3 ms·
1. Agreed that its hard to imagine Top Gear writing that way. For example, for Mercedes they write: "Packed with every conceivable gadget, the S-class is tradit
by SlipperySlope 14y ago
1. Agreed that its hard to imagine Top Gear writing that way. For example, for Mercedes they write: "Packed with every conceivable gadget, the S-class is traditionally a place where new technology is debuted – and because this is Merc’s flagship it usually works faultlessly." Car and Driver writes: "Mercedes also claims its new sedan is its safest yet. S-classes equipped with optional Distronic Plus cruise control go beyond the standard car's safety features with a short-range radar system that "looks" at an area closer to the front of the vehicle than the long-range radar used by the cruise control."
2. Regarding stress and strain while driving - here is a research paper that might convince you: http://www.ectri.org/YRS07/Papiers/Session-9/Schiessl.pdf http://www.ectri.org/YRS07/Papiers/Session-9/Schiessl.pdf
3. Experience with diverse embedded software systems, from medical electronics to military jets, has demonstrated that software can be indeed engineered, and verified, to be more safe than simple mechanical and purely human controlled systems.
4. In fact current automatic transmissions are now more fuel efficient than manual transmissions: http://green.autoblog.com/2010/08/18/greenlings-why-do-automatic-transmissions-now-get-better-fuel-e/ http://green.autoblog.com/2010/08/18/greenlings-why-do-autom...
- mibbitier 14y ago3. Why does everyone sigh when they find a "software" on off switch compared to a hardware one? Because the software one invariably doesn't work, or doesn't work immediately. 4. I'm sure it's possible to make an automatic transmission better for fuel consumption, that's an easy problem. But make an automatic transmission that knows what you as a driver want (I'm betting that's rarely "fuel efficiency") - that's the holy grail, which certainly hasn't been achieved yet.