This damned tyre pressure warning system.

[culzean]

Yes I know the legal and other things, that was just my personal opinion and preference.

My Jazz would be a great car without all these auto/warning/assist systems. Now it's just tolerable, as it is annoying to have pre-drive procedure of disabling interfering systems taking more time than 70's diesel pre-glowing time and still have bunch of systems preventing me to do things I'd like to do and which I can do with our older cars.

We are keeping my wifes MK2 because simply do not want any 'automation' on the car, it drives me nuts - OK ABS and VSA ( and VSA can be disabled because you are better off without it in some situations ) can be considered safety features like airbags and seatbelts - but as for the other annoying stuff - no thanks, and deffo not auto stop / start.

[TnTkr]

I like my 1989 Peugeot 309 GR very much. No interfering systems and automatics. 92 HP and 930 kg means nice performance. Good to drive. Good size for our family. It's just that after 30 Finnish winters there is rust, which you can repair but can not stop. And if spares are needed, you can't go to shop and buy, but need to search Internet.

Regarding Jazz we have agreed that we keep it year or two and if all these interfering systems are still too annoying, then we sell it and get something older again. Or if it's just me, we may switch cars with my wife, who has nice 1st gen Honda CR-V.

But don't get me wrong, there is a lot in Jazz that I like. For example performance (130 HP), driveability, size, usability, looks.

[peteo48]

The "tech" thing is interesting. I would happily ditch the "not fit for purpose" tyre pressure warning system but, as Culzean pointed out earlier, it is a legal requirement.

But I have looked a few reviews of the Honda "E" - they are overwhelmingly favourable but do you really need the ability to have tropical fish on the infotainment screen? Is it even safe to provide the ability to play an X box through it? Is it really necessary to replace all the mirrors with cameras?

[Jocko]

But I have looked a few reviews of the Honda "E" - they are overwhelmingly favourable but do you really need the ability to have tropical fish on the infotainment screen? Is it even safe to provide the ability to play an X box through it? Is it really necessary to replace all the mirrors with cameras?

I think these first two functions just show the versatility of the system. You can play Xbox games on your phone but I doubt you can do it in the car while it is in Drive mode.
With regard to cameras instead of mirrors, this is quite a large energy-saving device. Hypermilers remove their exterior mirrors because they are a considerable drag on a car (remember the old round mirrors on the front wings of old cars!).
The cameras are tiny slim devices, and the image they give is better than a mirror, especially after dark and in poor weather. They also auto-align for reversing, showing where the wheels are (so no more nipped kerbs).

[richardfrost]

This is what results if you strip all the tech from a Honda E and put in an old A Series engine. I'd buy that car.

I DID buy that car! Or rather, my Dad bought it for me. It was in van form and came in British Racing green! Drivign at it's most basic.

[peteo48]

But I have looked a few reviews of the Honda "E" - they are overwhelmingly favourable but do you really need the ability to have tropical fish on the infotainment screen? Is it even safe to provide the ability to play an X box through it? Is it really necessary to replace all the mirrors with cameras?

I think these first two functions just show the versatility of the system. You can play Xbox games on your phone but I doubt you can do it in the car while it is in Drive mode.
With regard to cameras instead of mirrors, this is quite a large energy-saving device. Hypermilers remove their exterior mirrors because they are a considerable drag on a car (remember the old round mirrors on the front wings of old cars!).
The cameras are tiny slim devices, and the image they give is better than a mirror, especially after dark and in poor weather. They also auto-align for reversing, showing where the wheels are (so no more nipped kerbs).

Good points - might have to change my mind!

[Downsizer]

This is what results if you strip all the tech from a Honda E and put in an old A Series engine. I'd buy that car.

I DID buy that car! Or rather, my Dad bought it for me. It was in van form and came in British Racing green! Driving at it's most basic.

Even your original Mini was a dramatic improvement on what we had driven before, e.g. the side valve Ford Prefect I learned on, with a 3 speed gearbox, no synchromesh on 1st, and wipers linked to the exhaust vacuum.  At least I learned to double-de-clutch but I prefer the CVT.  Fortunately, cars have become progressively more economical, more reliable and safer, and our niggles, although irritating, are relatively trivial.

[equaliser]

Even your original Mini was a dramatic improvement on what we had driven before, e.g. the side valve Ford Prefect I learned on, with a 3 speed gearbox, no synchromesh on 1st, and wipers linked to the exhaust vacuum.  At least I learned to double-de-clutch but I prefer the CVT.  Fortunately, cars have become progressively more economical, more reliable and safer, and our niggles, although irritating, are relatively trivial.

When I was a young trainee mechanic back in the late 80s early 90s, fuel injection and catalytic convertors were just coming in and the older mechanics saw it as the work of the devil. There were some problems with those systems in the  beginning, but they eventually got on top of it and nowadays we don't even think of these complicated technologies (at the time) as an issue. I'm sure it will be the same, in time, with all the driving aids were are moaning about now.

[TnTkr]

When I was a young trainee mechanic back in the late 80s early 90s, fuel injection and catalytic convertors were just coming in and the older mechanics saw it as the work of the devil. There were some problems with those systems in the  beginning, but they eventually got on top of it and nowadays we don't even think of these complicated technologies (at the time) as an issue. I'm sure it will be the same, in time, with all the driving aids were are moaning about now.

I fully understand your point about the new immature systems. However, complicity and immaturity are not the only reasons to dislike auto/assist/warning systems. There is a fundamental difference between technologies which improve the car e.g. performance, economy and reliability, such as fuel injection and catalytic converter, and the new systems which deny and deprive driver's command of the car by preventing, interfering and disturbing driving and operation of the car's functions. Latter is a manifestation of nanny state. That is what I genuinely dislike.

[culzean]

When I was a young trainee mechanic back in the late 80s early 90s, fuel injection and catalytic convertors were just coming in and the older mechanics saw it as the work of the devil. There were some problems with those systems in the  beginning, but they eventually got on top of it and nowadays we don't even think of these complicated technologies (at the time) as an issue. I'm sure it will be the same, in time, with all the driving aids were are moaning about now.

I fully understand your point about the new immature systems. However, complicity and immaturity are not the only reasons to dislike auto/assist/warning systems. There is a fundamental difference between technologies which improve the car e.g. performance, economy and reliability, such as fuel injection and catalytic converter, and the new systems which deny and deprive driver's command of the car by preventing, interfering and disturbing driving and operation of the car's functions. Latter is a manifestation of nanny state. That is what I genuinely dislike.

+1

My thoughts exactly

[Muldoon]

Some good points. Technology over the past 30 years has seen vast improvements in efficiency and safety but where does it cross the line into unnecessary gimmicks? The original 1959 Mini was an engineering masterpiece of it's time but compared to today's safety regulations a death trap. Does the new Honda E inherit it's role?

Agree most issues are just niggles and minor irritations compared to the motoring standards of the 1960s and 1970s modern cars are far safer, efficient and rust resistant.

[peteo48]

Technology advances all the time, often for the greater good but, occasionally, there is overreach. Much was invested into 3 D technology for TVs - it was going to be the next big thing but it died a death because it didn't add much, if any value, to the viewing experience and was a monumental faff with having to wear googles.

TnTkr is dead right in his post above.

[culzean]

Technology advances all the time, often for the greater good but, occasionally, there is overreach. Much was invested into 3 D technology for TVs - it was going to be the next big thing but it died a death because it didn't add much, if any value, to the viewing experience and was a monumental faff with having to wear googles.

TnTkr is dead right in his post above.

There is no doubt in my mind that in last few years car buyers have been used as guinea pigs to subsidise development of some of the systems destined for autonomous vehicles like speed limit recognition, auto braking etc.   They had a big display of autonomous vehicles in Los Angeles a few years ago and sure enough the cars stopped for red lights etc. it only came out later the they had fitted transponders to traffic lights and some other stuff because despite all the tech and hype the cars systems still could not reliably tell the state of a traffic light or pedestrian crossing among the background clutter..... and it has all gone incredibly quiet in last few years after some spectacular 'accident' by AV, randomly changing lanes or hitting roadside barriers when white lines disappeared, getting confused at junctions,  and not being able to see a person pushing a bicycle across the road etc....

[Redstart]

When I was a young trainee mechanic back in the late 80s early 90s, fuel injection and catalytic convertors were just coming in and the older mechanics saw it as the work of the devil. There were some problems with those systems in the  beginning, but they eventually got on top of it and nowadays we don't even think of these complicated technologies (at the time) as an issue. I'm sure it will be the same, in time, with all the driving aids were are moaning about now.

I fully understand your point about the new immature systems. However, complicity and immaturity are not the only reasons to dislike auto/assist/warning systems. There is a fundamental difference between technologies which improve the car e.g. performance, economy and reliability, such as fuel injection and catalytic converter, and the new systems which deny and deprive driver's command of the car by preventing, interfering and disturbing driving and operation of the car's functions. Latter is a manifestation of nanny state. That is what I genuinely dislike.

[Redstart]

Mine goes off every day. (Bought 6 weeks ago 5100 on a 68)I reset it every evening. It goes off on the same but of dual carriageway on my homeward journey. Went off first on the M6 back from the dealers. One of the rear tyres is different to the michelins on the other 3.
That might be it possibly?