I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!


--
Michael Chare

Michael Chare wrote:

is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

Well yes, because thick copper is expensive, and those 4 wires (and
multiple CAN chips) can individually drive
tail/brake/indicator/reverse/fog lamps ...

Also the chips start to do snazzy things such as dimming one side's
front running lamps when indicating or providing the "moving pulse" on
newer indicators

Michael Chare formulated the question :
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the case
that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two thin wires
for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L bus is really
cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

Actually, it makes it easier and it can be more clever. One thick wire
as the main supply, then thin wires can be used to pick up the signals.
The trailer lights can be monitored and issues fed as data down the
can-bus.

In article , Harry Bloomfield
wrote:
Michael Chare formulated the question :
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and
CAN-L bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and
much thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

Actually, it makes it easier and it can be more clever. One thick wire
as the main supply, then thin wires can be used to pick up the signals.
The trailer lights can be monitored and issues fed as data down the
can-bus.


what's so new about this? I was at an international exhibition in Hamburg
in the '70s. There was a Leyland bus that was wired in this way. 40 years
ago!

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 5/24/2017 8:57 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
Michael Chare wrote:

is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

Well yes, because thick copper is expensive, and those 4 wires (and
multiple CAN chips) can individually drive
tail/brake/indicator/reverse/fog lamps ...

Also the chips start to do snazzy things such as dimming one side's
front running lamps when indicating or providing the "moving pulse" on
newer indicators

To hi-jack this thread slightly, it seems to me that the indicators on
many modern cars are significantly less visible, especially off-axis,
than those of older vehicles. Being positioned very close to bright LED
running lights does not help in other cases, too (so dimming these seems
an excellent idea to me).

newshound wrote:

it seems to me that the indicators on many modern cars are
significantly less visible, especially off-axis, than those of older
vehicles.
I find the worst design is circular brake lights surrounded by a ring of
indicators, or vice-versa.

Being positioned very close to bright LED
running lights does not help in other cases, too (so dimming these seems
an excellent idea to me).

Yes, several manufacturers seem to do that now.

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
news
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two thin
wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L bus is
really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much thicker
wires?

Yep.

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

It does when it is designed to handle a trailer.

charles pretended :
what's so new about this? I was at an international exhibition in Hamburg
in the '70s. There was a Leyland bus that was wired in this way. 40 years
ago!

Who suggested it was new?

A more recent addition to cars, maybe - past 15/20 years.

On 24/05/2017 20:57, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Michael Chare formulated the question :
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really
the case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with
two thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and
CAN-L bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and
much thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

Actually, it makes it easier and it can be more clever. One thick wire
as the main supply, then thin wires can be used to pick up the signals.
The trailer lights can be monitored and issues fed as data down the
can-bus.

Yes. And then you plug in a trailer with LED lights and the damned
monitoring pulse causes the lights to visibly flash every few seconds. I
had to change the trailer back to filament lamps thus losing the
reliability benefit - grrrr!

SteveW

"newshound" wrote in message
...
On 5/24/2017 8:57 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
To hi-jack this thread slightly, it seems to me that the indicators on
many modern cars are significantly less visible, especially off-axis, than
those of older vehicles. Being positioned very close to bright LED running
lights does not help in other cases, too (so dimming these seems an
excellent idea to me).

VW Golfs of recent vintage are terrible for visibility of indicators: the
front ones are placed close to the headlights and the back ones are right
next to the brake lights. Gone are the days when you had a side light /
indicator cluster that was totally separate from the headlights - maybe
within or underneath the bumpers.

I'm surprised that various countries haven't collectively mandated more
stringent Construction and Use regulations which require the indicator to be
as far as possible from any other source of bright light (headlight/DRL at
front, brake/fog at rear), and returning to the old days of function being
more important than style.

I too think that modern cars' indicators are far less conspicuous,
especially in daylight when the light reflected off the clear "glass" of the
cluster makes it harder to see the slightly brighter "on" phase of the
flashing light.

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
newshound wrote:

it seems to me that the indicators on many modern cars are
significantly less visible, especially off-axis, than those of older
vehicles.
I find the worst design is circular brake lights surrounded by a ring of
indicators, or vice-versa.

VW, hang you heads in shame.

On 24/05/2017 20:57, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Michael Chare formulated the question :
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really
the case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with
two thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and
CAN-L bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and
much thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

Actually, it makes it easier and it can be more clever. One thick wire
as the main supply, then thin wires can be used to pick up the signals.
The trailer lights can be monitored and issues fed as data down the
can-bus.

Well it no doubt depends on the vehicle, but the manufacturer can make
the car without any cable thick enough to power trailer lights, running
to the back of the vehicle.


--
Michael Chare

On Wed, 24 May 2017 21:46:14 +0100, "NY" wrote:

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
newshound wrote:

it seems to me that the indicators on many modern cars are
significantly less visible, especially off-axis, than those of older
vehicles.
I find the worst design is circular brake lights surrounded by a ring of
indicators, or vice-versa.

VW, hang you heads in shame.


An excellent example of form over function, not to mention road
safety.
--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

On Wed, 24 May 2017 20:57:28 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote:

Michael Chare wrote:

is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

Well yes, because thick copper is expensive, and those 4 wires (and
multiple CAN chips) can individually drive
tail/brake/indicator/reverse/fog lamps ...

Also the chips start to do snazzy things such as dimming one side's
front running lamps when indicating or providing the "moving pulse" on
newer indicators

How about a different cadence for hazard lights, so you don't mistake
them as an intention to pull out when the nearside indicator is
obscured.

--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

Graham. wrote on 24/05/2017 :
How about a different cadence for hazard lights, so you don't mistake
them as an intention to pull out when the nearside indicator is
obscured.

It would need to be very different, because normal indicators legally
have a wide range of speeds.

On 24/05/2017 22:37, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Graham. wrote on 24/05/2017 :
How about a different cadence for hazard lights, so you don't mistake
them as an intention to pull out when the nearside indicator is
obscured.

It would need to be very different, because normal indicators legally
have a wide range of speeds.

How about a double flash, pause, double flash?

I must admit that I am fed up of seeing vehicles that appear to be about
to pull out from a row, only to find as I get there that they have
hazard lights on.

SteveW

Steve Walker used his keyboard to write :
How about a double flash, pause, double flash?

That might work.


I must admit that I am fed up of seeing vehicles that appear to be about to
pull out from a row, only to find as I get there that they have hazard lights
on.

Me too. I even consider stopping to let HGV's out, then notice there is
no driver behind the wheel.

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
news
Michael Chare formulated the question :
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

Actually, it makes it easier and it can be more clever. One thick wire as
the main supply, then thin wires can be used to pick up the signals. The
trailer lights can be monitored and issues fed as data down the can-bus.

It's all far too clever IMHO. Take the seat sensors, if I bung a shopping
bag on the passenger seat the "fasten seat belt" command/bleeper goes barmy.
I realise it's all designed for dumbarses but c'mon.
With other probs, you take it to a dealer who sucks his teeth and hasn't a
clue. Whatever the diagnostics tell him it gets changed, charged for, and
still has the prob.
The poor back-street garage who i've used for 52 years is totally buggered.
Progress/profit.
The day we get driverless cars i'll be hopefully dead.

On Wed, 24 May 2017 22:37:41 +0100, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Graham. wrote on 24/05/2017 :
How about a different cadence for hazard lights, so you don't mistake
them as an intention to pull out when the nearside indicator is
obscured.

It would need to be very different, because normal indicators legally
have a wide range of speeds.

Change the mark/space ratio?



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 24/05/2017 23:16, bm wrote:
"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
news
Michael Chare formulated the question :
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

Actually, it makes it easier and it can be more clever. One thick wire as
the main supply, then thin wires can be used to pick up the signals. The
trailer lights can be monitored and issues fed as data down the can-bus.

It's all far too clever IMHO. Take the seat sensors, if I bung a shopping
bag on the passenger seat the "fasten seat belt" command/bleeper goes barmy.
I realise it's all designed for dumbarses but c'mon.
With other probs, you take it to a dealer who sucks his teeth and hasn't a
clue. Whatever the diagnostics tell him it gets changed, charged for, and
still has the prob.
The poor back-street garage who i've used for 52 years is totally buggered.
Progress/profit.
The day we get driverless cars i'll be hopefully dead.


I find I now have a car that is supposed to start when you press a
button and the key is in the car. However instead of starting I got a
message in front of me saying "Savelock RTFM". (Well perhaps without the
expletive.)


--
Michael Chare

In article ,
Michael Chare wrote:
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

Seems to be. When you make electronics in bulk they may well be cheaper to
the factory than high current cables and switchgear. But not, of course,
when it comes to buying replacements, if needed.

So saying, my last car was an early adopter of this idea, and the
electrics were very reliable even at getting on for 20 years old.

--
*If God dropped acid, would he see people?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Michael Chare wrote:
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

Seems to be. When you make electronics in bulk they may well be cheaper to
the factory than high current cables and switchgear. But not, of course,
when it comes to buying replacements, if needed.

So saying, my last car was an early adopter of this idea, and the
electrics were very reliable even at getting on for 20 years old.

Just wait until the electronics are not very reliable.
Similar to the Labour party.

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
news
On 24/05/2017 23:16, bm wrote:
"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
news
Michael Chare formulated the question :
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

Actually, it makes it easier and it can be more clever. One thick wire
as
the main supply, then thin wires can be used to pick up the signals. The
trailer lights can be monitored and issues fed as data down the can-bus.

It's all far too clever IMHO. Take the seat sensors, if I bung a shopping
bag on the passenger seat the "fasten seat belt" command/bleeper goes
barmy.
I realise it's all designed for dumbarses but c'mon.
With other probs, you take it to a dealer who sucks his teeth and hasn't
a
clue. Whatever the diagnostics tell him it gets changed, charged for, and
still has the prob.
The poor back-street garage who i've used for 52 years is totally
buggered.
Progress/profit.
The day we get driverless cars i'll be hopefully dead.


I find I now have a car that is supposed to start when you press a button
and the key is in the car. However instead of starting I got a message in
front of me saying "Savelock RTFM". (Well perhaps without the expletive.)

And this is progress?

Dave knows, but won't admit to anything. He's fractionally left.
Lets get Corbyn and sound engineers in power, then we'll know who are the
nogberts/pricks.
McDonnell might get to perform fellatio on Corbyn, legally. Not in closed
doors.
Ya hafta laugh at these ****s. And Dave.
Steady on missus, we might just have to pay a few UK pence more for our
caviar.
LMFAO.
Really though, I'm absolutely frightened to death of what the EU might
impose upon us.
They might even come to their senses? Nah.

En el artículo ,
newshound escribió:

Being positioned very close to bright LED
running lights does not help in other cases, too (so dimming these seems
an excellent idea to me).

I spotted a car the other day that turned off the running lights on that
side while the indicator was flashing. It certainly worked to make the
indicator more visible.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
(")_(") the one I never tried before." - Mae West

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
news
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two thin
wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L bus is
really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much thicker
wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!


yes in the same way they love making cheap self exploding car engins with a
rubber band connecting bits together .....

"NY" wrote in message
o.uk...
"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
newshound wrote:

it seems to me that the indicators on many modern cars are
significantly less visible, especially off-axis, than those of older
vehicles.
I find the worst design is circular brake lights surrounded by a ring of
indicators, or vice-versa.

VW, hang you heads in shame.
I quite like Audi sequential indicators which were pioneered by ford in the
60's ....

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
news
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two thin
wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L bus is
really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much thicker
wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!


LEDs are great but with fault finding flicker they bugger up my eyes big
time ....

That is because the manufacturers don't want joe public doing any job,
instead they want over priced specialists to do it.
However the current drain of modern lights is one heck of a lot less than
a bulb and arguably, less likely to fail without the driver being alerted
via a snazzy dasboard icon.

Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Michael Chare" wrote in message
news
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two thin
wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L bus is
really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much thicker
wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!


--
Michael Chare

On 24/05/2017 22:15, Graham. wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2017 20:57:28 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote:

Michael Chare wrote:

is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

Well yes, because thick copper is expensive, and those 4 wires (and
multiple CAN chips) can individually drive
tail/brake/indicator/reverse/fog lamps ...

The other thing is that the solid state LEDs essentially last pretty
much forever so you can dispense with sockets in many cases.

There is a slight problem with some of them producing a too collimated
beam of light so that they dim as you get closer but further off axis.
This is actually a benefit for motorway signs at night since it makes
them visible from further away without dazzling close up. But in bright
sunlight on cars it can work against being able to see them close up.

Also the chips start to do snazzy things such as dimming one side's
front running lamps when indicating or providing the "moving pulse" on
newer indicators

How about a different cadence for hazard lights, so you don't mistake
them as an intention to pull out when the nearside indicator is
obscured.

That is actually a damn good idea now that the flashing is no longer
determined by the vaguaries of a bimetallic strip and heater or simple
astable. dot-dash-dot-dash would be the most unambiguous.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Martin Brown wrote:

now that the flashing is no longer determined by the vaguaries of a
bimetallic strip and heater

But the sound of the flasher unit lives on, presumably as a .wav file?

http://www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-co...age/476100.jpg

On 24-May-17 9:14 PM, newshound wrote:
On 5/24/2017 8:57 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
Michael Chare wrote:

is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

Well yes, because thick copper is expensive, and those 4 wires (and
multiple CAN chips) can individually drive
tail/brake/indicator/reverse/fog lamps ...

Also the chips start to do snazzy things such as dimming one side's
front running lamps when indicating or providing the "moving pulse" on
newer indicators

To hi-jack this thread slightly, it seems to me that the indicators on
many modern cars are significantly less visible, especially off-axis,
than those of older vehicles. Being positioned very close to bright LED
running lights does not help in other cases, too (so dimming these seems
an excellent idea to me).

On some cars, the same position is used for front running light and
indicator, with the running light being turned off when the indicator is
in use. I have also seen running rabbit style indicators, where the
yellow LEDS light in sequence, moving towards the direction of turn.

--
--

Colin Bignell

On 24-May-17 8:50 PM, Michael Chare wrote:
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

A failed LED in an array won't make much difference to the function of
the light, but a failed bulb, which is far more probable, will.

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

I bought my car with manufacturer fitted fold-away tow bar and electrics.


--
--

Colin Bignell

Brian Gaff formulated the question :
However the current drain of modern lights is one heck of a lot less than a
bulb and arguably, less likely to fail without the driver being alerted via a
snazzy dasboard icon.

More than just snazzy, the system can be very practical, very useful. I
can plug the caravan in and know all the car and all the caravan's road
lighting is functioning. If there were a failure on route, I would know
immediately and know precisely which lamp had failed.

They don't even have to completely fail, a poor connection or
flickering lamp is enough to trigger a fault condition.

Nightjar wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Also the chips start to do snazzy things such as dimming one side's
front running lamps when indicating or providing the "moving pulse" on
newer indicators

I have also seen running rabbit style indicators, where the
yellow LEDS light in sequence, moving towards the direction of turn.

That's what I meant by the "moving pulse" I think Audi call them
"dynamic indicators"

"Mike Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
En el artículo ,
newshound escribió:

Being positioned very close to bright LED
running lights does not help in other cases, too (so dimming these seems
an excellent idea to me).

I spotted a car the other day that turned off the running lights on that
side while the indicator was flashing. It certainly worked to make the
indicator more visible.

I think that's fairly common. Our Honda CRV does that, both for DRL (during
day) and for sidelights (at night). I've seen quite a few other cars that do
it - in fact with today's poor indicators, it's often the first thing I spot
that tells me a car is about to turn.

On 5/24/2017 9:45 PM, NY wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
...
On 5/24/2017 8:57 PM, Andy Burns wrote:
To hi-jack this thread slightly, it seems to me that the indicators on
many modern cars are significantly less visible, especially off-axis,
than those of older vehicles. Being positioned very close to bright
LED running lights does not help in other cases, too (so dimming these
seems an excellent idea to me).

VW Golfs of recent vintage are terrible for visibility of indicators:
the front ones are placed close to the headlights and the back ones are
right next to the brake lights. Gone are the days when you had a side
light / indicator cluster that was totally separate from the headlights
- maybe within or underneath the bumpers.

I'm surprised that various countries haven't collectively mandated more
stringent Construction and Use regulations which require the indicator
to be as far as possible from any other source of bright light
(headlight/DRL at front, brake/fog at rear), and returning to the old
days of function being more important than style.

I too think that modern cars' indicators are far less conspicuous,
especially in daylight when the light reflected off the clear "glass" of
the cluster makes it harder to see the slightly brighter "on" phase of
the flashing light.

Glad it is not just me!

Perhaps what we need is some sort of European Union where collective
benefits (like USB charging on phones) can be worked out

:-)

On Thu, 25 May 2017 09:29:03 +0100, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Brian Gaff formulated the question :
However the current drain of modern lights is one heck of a lot less
than a bulb and arguably, less likely to fail without the driver being
alerted via a snazzy dasboard icon.

More than just snazzy, the system can be very practical, very useful. I
can plug the caravan in and know all the car and all the caravan's road
lighting is functioning. If there were a failure on route, I would know
immediately and know precisely which lamp had failed.

They don't even have to completely fail, a poor connection or flickering
lamp is enough to trigger a fault condition.

Just wondering - which car has that on? Im aware of the ones that
register a failed indicator bulb but not ones that show that trailer/
caravan road lighting/reversing/fog lights are working.

As an aside I watched a 17 plate Volvo tractor/trailer unit having its
lights checked at a service station the other day. Driver stood at the
back with a remote control and then went through the checks for all the
trailer lights. Fascinating to watch them all going off and on in
sequence including the side marker lights.

On 5/25/2017 12:34 AM, Michael Chare wrote:
On 24/05/2017 23:16, bm wrote:
"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
news
Michael Chare formulated the question :
I presume cars are made a economically as possible, so is it really the
case that a rear light unit with LEDs and driven by CAN bus, with two
thin wires for the power and two even thinner wires for CAN-H and CAN-L
bus is really cheaper to make than one with convention bulbs and much
thicker wires?

The modern system does not make connecting a trailer light socket easy!

Actually, it makes it easier and it can be more clever. One thick
wire as
the main supply, then thin wires can be used to pick up the signals. The
trailer lights can be monitored and issues fed as data down the can-bus.

It's all far too clever IMHO. Take the seat sensors, if I bung a shopping
bag on the passenger seat the "fasten seat belt" command/bleeper goes
barmy.
I realise it's all designed for dumbarses but c'mon.
With other probs, you take it to a dealer who sucks his teeth and
hasn't a
clue. Whatever the diagnostics tell him it gets changed, charged for, and
still has the prob.
The poor back-street garage who i've used for 52 years is totally
buggered.
Progress/profit.
The day we get driverless cars i'll be hopefully dead.


I find I now have a car that is supposed to start when you press a
button and the key is in the car. However instead of starting I got a
message in front of me saying "Savelock RTFM". (Well perhaps without the
expletive.)


Reminds me of a hired manual Renault (iirc) a few years ago. Required
you to depress the clutch (or was it the clutch and brake?) before it
would start. Spend five minutes waiting for the breakdown emergency
number to find the answer, even though it had an "information" screen.
No manuals left in hire car, of course.

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
That is because the manufacturers don't want joe public doing any job,
instead they want over priced specialists to do it.

Good luck finding a specialist who can do anything other than just fit a
new bit. Which joe public could do if he wanted.

Thing is most these days think everything can be done in software. Fixing
hardware doesn't come into it.

--
*The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.