Auto lights and wipers a year on
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Harry Bloomfield on 11 Jul 2010 08:20 Chelsea Tractor Man pretended : > On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 15:40:10 +0100, Mortimer wrote: > >> How do you define the delay for variable-speed intermittent? I've always >> wondered how this is done, having only ever driven cars with two-speed >> continuous (plus flick-wipe) or else fixed intermittent or auto wipe. > > theres usually a twist control on the stalk that adjusts the speed of > intermittent or the sensitivity of auto. Some have a learn mode, where the delay is set by your manually pulling the lever to give a single wipe - Vauxhall I think. -- Regards, Harry (M1BYT) (L) http://www.ukradioamateur.co.uk
From: Harry Bloomfield on 11 Jul 2010 09:04 Chelsea Tractor Man submitted this idea : > yeah sure. Might be believable if the car didnt have the manual switch as > well. Out of curiosity and tracing another minor fault, I pulled the auto control unit's fuse on mine. With no supply the auto thingummy the auto position on the switch reverts back to an intermitant wipe setting. The fault was that my reversing sensors had stopped working, then I found that it was due to the reversing lights not working because the fuse had blown. A 5amp fuse supplying two 21watt lamps on the car and then two more on the caravan - so just slightly over the limit, so I fitted a 10amp and it now seems OK. -- Regards, Harry (M1BYT) (L) http://www.ukradioamateur.co.uk
From: Harry Bloomfield on 11 Jul 2010 09:06 Mike Barnes pretended : > I take your point about "once developed" but I think the manufacturers > are a very long way from being able to dispense with manual control over > lights and wipers. At least until they works out some means for the system to tell when the screen is dirty and needs a wash/wipe. -- Regards, Harry (M1BYT) (L) http://www.ukradioamateur.co.uk
From: Adrian on 11 Jul 2010 13:38 Harry Bloomfield <harry.m1byt(a)NOSPAM.tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> So it's a case of "Any gadget must be better", is it? No gadget at all >> that you can think of that's a bit un-necessary and pointless? > Yes there are some pointless gadgets, but I will willingly accept ANY > gadget which avoids me taking my attention from the road. Hmm. I don't put auto-wipers into that category. When it's wet, there are other decisions than "Shall I put the wipers on?" which factor that piece of information in. And, really, extending one finger and flicking the stalk is hardly an onerous task requiring full attention. >> What about lane-departure bottomwobblers? > Probably pointless as I suppose you would get the warning every time you > needed to pull out of lane? Unless you've indicated. >> Road sign echoing in the dash? > If selectable, probably useful in thick fog. Have you considered slowing down in thick fog? > Reverse sensors? > > Brilliant, especially in some (most modern ones) cars where you cannot > see the rear end in your mirrors. Chicken or egg?
From: Harry Bloomfield on 11 Jul 2010 18:00
Adrian brought next idea : >> Probably pointless as I suppose you would get the warning every time you >> needed to pull out of lane? > > Unless you've indicated. So really a reminder to indicate a lane change then :-) > >>> Road sign echoing in the dash? > >> If selectable, probably useful in thick fog. > > Have you considered slowing down in thick fog? > In the bad old days the fog used to get so thick you would sometimes need someone to walk ahead of you to find the road. Despite it not getting quite that bad, it would still be useful to see the signs repeated on the dash. >> Reverse sensors? >> >> Brilliant, especially in some (most modern ones) cars where you cannot >> see the rear end in your mirrors. > > Chicken or egg? I think car body designs where you started to have to guess where your rear bumper was, pre-empted the appearance of such driver aids by many years. -- Regards, Harry (M1BYT) (L) http://www.ukradioamateur.co.uk |