Q: What is your opinion regarding the rapid introduction of "driver aids," from simple warning systems up to but not including driverless cars?
A: Thanks for your question. I always enjoy the opportunity to climb up on my soapbox and espouse my opinions on things automotive. Having spent a fair amount of time driving motor vehicles with most of the latest driver aids, one thing is absolutely clear. The federal government, insurance companies, safety groups and carmakers believe that the majority of motorists desperately need these electronic "nannies" to survive our highways.
Sadly, they are not wrong. Modern passive and active safety systems have significantly reduced the injury/fatality rates, but not crash rates. We're still colliding with other motorists and solid objects at unacceptable rates. Could there be any other reason for the tremendous effort to develop driverless vehicles?
In my humble opinion, most motorists would be safer traveling in a driverless vehicle programmed to recognize, identify and respond to pending threats instantly and automatically.
Sadly, the majority of humans cannot and do not. Daily routines, distractions of all types, multitasking, comfort and ease of operating modern vehicles — all contribute to allowing drivers to lose focus on driving. This delays recognition and response to impending threats, directly contributing to crashes.
In that respect, all driver aids are worthwhile. ABS, TCS, stability control, lane departure and closure rate warnings and the like are active safety systems with the role of full-time watchdogs, waiting to spring into action when you get in trouble.
Am I eager to ride in an automated, driverless car? No, I enjoy driving and have never liked riding without control. However, the only times I ever turn off the "nannies" in my 600-plus-horsepower Corvette is on the race track. On daily drives, they're all armed and ready.
Q: I have a 2005 Subaru Outback with 160,000 miles. Last summer the "Check engine" light began coming on, seemingly randomly. Our mechanic diagnosed a faulty oxygen sensor, a surprisingly expensive fix. Less than a year and 5,000 miles later the "Check engine" light is on and off again. We notice no difference in power or mileage, only the lack of cruise control. Should we pay to have the diagnostics and (possibly) sensor replaced again?