"Bell the Hybrid" - 111th Congress
 

Hi,

The current efforts to legislate noise makers on hybrids are H.R. 734 and S. 841. Both bills are flawed because they legislate one one solution:

"SEC. 3. Findings.

(8) ... require that vehicles emit a minimum level of sound designed to alert ll pedestrians, especially bind pedestrians, to the presence of such vehicles."

If they were changed to:

"SEC. 3. Findings.

(8) ... require that vehicles use any technical system that may include emitting a minimum level of sound designed to alert ll pedestrians, especially bind pedestrians, to the presence of such vehicles and reduce all accidents."

It would fix the legislation so it would address the real problem, pedestrian and accident deaths, and use the full might or our intellect and skills. But sound has been tried for 100 years and continues to fail.

There are more more errors in these bills but the "Finding" are what directs the allowed solution. However, the inflated claims in the bills and by their advocates leave them vulnerable to the facts and data ... the truth. That is the most powerful argument of all ... if we share it.

The most frequent and inflated claim is our hybrids are deadly but the facts and data show otherwise:

Prius Fatalities 2001-2007

The goal is to take any claims of "deadly" and "fatal" away from the honorable competition. What would help would be to make sure this URL is shared with reporters or their editors who try to claim our hybrid cars are 'deadly' or 'fatal' to pedestrians. I have no problem with the advocates making fact based claims but any words claiming "fatal" or "deadly" need to be corrected. There is no evidence of elevated fatalities or deaths associated with our Prius, 2/3ds of all hybrids on the road.

An approach would be to make sure this URL shows up in as many web pages, blogs and web-based comments as possible. This increases the Google ranking ... increasing the probability of a Google hit on a search. Google can be 'our friend.'

I don't look forward to this by any stretch of the imagination. I would rather take instruments to our Prius, soldering iron and boards. Product improvement is a heck of a lot more interesting but in this case, our Congress, our representatives, are about to legislate a mistake and legislate a placebo.

Since their invention, automobiles have made noise and killed pedestrians. We have run this experiment for over 100 years and the results are the same. Adding noise makers to cars is running the same, deadly experiment and expecting a different result ... it is insanity to legislate the same experiment and expect a different result.

This legislation could bring new technology, accident avoidance systems, and take a bite out of both pedestrian deaths, 4,200 per year, and car-to-car accidents. That is the direction legislation needs to go ... not legislating the same more noise that has failed so many dead pedestrians for the past 100 years and continues to fail today.

Bob Wilson

ps. Christopher Hogan did the initial analysis in 2008 for which we owe a great debt of gratitude. I'm not trying to stand in his shoes as much as take some of the heat ... someone has to do it. It is my hope he may post his 2008 report with a URL ... misery loves company.

Wow. Hateful.

A noise maker is a hardware solution to software problem. Perhaps folks could look both ways before entering an area with bits of equipment with more than 50,000 foot pounds of energy.

Not wild about the noismaker, understand why blind people might want one, but loudest vehicle wins.

A $10 infrared laser/arduino style range/velocity device might make some sense, sweep it around and it changes pitch/tone to indicate velocity and distance wherever you point it.

Our Prius (and every other car I have ever driven) came with a sound emitting device, a horn.
The legislation does have a good point however, loud pipes save lives!

Careful driving from motorists and pedestrians looking before crossing the street would be way more helpful than any noisemaker could ever be. We shouldn't have to legislate to counter stupidity or lack of responsible driving/walking.

well there are a lot of stupid drivers, and pedestrians already get the short straw. I certainly understand the concern, but don't know if making drivers deaf with incessant dinging is the answer.

There is a valid concern here though, just don't have a real good answer. I certainly don't want more pedestrians hit by cars for whatever reason.

I don't think there is a valid concern.

New luxury cars are so quiet I often can't tell if they're running or not unless another sense besides hearing tells me so. My hearing isn't bad either.

Do we need dingers on Caddys and Benzes too?

How about me on my bicycle? If I'm not huffing and puffing up a hill me and my bike make no noise either.

Cars sharing the road with pedestrians and cyclists do need to make themselves apparent. Whether this absolutely requires an audible warning or not, I don't know.

I do know that when I'm on a bike, a quiet car is completely inaudible to me when there's a loud car anywhere nearby. So suppose I need to move left, and I hear a car with a bad exhaust roaring up from behind. I wait for him to pass, then I think it's clear, but there could be a Civic on LRRs ten seconds behind him. It would be nice if all cars were equally loud, and this legislation would help bring them closer.

This legislation would also hurt my fuel economy.

I'd definitely support a requirement for a minimum sound level on a vehicle moving in reverse.

Like the cops would enforce a minimum noise level! LMAO

They sure as hell don't enforce the maximum noise levels.

I guess the enforcement end of this makes it moot. But the OEMs still would be stuck with dealing with it.