yea more BS regs in cars, just what we need. What next? Regulate the layout of the gauge cluster and infotainment so its the same across brands? No thanks

 

They had to do that, at least to some extent, with aircraft......it helped reduce the number of crashes/accidents.

I remember when I first took flight lessons, outside of some of the basic flight-instruments, the differences in the cockpits between light Cessna and Piper singles (the two most commonly-used training-planes) was quite significant...particularly for the throttle/mixture-controls, fuel-pump-switches, and flaps.

You seem to have a built-in hostility against almost any kind of regulations, even what IMO are reasonable ones.

 

the govt aint paying for your car. Boeing, Grumman, McDonald Douglas designed those planes, not the govt. Terrible analogy

because in the govts infinite wisdom knows how to properly lay out the best useable screen and gauges for a machine they didnt design, not the engineers of the machines itself. The more regs the more the brands start becoming the same. Utterly boring and lack of creativity. Its already being seen in the crash regulations making car exteriors have the same bloated look.

 

LOL, good point. Whenever we talk about regulation, we have sensible, well meaning things in mind - but the government never ceases to pluck things up.

 

Actually no, it is a good analogy....you simply are not grasping it. Engineers are (usually) good at what they do.....designing things.....unless management interferes with cost-cutting demands. Government is (usually) good at co-ordinating those designs to avoid confusion. It's difficult to have one without the other.

 

Here is a generally good article from the Toronto Star (Jill, I'll assume you are familiar with that paper) on the absurdity of unregulated shifters. The author did make one typo, though, in describing how the GM E-shifter works in the newer Lacrosse models...you actually move the lever forward and to the left to get into park, not Reverse....and his editors didn't catch that. I had one of those Lacrosses for about three years. But almost all the rest of his comments are right on.

https://www.thestar.com/autos/2016/1...s-with-it.html


AUTOS

PRNDL — why mess with it?

By Jim Kenzie
Special to the Star
Sat., Nov. 12, 2016
timer4 min. read

PRNDL ain’t broke.

So why are so many car companies bent on fixing it?

PRNDL — pronounced ‘prindle’ — is an acronym for ‘Park-Reverse-Neutral-Drive-Low,’ the sequence of the shift pattern on 100 per cent of automatic-equipped cars since, well, maybe the last Ice Age.

Sometimes the ‘L’ is replaced with ‘S’ (Sport), or ‘M’ (Manual), but the general sequence is the same.

Now the vast majority of today’s automatic cars have the shifter on the centre console; in the old days, a column shift was more common.

But even that pattern, from left to right, was still PRNDL.

There have been a few variations. Back in the mid-1980s, Jaguar introduced the ‘J-Gate’ shifter, often referred to as the ‘Randle Handle,’ after chief engineer Jim Randle.

In this design, the shifter ran down a longitudinal gate, top to bottom, PRND. From there, you could slide the lever to the left, and slide it forward, (completing the left-side stroke of the letter ‘J’) to successively select the lower ratios.

Now, that was the way to introduce change. Offer the usual format to those who didn’t care about shifting ratios for themselves, with the option of doing something different for those who did.

Nonetheless, it wasn’t well-received and was eventually dropped.

More recently, Jaguar and corporate cousin Land Rover have adopted a rotating **** on the console to select ratios. Takes a bit of getting used to, but at least the pattern is the tried and true PRNDL. Well, PRNDS, in this case.

Some Ford models have also adopted this design.

Lincoln uses dash-mounted push buttons. But top to bottom, the standard sequence is employed.

Many (bordering on all) carmakers have gone to electronic shift activation, with microswitches and wiring replacing levers, cranks, linkages and/or cables. The objective here is to save space — centre console real estate is even more valuable than waterfront Vancouver; save weight; and improve reliability.

No probs, as far as that goes.

But to avoid confusing the electronics, there are often delays built in to the activation. If you want to execute a quick three-point turn, for example, you sometimes have to wait for what seems like an eon before the car switches from reverse back to drive while that 18-wheeler is bearing down on you. Don’t ask.

Still, there is no reason for the pattern for ratio selection to be anything but what everyone in the bleedin’ world understands — PRNDL.

But, oh, no. Some engineers don’t get it that ‘progress’ means ‘making things better,’ not ‘making things different just because we can.’

So, many of them have eliminated the Park position altogether, and replaced it with a push button.

This is not old-fartism on my part; this is simply wrong.

With something as important to your personal safety as making sure your car is in Park before you leave it, you want — you need, you deserve — a positive reinforcement that you have selected that secure position.

So, instead of a solid chunk of tactile feedback that your car is secured against rolling away and killing you or your family, you have to rely on a button, which may have a whopping two millimetres of travel, offers no tactile feedback at all, and maybe, just maybe, offers a warning light of some sort.

Two recently encountered examples of this nonsense are the Genesis G90, and the Mercedes-Benz SL 450 sports roadster.

At least in the Genesis, the push button is at the far (front) end of the shift sequence, where Park at least should be.

Mercedes puts it at the near (or rear) end of the quadrant, exactly where 99.9 per cent of drivers would not expect it to be.

Especially for a company which prides itself on its safety innovations (this apart, generally with justification), this is just stupid.

Their arch-rivals at BMW are no better, and may, in fact, be worse. They may have been first with electronic shifters in the E65 7 Series in 2002, but that error was completely obscured by the controversy over that car’s bustle-back rear end styling, and its introduction of the iDrive control system.

This car returned the shift lever to the steering column, a skinny little stalk whose operation remains confusing to this day.

But it’s not even the worst BMW shifter! Try to figure out how to put any BWM M car with the dual clutch gearbox into Park, even with the Owners Manual open on your lap. I defy you.

Maybe the stupidest shift mechanism currently out there can be found in the Cadillac XT5 SUV, and more recently spotted in the new Buick LaCrosse.

In this, you slide the lever forward into Reverse, then somehow push the lever downwards towards the floor, then slide the lever to the left to find Park.

No, no, no, no, no.

There is no need to reinvent this particular wheel.

These new designs offer zero added functionality, and simply introduce confusion.

They can’t say I didn’t warn them. And where are our governmental safety standards people in all this?

Shame on them all.

 

dunno what this dude is talking about, theres no delays in electronic shifters ive used. Every car is different in terms of layout for pretty much most controls not just the transmission. Same people probably complained about keyless entry when it first came out.

 

Some shifters DO have slight delays....although it usually is not longer than a second or two. Longer than that, and it is typically a fluid-level problem in the unit itself.

 

It's not about a delay, it's the fact with so many different shifter designs, someone unfamiliar with a particular design can cause a crash. A good example would be my (now my daughter's) M2 - it does not have a park position, it only goes in park after the engine is shut off, but with running engine it must be shifter to neutral and handbrake engaged. So many times a valet in a parking garage would bring it to me, and not know how to shift it in park, several times they just left in in D with hand brake engaged or in neutral without hand brake engaged. Stupid designs like these should be regulated.

 

Definitely. Not only that, but, even after a year or so with the car, I accidentally brushed the small Park-button on my Lacrosse's GM E-shifter with my thumb, by mistake, when the car was doing maybe 2-3 MPH in a parking lot. A ratcheting-sound, and the car came to an abrupt halt. Fortunately, no apparent damage....and I didn't seem to have any added transmission problems after that. But I absolutely hated that shifter, even though I loved almost everything else about the car...I only replaced it because it got too big for my everyday driving/manuvering needs.

Your daughter's car has a wood-grip shifter? Or is that a typo, and you meant would?

Totally agree. While I respect 4TehNguyen's opinions, I have to disagree with his opposition to what IMO are sensible regulations.

 

I meant to type "would be". I need to start proofreading what I post.

 

God forbid someone has to learn something new when getting in a different vehicle, using a new phone, using a different product of something etc. Nope get govt to solve it because its too much of a burden. Yes some shifter implementations are more idiotic than others but that's how the industry tries different things and weeds bad designs out. Gotta hand it to BMW and the germans to make something as simple as a shifter unintuitive.

 

I've driven at least 20 different rental cars this year and the only time I had an issue was in the new Nissan Rogue because I didn't realize there was a side button to depress to shift into gear.

 

ah, another thread about nothing.

mmarshall, that's a genesis (g90 i think) shifter pic.

 

I agree. I think people are overthinking the safety issue lol. I like the gated shifters. Not a fan of the fed/back shifter with the button…that is a relic of the 1980s that is back

I will say. Some of the new designs are quite interesting. Teslas push button design where the chargers are located is cool. I like the LC500 shifter but despise the look of the LS500 shifter. Buick. Has a nice shifter In the lacrosse. Mercedes could be more interesting with their column design. The dual designs certainly free up space