Leaked info on Bronco's technology: Off-Road Navigation, Adventure Capture, Real-Time Tire Pressure

[DaBoss]

Thank you. Haven't been in a new Ford, so I was unsure.

Sponsored

 

[OX1]

What is Ford's tire pressure update rate now?

 

[PAPA old school]

Thank you. Haven't been in a new Ford, so I was unsure.

just buy a seat belt extender and defeat the system, its locked in and warnings go away

 

[BroncoRevital]

This is very cool news. Again, I hope we aren't getting our hopes up for nothing but these are some really cool features. It sounds like we might be getting a front camera and that would be fantastic.


As for the back seat situation it would be nice to be able to turn that off or not have to opt into it but those that are mad at it have to be a special kind of selfish asshole to get your panties in a bunch over something that can save kids lives. I can joke about it but to actually be that opposed to it is just pathetic.

 

[Carolina Jim]

You can't trump someone's personal experience with tragedy - so I won't try.

But you are correct about the complexity of life today. In addition to the 'clutter' you reference, there's tons more known today about human physiology - and the abnormalities that small percentages of the population have. Shall we outlaw peanuts at the ballpark because 0.6% of people are allergic?...or stop people from using fragrances because they irritate some with respiratory issues? As the mysteries of DNA continue to unfold we are likely to better understand why some people (through no fault of their own) are more prone to substance abuse...shall we then ban all those substances?

I'm all in favor of having products available to help people with individual needs or personal situations. But attempting to make life a 'one size fits all' scenario is a fool's errand.

 

[BroncoRevital]

Right, not being annoyed by a feature that saves kids lives and does very little to effect me is pathetic.
What’s naive is not understanding that mistakes and sever circumstances can happen out in the real world. Sometimes the perfect storm can happen and although yes it still might be neglectful by the parents and or guardians a feature to save that innocent kids life isn’t going to ruin my day. If it does for you then Im sorry to break it to you but your infallible stance is your own problem.

 

[BroncoRevital]

I'm all in favor of having products available to help people with individual needs or personal situations. But attempting to make life a 'one size fits all' scenario is a fool's errand.

I agree and there are many circumstances that go too far and impend on other people not effected. It’s the affected persons responsibility to adhere to their issue. Not everyone else’s. This however shouldn’t be one of them. It’s like saying smoke alarms are stupid and annoying because I’ll never set my house on fire.

 

[Carolina Jim]

It’s the affected persons responsibility to adhere to their issue. Not everyone else’s. This however shouldn’t be one of them.

In effect, Ford is taxing Bronco buyers ~$5M/year to provide this safety feature (~$20/per X # Wrangler units sold). I can think of numerous other safety features that Could save lives:

• built-in defibrillators
• EpiPen & NARCAN in every glovebox
• breathalyzer/ignition interlock

I'm sure you could come up with many others. Where should we stop??

 

[BroncoRevital]

In effect, Ford is taxing Bronco buyers ~$5M/year to provide this safety feature (~$20/per X # Wrangler units sold). I can think of numerous other safety features that Could save lives:

• built-in defibrillators
• EpiPen & NARCAN in every glovebox
• breathalyzer/ignition interlock

I'm sure you could come up with many others. Where should we stop??

I mean sure but defibrillators are expensive.
EpiPens/Meds are people’s own responsibility.
Breathalyzer/ignition are an infringement to your use of property and are also too expensive.

The main issue here is a child is innocent and not responsible in this situation. I can spare $20 for this

 

[Stampede.Offroad]

I agree and there are many circumstances that go too far and impend on other people not effected. It’s the affected persons responsibility to adhere to their issue. Not everyone else’s. This however shouldn’t be one of them. It’s like saying smoke alarms are stupid and annoying because I’ll never set my house on fire.

If I don't have kids or pets or any other dependents/animals why would such a thing be on by default? Or similar nannies turned on automatically with every restart of the vehicle?

Offering a service or letting you opt into something is one thing, forcing it on everyone because a few made a mistake and hurt societies feelings is different. Lowest-common-denominator doesn't have to apply to people -- if you're expected to be responsible enough to operate a vehicle, you should be expected to have common sense.

Nannies just make people more dependent on outside forces to solve their problems for them, and less likely to take responsibility themselves.

To take your example, I don't think you should be legally required to have a smoke detector in your house, or to wear a seatbelt. At the same time, if you have common sense I expect you to see the value in those things and choose to use them when it is appropriate. That's your responsibility. If you don't and your house burns down, that's sad, but the result shouldn't be the community demanding that everyone install them because it hurt their feelings when your house burned down -- it should be people learning from your mistake and reevaluating their own use of smoke detectors, or seatbelts, or occupant reminders.

If you don't have a smoke detector, or insurance, and you burn your house down and the neighbors house, again that's your responsibility (and to a lesser extent, theirs, they should consider the possibility that their insurance etc. should take into account forces outside their control). Just because you have a smoke alarm, or a fire department, or a fire extinguisher, etc. etc. doesn't mean the sad story of a few houses burning down should force everyone to install fire suppression devices and cameras in their house so they can be monitored by the "safety dept", even though that would very likely result in fewer fires and property losses.

It all boils down to where you draw the line for the expectation that people take responsibility. The direction of the mob seems to be lower and lower standards.

 

[BroncoRevital]

If I don't have kids or pets or any other dependents/animals why would such a thing be on by default? Or similar nannies turned on automatically with every restart of the vehicle?

Offering a service or letting you opt into something is one thing, forcing it on everyone because a few made a mistake and hurt societies feelings is different. Lowest-common-denominator doesn't have to apply to people -- if you're expected to be responsible enough to operate a vehicle, you should be expected to have common sense.

Nannies just make people more dependent on outside forces to solve their problems for them, and less likely to take responsibility themselves.

To take your example, I don't think you should be legally required to have a smoke detector in your house, or to wear a seatbelt. At the same time, if you have common sense I expect you to see the value in those things and choose to use them when it is appropriate. That's your responsibility. If you don't and your house burns down, that's sad, but the result shouldn't be the community demanding that everyone install them because it hurt their feelings when your house burned down -- it should be people learning from your mistake and reevaluating their own use of smoke detectors, or seatbelts, or occupant reminders.

If you don't have a smoke detector, or insurance, and you burn your house down and the neighbors house, again that's your responsibility (and to a lesser extent, theirs, they should consider the possibility that their insurance etc. should take into account forces outside their control). Just because you have a smoke alarm, or a fire department, or a fire extinguisher, etc. etc. doesn't mean the sad story of a few houses burning down should force everyone to install fire suppression devices and cameras in their house so they can be monitored by the "safety dept", even though that would very likely result in fewer fires and property losses.

It all boils down to where you draw the line for the expectation that people take responsibility. The direction of the mob seems to be lower and lower standards.

Ok yes I agree on much of this but it’s not about relying on “nannies” or people’s feelings. It’s about a helpless innocent child. That’s what trumps all these other issues and scenarios.
This line isn’t very low. It does almost nothing to effect you negatively.

My only issue would be with it is not being able to turn it off because frankly I don’t fully know how it works. I don’t want this thing going off when I just have my stuff in the back.

Sponsored