Speed Cameras, Life Savers or Money Makers

According to a landmark study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Arizona leads the nation in red light running crashes and fatalities. Current data show a marked decrease in the number of accidents and deaths from motorists running red lights since the addition of red light cameras in 14 dangerous intersections a few years ago,

That of course is good news. While there was very minor opposition to cameras being installed to prevent red light running, the situation is very different with the addition of over 100 speed cameras and 40 odd mobile vans on Arizona highways snapping pictures of drivers going 11 miles per hour over the posted speed limit. So now there is a battle raging in Phoenix Arizona about the use of those cameras and this is one battle that isn’t close to being over.

The battle lines are simple. One side says that the cameras save lives by slowing traffic down and the other side says they actually cause problems because people speed until they see the signs for the cameras then slam on the brakes which of course can cause accidents. Like most arguments I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between.

American Traffic Solutions, the company that sells the system, commissioned a polling firm, Public Opinion Strategies, to do a survey. Five hundred registered voters in Arizona were asked their opinions on Jan. 13 and 14 and the results according to POS showed that 84 percent of voters surveyed said city police departments should continue using red-light cameras. There was less support, but still firm majorities, for speed cameras run by cities and counties (69 percent) and the Arizona Department of Public Safety (63 percent). POS said the poll's margin of error is 4.38 percent.

Something to keep in mind is that cars are so much safer today then even 10 years ago, and highways are also much better and safer. While people who drive slow say that speed kills, the fact is that speed in and of itself doesn’t kill. Let’s acknowledge that driving 100 miles an hour on city freeways is dangerous not to mention stupid, but driving 75 miles an hour in a 55 mile an hour zone is not as long as people driving slower stay to the right which by the way is what they’re supposed to do.

Where problems happen is in the variance of speeds because some people seem to feel that if the posted speed is 55 mph they can do 55 mph in any lane they want. Unfortunately that usually means they park in the center lane where they mosey along not worrying about the traffic behind them. That in turn causes people to have to change lanes to get around them, and we all know changing lanes on freeways can be dangerous.

Back to the survey numbers for just a minute; I don’t know anyone that argues that red light cameras are a bad idea. But let’s look at the numbers for speed cameras. Over 60 per cent feel they’re a good idea but here’s an interesting statistic about the survey. The demographic groups with the highest levels of support for the DPS program are not surprisingly, older voters and women. Younger voters, particularly men, are more likely to oppose the program.

So the question is, do the speed cameras save lives or are they cash cows for a strapped city. Here’s what we’ve been told so far. Recent numbers bandied about from DPS about lives saved since the cameras were installed have talked about reductions in crashes saving 3 or 4 lives a month. Here’s what wasn’t mentioned. Over the last 12 months there have been some 12 billion fewer miles driven by motorists which is roughly 5.6 percent and will certainly have a direct affect on the number of traffic fatalities. Here’s the kicker though. Some estimates say the Arizona will make as much as 175 million in 2009 from speed cameras.

So, do speed cameras save lives, or make money, or maybe both?

One of our listeners talks about blogs

We always appreciate listener feedback from our radio show and we thought we'd share his thoughts about bloggers and blogging. While there are certainly bloggers out there that provide accurate, good and important information, we appreciate the thoughts expressed by this listener.

Bill/Cathy:

I wanted to tell you that it’s so nice to work with professional people who’ve been in this industry for a long time.

I’ve been contemplating starting a blog but after visiting with a lot of them, visiting their sites along with forums from various automotive sites I’ve come to the conclusion that there is a lot of difference between a blogger and a journalist. Bloggers are filled with opinions with little or no experience behind them.

Having been on the internet since 1987 and seeing all the changes that have come from it, mostly good - but bloggers make me sick. I would call it a cesspool of imitators.

I feel really sad to see all the newspapers and magazines with real writers and journalists being outsourced to bloggers.

I don’t know who sponsors your site or your program but forward this on in hopes they “see the light”. It’s so nice to talk to people who know what the hell they’re talking about.

Jeff

Are U.S. Automakers really building cars no one wants to buy?

by Bill Zervakos
December 2008

There is a lot of hyperbole about how bad the vehicles coming out of Detroit are; ergo American automakers are in trouble. Are American automakers really building inferior products? Let’s look at the numbers from November of 2007 through November 2008 for a few of the key players:

Chrysler, down 47% Nissan, down 42.2% General Motors, down 41.3% Toyota, down 33.9%
Honda, down, 31.6% Ford, down 30.6%

You’ll notice that Ford is down less than anyone else and Nissan sales are even worse than General Motors.

No doubt labor costs for unionized shops are higher than those of non-union shops but are labor costs the reason for the collapse in sales? Leaving aside all the differences in compensation between the U.S. makers and importers, I don’t see how any manufacturer can exist for long with over 30% losses in sales.

We’ve clearly seen the incompetence of CEOs’ on Wall Street, seemingly without consequence or accountability and certainly without any oversight, given billions of dollars specifically, we were told, to loosen up credit for consumers. Instead they chose to use those billions to pay dividends and bonuses while buying other financial institutions, choosing to do nothing about making money available for loans. To then watch Congress address the CEOs’ of the U.S. automakers as though they’re inept seems a bit self serving.

It’s important to point out here that Ford President Alan Mulally has been with the company for just over 2 years, Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli has been with them since 2007 and GM CEO Rick Wagoner took over the controls of General Motors in 2005. So while there were problems in the past, linking the ills the industry faces today exclusively to these executives performance is short sighted, and appointing a car czar is not the answer.

Rick Wagoner of GM has acknowledged that allowing the EV1 to be eliminated was not the right thing to do. But GM, Ford and Chrysler have made huge strides in developing electric vehicles, some that will be on the road by 2010. They’ve been doing this without government or a car czar telling them they had to. But here’s what we must remember: Detroit built what people were buying. It’s true that some gas guzzlers were incentivized but in a capitalistic society businesses are all about making money and big vehicles were money makers. Proof of that is the 22% increase in truck sales this November, with gas under $2.00 a gallon, over July sales when gas was $4.00 a gallon. The consumer drives the market and will continue to do so.

With legislators pontificating and blustering about how outraged they are with the big 3 CEOs’ and the media right there with them, talking about how irresponsible Detroit has been in product development, without laying out all the facts, it’s no wonder that people aren’t buying American cars. The facts are that there were several automakers, including some importers, that made some pretty bad cars in the past, but today everyone is building pretty solid vehicles. The prevailing perception is that American cars aren’t as good, yet in a Consumer Reports study as far back as 2006 provided results showing that the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan outperformed the Honda Accord V6 and the Toyota Camry V6 in reliability studies. Interestingly those same studies indicated that people will still buy the imports. Perception is true even if it isn’t fact and when a false perception is promulgated, change takes even longer.

So, are U.S. automakers really building bad cars? Not at all, and if people would do their homework and not buy into all the negative hype, they’d be very pleasantly surprised with what’s coming out of Detroit.Other countries are supporting their automakers and we should do no less. If we were in a normal economy and automakers weren’t manufacturing the right products, then the market should be allowed to correct itself. That isn’t the case today.

Generally speaking, I’m not for government intervention but this is a critical industry for America and the three CEOs’ weren’t the cause this financial crisis and they can’t fix it. But allowing any one of the heretofore big three to die could create a tragedy of epic proportions. The facts are, until the consumer starts buying again, all automakers are in peril.

2009 Mazda3 S 5-Door Grand Touring

Well with the entire world hearing about gas guzzlers, the timing couldn’t be much better for checking out this nifty little 5-door sport wagon. The Mazda3 styling is based off the MX-Sportif concept so while the little grocery getter is very practical it stays true to the zoom-zoom campaign that represents the promise of fun driving that Mazda touts.

The 2.3 liter engine produces 156 horsepower and mated to a 5-speed manual transmission, it’s perky enough to make the 3 feel sporty, albeit at higher rpm, which is not too big a deal for most. That said, aficionados will no doubt opt for the very potent MazdaSpeed3 which pumps out 263 turbo-charged horses that propel the car from 0-60 in a mere 5.4 seconds with a top speed in excess of 150mph.

Truth is though this car was designed to be functional with a sufficient amount of form to offer drivers economy, with just a bit of panache, and to that end the Mazda3 S delivers. With 17-inch alloy wheels, xenon headlights and foglamps, side sill extensions, sport styled front and rear fascias and the obligatory rear hatch spoiler; this is a very sharp looking little car.

In the S trim you’ll find leather trimmed seating areas, tilt & telescoping steering wheel, 60/40 split fold-down rear seating, AM/FM/CD with controls in the steering wheel, cruise control and power windows standard. Heated front seats, electroluminescent gauges and a trip computer add a touch of luxury, okay; a very small touch, but nice none the less. Base price for the Mazda3 starts at just under $14,500 but with all the goodies on my tester, the price came to just a tad over $22,500 with shipping. Not bad but there are at least 15 models that compete with Mazda in this crowded segment of the market.

As far as driving the Mazda3 goes, I’m a pretty big boy and I have to say I was very comfortable in the driver’s seat and the car handled better then I expected in actuality. While the steering was quick the variable assist could get a bit heavy at times but overall it wasn’t a problem. The balance of the vehicle was surprisingly good despite the 60/40 weight distribution and the ride actually bordered on nimble.

All in all I have to say that overall I was very pleased with the Mazda3 S, but in the interest of full disclosure I have to acknowledge that I’ve been a Mazda fan for quite a while, having owned a Miata for about 12 years. But the truth is, they are very solid cars that, as I said before, do a better than average job of mixing form and function. So, if you’re looking for something that will deliver close to 30mpg on the highway and 22 around town, maybe you should take a ride in a Mazda3 S before making up your mind. I liked it a lot and I’m betting you will too.

Two for the Road talks Trends

The automotive landscape is in constant flux and what amazes me is how quickly manufacturers are making changes and getting them to market. There was a time that it took 5 plus years from the concept to production and in some cases that time is more than cut in half. Some things we see coming include;

A Cadillac CTS wagon and yes you read correctly I said a wagon. GM says they expect to only sell around 4,000 units of the CTS Sports Wagon in the US but they hope to be a big hit in the Euro market. The CTS Sports Wagon will go on sale in the spring of ’09 with a choice of two 3.6 liter V6’s, one being the 304 horsepower Direct-Injection but the Asian and Euro markets get a 2.9-liter turbodiesel engine that Cadillac is developing. I wonder when the American market will welcome that engine. Stay tuned for more on this car.

Good news for rear-wheel drive fans the Alpha RWD Cadillacs are scheduled for the 2011 model year replacing the front-drive BLS in Europe and expanding the lineup to the U.S. The 3-series sized car could be a big hit but only time will tell.

Look for a new Lambda Escalade as GM tries to inject some new excitement into the Tahoe based Luxo-SUV. Using the Lambda platform makes economic sense because of production of the Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia, Saturn Outlook and the new Chevy Traverse. It would also give the Escalade a more edgy look without going overboard. It would most likely be powered by a small-block V8 since the Northstar replacement planned for the Enclave was cancelled.

While the new Chevy Cruze is a pretty nifty looking little car, we’ll have to wait until 2010 before production begins in the U.S. Production in Germany, South Korea and Russia begins in March of 2009 with the car being powered by an anemic 112 horsepower 1.6 liter or 140 horsepower 1.8 liter gas engines and a 150hp 236 lb-ft of torque 2.0 turbodiesel. We won’t see the diesel iteration in the U.S. because the cost of the Cruze would go north of $30k and I don’t thing that will work for a vehicle only about the size of a Cobalt. This market will likely get a 1.4 liter turbo in the 150 to 170 horsepower range. Nice looking car but we’ll have to wait and see.

There’s a lot of buzz about the Hyundai Genesis and perhaps rightfully so, it appears to offer a lot of luxury and way better than average performance for not a whole lot of money. But Hyundai is jumping into the CUV fray with the 2010 Portico. While only spy pics are available, it’s pretty clear that Hyundai is aiming to cut into the Sport Cross-over market. The Portico has a pretty aggressive stance, a lower swept back roofline that despite the camouflage looks very interesting. Maybe even more interesting is the talk about eventually getting hybrid power. Slated to go on sale in 2009 as a 2010 it will be interesting to see if the Portico continues Hyundai’s march towards dominance with lots of quality at a great price. So far, looks pretty good.

Mitsubishi’s Lancer Evolution Revolution

The Phoenix Automotive Press Association had an opportunity to meet with PR Product Manager, Moe Durand and Melvin Bautista from Product Planning for Mitsubishi and talk about the all-new 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer family. Lancer debuted in 1973 and over the years Lancer has won several Rally Championships but not necessarily the hearts of the American consumer. Mitsubishi is hoping that will all change with the new iteration of the Lancer and as far as styling goes, they’re on the right track.

Trim levels include the Lancer, the Ralliart and the very potent Evolution. With the production of the 2009 Ralliart Mitsubishi has made a dramatic leap in performance and styling over the previous generation. Gone is the boxy squared off look and in is the sleek low nose high deck aggressive look you’ll see on the likes of the Lexus IS, and the huge aggressive grille you see on the Nuvolari inspired Audi S4 so needless to say, it’s a very cool looking car especially for the Tuner crowd.

It’s interesting to know how the styling cues must have a great degree of functionality in vehicles today, which presents an interesting challenge to designers. For example the lower grille opening on the Ralliart allows for more airflow to the intercooler, while the hood scoops and ducting help remove under hood heat while also providing air to the turbocharger. The functional side vents help extract hot air from the engine compartment.

The base engine is a 2.0 liter 4-cylinder that puts out 152hp and 146 lb/ft of torque in the Lancer and 237hp and 253 lb/ft of torque with both engines red-lining at 6500rpm. The Evolution is an entirely different matter. Horsepower jumps to 291 and torque goes to 300 lb/ft and redline is at 7000 rpm. How that happens has to do with some differences in engine architecture but the long and short of it is that it is a very potent engine.

Power gets to the wheels through a very sophisticated TC-SST transmission. All that alphabet soup stands for, Twin Clutch Sportonic Shift Transmission, but what it means is that it is one quick shifting transmission.

While we didn’t get a lot of wheel time, what we did get in the Evolution MR was pretty impressive. It’s quick fast and has a pretty serious fun quotient and is surprisingly roomy inside and we are looking forward to spending a week in this exciting new car from Mitsubishi

VOLVO CARS STUDIES BUGS TO IMPROVE SAFETY

As heard on Two for the Road USA Radio Show - September 21st - KKNT 960 AM Phoenix Arizona - Click on Radio Shows on www.twofortheroadusa.com

Since the first single cell organism emerged from primordial soup, nature has been testing, selecting and perfecting how best to help life survive. Along the way, she encountered dead ends and thankfully many successes. Today, lessons learned from Nature help scientists improve our lives with technologies like Velcro© that was inspired by burrs on seed pods, self-cleaning coatings for ship hulls from shark skin structures, neuromorphic computer chips that will one day be able to process information the way our brain does, just to mention a few.

Nature is a wonderful laboratory. "We learned of Dr. Claire Rind´s, Newcastle University, UK, studies into the migratory locust, the African Locust, that they tend to avoid bumping into each other during flights," states Jonas Ekmark, Preventive Safety Leader at Volvo Car Corporation. "Our original thoughts centered on pedestrian safety. If we could trace how the locust is able to avoid each other maybe we could program our cars not to hit pedestrians." During the study, Dr. Rind learned that visual input is instantly transmitted to the insect's wing nerve cells, seemingly bypassing the brain. Dr. Rind calls this the Locust Principle.

"Locusts are quick reacting and have reliable circuits, they do their computations against lots of background chatter, much like driving around town," comments Dr. Rind. Volvo wanted to learn if locust sensory-input routing methodologies could be built into a vehicle pedestrian safety system. The goal was to avoid hitting pedestrians. Primary to this research was to synthesize a locust algorithm that could be applied to a car. "As it turns out, the locust processing system is much more sophisticated than the hardware/software currently available. In the end technology was no match for nature," says Jonas Ekmark.

"What we learned was very encouraging. However, rather than wait for technology to catch up to Dr. Rind's Locust Principle, Volvo created a pedestrian alert feature that will be introduced in the near future."When we started in late 2002, sensing and computational systems were rather weak."

But technology is quickly catching up. Volvo City Safety has been launched as standard in the new Volvo XC60. At low speeds, City Safety is smart enough to bring the XC60 to a complete stop should the vehicle in front suddenly stop.

"Beyond City Safety our next step will be our first pedestrian avoidance feature", comments Jonas Ekmark. "Although City Safety is not related to our Locust research, we are confident that our first pedestrian auto brake feature will be very good at taking actions to help avoid hitting pedestrians," comments, Jonas Ekmark.

"While some interesting ideas came from this study, we still have a many more years of research ahead to bring that small locust brain into our cars. We have found a lowly locust has man beat, at least for now. Still, the big question remains: How do groups of locusts keep from bumping into each other? Maybe there is more to be learned? We will continue to follow interesting paths in our efforts to reach our safety vision; to design cars that do not crash," concludes Jonas Ekmark.