 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / May 2005I'm Shocked that Ford Allows This
Like most (all?) vehicles sold in America today, the Ford F-150 pickup truck has a seatbelt reminder system that illuminates an idiot light on the dash and sounds a chime if you forget to buckle your seat belt. However, there is a way to defeat this feature, at least on the previous generation of F-150s (the ones with the rounded body styling - not sure if this aplies to the new ones with the angular, boxy styling). The owner's manual clearly documents a Rube Goldbergesque procedure for turning off the warning chime. Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter will engage, or requiring you to have your foot on the brake pedal before you can shift out of the "Park" position. None of these "Keep Ford From Being Sued" features can be disabled (or, at least, none of the disable procedures are documented). Traction control can be disabled, but only temporarily; always defaults to "on" whenever you start the car, so you have to keep disabling it every time you get behind the wheel. So how the heck did the procedure for disabling the seat belt reminder manage to slip past Ford's team of Corporate Lawyers and make it into the owner's manual?!?!?! I bet some heads rolled over in the legal department after that one... ;)  SignatureLife is short - drive fast! http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan/ > Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s > features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter > will engage, or requiring you to have your foot on the brake pedal > before you can shift out of the "Park" position. And your reason to defeat these useful safety features (which ALL modern manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly what? When I started out with older cars, I learned the hard way to always press the clutch when starting. The occasional lurch from assuming it was in neutral (hey, I LEFT it that way) was quite surprising. Nowadays I wouldn't even know if a car can be started without the clutch pressed; it became ingraned in me to always press it anyway. > > Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s > > features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly > what? 1) There are lots of current and recent cars that do not have shift/brake interlocks or clutch/starter interlocks, neither of which is required by law, and 2) The ability to crank a manual-transmission vehicle with the clutch pedal released can be very useful, as can the ability to shift out of park without one's foot on the brake. Clutch/starter and shift/brake interlocks are a nuisance and a hindrance; they're a "useful safety feature" only for lazy people who refuse to pay attention to the many tasks involved in safely operating a motor vehicle. > When I started out with older cars, I learned the hard way to always > press the clutch when starting. Your own stupid fault for not paying attention to the task at hand. > The occasional lurch from assuming it > was in neutral (hey, I LEFT it that way) was quite surprising. Only because you were not paying attention to the task at hand. I have driven many, many miles in many, many cars without interlocks, and never once have I "accidentally" cranked a car in gear or had any other kind of incident. It must be because I take mental and physical control when I get behind the wheel, rather than depending on gizmos and gadgets to save me from having to use my brain. Pity you're so mentally feeble that you can't manage to do likewise. Even bigger pity if you're able but choose not to. I agree that the interlocks are annoyances, but GEEZ Daniel! Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning? ;-) >> > Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >> > features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Pity you're so mentally feeble that you can't manage to do likewise. Even > bigger pity if you're able but choose not to. > I agree that the interlocks are annoyances, but GEEZ Daniel! Who pissed in > your Wheaties this morning? ;-) John "Pwease don't let the automakers sell cars without devices to pwotect me fwom my own stupidity" Harlow, as it seems. As a professional strident sonofabitch myself, baseless amateur efforts like Harlow's are bothersome to me -- number one. Number two, "I'm lazy and stupid so everyone should have to have annoying interlocks in their cars" illogic is even more bothersome. > >> > Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s features, like > >> > requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter will engage, [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Pity you're so mentally feeble that you can't manage to do likewise. > > Even bigger pity if you're able but choose not to. >> > Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >> > features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >when I get behind the wheel, rather than depending on gizmos and gadgets >to save me from having to use my brain. Wow, I am blown away by your position on this. It is so OPPOSITE of your stand on amber turn lights. When other have suggested pretty much the exact same position on amber turn signals you denounce the for failing to fall in line with your unproven assertions regarding the benefits of amber. Yet we know that the interlocks you are railing against here have reduced the incidence of "unexpected acceleration" situations but you are still against them! Astounding. I'm sure the irony will be lost on you. >Pity you're so mentally feeble that you can't manage to do likewise. Even >bigger pity if you're able but choose not to. Again, the irony..... -- New service to compete with paypal Get $25 pre-registration bonus by following this link www.greenzap.com/25smackers4u > >I have driven many, many miles in many, many cars without interlocks, > >and never once have I "accidentally" cranked a car in gear or had any > >other kind of incident. It must be because I take mental and physical > >control when I get behind the wheel, rather than depending on gizmos > >and gadgets to save me from having to use my brain. > Wow, I am blown away by your position on this. It is so OPPOSITE of > your stand on amber turn lights. Not really, no. Not if you actually -- y'know -- think about it. Perhaps you need a brain/keyboard interlock, Ashton. >> >I have driven many, many miles in many, many cars without interlocks, >> >and never once have I "accidentally" cranked a car in gear or had any [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Perhaps you need a brain/keyboard interlock, Ashton. Ah, your standard response whenever your shortcomings and contradictions are pointed out. -- New service to compete with paypal Get $25 pre-registration bonus by following this link www.greenzap.com/25smackers4u > 2) The ability to crank a manual-transmission vehicle with the clutch > pedal released can be very useful, Is it possible to start cranking with the clutch depressed, then pop the clutch while still cranking? >>2) The ability to crank a manual-transmission vehicle with the clutch >>pedal released can be very useful, > > Is it possible to start cranking with the clutch depressed, then pop the > clutch while still cranking? No. Ulf > > > Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s > > > features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > Pity you're so mentally feeble that you can't manage to do likewise. Even > bigger pity if you're able but choose not to. Agreed 100% Daniel! Morons who refuse to pay attention should not be driving to begin with. Any safety 'features' like the ones mentioned should be easily disabled should the owner not wish to be bothered with them. Just like all those buzzers and such when you leave your lights on, or lights that turn off. If I leave teh lights on it's fora reason. If someone forgets about leaving the lights on they will learn pretty quick to be sure the lights are off when they are walking around in the freezing cold parking lot asking for someone to give them a jump. Stop bringing us all down to the dumbest common denominator as seems to be the American way these days. Cory >> Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >> features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly >what? The ability to crank an engine which will not otherwise start and use the starter motor to move the car can be handy, such as if the car stalls on a rail crossing with a train approaching. The braking to shift out of park is just an annoyance that doesn't serve me the least little bit, costs extra, and only serves the auto company that built the car to protect them from lawsuits. Dave Head >>> Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >>> features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly >>what? >The braking to shift out of park is just an annoyance that doesn't serve me the >least little bit, costs extra, and only serves the auto company that built the >car to protect them from lawsuits. It was implemented because of a lawsuit. >>>> Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >>>> features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >It was implemented because of a lawsuit. Which one? The Audi "unintended acceleration" lawsuit? How did that affect Ford? SignatureLife is short - drive fast! http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan/ >>>>> Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >>>>> features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter >>>>> will engage, or requiring you to have your foot on the brake pedal >>>>> before you can shift out of the "Park" position. >>>>And your reason to defeat these useful safety features (which ALL modern >>>>manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly >>>>what? >>>The braking to shift out of park is just an annoyance that doesn't serve me the >>>least little bit, costs extra, and only serves the auto company that built the >>>car to protect them from lawsuits. >>It was implemented because of a lawsuit. > >Which one? The Audi "unintended acceleration" lawsuit? Yes, but only in USA. >How did that affect Ford? I suppose Ford did not want an "unintended acceleration" lawsuit. It seems only prudent in lawsuit happy USA. >>>> Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >>>> features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >It was implemented because of a lawsuit. Yeah, I know. That still doesn't change the fact that its an annoyance, and an expense that _I_ have to pay for and from which _I_ derive no benefit. Dave Head >>>Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >>>features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > starter motor to move the car can be handy, such as if the car stalls on a rail > crossing with a train approaching. Yeah, and how often will that happen in a lifetime? Oh, forgot we're talking about Fords, never mind... > The braking to shift out of park is just an annoyance that doesn't serve me the > least little bit, costs extra, and only serves the auto company that built the > car to protect them from lawsuits. > > Dave Head Ulf >>>>Frankly, I'm shocked. Ford vehicles are LOADED with Cover-Your-a.s >>>>features, like requiring you to depress the clutch before the starter [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Yeah, and how often will that happen in a lifetime? Oh, forgot we're >talking about Fords, never mind... Try living in my original hometown, Fostoria, Ohio, with 3 separate railroad companies coming thru such that even the trains have to wait on other trains a lot. There was always that fear amongst the residents of getting stuck on a crossing. Dave Head >> The braking to shift out of park is just an annoyance that doesn't serve me the >> least little bit, costs extra, and only serves the auto company that built the >> car to protect them from lawsuits. >> >> Dave Head >Ulf >>And your reason to defeat these useful safety features (which ALL modern >>manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly >>what? > The ability to crank an engine which will not otherwise start and use the > starter motor to move the car can be handy, such as if the car stalls on a rail > crossing with a train approaching. I had piece of clutch linkage fall off when a 5 cent pin broke on my '73. Using the starter to start the car in gear (yes, it's strong enough to do that) I was able to get back to where it fell out, found it, and put back on to go home. No, I can't manage to shift without a clutch. Just a skill I don't have. >>>And your reason to defeat these useful safety features (which ALL modern >>>manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >that) I was able to get back to where it fell out, found it, and put back >on to go home. There ya go... another good example. >No, I can't manage to shift without a clutch. Just a skill I don't have. I've done it - not particularly well, but I've done it. Dave Head >>>>And your reason to defeat these useful safety features (which ALL modern >>>>manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Dave Head Some cars are a lot easier than others. I could shift an old VW with an 020 tranny without any problems. The later 02A and whatever they used in the 1.8T was a lot more difficult, and being worth a lot more than an old beater with an 020 I never tried that hard. A Borg-Warner T10 can be shifted without the clutch, but it helps to have a Hurst shifter so you can actually feel the gears moving rather than the stock "suggestion lever." I haven't had the balls to try shifting a Porsche transmission without the clutch... The ability to do this helped a lot one night a few years ago when my Scirocco's pedal cluster self-destructed at a stop sign on the way home from work. I lost all clutch action instantly; I killed the engine and then restarted it in first gear so I could limp to a nearby church parking lot. Traffic was way too heavy and there were way to many stops to seriously contemplate trying to drive all the way home, although I did consider it momentarily. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel > No, I can't manage to shift without a clutch. Just a skill I don't have. I can do it, but not consistently. I can go from 1st to 2nd most of the time, but I almost always fail when going from 2nd to 3rd. I haven't had any luck with clutchless downshifting. > >>And your reason to defeat these useful safety features (which ALL modern > >>manufactures implement, not sure what your problem with Ford is) is exactly [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > No, I can't manage to shift without a clutch. Just a skill I don't have. I drove my Olds Calais for about a week without the clutch. Put a good 250-300 miles on it like that. Was pretty fun actually. I first learned to shift without a clutch on my Prelude, which was my first manual trans car. On that car I learned to upshift, downshift, and yes, even powershift (not that the little 4 banger had any power) ... all without the clutch. I was a pro at it so when I got the Olds it wasn't bad at all. The Olds shifter was a little sloppy and didn't have the nice feel of the Prelude's, but it wasn't bad at all after a little getting used to. A couple times I ground third until I got used to the shifter and transmission. Also, I didn't like how those damned modern fuel injected cars would keep the throttle open a little after you let off of it. It's to reduce emissions supposedly, but it makes for a hindrance to 'enthusiastic' driving and makes shifting without the clutch a little more difficult. The Prelude had dual carbs and didn't have that silly slow return to idle stuff. In any case, shifting without the clutch is fun. I've talked to truckers who do it frequently and the one guy's mechanic at work was baffled as to how other trucks going the same distance would go through several clutches before his would need one. Cory |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.