Are futuristic cars even a thing anymore? I feel like all the future tech is already here, at least the interesting stuff that we actually see, touch, and experience with our cars. We’re at the point where it seems the only futuristic box to tick is self-driving, and when that happens, forget it. There won’t be anymore car-of-the-future interior takes, other than comfier chairs and bigger screens, I guess.
… but I’m getting way off course here. I want to explore how we feel about all those once-futuristic speculative car features that have since arrived but failed to whelm. The earliest among them, at least from my Gen-X POV, are the ideas of talking cars (pre-Knight Rider, mind you) and digital dashboards.
Set aside the fact that I still love digital dashboards. Based on how well they flourished, It’s save to say the general public got over all-digital gauge clusters pretty quickly. Even when the “gauges” in a modern car are 100% pixels, they’re frequently representing good ol’ numbers in a circle with a swinging needle. And when they’re not, they’re doing some weird thing like 3D tunnel-ometers or I don’t know what. Does anyone like that?
Also super-futuristic when it launched, but nobody (as far as I can tell) cared: automatic parking. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s neat, especially when the car is making an actually-difficult (for most people) maneauver:
Much less impressive: this dumb make-car-crawl feature. Is there also an integrated dentless paint repair feature for when your doors get dinged to hell by the people parked next to you trying to get into their cars?
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone auto-park a car, ever.
Your turn:
What Futuristic Car Features Impressed You Least When They Finally Arrived?
Top graphic image: GM
Effin’ touchscreens.
i let my car parallel park itself 7 times out of 10, it is quite fast and good at it in my experience
a modern feature that i do hate/turn off is lane assist because if there is a pothole i can navigate around by not being dead-centered in a lane, i’m going to gently hug the left or right side of the lane to miss it, also stop tugging on and buzzing my fucking steering wheel
lots of “old man yells at cloud” energy here imo but i am also a millennial and a general enjoyer of technology
-proximity keyless entry OK
-key fobs coded to each driver’s preferences OK
-speed-sensitive, self-adjusting audio volume- NOT NEEDED. IMPRECISE. NOT ACCURATE
-automatic climate control (about 85% of the time)- SEE ABOVE
-backup cameras- GREAT
-heated steering wheels- GREAT
-heated external rear view mirrors.-GREAT
-heated seats GREAT
-auto high beam- ABSOLUTE WASTE. DELAY. INACCURACY. EASIER TO DO IT MYSELF
-auto wipers -SEE ABOVE
-heads up display- WASTE
-cvt- NOT GREAT BUT DOES PRODUCE ~~10-15% BETTER MPG.
I’ve noticed the execution of any feature is the most important part. I’ve used good versions of all these features. I had a ’95 Chevy C1500 and it was the first car/truck I had with speed-sensitive volume, and it worked brilliantly. I had a 2005 Outback with the worst auto-climate system ever. Yet a 2002 Volvo V70 had auto-climate so good it was virtually set and forget.
The auto-high beams are the same, my wife’s MDX is terrible my WRX is better but not perfect.
Driving your car remotely with your phone. Yes, like a FPV drone, and like in Tomorrow Never Dies. My new car has Chinese genes, and apparently a lot of the new Chinese EVs and hybrids can do remote parking over the cellular network. In practice it’s a blurry frustrating mess, the car blurs out signs and license plates for privacy(????) so that introduces even more lag with image processing, you can’t see much and the car moves at a glacial pace for safety (which makes sense but still). You tap the d-pad on the phone screen, and 5 seconds later it moves 20cm forward and stops abruptly. Rinse and repeat.
Only used it once while street parked; was parked illegally in front of the first spot, guy behind me left and i reversed remotely into the spot. But it’s too risky and annoying for me to use it regularly.
For features that I’ve experienced personally, automatic rain sensing wipers and power tailgate have not impressed me at all. Both features suck.
My C-Max has both features and both are inferior to the regular/non-powered versions
For the wipers, I’d rather have regular wipers with an intermittent feature. The automatic wipers behaving in a really erratic/inconsistent way… especially when it comes to snow or mist.
For the powered tailgate, it opens slowly and for what it must cost, there is no real value added to a regular tailgate on regular struts.
And for features I haven’t had on any car I’ve owned… all the incorrectly-named “self-driving” systems.
Until these systems get good enough to safely drive me somewhere while I LEGALLY take a nap in the back seat, they’re all a waste of time and money. I won’t spend a nickel on any of them.
Just give me regular cruise control.
Power hatchback/doors.
Promise: your car’s door(s) can open when your hands are full / otherwise occupied / lazily chilling in the driver’s seat.
Reality: open/close sensor works so reliably it might as well be made by Lucas Electrics. And when it does work, it’s slower than you could do it, and stupid expensive to repair when it breaks. Great!
Every single variety of self-driving has not particularly impressed me.
The in-dash CRT in 1989 Buick Reatta. The 1990 models went back to normal controls for the climate and radio.
Interference engines.
A good old Ford 302 used to be good for 135hp. A modern Coyote makes 460hp from the same displacement.
I’ll take the interference engine.
The Ford 3.2L SHO did 220hp 30 years ago with 1.8 less liters. surely we could make a modern non interference engine that is still powerful.
10:1 in a non-interfernce engine is impressive, but I’d imagine that’s going to be close to the limit. Compression ratios are generally much hogher today.
I think most importantly, engines shouldn’t have timing issues. I’ve owned many interference engines, and never had any type of problem on a modern chain setup.
I know that many do have problems, but it’s not the fault of the interference design. The failures are all caused by incompetent timing chain system design.
If I were an engineer, I would just go to a scrapyard, find an engine with a timing setup that’s pretty much never failed, and copy it.
I’ve never had issues with timing chain systems other than engineer’s/Designer’s neglect in making room in an engine bay leading to space issues.
Timing belts and interference engines combined with being extremely hard to replace is a bad combination.
True, belted engines should definitely be designed with consideration for serviceability.
Still, failures of belts are almost always due to user neglect.