It's funny how you take everything out of context.
Interesting story. But let me explain mine, Not to mention I have only driven manuals.
First car to learn in is a dreadful Corsa.
Then, moved to different instructors due to inconsistency but to a new car as well which is relatively fun. DS3.
I only had a few stints out in an X-Trail before my Dad passed away. Similar to one in this picture, tall car but I really wasn't a fan.
10 months after my test, I use the skills off the '2 mile loop' to put in this, not to mention I do an average of 40 miles for 5 days a week.
Nothing really to explain now as it seems to go back and forth and @TheCracker has just really just bonded all my points together within one post.
- 40,750
Because everyone knows that practicing drivers are the ones to entrust with knowing what they should be taught to deal with in everyday driving.
You've spent the entire last page trying to argue that Neddo has been saying things that he hasn't said. You have a small violin anywhere?
By all means, don't start now.
- 3,835
- Leiria
They are vital, but what if you drive a car that hasn't have them in the first place? I had a lock up at 33mph, not 3.
I had them to. But that's not driving like @a112 said.
I think it's a better option to help people understand the dangers and how to react on abnormal situations. Yes, although I agree that there is much to be learnt with everyday driving, there are certain situation that are avoidable with proper training.
@TheCracker, you raise some good points, but I still think an advanced driving course is important and necessary because driving isn't just understanding the basis of it, it's not just pressing the pedals, shift a few gears and turn the wheel. Not being a danger to themselves and others isn't just being an idiot, it's also knowing to recognize the dangers, which I did, but then, after my mishap, I know where are the limits (mine and the car's) but first I endangered the envioroment around me. Was I going too quickly for the conditions? Maybe I was, but I had no clue of it because was within the speed limit (we have a 10% tolerance). But then I could avoid this situations if I had a proper instruction on the wet.
- 2,794
- 4,897
- UK
- 27,205
- United Kingdom
I've often thought that while say, stability and traction control systems should be standard on new vehicles, drivers should still get at least some basic training on how to respond if a car doesn't have them - or even if those systems allow a degree of leeway (as many do) before they cut in.
Stability control particularly, as a lot of modern cars can allow an unnerving (for someone not expecting it) degree of slip before it curtails a spin. I'd expect a lot of drivers may have no clue what caused such a slip, other than perhaps "speed" - but some sort of training to make them understand why a car can slide (differences in road surface, poor inputs etc) would surely be a benefit, additional to the safety net of stability control.
Particularly as, as has already been mentioned, a lot of new drivers may be stepping into cars that, while they may now have ABS as that's been mandatory for decades, may not have stability or traction control.
If they're justifiable, justify them.
But in order to do so, I'd have to be fairly confident that you've driven enough vehicles with dual-clutch transmissions and driven enough of a mix of older and more modern vehicles for your opinions to be worth the pixels they're written in. Otherwise they'll just look like the luddite rantings of a typical internet keyboard warrior.
You'll certainly have to work harder to justify the second opinion because it's a great deal less subjective than a preference for dual-clutch transmissions. As I mentioned before, and to which you never responded:
I'm all ears.
Now for another unpopular opinion, alternatives to cars aren't that boring. Especially the theoretically not so impossible hovering cars/vehicles alternative, because they would render most roads useless and probably reduce that kind of pollution. Pods would still need roads or tracks to move. Most car enthusiasts think that all of future transport will be just that but I greatly disagree.
- 5,204
- Finland
Professional teaching of teenagers who have little to no knowledge on the subject before they're allowed to endanger themselves and others on the public roads. What a terrible idea.
I'm fairly sure that getting into a situation where stability control or even ABS had to be used to prevent an accident is an automatic failure in the driving test around here anyway. The point of the driving instruction is to make people drive safely and not to take unnecessary risk, and if you've reached the point where basic driving skills aren't enough you've probably taken an unnecessary risk in the first place.
- 2,308
- United States
- monkeylima
- 5,204
- Finland
Not quite. Assuming that the 21 or older is supposed to have a licence, because if that isn't a requirement I could just as well stop right here, you might still end up with someone who has practically no teaching skills, or simply can't drive well enough to teach it to someone else. And even if you get someone who can do both, you're still missing 19 hours worth of theory lessons before you're allowed to be taught in traffic with other cars, cyclists, pedestrians...
- 3,569
- Connecticut
- SPhilli
- SPhilli911
If the rules in West Virginia are anything like Connecticut then you still have to test with the Department of Motor Vehicles before they hand you a license. The test is both a written one and an on the road test, so if the 21 or over teacher is a terrible driver, then it will show on the test.
Not saying it's a good system, there are plenty of crap drivers on the roads here. I think getting a license in the U.S. is too easy.
- 27,205
- United Kingdom
For me this comes back to my previous point. There should be more to driving instruction and testing than just basic preparation for driving. A safety system like ABS or stability control might save a driver following a mistake, but it won't teach them how to avoid that mistake in future.
If a driver does something dumb enough to necessitate stability control intervention on a driving test I've no doubt they'd be failed for it, but if they do something requiring stability control intervention after their driving test, what might they take from it? My expectation of many drivers is that it'd sap their confidence somewhat, and drivers with no confidence are almost as bad as drivers with too much.
Some kind of driving instruction that teaches people not just how to operate a car but how to understand the way a car reacts to inputs - regardless of electronic safety nets - would be hugely beneficial to driver safety and competence.
- 2,308
- United States
- monkeylima
Yes, the person 21 and over must have a valid license and we have to take both a written and a driving exam. Like @SPhilli911 said, if the teacher isn't very good it will definitely show. In my state, however, you can take a Driver's Ed class in high school (only a few don't offer it) in order to reduce your insurance costs; which I did, even though I already had my license for a year.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,968
- Mile High City
The ABS fuse will take out your ABS though, and that's one that I'd keep on unless you're purely learning how to drive on the track. For ice autocross I like to keep the ABS on and take out the stability control. Pumping the brakes (especially on ice) just doesn't do it for me, and it'd be counterproductive muscle memory for driving in regular icy conditions. In many cars it's easy to disable stability/traction control without disabling the ABS. However, I found that in the infiniti I had to take the center console out and unplug the vehicle yaw sensor to disable stability without disabling ABS. Kindof a pain. Worth it though, powerslides and donuts in the AWD SUV are good fun.
- 5,065
- Fort Worth
- That_sneaky_azN
