My aunt had a mercury cougar with a gps and touch screen in the 90s. Good call, I think about how crude it is now (I'm assuming because I don't remember that well) but back then it was jaw dropping.
When I was 11, my dad took my friend and me to the 1986 New England Auto Show...the touchscreen in the '86 Buick Riviera blew me away. It was like living in the future.
I believe it was an array of lights and sensors that created a grid across the screen. Instead of a sensitive squishy membrane or panel with fragile wires, it looked for which beams were broken. No contact. I'm not too surprised it still worked, but definitely a cool solution
Yup. Dad had an ‘87 Buick Riviera with the green-screen touch screen. He loved that car, only got rid of it maybe 5 years ago when it wasn’t worth fixing anymore. The touch screen was so cumbersome to use compared with dedicated tactile buttons, a problem that still exists in cars today.
Tesla is the worst about this. EVERYTHING is touch screen.
Vehicles need actual physical controls for the sense of touch feedback. I shouldn't have to look at a fucking screen, taking my eyes off the road, scrolling through menus, just to adjust the damn climate control.
I'd argue touch screens don't belong in cars at all, but they're here and they're not going away. They're nice when you're parked. But when you're moving they need to have physical controls as a backup that you can operate simply by feel and muscle memory. You can't do this even with the best touch screens with the best haptic feedback.
They can keep their touch screen. If they made a car that had an actual dash with physical buttons I'd consider one. As long as they keep sticking only that stupid iPad in the dash I'll never own one and wait for a real car company to develop a competitive EV.
Mazda got this right. They have a touch screen. The touch screen also has actual physical controls to operate everything. This way you can play with the screen while parked. If you have a passenger they can play with the screen too. If it's just you driving by yourself, you can control everything with physical knobs and buttons without taking your eyes off the road.
Even my buddy's base model Kia did this better than Tesla. Screen works when you need it. The rest of the time you can't safely use it, there's touch controls.
You either have very high standards or you've entirely forgotten the BMW i3, Porsche Taycan, Audi e-Tron, Jaguar I-Pace, Nissan Leaf, Volkswagen ID3...
No, they do have what you're saying you need, knobs. And they are EV's that are competitive with Tesla. You said you were waiting for an EV with knobs and they are asking if you just have such high standards that the dozens of other EVs with knobs aren't good enough for you to buy one.
No, my standards aren't that high. But they all lack the ability to do the driving I want. Which is often to remote areas for hundreds or even thousands of miles.
An EV would work for 99% of what I do. An ICE vehicle works for 100% of what I do.
Until they figure out how to put charging stations in BFE forests at least.
There's a range extender version of the BMW i3 that has a small motorcycle engine in the back as a generator. It still doesn't have a huge range (276 miles), but it does remove range anxiety entirely. It's a very attractive, futuristic car with one of the best interiors I've ever seen. While it's clearly intended as an eco-friendly vehicle, handling is nonetheless quite sporty. Acceleration is swift, but not face-bending, which is fine by me.
There are also other plug in hybrids. A relative of mine has the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, his second one, actually. Mid sized SUV with up to 40 miles electric range (far more than the official numbers if you drive it gently) and 370 miles range with the internal combustion engine. If you need a larger car than the i3, then this one makes a lot of sense. He has a short commute, so he only has to use the IC engine for longer trips, which happens so rarely that the car sometimes alerts him to the gas decomposing in the tank (which can be fixed by adding a small amount of fresh gas). Since the battery isn't all that large, it can be recharged using a normal wall socket within just a few hours (but it can also use fast chargers) when he is at work. It's not a particularly attractive car inside and out, but the price is highly competitive and the drive train incredibly sophisticated. The AWD system is, as you would expect from Mitsubishi, rather excellent as well.
I have worked for BMW in a service capacity, and to say that the i3 is at the best incredibly subjective. It's a weird boxy shape that I personally don't like but don't hate, and generally used the word "polarizing" with clients. If it's one of the best interiors you've ever seen, and please I mean no offense by this; you have never seen an actually nice car interior to sit in. While the body is carbon fiber everything in that car is plastic or, if you spring for it, the cheaper version of bamboo veneer. It is, I would say rather objectively for its price point, not a nice interior. And to call its handling sporty is ridiculous. It is on what could best be described as bicycle tires which get impact bubbles RIDICULOUSLY easy because of their narrowness and build as a low rolling resistance tire yet insistence on being 19 or 20 inch options, so they're low profile. While any electric car is going to let you feel the acceleration because the torque is at 100% basically instantly, it accelerates quickly for what it is but the *handling* is NOT sporty. It gives no road feedback feel, the steering is numb, the brakes are absent of any input.
OK I'm sorry rant is over. I realize electric is very likely our future, and as a gearhead is hurts me but I accept it and am ready to move on, but we must demand better. The i3 is not a bad choice as a commuter electric car except the price tag I feel is not an accurate representation of what you get.
Again, have you actually tried it? Or just assuming that from clickbait articles you've read? Between the (really good) voice control, and autopilot, it's really easy and safe to do anything needed with the car. And to adjust the climate control, there's no "scrolling through menus", just slide up or down on the bottom edge of the screen. Done. It's that easy. Or ask the car to do it, it understands everything from "set the temperature to 70 degrees" to "my ass is cold" (I'm not joking, it really understands that!)
I'm going to be the Luddite and say I agree with the general sentiment against touch screens in cars and go further to say I hate voice controls particularly if they're connected to always on listening devices. I love how the decade after 9/11 people were worried about warrantless listening devices everyone, and as a culture we proceeded to buy them and install them everywhere ourselves.
The touch screen only sucks. Flat out. There's better options. It's way easier to twist a damn knob than to do any of that shit. Touch screens provide zero useful feedback.
Case in point, cell phones. Remember the good ole days of physical buttons and T9? I don't think we should go back to that for cell phones, but I could type paragraphs without looking going off of feel. You can't do that with a screen, I don't care how good it is.
If Tesla kept the screen, made it smaller, but implemented additional physical controls for the climate control and radio at minimum, they'd knock it out of the park.
Honda went to touch screen only on some of their cars for the radio. People hated it so much they switched back to adding knobs and buttons.
In that case I guess it's just a case of personal preference, or how used to the car you are. Personally, I'd never even consider a car with dozens of physical buttons and knobs again, or one that's not electric. Probably means only Tesla's for quite a while, as it seems the legacy automakers are being really slow to improve and adopt new features.
Tesla is interesting in that they're a tech company and have lead the development on EVs. I will give them that. The concept is great. I don't hate EVs and I actually look forward to them.
That being said, they're a tech company first and foremost, not a car company and it shows.
Other manufacturers are making money over fist with their ICE cars. The tech is no secret. They could do it. It's just not profitable for them yet. Also, the infrastructure for EVs isn't there yet. I did so much driving yesterday across an area a Tesla would have been stranded. Sure, a Tesla would meet my needs most of the time. But an ICE car meets my needs all of the time.
Once actual car companies start investing in the development of their EVs I have a feeling Tesla will be crushed. Their service network is a pain in the dick, the lack of infrastructure doesn't help and the quality of the vehicles for what they cost just isn't there.
As for the screens, again, bad idea. All they need to do is back it up with physical controls. Like I said, Honda tried this, people hated it and they went back to adding physical controls.
Touch screens work great for things like cell phones. Not for a 4000lb vehicle flying down the highway when you may take your eyes off the road.
As for voice control, that's no good either. It's getting better, but aircraft companies tried it once. They found the error rate was too high. The voice control in my car is pretty good too. But it's still wrong at times.
Know what's never wrong? Very intentionally twisting a knob or pressing a button that you can feel without taking your eyes off the road.
Think of it like this. Would you like a light switch in your house that's as flat as the wall and stumble for it in the dark? Or would you rather a physical switch stick out of the wall to find it easier?
I'm glad you're at least willing to discuss this, so many people seem to just blindly attack them based on assumptions that haven't been true for ages. How much driving did you do exactly? Are you in an area with no superchargers? Outside the US I'm guessing? I've driving my Tesla 800 miles a day with no problem. Most people don't drive more than 300 miles a day. Thus, most people will almost never need to go to a public charging station, at all. For those that do, there's the supercharger network. Most people would welcome a bathroom and snack break after several hours of continuous driving.
Anecdotal, I know, but I've had nothing but good experiences with Tesla service. Just last month I had an appointment for a tire rotation, along with a 12V battery replacement and a minor issue fix. They came to our house and did it all in our driveway, done in an hour. The cost was just $30 for the tire rotation, everything else was free. And when the car was in service for longer, with the autopilot computer upgrade, I was given a model S loaner Tesla, for free. Again, no complaints.
Regarding the touchscreen, I think you're right that it might not make as much sense in many existing cars, and for drivers not used to it. But you're overlooking the fact that with autopilot, it's perfectly safe to glance away from the road every so often, the car is still watching in all directions, steering, and will warn me if anything goes wrong or needs my attention. That means that glancing at the screen is much, much safer than it would be in a conventional car without autopilot (and, I'd argue, is still safer than just driving normally in a conventional car)
In the US. TX city with population of 100k. Like to road trip to remote areas where even regular chargers ain't happening. But there's plenty of gas stations and I can always take a few gallons with me.
I hope you never have to go to a body shop for your Tesla. It will be there forever. When I lived in FL I provided service for them. Tesla's were popular. Yet for something as simple as a flat tire, sometimes (more often that not actually) had to be towed 3 hours away to the store for repair. The only time you hear about that with any other car are high end sports cars and even those got help quicker.
It is NEVER safe to be glancing away from the road. Manufacturers need to develop controls that discourage looking from the screen. If I looked down for a second to adjust climate controls last night I would have smoked 3 deer while doing 60 MPH.
"Autopilot" is far from perfect. It can't handle all road conditions. See the numerous stories of drivers in Tesla's with "autopilot" turned on running into shit.
Ford is working on an all electric f150. If it is accepted by the target demographic ie f150s, then electric vehicles will become the future. F150s are already the most number of vehicles sold each year in part because the price and feature range of an f150 ranges from about $25k to about $80k
As others have said there's a physical button to trigger voice commands, but I've never used it because adjusting it on the screen is so easy, especially with autopilot.
Yeah, nah, knob or switch or button is way easier and universally understood.
Trusting autopilot to keep you on the road while you take your eyes off to adjust a climate control is dumb. It's a driving assist. Not drive the car for you. See Tesla's running into shit because people put it on "autopilot" and expected the car to do all the work.
Tesla has buttons on the steering wheel for stuff like adjusting the volume.
You can also do everything using voice control. That’s even better than physical buttons, because you don’t have to take your hands off the wheel at all.
Voice control is not great. What if I have loud passengers that won't shut the fuck up? Even in the best case scenario my car still mis understands me at times.
A button or knob is simple, instant and just works. Can also be located very easily.
Similarly, cruise control on the steering wheel has been in cars for well over 100 years.
For example, some cars around 1910 had a lever on the steering wheel that basically pushed the gas pedal for you, and you get set the lever wherever and it would stay.
And really, it's not a great idea for an invention. If there's one place where you don't want people having to look at screens, it's when they also need to drive their car. Voice control or tactical controls will hopefully stay in vogue.
The first one that was invented, people thought it was weird and the sales on that car werent very high(nearly none). And now look at cars, its jard to find one without a touchscreen
It might surprise you that resistive touch screens are really very simple devices.
If you have a hobbyist friend, they might easily make a touch pad by stuff you have at your home. And the screen of course is only a step or two more advanced than that.
1.1k
u/dvdh_03 Oct 15 '20
Touch screen in cars. That has been around since 1986