View Single Post
Old 03-22-2010, 10:48 PM   #17 (permalink)
cfg83
Pokémoderator
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,864

1999 Saturn SW2 - '99 Saturn SW2 Wagon
Team Saturn
90 day: 40.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 439
Thanked 532 Times in 358 Posts
Old Tele man -

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Tele man View Post
...*my* technical summarization:

PRO: Fly-by-Wire = decent "canned" FE and excellent emissions control

CON: Fly-by-Wire = less than "optimum" FE and interference with driver control in some hypermiling situations.

...when the computer is "in control" the driver's "options" are limited.
Yeah, it's a CONundrum. I feel that my favorite cars are the 1996 to 2000 era because of OBDII + (mostly?) otherwise mechanical systems.

My Dad's argument is that mechanical systems are more likely to "fail gracefully" in the sense that you have a greater *likelihood* of detecting a failing mechanical part before it fails catastrophically. However, with an electrical system, it's either working, or suddenly not working. I admit there are counter-examples on both sides, but I think this is still true overall. Maybe it would be more fair to say that the mechanical systems just have more "development time" built-in.

I would argue that we are in a transition where fly-by-wire is still maturing. I don't want it because I am old-fashioned, me likey me cables. But if it is best for emissions, it's harder for me to justify my position.

Hmmmmmm, how about an open-source fly-by-wire, OSFBW or FBWOS?

CarloSW2
__________________

What's your EPA MPG? Go Here and find out!
American Solar Energy Society
  Reply With Quote