Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Frankly speaking, what is the purpose of this thread?
A head on collision with a pedestrain at 50km/h or more would definitely inflict injury regardless if the specific vehicle has an outstanding result for pedestrain safety.

At lower speeds wouldn't it be safer for the pedestrains if the car has better brakes? Makes more sense to R&D into that I would say.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

axl said:
My 2 cents:

1) As long as BMW maintains its I6 tradition..

2) As long as consumers continues to buy them, thus ensuring a healthy profit line...

It's fine right? I dunt see no quandry... anywhere. :|

EDIT: As long as regulations won't demand a min 4-star rating for pedestrain safety, I dunt see why things cannot remain status quo. :D
The deadline is 2010 for pedestrian safety rules to be tightened. Since 1 July 2005, phase A has started. But from my brief research, this is NOT law, but a commitment by manufacturers. I cannot find anything to say BMW did or did not meet its commitment with the E90. Many people wanted to put it into law, but manufacturers negotiated it to be a `commitment' instead. BMW is part of the consortium of european car manufacturers who COMMITTED to improved pedestrian safety way back in 2001. Actually all the auto manufacturers did something, achieving like 2 star or more for new vehicles, but BMW E90 was still `dire'.

I think if the E90 was released before 1 July 2005, BMW may have `technically' held to that agreement, but not in spirit. The E90 was released before or after 1 July 2005??

Sorry, after more research, it seems that BMW did not meet its commitment. I am not sure. Anybody know?

Links:

http://www.safetyresearch.net/Library/SRS037.pdf

http://www.europarl.eu.int/omk/sipade3?PUBREF=-//EP//NONSGML+REPORT+A5-2002-0154+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&L=EN&LEVEL=0&NAV=S&LSTDOC=Y

http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.ef9d8cc/0
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Heh Mike,
All of us are both drivers[behind the steering] and pedestrains[off the car, eg. when I misplaced my car keys :)].

As a car owner realistically, before I buy my car, my considerations are driver safety first over pedestrain safety. Not that I dont give a damn to other road user safety.

When I walk on the road, as a pedestrain, I ought to exercise my share of caution. Cant expect the cars to do that, it must be in my own discipline...to look left/right, left, up/down, etc..before i cross the road. Most of the time, when an accident occurs where a car hit the pedestrain...a hit is a hit...severity of injury probably depends more on the speed on impact. remember there used to be a TP advertisement on TV which shows a person knocked by a car at varying speeds?
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

michaeltan said:
The deadline is 2010 for pedestrian safety rules to be tightened. Since 1 July 2005, phase A has started. But from my brief research, this is NOT law, but a commitment by manufacturers. I cannot find anything to say BMW did or did not meet its commitment with the E90. Many people wanted to put it into law, but manufacturers negotiated it to be a `commitment' instead. BMW is part of the consortium of european car manufacturers who COMMITTED to improved pedestrian safety way back in 2001. Actually all the auto manufacturers did something, achieving like 2 star or more for new vehicles, but BMW E90 was still `dire'.

I think if the E90 was released before 1 July 2005, BMW may have `technically' held to that agreement, but not in spirit. The E90 was released before or after 1 July 2005??

Sorry, after more research, it seems that BMW did not meet its commitment. I am not sure. Anybody know?

Links:

http://www.safetyresearch.net/Library/SRS037.pdf

http://www.europarl.eu.int/omk/sipade3?PUBREF=-//EP//NONSGML+REPORT+A5-2002-0154+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&L=EN&LEVEL=0&NAV=S&LSTDOC=Y

http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.ef9d8cc/0

i dont see hows thats gonna help when exotic car manufacturers are not even submitting the NCAP ratings. so if u have more money to buy these cars, the car manufacturer is ruled out from adopting the pedestrian safety approach? this is bullshit. safety institutes can say and implement what they want, but to car manufacturers, drivers safety is first. if u need both driver and pedestrian safety, i recommend the other BMWs>>> BUS, MRT OR WALK.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Well when the time comes, BMW will have a way to present the right solution anyway, so no point worrying about it. After all, how effective does this really count towards saving lives? Better responsibility on the driver's side is still the most effective method to reduce accidents.

It is not about minimizing the impact of accidents, but about minimizing the rate of accidents!

OT to michaeltan: I think all car companies, Lexus, BMW, Merc, Honda, all have some skeletons in their closet, just that some are really covered up real well.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

rex7_vtec said:
Frankly speaking, what is the purpose of this thread?
A head on collision with a pedestrain at 50km/h or more would definitely inflict injury regardless if the specific vehicle has an outstanding result for pedestrain safety.

At lower speeds wouldn't it be safer for the pedestrains if the car has better brakes? Makes more sense to R&D into that I would say.
All things were considered by the commission set up by the European commission, and in Europe itself, they expect to save 2,000 lives. No use arguing about this figure, as the car companies themselves did not. For all our purposes, we can take this figure as correct.

Not that I am a tree hugger, and you can take me out of the picture, but this academic exercise may interest or evoke feelings out of even tough guys, especially tough guys who had their loved ones killed in road accidents, in a pure, non-fault accident.

Putting bigger brakes is good, but is this inherent protection not better?

And YES, ABS etc. is part of the EC's grand plan to improve pedestrian safety.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Not that I wanna bait you guys, but it is of note how so many guys respond to any thread which ain't favourable to BMW in this forum. But it makes lively discussion, just sometimes I wished that it was not always me vs the world, but rather a more balanced discussion.

Even here, we're talking about lives! Though I do not want to be too involved in this personally, and prefer to treat it as an academic exercise, I got my year old boy and thinking about it, I would want enhanced pedestrian safety to make sure he got every chance to keep alive in the world.

Esp you, elmariachi, you keep on crazily knocking the wisdom of pedestrian safety as BS, what's your contribution to this safety issue? By saying that it's BS???

Initially I thought of it as a political game, but thinking of my boy, immediately I changed my mind. I want it to be law. Though I don't like law so much. It is irrational. I'm sorry.

By the way, the euro legislation, ALL CARS TO BE SOLD must comply. NCAP is indicative only. Homologation of the car requires compliance with the proposed legislation, which is now only a `commitment' not met by some companies.

elmariachi said:
i dont see hows thats gonna help when exotic car manufacturers are not even submitting the NCAP ratings. so if u have more money to buy these cars, the car manufacturer is ruled out from adopting the pedestrian safety approach? this is bullshit. safety institutes can say and implement what they want, but to car manufacturers, drivers safety is first. if u need both driver and pedestrian safety, i recommend the other BMWs>>> BUS, MRT OR WALK.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Hmmm, yes I see your point in your presentations above.

But honestly as a car enthusiast yourself, would it matter in your decision to purchase a car if it is deemed a "pedestrain killer"?

As for me, I wouldn't really care 2 hoots as long as I know that I will be a responsible driver and be wary of my driving environment.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

rex7_vtec said:
Hmmm, yes I see your point in your presentations above.

But honestly as a car enthusiast yourself, would it matter in your decision to purchase a car if it is deemed a "pedestrain killer"?

As for me, I wouldn't really care 2 hoots as long as I know that I will be a responsible driver and be wary of my driving environment.
Maybe it'll be better if he doesn't drive at all cos he'll be contributing to the green house effect. In fact if he's truly concerned with all the ills, wrongs and short comings of this world, it'll be better for him to live high up in Tibet.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

michaeltan said:
Esp you, elmariachi, you keep on crazily knocking the wisdom of pedestrian safety as BS, what's your contribution to this safety issue? By saying that it's BS???

Do any car enthusiasts in the right state of mind ever think about pedestrial safety when buying a car or when driving? I think not. and likewise, my contribution to this safety issue is by using my right foot on the brakes and manouevering evasively. what use is a car that has pedestrian safety if most people around the world, especially so, in singapore dont know how to press on the brakes hard enough or taking counter measures when driving? and NCAP tests are based on a fixed speed bracket which most of us dont drive at making it an invalid real world application. For me, i see the practical application of these theories and it just isnt clicking. maybe if u do drive at the speeds NCAP tests their cars, they would make perfect sense for you to confide and contest against it accordingly to the cars you drive. DO you? if not, i think its plain waste of time trying to prove otherwise. Road safety starts at your hands and ends in your hands. like they say, a bad workman blames his tools and i can only say this; A bad driver blames his cars. So if u contest that BMW is not doing enough for pedestrian safety, you are indirectly telling us we are bad drivers and we are contributing to the accident no? If thats not what you meant, i suggest scrutinizing the posts you have so written bias towards BMW though you consistenly claim otherwise which i never believed from the lingua you are speaking in.

Cheers.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Reading some of your posts above, is it just because of the propeller badge of BMW that some of you are so dismissive of human lives? Is it because of the blue prop badge that some of you guys question NCAP and all the global efforts for pedestrian safety with a little more than ill worded churlish statements? Without even reading more about NCAP?

What's it with the blue propeller badge? Does it turn some of you into monsters?

Read your words again, some of you people, thinking about your child, your dad, yourself. See how bad it sounds.

Self safety, if you disregard, never mind. Pedestrian Safety is talking about OTHER PEOPLE LEH! You cannot just disregard other people in the same way you disregard your own life.

Does owning a BMW really turn some people into arrogant, ignorant monsters? The way I see many BMW drivers on the roads, perhaps. Not a general statement, but a BMW really turns SOME into monsters.

My god. I can't believe what I'm reading here.

My boy, if anything happens to him because of a missed commitment by an auto manufacturer, boy am I gonna haul EVERYBODY to court, the driver, the car manufacturer, etc.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

so summing things up..

1) u are gonna haul the whole world to court if or when you blame the car for not being pedestrian safety enough to be on the roads?

2) By dismissing the fact the BMW drivers are monsters imply those who drive lexus, WRX, Ebolushen are all not monsters ( by fact that the drivers effectively control the car)

3) And the fact that just because we dont give it much though on pedestrian safety on cars imples we are monsters? So its assumption/insult that we disregard our own lives at the expense of others.

And by the way, blaming that a car is at fault is gonna take hell of alot of work proving in court especially in singapore when YOU ARE GUILTY UNTILL PROVEN INNOCENT. so i would say, the driver is effectively at fault no matter what. You might be luckier if you were in EU.

OT to MT : If this is a healthy discussion, you should not be hitting out and sterotyping BMW drivers. it shows the lack of respect for people the way you claim we are monsters.

As from the thread you posted in Carma.

"Encounter with a BMW 318 on ECP: some people really ego issues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yesterday, I was happily driving on the ECP enroute from East Coast to city.

There was a BIG gap which a taxi was on lane 2 and a BMW 318i was on lane 1 (fastest lane). BIG gap means about 200m!

But BMW 318i was travelling pretty slowly, almost same speed a taxi.

So I went from lane 1 to lane 2 since the 318 was not gonna give way. Didn't even flash him.

This guy suddenly picked up speed. I could hear his engine gunning to max.

Doesn't matter, I floored my accelerator and pulled away rapidly from him. Then I overtook him and still pulling away. LOTS of room. He was FAR to the back.

UNBELIEVABLY, THIS GUY HORNED AT ME RUDELY.

Nearing the Rochor exit, I slowed down to exit. This 318 guy weirdly pulled behind me tailgating. Well .... I pulled away from him again, sacrificing the correct exit (the GPS will find me another way later)

Nearing the next exit (Prince Edward???) I pulled to the exit, waiting to exit. This guy went on my right about to crash me. LOL!

And he was looking at me showing vulgar signs. That's OK, I'm used to it, and I do that myself sometimes when the other guy is unreasonable, and I smiled sweetly at him.

He went beserk! anyway, no more playing, I went to the next exit (Marina) and went on my way.

BUT, this kind of driver, sheeeesshhh! "


=================================================================

By indulging in races or trying to prove a point to the BMW driver, you are in no different from a monster the way you claim we are. So you should reflect before posting about others or even assuming for that fact.

Full Link : http://forum.carma.com.sg/showthread.php?t=1228999
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Can we stop at this point? Cause I really dun see the point of arguing on 2 different platforms / perspectives. We will be going round and round in circles.

The analogy is simple. We chose to go for some supper at Newton, while some "activists" were championing the use of styrofoam plates and plastic spoons - environmental concern. Not that we cannot give a damn, but the issue will never be about the plates and spoons at Newton. We go there for a bite, that's all. Just a simple need which needs to be fulfilled. And do we care about the environment? Of course we do. Do we care enough to stop going to Newton? No. Absolutely not. Because we, as food consumers, could not see the usage of plastic spoons and foam plates as a serious eye-to-eye issue against the "activists."

You could champion for pedestrian safety, but here we are talking automobile enthusiasm. Again, not that we are heartless, but the bases of paradigms are different.

I could sympathise with the victims of car accidents, but it sounds far-fetched for BMW designers to shoulder the blame when the biggest perpetrators are reckless drivers.

Be reminded, it is never the knives, or the designers of knives, to be blamed for murders. It is the scheming murderer himself.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

michaeltan said:
My boy, if anything happens to him because of a missed commitment by an auto manufacturer, boy am I gonna haul EVERYBODY to court, the driver, the car manufacturer, etc.

Dude, it ain't just the manufacturer man.... Pardon me for my ignorance in lawsuits in Singapore. But honestly I've not heard of a single accident whereby a driver is not at fault and the vehicle is deemed responsible for the injury or fatality...

Just like I always like to blame my calculator when the figures in my accounts don't add up. Well I tend to mis-press some buttons sometimes....
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Bro elmariachi, I know I write as convolutedly as a lawyer but without the refined grammar, but you should also read more carefully (note the bold):

Does owning a BMW really turn some people into arrogant, ignorant monsters? Not a general statement, but a BMW really turns SOME into monsters.

And yes, i'm afraid in this case, it does include you since you sound so much like a monster in some of your posts in this thread. Nothing personal of course, just a fair comment based on your statements here.

Your statement about the courts - you know it is untrue. Singapore has one of the greatest legal systems in the world, all things considered. It's not perfect, but it's not as you say.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

rex7_vtec said:
Dude, it ain't just the manufacturer man.... Pardon me for my ignorance in lawsuits in Singapore. But honestly I've not heard of a single accident whereby a driver is not at fault and the vehicle is deemed responsible for the injury or fatality...

Just like I always like to blame my calculator when the figures in my accounts don't add up. Well I tend to mis-press some buttons sometimes....
what about a manufacturer which misses a commited date? :)
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

michaeltan said:
what about a manufacturer which misses a commited date? :)
Well yet again, it depends on the situation and circumstances. There are numerous factors involved when it comes to this specific dateline issue.

Cars manufactured 10-20 years ago are still running on our roads. They for sure would have failed miserably in regards to current safety standards/requirements. How are we going to debate on this then?
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

Michael,

Blacklabelling us as "monsters" really shows your bias against any alternative views in a healthy discussion. Most writers of the posts understood your reasoning, but could not see how a design issue as such could create a huge negative sentiment against a marque. We do care about pedestrians, unless you have the preconceived notion that we dun by choosing to drive a BMW. You have lost your credibility altogether. Generalisation will never ever earn your merits for the argument.

Wearing leather does not mean we ignore the killings of animals.

Smoking and driving do not mean we ignore pollution issues.

Just gotta learn to see thing from alternative persectives. Yes, I cannot believe that I even bother to reply to you too.

michaeltan said:
Reading some of your posts above, is it just because of the propeller badge of BMW that some of you are so dismissive of human lives? Is it because of the blue prop badge that some of you guys question NCAP and all the global efforts for pedestrian safety with a little more than ill worded churlish statements? Without even reading more about NCAP?

What's it with the blue propeller badge? Does it turn some of you into monsters?

Read your words again, some of you people, thinking about your child, your dad, yourself. See how bad it sounds.

Self safety, if you disregard, never mind. Pedestrian Safety is talking about OTHER PEOPLE LEH! You cannot just disregard other people in the same way you disregard your own life.

Does owning a BMW really turn some people into arrogant, ignorant monsters? The way I see many BMW drivers on the roads, perhaps. Not a general statement, but a BMW really turns SOME into monsters.

My god. I can't believe what I'm reading here.

My boy, if anything happens to him because of a missed commitment by an auto manufacturer, boy am I gonna haul EVERYBODY to court, the driver, the car manufacturer, etc.
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

pls dont bother to reply lah, this thing will neva end. We noe wat we r driving....
 
Re: Another BMW marketing-engineering-legislation quandary - Pedestrian Protection

kenntona, there are some in this thread who, in their blind defense of the blue propeller badge, have overstepped the boundary beyond what I perceive as the obligatory moral duty to preserve lives when we can, by seconding this moral duty to the vague item called `driver enjoyment'. They have belittled whatever genuine effort to improve pedestrian safety by dismissing them as largely irrelevant, without actually thinking about it.

My term `monsters' was referring to them, not all BMW drivers in general. You are not a homogenous group. All kinds of people drive BMWs, not only monsters. I did not generalize. I think before you criticize, you should read the post carefully.

You should not bother to reply to me, but if you read my admittedly convoluted language insufficiently well, and criticize my post on a wrong basis, you should reply or retract. It is only FAIR.



kenntona said:
Michael,

Blacklabelling us as "monsters" really shows your bias against any alternative views in a healthy discussion. Most writers of the posts understood your reasoning, but could not see how a design issue as such could create a huge negative sentiment against a marque. We do care about pedestrians, unless you have the preconceived notion that we dun by choosing to drive a BMW. You have lost your credibility altogether. Generalisation will never ever earn your merits for the argument.

Wearing leather does not mean we ignore the killings of animals.

Smoking and driving do not mean we ignore pollution issues.

Just gotta learn to see thing from alternative persectives. Yes, I cannot believe that I even bother to reply to you too.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
82,750
Messages
1,019,327
Members
78,167
Latest member
99okmeme
Back
Top