March 23, 2007
From the desk of Jane Galt:Okay, maybe I'm just an urban snob. But what's the big fuss about cars that parallel park themselves? Parallel parking is just not that hard. I mean, I'm not against it, but from the video, it seems like setting up the car to park is more of a pain in the ass than just parking it, plus the actual parking process takes longer than doing it yourself, and it doesn't do quite as good a job.
Plus the people doing the parking in the video pick a space big enough to front park in. It doesn't exactly make me long to go out and buy a car with this feature. Show me the Lexus shoehorning itself into a space big enough for a Corolla, and I'll get excited.
Update Sorry, I was unclear. Obviously, if you live in a rural area, you don't get much rpactice parallel parking, so you're not good at it . . . but you also don't need this car. I was trying to ask, who is the market for this thing?
Posted by Jane Galt at March 23, 2007 10:43 AM | TrackBack | Technorati inbound linksNo offense, but you're "just an urban snob" (in your own words). Speaking as someone who doesn't live in a big city, if you only do it about once every three years or so, parallel parking is a royal pain in the ass. I have no doubt that if I did it every day this would not be the case. As it is, however, it takes me about ten minutes to do it, and I don't know anybody locally who fares much better.
Given that point, as somebody who only parallel parks about once every three years, I don't see what the big deal is on cars that parallel park themselves. It's not like it's a feature I'd actually use that much.
Since moving to a rural setting my previously Mad parallel parking skillz have gotten so bad I actively avoid parallel parking in the city. I would rather walk an extra 4 blocks to avoid it.
It's also the case that the car requires 3+1/4 feet on each end. Maybe my perception of distance is off, but that seems like more than I typically have when I parallel park.
If the car requires 3+ feet to parallel park, that really isn't impressive at all. Wait, 3+ feet on *each* end? I've gotten my jeep into a spot that had a total of 6" to spare. Granted, it's a wrangler which means I see down to the corners, and it took a good long time to get in that spot... but still.
As to urban snob, you may well be, but certainly not because of this. I only parallel park when I go into the city, something which I manage to keep under a few times a year, and somehow, I'm not impressed. Well, I'm impressed that someone managed to get such a system to work. I'm not impressed with it as an option on a car. But, then again, I hate anti-lock breaks and cruise control, so maybe I'm not representative of the car gizmo market.
I don't think there is anyone who is legitimately excited about owning a car that eliminates the need to manually parallel park. The real appeal of this car is to gadget geeks who think that a car that seems to have artificial intelligence is really neat and appealing. Most of the fuss I've seen comes from "urban snobs" (ha ha) who don't get the geek appeal and think that the car is actually targeted at suburban parallel-parking scaredy-cats.
On the other hand, every technology needs early adopters. GPS used to be a feature reserved for the swankiest of rides; nearly every car on the market now has a navigation system option. If we see the same kind of growth in the "car-parking-itself" feature, maybe I won't find myself yelling at that guy who took up just a little too much space.
Doesn't status answer this question? I don't think that people are paying for a system to park their cards. They're paying for the status which comes with being able to own a car that will park itself, even if it doesn't do a very good job of it.
Am I wrong?
Unfortunately, what the driving world really needs is a car that can park itself into perpendicular spots. I mean, have seen the parking skills in lots these days? Jeebus!
And what the world of commenting really needs is people who proofread before posting. That should have read, "Have you seen."
CarThatDrivesByItself 1.0 is, well, sort of gimmicky.
My guess is that CarThatDrivesByItself 2.0 will be slightly more interesting. CarThatDrivesByItself 3.0 will be indespensible.
This car (like the rest of the Lexus line) is targeted at people who aren't passionate about driving and, consequently, never got very good at it.
I think this is a first in automotive marketing: a car with an advertising campaign based explicitly and without embarassment on the target demographic's lack of driving skill.
I'll be excited when they come out with a car that can swivel all four wheels 90 degrees so I can instantly parallel park with less than an inch to spare.
Another vote for "gadgetry for gadgetry's sake". If the curb is so sparsely parked that there are spaces with >3' clearance on both ends of the vehicle, then there's also a wide open stretch a half block up that you can pull into forward-wise and avoid the whole issue. If the street is so densely parked that parallel is your only option, then this system can't help you.
I'd like to see a car that can navigate safely by itself in bumper to bumper traffic, maybe with an alarm to wake up the driver when traffic loosens up.
Hey, when I can stretch out in back, my legs across the seat, and have a beer while reading the sports page, THEN I'll be impressed.
Hey, when I can stretch out in back, my legs across the seat, and have a beer while reading the sports page, THEN I'll be impressed.
...right up until the State decides that you need to report for questioning, and appropriates the vehicle's control logic. Hello, Minority Report!
I'll be impressed when a car can parallel park itself... on a hill, and with a standard transmission and a sketchy e-brake. Hell, even if it can angle-park under those conditions, I'd be impressed.
Anon - every car campaign which emphasises "safety" is, in part, based on the target market's lack of driving skill. Especially Volvo, whose unofficial motto is "it's a good car to have a crash in".
Good lord, I must be an urban snob, too. I don't drive now in Brooklyn, but I did in San Francisco, and 3+ feet would have been wonderful. I was see-sawing in maybe 14 inches leeway, trying not to be one of those jerks that bumped the other cars. And this, on a hill, with a manual transmission in an 80's beater I bought for $1000. And yes, I did walk to school uphill in the snow both ways after picking bandwidth to feed the blog.
I was trying to ask, who is the market for this thing?
People who want to sue somebody when they ding another car trying to park.
Comments are Closed.