Death to pedestrians!

michael said:

And your point is????

Click to expand...

That your efforts to trivialize the issue backfired.

CGameProgrammer said:

By the way there are a lot of cars, including regular gasoline cars, that can not be heard in many circumstances when idling, or they have auto-off (such as hybrids) and are literally silent at a stop.

Click to expand...

My Prius C is completely silent when stopped, but as soon as I take my foot off the brake pedal the electronic noisemaker comes on. I can hear it with the windows rolled down in the garage, but in normal driving it's inaudible inside the cabin.

roundpeg said:

michael said:

And your point is????

Click to expand...

That your efforts to trivialize the issue backfired.

Click to expand...

You sure picked the right name for yourself

Let me try to explain why the studies are faulty....

They compare all ICE cars with all Hybrid and Electric cars, nationwide. They are not a cohort.

We know that EVs are much more common in California than, for example, in Wyoming.
We know that most current EVs (pre Bolt and excluding Tesla) are "commuter cars"

One cannot compare the low speed pedestrian accident rates of a pickup truck in Wyoming, as an example, with a car in Los Angeles. There will NATURALLY be more pedestrian accidents in cities.

A much more reasonable study would have been to compare low speed pedestrian/auto accident rates within the Los Angeles City Limits than nationwide. The 372 page study that analyzed the benefits of noisemakers did not such thing. It was the work of government workers looking to make rules.

I did not trivialize pedestrian accidents...I said that the efforts should be directed at the more serious side of the problem.

What is wrong with you?

You stoop to insults twice in one post and then ask what's wrong with me. Nice.

Try answering my question. It was: what is the argument in favor of an EV or any car being completely silent at low speeds?

Without insults.

The only arguments against are personal preference and (highly localized) "noise pollution". You can argue that all cars should be painted high-visibility yellow because it's safer, but few would agree with such a claim, again due to personal preference.

I found the pedestrian sound was very audible even outside and moving with the windows closed. I could hear when it turned off above 14 mph.

EldRick said:

Over 14mph, the tires make enough noise to do the job.

Is Tesla irresponsible on this one, I'd say Yes. Here's a real-life experience: https://forums.tesla.com/de_DE/forum/forums/pedestrian-alert-electric-carstesla

Click to expand...

There will be tons of situations like this where the driver is at fault not because you didn't hear the car however it would be interesting to know had you heard the car would you as The Pedestrian paid more attention or felt you could have diverted your accident.

CGameProgrammer said:

You can argue that all cars should be painted high-visibility yellow because it's safer, but few would agree with such a claim, again due to personal preference.

Click to expand...

Good point. A rigidly-enforced highway speed limit of 10 mph would no doubt save lives, but is nonetheless clearly undesirable. Life is full of tradeoffs. In a free society, these tradeoffs are best left to personal preference.

roundpeg said:

You stoop to insults twice in one post and then ask what's wrong with me. Nice.

Try answering my question. It was: what is the argument in favor of an EV or any car being completely silent at low speeds?

Without insults.

Click to expand...

The argument in favor of silence is that the world is too noisy, and all things should be quiet unless there is good reason for them to make noise. The EV is beautifully quiet. Better have a good reason to make it have the failings of an ICE car.

The question at hand is whether the new law as written makes sense.... This law:

Requires generated noise every single time the car is moving slowly or stopped (yes, even when stopped, see the law) without there being convincing evidence that it does any good. And without regard to whether pedestrians are in the vicinity. Think of those chirpers that are sometimes installed at intersections, making noise 24/7 because a blind person might eventually come along.

It causes the driver to believe he can be less careful because the car announces itself

It does not benefit the deaf or those with headphones, who for the reason above are put at greater risk.

It does not apply to motor vehicles with engines, even to those whose engines stop when the car stops.

It does not apply to large vehicles.

I have seen no evidence that the study has considered differences in the usage (urban vs suburban vs rural) of EV usage vs ICE usage, so I question even the small safety advantage they claim.

A recent study showed that in New York City alone, 500 pedestrians are hospitalized yearly after being struck by bicycles. While I don't know the number of pedestrians hospitalized after being struck by an EV, it is reasonable to assume that it's in proportion to the EV population, so perhaps 100 a year. Shall we require bicycles to have continuous noisemakers? They are completely silent and statistically more dangerous to pedestrians than are EVs.

It's a stupid law.

Turning your question around, what is the argument in favor of an EV or any car not having a flashing strobe? My thinking is that a noisemaker is a false solution to a problem that is small or even nonexistent, and that it risks unintended consequences.

The reason bicycles collide with pedestrians is because many cyclists run stop-signs and have no regard for any traffic around them. Not all, of course, but there are definitely crazies out there. I would be surprised if there were any incidents at all of an EV hitting a pedestrian at low speed. This law was not created to solve a problem that existed; as soon as EVs started appearing, certain groups objected to their existence because they were afraid the cars would be too quiet. The problem the law is designed to prevent hasn't actually occurred.

Making a sound while stopped makes sense if you're in drive mode, arguably, just like an idling car. I turned mine off because I found it considerably louder than most cars; it seemed quite obnoxious. I didn't usually notice it if I had the radio on, but if I found it obnoxious when I could hear it, then I suspect others nearby would also have hated the sound. What people here haven't yet addressed is whether or not pedestrians actually want to hear this sound.

EldRick said:

...I don't need the sound...

Click to expand...

It's not about what You need, it's about someone else being able to tell your car is there, and not step in front of you.

If you do disable it, and injure or kill someone as a result, I hope they prosecute you.

Click to expand...

Relax bro...there are far more serious and riskier things in the world to worry about.

michael said:

If a silent vehicle is a problem, then there should be a required minimum noise level, and it should pertain to all cars, not merely to EVs.

I hate EV's being singled out for noisemaking...if it's REALLY a problem, then make the requirement apply to hybrids and quiet ICE cars. If not, then not.

Click to expand...

Indeed I agree. The majority of a vehicle's sound comes the tires. I can sneak up behind you in a Toyota Camry V6 and you'd not know I'm there anymore than you'd know it's an EV.

CGameProgrammer said:

It turns out the annoying pedestrian warning speaker can be disabled by just pulling a fuse.

Click to expand...

So......which fuse was it? More interestingly though, I think it would be great if we could make our own pedestrian warning sound. A particular Ludacris song comes to mind I frequently find that my pedestrian noisemaker is TOO quiet, and the horn is too rude. People amble through parking lots like cattle.

The manual has a fuse diagram and the relevant fuse is labelled in it. It's easy to find; it's adjacent to two empty fuse slots.

LOL!

So, is that why my Bolt honks at me (3 quick honks) when I step in front of it while it's running to look at or get something?

I can see how it would become really annoying really fast in a big City where people are constantly walking in front of the car. Probably startling to them as well.

On the other hand, I've nearly run into a pedestrain while turning at a corner in other vehicles with less visibility issues than the Bolt and I can see the value of the honking in that situation.

Tough call. If I still lived in the City, I'd probably remove the fuse. However, where I live now, I don't "run across" (pun intended) many pedestrians.

So, I'll just leave the fuse in for now.

I'll never understand the reasoning behind disabling this critical safety feature.

But then, there's a guy on a Bolt FB group who hates the "something in the back seat" reminder (to help prevent leaving a child or animal in a hot car). He felt that GM should have devoted resources into more useful features.

dandrewk said:

I'll never understand the reasoning behind disabling this critical safety feature.

But then, there's a guy on a Bolt FB group who hates the "something in the back seat" reminder (to help prevent leaving a child or animal in a hot car). He felt that GM should have devoted resources into more useful features.

Click to expand...

Isn't there a software switch for "the something on the back seat" warning. I recall turning that off when I when though the vehicle preferences.

sgt1372 said:

dandrewk said:

I'll never understand the reasoning behind disabling this critical safety feature.

But then, there's a guy on a Bolt FB group who hates the "something in the back seat" reminder (to help prevent leaving a child or animal in a hot car). He felt that GM should have devoted resources into more useful features.

Click to expand...

Isn't there a software switch for "the something on the back seat" warning. I recall turning that off when I when though the vehicle preferences.

Click to expand...

Yes there is, and it was pointed out to the whiney FB poster. But his contention is that this "feature" is a waste of resources. Much better to devote resources for things like adaptive cruise control.

dandrewk said:

sgt1372 said:

Isn't there a software switch for "the something on the back seat" warning. I recall turning that off when I when though the vehicle preferences.

Click to expand...

Yes there is, and it was pointed out to the whiney FB poster. But his contention is that this "feature" is a waste of resources. Much better to devote resources for things like adaptive cruise control.

Click to expand...

Well, I agree with that. Of course his fallacy is that the two features are by no means mutually exclusive.

SeanNelson said:

dandrewk said:

sgt1372 said:

Isn't there a software switch for "the something on the back seat" warning. I recall turning that off when I when though the vehicle preferences.

Click to expand...

Yes there is, and it was pointed out to the whiney FB poster. But his contention is that this "feature" is a waste of resources. Much better to devote resources for things like adaptive cruise control.

Click to expand...

Well, I agree with that. Of course his fallacy is that the two features are by no means mutually exclusive.

Click to expand...

And of course, checking a sensor in the back seat and sounding the reminder MUST have used up just as many resources as programming adaptive cruise control would have. :roll:

Fuse #34 in the box under the hood on the right top corner is Pedestrian friendly alert function or PFAF fuse. See page 265/266 of the owners manual PDF. I pulled it out, I like the sound of silence. If you hit a pedestrian, with or without the sound, you are most likely at fault.