<![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS - Jalopnik Comments]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS - Jalopnik Comments]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> @charles_barrett: If my nephew said that, I would need to call in the police to help me lock down all my guns, b/c my bro would shoot him at least once with each one.

rioja951

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> How do you measure the number of fatal crashes that didn't happen? Their explanation of how they came up with the numbers is really pretty thin.

Don't get me wrong, I hate electronic nannies, but the study seems a bit weak.

jdepould

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> @drewheyman:
FOLLOW THE MONEY!

The IIHS only cares about saving money for its companies. It is the worst industry shill that always hooks dumbass reporters with the snazzy car crash videos...

These are the same corp nimrods who complain about cars costing too much to fix in 5mph crashes yet do not compare the fuel economy received by not having 1980's "rail road track" bumpers attached to shock absorbers on cars...

econobiker

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> There is noone on a cell phone smart enough to use this system.

muleshoe

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> why did they only study fatal crashes? isn't blind spot detection primarly to prevent side swipes and fender benders?

Also no estimate of repair costs saved by purchasing the option vs not?

that's a surprisingly rotten study by IIHS, who usually does ok work. Or maybe its USA Today's reporting that's rotten, like it mostly always is.

drewheyman

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> What happens to insurance rates if cars dont crash?

IIHS is the insurance industry. Of course they are against crash avoidance.

JONNRG

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> all i can see this type of device leading to is an increase of lawsuits by idiots against car manufacturers

will

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> if you really want to prevent accidents all you need to do is outlaw automatic transmissions, power steering, dashboard-gps and car stereos

will

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> @elwood: Correct. The IIHS is saying that there is the possibility they could lead to more reckless driving. Obviously there is NO proof of that.

I thought the number of fatal crash reductions by the lane departure and frontal avoidance systems was very significant.

Rabbi Dave

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> Why do we need lane departure warning systems? Isn't that what the road reflector bumps are for?

bigloaf

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> @brownie: If it prevents (or could prevent) crashes, then it's doing good. What's happening is that these technologies are doing less good than people said they would, not doing more harm than good.

elwood

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> I'm from Naive-istan.

Nayrlladnar

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> @Nayrlladnar: Where did you get that idea?! What country are you from? Welcome to America!

NovaloadMissesPolar

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> Imagine the "Must Read" one will go through prior to starting the car.

[ ELÇEVEN ]

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> @brownie:Because it does more harm than good means it will become mandatory.

Government had good intentions when the first generation air-bags were killing short people. Thank God they had good intentions.

.: R32-PΩWER ™

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> Called it.

[jalopnik.com]

Jon

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> [Teen, sheepishly]: "Mom, Dad, I kind of wrecked the car. It's kind of wrapped around a tree trunk. It kind of jumped out from nowhere. I kind of was texting Judy..."

Charles_Barrett - Now with Variable-Valve Timing

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> I thought all legally licensed drivers came equipped with common sense... /shrug

Nayrlladnar

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> "They(sic) technology also causes the drivers to be more reckless and careless while driving." No doubt. Look what ABS, traction control and all wheel drive have done for the average motorist here in the US of A. Given them more freedom to yammer on the phone, send texts VIA Blackberry, put on makeup, read the paper and atch a movie on their in-dash DVD player. Simultaneously. While tailgating you at 90 in the left lane.

Mike the Dog

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> Just because it does more harm than good doesn't mean it won't become mandatory equipment someday.

brownie

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]>

[www.transportblog.com] This has great all round visibility,can't see it catching on though.

layabout

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> WILLWARNETT to the rescue!

boosted-lego-wagon

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> I have my own built-in Crash Avoidance Technology.

It works amazing.

Dr.Danger, I run the Death Star

]]> <![CDATA[Crash Avoidance Technology Only "Kind of" Works, Says IIHS]]> There is between around 42,000 automobile deaths annually.

WAT.

boosted-lego-wagon

]]>