[angelmb]

Mercedes has revealed two new safety-related features to be incorporated into the new S-class, which will be unveiled at September�s Frankfurt Motor Show.

The new S-class is described by insiders as the most technologically advanced car ever to make mainstream production.

It will be the first Mercedes to feature Brake Assist Plus � a system which automatically activates a brake booster when radar sensors mounted in the front bumper predict a critical braking situation is about to occur.

Using information from the sensors, which monitor the road ahead, newly developed software determines the distance to cars ahead and both warns the driver when they get too close, and provides added braking power if it appears that a collision is about to take place.

Simulations found the accident rate was reduced from 44 per cent to 11 per cent with the technology, which Mercedes says will eventually be made available to other car makers. Statistically, every fifth car accident involves a front to rear impact, says Mercedes. The Brake Assist Plus system can also stop the car automatically without the driver touching the brakes, although this can�t be featured without changing European laws.

Mercedes has also refined its Pre-Safe system. As well as pre-tensioning the seatbelts and putting the passenger seat to its optimum position in critical situations, it is also capable of closing windows and inflating front seat cushions to increase the effectiveness of the side airbags.

[Randman]

And with any luck, less than 1 million will have to be recalled.

[Athens]

I think a added feature that should be in all cars is a system that prevents the car from being put in gear unless all seats that have a person it in is buckled up. Pressure sensor in the seat with a sensor in the seatbelt would work effective.

[analogika]

cab drivers here (virtually all cabs are Mercedes) are legally allowed to drive without seat belts, since they're at risk of being robbed and need the ability to escape quickly.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by analogika

cab drivers here (virtually all cabs are Mercedes) are legally allowed to drive without seat belts, since they're at risk of being robbed and need the ability to escape quickly.

I dont mean for cops, and taxis and commercial cars, regular passenger owned cars.

[entrox]

Originally Posted by Athens

I think a added feature that should be in all cars is a system that prevents the car from being put in gear unless all seats that have a person it in is buckled up. Pressure sensor in the seat with a sensor in the seatbelt would work effective.

What's next? A breath analyzer which prevents you from starting the engine if you're intoxicated? A vision test which you need to pass to prevent you from driving without glasses/contacts?

I wouldn't want such a car.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by entrox

What's next? A breath analyzer which prevents you from starting the engine if you're intoxicated? A vision test which you need to pass to prevent you from driving without glasses/contacts?

I wouldn't want such a car.

Thats another feature I think should be installed in cars. Another good one would be a camera or sensor that watchs the drivers eyes and can tell if they fall asleep or almost are about to fall asleep.

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by Athens

I think a added feature that should be in all cars is a system that prevents the car from being put in gear unless all seats that have a person it in is buckled up. Pressure sensor in the seat with a sensor in the seatbelt would work effective.

No, nay, bloody never. It's about time people stopped saying what I should and what I should not do in and with my car. Governments are bad enough so let's keep car manufacturers out of it. It is MY problem if I decide not to wear my seatbelt not somebody else's.

[Randman]

What if someone is blinking or squinting from the sun or headlights in their eye? Or if you have an eye problem? And could you wear sunglasses with such a system? Sometimes, too much nannying isn't a good thing.

As far as the breathalyzer, there's talk that drivers in New Mexico convicted of DWi might have to deal with that. Of course, this brings into question mouthwash with alcohol content.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by entrox

What's next? A breath analyzer which prevents you from starting the engine if you're intoxicated? A vision test which you need to pass to prevent you from driving without glasses/contacts?

I wouldn't want such a car.

Actually, that sounds like good features to have in cars. Along with the sleep detection camera. If such things could be implemented in a non-obstrusive manner and made mandatory this will get a huge thumbs up from me

[zigzag]

I saw one of these the other day. Very Jaguar-ish, and totally unlike any Mercedes I've seen before.

[milhous]

Originally Posted by Randman

And with any luck, less than 1 million will have to be recalled.

exactly.

more "safety features" means higher cost and more electronics means higher rate of failure. if you want the highest safety, you might as well get rid of roads and put cars on tracks. yeah right!

[entrox]

Originally Posted by zigzag

I saw one of these the other day. Very Jaguar-ish, and totally unlike any Mercedes I've seen before.

That's the CLS-Class, a completely different beast.

[rozwado1]

Originally Posted by Athens

I think a added feature that should be in all cars is a system that prevents the car from being put in gear unless all seats that have a person it in is buckled up.

Most Idiotic Idea of the Day�

This would be so goddamn cumbersome.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Athens

I think a added feature that should be in all cars is a system that prevents the car from being put in gear unless all seats that have a person it in is buckled up. Pressure sensor in the seat with a sensor in the seatbelt would work effective.

Yup, really great for when you have a 21" CRT or a boxed G5 in the back seat, and the seat's weight sensor is telling the car's computer than a 70lb child is unbuckled.

On a more bizarre note, a friend of mine just told me that in New Jersey, anyone 12 and under has to be in a child seat. Now, I've seen plenty of people who were my size at age 12. Where the heck do you get a child seat for someone 5'6"? Wouldn't it make things worse? What about adult midgets? Do they need to sit in child seats?

Originally Posted by entrox

What's next? A breath analyzer which prevents you from starting the engine if you're intoxicated?

You think that's fiction, eh? They already have those -- but for now, only for when a court orders it for a repeat drunk driver. Only a few states do this, but it seems like a good idea. For non-offenders, it'd be icky!! (What I wouldn't mind is a breathalyzer in the car that just tells me if I'm OK or not, but takes no further action.)

tooki

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Athens

I think a added feature that should be in all cars is a system that prevents the car from being put in gear unless all seats that have a person it in is buckled up.

P.S. While I entirely believe that kids should be buckled in (and any adult who doesn't enforce this should be punished), I think that any adult stupid enough to drive in a car unbuckled is no big loss if they should get in an accident and die. They knew better, and I'm just as happy to see them stop polluting the gene pool.

[OreoCookie]

Well, I find your comment about elimination from the gene pool a bit cynical. But in essence, I agree. (Subjectively) Germany is much stricter than Italy or the States. I don't see anyone here driving without a seat belt (obviously, there are some, but it's very rare). In Italy, I got laughed at, because I wanted to put on my seatbelt in the back of the car (the seatbelts were tucked into the seats, no way of getting them out).

[Sealobo]

we don't need smarter or faster or safer cars.... but more educated drivers.

[ManOfSteal]

The '88 Dodge Aries hands down. It included a "Map Light"...S-T-A-N-D-A-R-D!

[Randman]

Originally Posted by Sealobo

we don't need smarter or faster or safer cars.... but more educated drivers.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Goldfinger

No, nay, bloody never. It's about time people stopped saying what I should and what I should not do in and with my car. Governments are bad enough so let's keep car manufacturers out of it. It is MY problem if I decide not to wear my seatbelt not somebody else's.

It is every one elses problem when
you are taking up a important space and using up important doctors
when your costing the medical system a lot when it didnt have to
when your family is put in debt from the costly medical expensices
when you are the driver and you didnt make any one else in your car use a seat belt and they are all dead.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Randman

What if someone is blinking or squinting from the sun or headlights in their eye? Or if you have an eye problem? And could you wear sunglasses with such a system? Sometimes, too much nannying isn't a good thing.

As far as the breathalyzer, there's talk that drivers in New Mexico convicted of DWi might have to deal with that. Of course, this brings into question mouthwash with alcohol content.

sunglasses? where did that come from

[ReggieX]

Originally Posted by ManOfSteal

The '88 Dodge Aries hands down. It included a "Map Light"...S-T-A-N-D-A-R-D!

I had a funky map light in my '81 Lynx.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by tooki

Yup, really great for when you have a 21" CRT or a boxed G5 in the back seat, and the seat's weight sensor is telling the car's computer than a 70lb child is unbuckled.

Then buckle the seat, i usally use seat belts tosecure items like that anyways. But if not just put the buckle in and let it sit ontop of the seatbelt DUH.

On a more bizarre note, a friend of mine just told me that in New Jersey, anyone 12 and under has to be in a child seat. Now, I've seen plenty of people who were my size at age 12. Where the heck do you get a child seat for someone 5'6"? Wouldn't it make things worse? What about adult midgets? Do they need to sit in child seats?


You think that's fiction, eh? They already have those -- but for now, only for when a court orders it for a repeat drunk driver. Only a few states do this, but it seems like a good idea. For non-offenders, it'd be icky!! (What I wouldn't mind is a breathalyzer in the car that just tells me if I'm OK or not, but takes no further action.)

tooki

A drunk that cant drive would prob ignore the breathalyzer anyways. Whats wrong with having that system in there to keep a non offender from becoming a offender? After all it saves there life as well as the person they could kill and i mean ther elife as in job and famliy Many drunk drivers when not drunk think they wouldnt drive drunk

[entrox]

Originally Posted by Athens

It is every one elses problem when
you are taking up a important space and using up important doctors
when your costing the medical system a lot when it didnt have to
when your family is put in debt from the costly medical expensices
when you are the driver and you didnt make any one else in your car use a seat belt and they are all dead.

While we're at it, we should also forbid smoking (lung cancer), every sport except Chess (risk of injury) and make all corners round (risk of tripping and busting your head open). All of those contribute to people unnecessarily clogging up the medical system.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by tooki

P.S. While I entirely believe that kids should be buckled in (and any adult who doesn't enforce this should be punished), I think that any adult stupid enough to drive in a car unbuckled is no big loss if they should get in an accident and die. They knew better, and I'm just as happy to see them stop polluting the gene pool.

Ya well I worry about my best friend every day because his a dumb **** when it comes to using them. I never see him use them well not until its hinted or told some times he puts it on 3o mins into the ride. Ive lost a few friends for not having seat belts on. I would accept any system that intrudes in my life just a little bit to have them all back

[Athens]

Originally Posted by entrox

While we're at it, we should also forbid smoking (lung cancer), every sport except Chess (risk of injury) and make all corners round (risk of tripping and busting your head open). All of those contribute to people unnecessarily clogging up the medical system.

Who said anything about banning cars? Thats a stupid argument b because im talking about things that prevent needless deaths with out ristricting the use. Smokes have filters, and in many places you cant smoke inside, that reduces some of the risk. We have cars and seat belts, no one is saying take away the car but to make systems that make it so you have to use a seat belt and cant drive drunk.

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by Athens

It is every one elses problem when
you are taking up a important space and using up important doctors
when your costing the medical system a lot when it didnt have to
when your family is put in debt from the costly medical expensices
when you are the driver and you didnt make any one else in your car use a seat belt and they are all dead.

bzzt

I'm using up important doctors ? They are there for a reason. It's not like a hospital will run out of space and doctors because of 1 person. Unless there was some kind of disaster that happend at the same time but that's stretching it.
I pay for the health insurance, I pay taxes.
My family will never be in debt for my medical expenses since we have a perfecly working free healthcare system over here.
It is NOT my responsability what other people do. If they don't want to wear their seatbelts it is not my problem. It was their choice.

[Athens]

wow now I know that many of you have never lost any one to a car crash. How about this one, many years ago hitch hiking my best friend, me and my girl friend rolled off the hwy, guess what i was the only one using a seatbelt and i walked away with a scratch, the stupid driver who was stoned, my girl friend and my best friend died. That kinda changed my opinon on things. 3 of my other good friends have been in major crashes too, all lived and all used seat belts.

[entrox]

Originally Posted by Athens

Who said anything about banning cars?

No idea.

Thats a stupid argument b because im talking about things that prevent needless deaths with out ristricting the use. Smokes have filters, and in many places you cant smoke inside, that reduces some of the risk. We have cars and seat belts, no one is saying take away the car but to make systems that make it so you have to use a seat belt and cant drive drunk.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're trying to protect people from themselves and argue that they should be prohibited from driving without seat belts because their medical treatment would cost too much, right? How is this any different from forbidding people to smoke, so their lung cancer doesn't clog up hospitals?

While I agree in principle, having such forced checks would be a gigantic annoyance to everybody. I'd be the first one to short-circuit the belt-detection device although I never drive without being belted.

[Goldfinger]

Look, I'm really sorry for you. I agree that it is horrible and I can understand your point of view. BUT, If I choose to not wear my seatbelt then it is my problem, what I'm trying to say is that we should not be forced to wear a seatbelt, if we die in a car crash because we didn't wear it it is our own problem and not the government/car manufacturer's problem. Putting emotional pain suffered by friends/familiy aside, I absolutely hate the pampering that we get from the governments. I hope I make myself a bit understandable..it's getting late.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by entrox

No idea.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're trying to protect people from themselves and argue that they should be prohibited from driving without seat belts because their medical treatment would cost too much, right? How is this any different from forbidding people to smoke, so their lung cancer doesn't clog up hospitals?

While I agree in principle, having such forced checks would be a gigantic annoyance to everybody. I'd be the first one to short-circuit the belt-detection device although I never drive without being belted.

No one is being prohibited, they can always put the belt on and blow. Nothing stops them from doing thyat

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Goldfinger

Look, I'm really sorry for you. I agree that it is horrible and I can understand your point of view. BUT, If I choose to not wear my seatbelt then it is my problem, what I'm trying to say is that we should not be forced to wear a seatbelt, if we die in a car crash because we didn't wear it it is our own problem and not the government/car manufacturer's problem. Putting emotional pain suffered by friends/familiy aside, I absolutely hate the pampering that we get from the governments. I hope I make myself a bit understandable..it's getting late.

sad that people dont care enough for each other that there would be such strong opisition to a few devices because they are inconvient or have a extra cost to it.

Sad stat in British Columbia, the number one cause of death for the ages of 15-24 is car crashes. 85% of those no seatbelts and excesive speed.

[entrox]

Originally Posted by Athens

sad that people dont care enough for each other that there would be such strong opisition to a few devices because they are inconvient or have a extra cost to it.

Sad stat in British Columbia, the number one cause of death for the ages of 15-24 is car crashes. 85% of those no seatbelts and excesive speed.

What happened to the concept of taking responsibility for one's actions? Although I wouldn't go so far as to say that they deserved what they got for driving excessively fast without seat-belts, I honestly have to admit that I couldn't care less.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by entrox

What happened to the concept of taking responsibility for one's actions? Although I wouldn't go so far as to say that they deserved what they got for driving excessively fast without seat-belts, I honestly have to admit that I couldn't care less.

Exactly. If someone wants to act stupidly and get themself killed why should I stop them?

That said, if carmakers want to make it impossible for you to start your car without wearing your seat-belt, that's their prerogative. I always wear my seat-belt anyway, but it pisses me off that my tax dollars are wasted on something as stupid as enforcing seat-belt laws for adults. (But by all means require seat belts for kids and make parents criminally responsible for failing to ensure their kids are buckled up.)

[cenutrio]

Probably two of the most technologically advanced cars of its age.



In today standards both would be years ahead of that Mercedes.

Of course, this is a personal opinion and you may find it outrageous. However, both cars had features that even today's cars (including that top of the line cars) lack.

The DS is a 1955 car and the SM is a 1968 car. Both Citroen.

Once you drive one, you never forget. They were unique like some other cars from that age.

No matter if you're driving a top of the line Mercedes, an Audi, BMW, Lexus or wherever, they all feel the same, their handling and feeling is a photocopy no matter the brand. Excellent cars, yes.

But boring.

I rather enjoy cars from the 60s and 70s, those days there was some imagination in the automobile business.

Again just my 2 cents.

[ryaxnb]

Does the car have PRTALK-Sense? I'm not gonna go out and blow tens of thousands on a Mercedes on your forum post.

[Randman]

Originally Posted by Athens

sunglasses? where did that come from

You said you wished cars had sensors that detected when you were falling asleep. You said the sensors would watch the eyes but if you were wearing dark sunglassses, the sensors wouldn't be able to determine if your eyes were open or closed.

[MilkmanDan]

This is the most advanced car ever! Fools!

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Randman

You said you wished cars had sensors that detected when you were falling asleep. You said the sensors would watch the eyes but if you were wearing dark sunglassses, the sensors wouldn't be able to determine if your eyes were open or closed.

Ah, there is a system being developed in Japan for that, the eyes are just one part of it. It also watchs head movement, driving pattern and a few other things and sounds a alarm if it thinks the driver is falling asleep. This was from a show I saw in 2001, I actuall wonder what if anything happened with it

[Athens]

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Exactly. If someone wants to act stupidly and get themself killed why should I stop them?

That said, if carmakers want to make it impossible for you to start your car without wearing your seat-belt, that's their prerogative. I always wear my seat-belt anyway, but it pisses me off that my tax dollars are wasted on something as stupid as enforcing seat-belt laws for adults. (But by all means require seat belts for kids and make parents criminally responsible for failing to ensure their kids are buckled up.)

Im sure some of you will think differently when you have a teenage son thats driving on there own. Me personally I couldnt care what I do to myself, its others I care about. Dosent matter stupid people will do stupid things. I learned tonight the best thing is to not know stupid ppl to avoid problems.

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by MilkmanDan

This is the most advanced car ever! Fools!

..Kitt..

Winner!

[analogika]

[entrox]

Originally Posted by cenutrio

Of course, this is a personal opinion and you may find it outrageous. However, both cars had features that even today's cars (including that top of the line cars) lack.

Such as?

[entrox]

Originally Posted by Athens

Im sure some of you will think differently when you have a teenage son thats driving on there own.

I'd trust him to be responsible. I was, back when I first got to drive and all my friends also were. Why shouldn't he be?

I learned tonight the best thing is to not know stupid ppl to avoid problems.

Yeah, whatever.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by entrox

I'd trust him to be responsible. I was, back when I first got to drive and all my friends also were. Why shouldn't he be?



Yeah, whatever.

Im pretty sure Europe is a bit different then North America. Almost every one I know from Europe don't even have a licence let alone a car since its costs so much for car, gas, insurance over there.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by analogika

That was a good one

[analogika]

Originally Posted by entrox

Such as?

-hydraulic suspension

-headlights that would turn with the front steering to better light up curves (though these didn't show up until the second-series DS, admittedly - in the sixties. That particular DS picture, btw, is a sixties/early 70s model). BMW just recently added this to some of their high-end models as a spectacular new feature.

-what is among the most beautiful automotive design ever to hit the road in the case of the DS. The SM pictured, well...but it had a Maserati engine.

-...

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by Athens

Im pretty sure Europe is a bit different then North America. Almost every one I know from Europe don't even have a licence let alone a car since its costs so much for car, gas, insurance over there.

Your view is wrong. We do have decent tests before we get a license and we don't give licenses to hormone infested teenagers (the idea of letting 16 year olds drive cars makes me sick). But, what has that to do with responsability ?

Oh and an other for the DS and SM. I really hope that the new C6 will become somewhat succesfull.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Goldfinger

I really hope that the new C6 will become somewhat succesfull.

Ooo.

Nice.

I hadn't seen the C6 before. I wonder how it'll look in real life (pictures never really do these things justice).