Do You Want Mandated or Selectable Safety?

17-Ford-F-450-PlatinumA II

By G.R. Whale

As working vehicles, pickup trucks have been slower than cars to adopt safety equipment, from laminated glass and seat belts to antilock brakes and airbags. As technology progresses and the U.S. highway fatality rate swings upward for the first time in years, the government will require more safety systems on pickups.

There's little that pickup buyers can do about federal safety requirements for vehicles; few of these features can be shut off or dialed down. Some of them work well and others are sensitive and react to dangers that don't exist. Right now many of these safety systems are optional, but the potential exists for them to become standard down the road.

Early research has found that few complain about or disable blind spot warnings but audible lane departure warnings are often turned off because drivers don't like nannies that let everyone in the car know they were too lazy to signal. Vehicles that offer non-audible alerts, such as GM's vibrating seat cushion or other manufacturers' vibrating steering wheel, lead to fewer active safety systems being disabled.

Your humble correspondent considers the driver to be the only active safety system —those designed to avoid crashes — that needs be engaged all the time. What active safety systems do you want on your pickup and which would you like to be able to disable? photo by Angela Conners



Hmm...besides seatbelt and airbags I say the rest should be optional. Far as I'm concerned theirs no replacement for just being attentive behind the wheel. Far too many people rely on the driver nannies these days. Not sure I can trust them if they can't even get ignition switches and brakes right after how many years now??? Lol

One thing is for sure. I DON'T want auto stop. I don't want my truck slamming on the brakes on L.A.'s busy freeways because it see's a reflection off another trucks bumper. Ask Ford owners about this. The more automated the more lawsuits when they fail.

I would like to see Ford install a Fire suppression system like race cars. That way people will be safer and investigators can find the cause of the fire since it won't burn to the ground and houses and cars nearby won't burn either.

More Fiat-Ram-Chryslers burn than any other vehicle. Too bad you drove without insurance in the 1980s.

I mandate HEMI V8 buys insurance.

I would like to see Ford install a Fire suppression system like race cars.

Posted by: HEMI V8 | Oct 25, 2016 6:16:15 PM

Agreed, as well, Ford should be mandated to build vehicles that don't stall and brakes that work.

Need the elbow on the door with cell phone n the hand holding up the drivers head warning shocker.

I just want to be able to shut off the seat belt reminder. Sometimes when I'm driving 1/2 mile across the farm at 15 miles an hour I don't want to buckle up. Especially if I'm wearing gloves or a big coat or something. You used to be able to shut them off, but now it's getting harder.

I also don't mind the rearview camera becoming mandatory just because I personally would never buy another vehicle without one and there are a lot of people that REALLY need it.

I also don't mind the rearview camera becoming mandatory just because I personally would never buy another vehicle without one and there are a lot of people that REALLY need it.

Why? Making things like that mandatory just drives up the base cost for everyone whether they need it or not.

GOVT motor trucks need to be mandated to stop shaking...otherwise all optional for me please...thank you.

No more mandated safety equipment. Safety glass and antilock brakes are one thing because they are an improvement on an existing necessary driving function. Reminders that nag you while you are driving or makes the decision to slam on the brakes for you is distracting and dangerous.

Selectable safety, I don't need or care to pay for stupid useless vibrating seats, and dumb beepers.

What we need to see is package separation. I would rather buy a truck with a few high end options for safety like driver assist, park assist, radar. Leave tpms out. Rubber floors, seats with heat steering too, hand shift 4x4. Normal radio with a CD and a subwoofer. Roll up Windows? Maybe,.. Example. Powerwagon tradesman. Its almost perfect.

It's the same as not being able to find low option diesels. The mid trim diesel Colorado I saw was perfect and the sticker was the same as a optioned v6 off road. Packages need to be optioned. Gearing options need to be unlocked for certain styles that won't allow order too! Some people want low gears for towing light but in the hills. Nissans new xd is like this. 3.92 available in diesel only? The gas even though equipped with a 7 speed is only available with 3.3? That's backwards imho. I know the different trans. But I still think it would benefit from gearing options greatly.

Another package ordering anomaly is chevy double cabs. The very early build ltz's came with 8 speeds and 3.42 gears. Can't buy or order this configuration. It might be available this year. But all the double cabs I've looked at have 6 speeds. The only similar are crew cab ltz 71's with 55k sticker. So you need to basically order all the safety items to get the 8 speed with 5.3

Talking about safety over aesthetics, here's a sneak peek at the '18 Express:

Your welcome.

Driver's focus and diligence are key safety features that computers, sensors and other nannies can't really do much about.

Decent tires and brakes are another. I preach to my kids that a vehicle having a dead battery is inconvenient but it probably won't kill you. A car with bad brakes will.

A car owner who doesn't care about safety overcomes a myriad of safety systems. All of the foregoing comments apply to trucks equally if not more so.

Safety should always be mandated, but extras as described above are not necessary. Before vehicles use this high tech stuff, they should first get the old tech done correctly before taking on the new stuff.

Less government is always a good thing!!!

Freedom > safety

Make all of the basic safety tech mandatory. If it saves lives and prevents injury or property damage, it's worth it for everyone on the road (including motorcyclist, bicyclist and pedestrians).

Anyone who pays an insurance premium should favor all of the added safety options. This available tech should at the very least prevent insurance rates from skyrocketing. Maybe it could offset all of the accidents caused by distracted driving.

My argument for helmet laws... Why should I pay more for my moto insurance when, much of my premium is going to some idiots medical bills that could have otherwise been prevented by wearing a helmet. "My Freedom" you say? Well you should pay more if you want that freedom to cover yourself and likeminded fools.

Around here a bull guard would do much good against all the deer accidents, but doubt that would ever be mandated by a government that probably thinks deer are an endangered animal.

I agree on the rear view cameras. Those things are fantastic and cost very little ($20 camera and the screen is either already there or of modest cost) probably less than $100 and it can avoid most folks small, stupid errors that might cost a few hundred dollars in repairs either to their own car or someone else's.

The auto-braking will likely become standard in a few years. The sensors are getting cheaper and the computer can think and act much faster than a human.

I feel it helps not because I am inattentive but against other stupid/careless people on the road that I have to drive along side of.

Unfortunately, time and time again, the industry has show that if something isnt mandated they will at most make it optional. Some stuff like structural/technological improvements aimed at improving accident surviveability should be mandated, like seatbelts, crumple zones, side and front airbags, structural improvements to help in rollovers/small overlap crashes, and traction control are all good things that industry likely would have never made standard if it wasnt mandated.

When you get into stuff that decreases driver distraction/tries to replace some functions of the driver (blind spot monitors, backup cameras, semi automated braking), then I am of the opinion that there should be no half measures. Either make the car fully autonomous and completely remove controls from the passenger compartment, or leave that stuff off completely. With partial automation, good/attentive drivers will see almost negligible benefit from it and driver prone to distraction will become dependent on the automation and trust it too much, and eventually will become further distracted and further out of control before they realize it is too late (read about the Air France flight 477 crash, absolutely terrifying).

Seven large pickup trucks and four “small” pickups were tested, meaning that while not every truck on the market fell under IIHS’s watchful eye, most did. Three of the seven large trucks (2016 and 2017 Chevrolet Silverado, Ford F-150, and Toyota Tundra) and all four small pickups (2016 Chevrolet Colorado, GMC Canyon, Nissan Frontier, and 2016 and 2017 Toyota Tacoma) are available only with headlights that scored the worst rating, Poor.

Stabiltrac or advancetrac or whatever should always be able to be overridden for off road situations

My 2016 Tundra Platinum has Blind Sport Monitor (BSM) with Rear Cross-Traffic Alert (RCTA) with an on and off switch. I personally grown to like the BSM and RCTA system, it's very nice even if you check you mirrors to ensure 99% of the time no vehicles are in your blind spot. The only time I disable BSM is when I am towing, because the trailer will trip the system sometimes. Otherwise, BSM is always on in my Tundra.

There are Pickup Trucks on the market that don't offer a standard backup camera, that is something that should be standard.

Systems I don't want:
Auto braking that can't be turned off
Lane keep assist that turns the wheel when you drift out of your lane
Auto Start/stop
Auto high beams
Auto Windshield wipers

Blind Spot Monitor (BSM)*

I'm still waiting for an action movie to have a scene where the hero is boxed in by the baddies and has to bash his way out of traffic but gets stuck/killed because of all the nannies like auto braking, lane departure assist, etc.

I don't want any tech in my truck that can override my driving and slam on the brakes. Not now, not ever. The idea that the same people behind My Ford Touch might be in charge of something like that gives me chills.

Safety vs Weight vs Complexity vs Cost vs Gov Involvement vs Being a Careful Adult/Good Drive...

A never ending mix of pros and cons... I LOVE antilock brakes, seat belts, laminated glass, safety cages/crush zones, non impaling parts on a car/truck, and even the backup or even better 360 degree camera systems... but I despise lane assist, blind spot monitoring, traction control, automatic headlights, automatic wipers... I don't have any experience yet with adaptive cruise, vibrating seats, assisted and unassisted autonomous braking...

Its a tough call and it would be nice if we could cherry pick our features and save the money and weight if we were comfortable with taking the risk for ourselves and risking everyone else as opposed to the nanny state thugs crushing the life out of everything. As we move from the middle towards fully autonomous EVERYTHING which honestly more and more fatter dumber lazier Americans LOVE it seems like its just a matter of when and not if.

Just wait until your following someone and the computer in their vehicle gets confused or malfunctions and slams on the brakes and you rear end them. Whose fault would it be then? Yours? The manufacturer? Hmm.... Would you be able to prove it wasn't your fault? Or perhaps your driving along on a slick road and your vehicle slams on the brakes and causes you to wreck. Good chance it could happen since they are still having problems with brakes, ignition switches, and alternators. Lol

The comments to this entry are closed.