LOL. I wasn’t driving with the parking break on. I parked it and then put the parking break on. He said no one has ever parked a returned car and applied the parking break.
who broke the parking brake?
Fine, I skipped a step. When I leave the car and take my keys with me, I have to shut the car off. Bear in mind, people are dying because push-button-start cars don’t shut off by themselves…
They are? I was under the impression that it was almost impossible to kill yourself with car exhaust from a modern car, even intentionally, because of modern emissions standards.
I linked to an article upthread about people who died from the exhaust from a modern car, after unintentionally leaving it running in a garage attached to the house.
See the link in Post #14. At least a dozen people have died, and there’ll be more before they fix this.
The more complex things become the less likely the average person understands them, increased chance of a small thing leading to total system failure, and for “novel” situations to occur that would be hard to forsee. That’s why I like that my 2016 car uses the traditional old key system and is a manual transmission.
There’s a lot that can go wrong with a manual transmission and a key ignition, too. I don’t really buy the whole “understanding” argument. How many people really know the details of how an ignition system works? And of those how many could really diagnose and fix a broken one? I think most people would agree those numbers are relatively tiny compared to the car-owning hordes. So if that’s the case, why not adopt a technologically more advanced version that makes things easier and more secure?
Since you brought up manual transmissions, I view this as a congruent and equally dubious argument. Shifting gears has been a solved technological problem for decades. Sure, there was a time when automatics were new and shiny and not as reliable, but those days are decades in the past. I can think of no rational justification for the continued manufacture of manual transmission cars other than there is large group of obstinate people out there who genuinely want to spend substantially more effort accomplishing the mundane task of going to a place.
(I understand there’s a small and perverse subset of these people who use them because they find driving somehow pleasurable. I don’t claim to understand them or their obvious derangement, but whatever floats your boat. I’m not gonna judge you just because you’re clearly insane. I’m talking about the miserable commuting masses, here.)
NM
I spelled “brake” as “break” repeatedly last night. LOL.
If your car is in open air, yes, the CO concentration coming from the exhaust pipe will be sub-lethal.
If your car is in a closed garage, eventually it will lower the oxygen concentration in the garage enough so that combustion is compromised, and it’ll start churning out more CO than it otherwise would. This gas seeps into your home through gaps and cracks in the walls. This is especially a problem if you have bedrooms above the garage, as some homes do.
Every house should have at least one CO detector. They’re like seat belts, in that they vastly reduce your odds of death/injury.
Some do, some don’t. I think it’s becoming more common as keyless ignition becomes more ubiquitous.
That’s why they asked me if there was a bedroom above my garage when I got home insurance. And then double checked: “You do?” I got the feeling that was going to be a surcharge. Maybe I should have explained that I would never park my car in there.
All of this pales in comparison to the threat driverless cars will potentially pose. Imagine hackers suddenly interfering with thousands of cars moving on the highways. It would be Demolition Derby on a massive and deadly scale.
With an automatic transmission, the parking brake is an unnecessary accessory. I was specifically taught* to never use it.
(Unless you’re in a Hitchcock movie driving down a mountainside after a criminal cut your car’s hydraulic lines
*in high school driver education class, circa 1975, USA. In Europe, I assume it’s different–but they have a lot more manual transmissions.
it’s a back-up in case the park pawl fails to engage or slips out. There’s no reason not to use it. and lack of use can cause the mechanism to eventually start binding up so if someone does use it, good luck getting it to disengage.
It’s useful when parking on steep hills because it reduces the load on the parking pawl; this makes it easier (or on some cars/hills, possible) to get it out of park the next time you want to drive the car.
The right way to park on a hill:
- stop car.
- keep foot on driving brake.
- shift transmission to park.
- apply parking brake.
- release driving brake.
This sequence assures that most/all of the gravity load is taken up by the parking brake.
The right way to leave a hill:
- keep foot on driving brake.
- shift transmission to drive.
- release parking brake.
- release driving brake.
- drive away.
This sequence assures that the gravity load is transferred from the parking brake to the driving brake, and not to the parking pawl.
Yeah, me too. The first one can be installed on cars that require an ignition key to start.
Ooh… I could murder a kebab right now!
Oh, wait… Never mind.
My wife’s car (a 2007 Mazda CX-7) has a remote start; it’s actually on a separate keyfob from the larger fob which acts as a keyless entry system, and contains the chip which lets you use the keyless ignition system.
If you start it up using the remote start, and you don’t then enter the car with the keyless entry fob, the engine shuts down after ten or fifteen minutes.
This includes locking the doors, so that someone doesn’t drive away with your car. But that carries with it the consequence of accidentally locking your toddler in the car when you’re distracted enough to not get in and go right away. It’s happened to my friend twice. oops!