Are cars really getting safer and more reliable?

I’m not sure it’s modern cars per se that are the cause of terrible driving. I suspect it’s more because most people simply don’t bother to think about improving their skills once they’ve passed the (very basic) driving test. I took the IAM test and advanced IAM test within a year of passing the normal one, and was trained for both by a Police driving instructor. I can still remember the lessons: terrifying, invigorating and challenging, and that was before engaging gear. But the training held, and I’m aware of trying to be better every time I set out. Driving remains a constant test of skills and ability, and it’s also – interestingly – a social function, since many of the same qualities – thoughtfulness, courtesy, patience, consideration and honesty – are required.

When I took delivery of a new car four or five years ago the salesman informed me that I would need to depress the clutch to start the engine. My father taught me to do this when I was 17 and asked me to put my foot on the clutch before starting, which would reduce the load on the starter and make sure that the car would not roll forward if accidentally left in gear. He also warned me that I would have to ensure that the car was in neutral with the handbrake applied when I took the driving test – which is about the only time I have started a car without the clutch depressed. I’m glad that the motor industry has worked out that it’s safer to start a car with the clutch depressed. I believe it’s been a requirement in the US and Canada for many years.

One of my pet hates on modern cars is the dash board illumination, which all too often is LED’s or similar. I feel that sat navs are too distracting to use safely. I have the use of a stick on (Tom Tom) that sits in front of my wife, or of myself if she is driving. The built in ones would be a negative for me if buying. And I fully agree about the modern heater / air con controls as expressed by rich835 above.

On the other hand I find that some cruise controls (like those on the Discovery) save my left leg a fair bit of exercise. Those on the 1998 E Class were good too, as are those on the SLK and X type Jaguar. A pity that they don’t cut in until about 25 mph though, as in safari parks in SA my right leg can get tired!

Today’s biggest issue affecting vehicle safety is actually down to the state of our roads. It is not always possible to avoid the ever-increasing number of potholes without crossing the centre of the road. I have just paid for two new front coil springs (one broke, the other as a precaution) and one new drop link – all broken due to the bad maintenance of our roads. I have seen alloy wheels broken, steel wheels bent, tyres split and all because the various authorities responsible for road maintenance simply do not do their jobs – from the Highways Agency responsible for Motorways and Trunk Roads to the county councils’ highways departments. Locally, my council sends out a team to patch potholes but they do not seal the edges of the holes and certainly don’t tamp down the filling properly so, with a few months, the same pothole reappears. This is an issue of maladministration and misuse of public funds – due in part to the privatisation of services by councils.

Yes, cars are getting better but sadly drivers are getting worse.

I agree with Malcolm r 1st comment that mileage done should be a consideration. I was a mechanic for 40 years and the repair work we had to carry out on especially company cars with high mileage was considerable. This is a factor that would be impossible to get figures for. A lot of these cars would have done in excess of 90000 miles in three years which would probably mean another 30000 miles if extended to 4 years. I cannot see this being safe if owners decide not to have it serviced regularly or even only have this carried out once a year to save on company costs. I don’t know if it would be possible to see failure rates for cars with mileage in excess of say 40000 miles. The problem is though how do you police a mileage restriction as the only time it is legally taken is on its first MOT and the circle starts again.

What extending the period before a first MoT fails to take into consideration is the difference in mileage some cars will do over the first three years of their life. Some will be on Motorways doing 20,000+ miles per year as Rep Mobiles while others will be lucky to do over 40 mph in town as they never go further than the school run or the nearest shopping centre.

It also doesn’t take into consideration that not everyone keeps their vehicle serviced to the Manufacturer’s specs, you only need to drive a short distance to see cars with faulty lights and I’ll guarantee the drivers are blissfully unaware of the problem.

One of the biggest problems we now have on our roads is caused by Day Running Lights, vehicle all lit up to the front, dashboard lights on, but no rear lights as the driver is either unaware or hasn’t been informed that the vehicles rear lights don’t come on with the DRLs. I got caught out by this a couple of years ago while driving a Hire car, it was only another motorist frantically flashing their lights at me that alerted me to the situation. I haven’t been caught out since.

I’ve been driving for over fifty years.

Cars are infinitely safer. They are also much faster, and tyre noise exempted, quieter.

But there are many more cars vying for available space, and using the increase in available power to nip aggresively into it. Drivers are less patient, accelerate faster and drive faster. Because we are so insulated from reality in this ‘Top Gear’ illusory, macho world, drivers are worse. We confront with our cars, and with our driving, as stress and tension cannot be expiated so conveniently at home, or against the boss (we might get sacked). Driving aggressively seems cheaper than talking face-to-face.

Alcohol still plays a terrible part – which was worse in my youth (hangs head) – but we now have illegal drugs too.

Cars better, drivers worse.

car design has assisted in reducing bad and fatal accidents caused by reckless drivers AT THE EXPENSE OF safer drivers. One example is that the safety pillars of cars which help protect the occupants reduce the visibility of those careful drivers who were always able to check 360 degree visibility. And if the new models of even smaller cars get any more “tank like” none of us will be able to put our cars in our garages.

As said, drivers are the main problem.
I claim to be a unique driver ; which is some claim needing backing:

All drivers claim ‘to be above average in driving ability’.
I acknowledge – and have done for a very long time – that I am below average.
Mathematically and statistically only one of the above ‘group’ can be telling the truth.

I have been driving ‘only’ since .. 1960, thankfully major accident free – so far.
One may wonder how.

Now into my 70s I am – and make myself be – more aware of my ‘below average’ ability, now at risk with age related draws-back.

The age-old motoring adage ‘Look in the mirror’ has a deeper meaning than the obvious and is relevant for ever.

It might have more impact if all rear-view car mirrors had an engraved message with the same salutary reminder:
YOUR driving ability is below average : FIX IT NOW

The conversation started with MOT’s.
Interesting to note the number of associated subjects that have been mentioned!

Contributors have added a range of skills and experience which today are redundant and not required to be allowed to take a ton of metal onto our roads!

I passed my tests a number of years ago and I am still allowed to take a truck weighing 44 tonnes onto the road. I can also drive a vehicle carrying 100 passengers and will not be assessed, because of my advancing years on my suitability to used the roads of Britain and Europe!
Because of progress, I welcome the latest electronic devices and systems installed in new vehicles that minimise the incidents (accidents!) which are the subject of many “reality” programmes! I will not fault this type of progress.

We are all recalling the glory years when it was good to get out and get under but don’t ask the new driver to follow our enthusiasm to get dirty in the name of impressing the girlfriend!
Today’s driver has to drive the latest model and have the loudest music system and be at the head of the queue at the traffic lights.
Have we had a contribution from any one from that group?

I urge all to continue safely on the roads, predict the other drivers actions and arrive safely but not necessarily first.

We have discussed the safety of cars, but perhaps we should look at the improving reliability of cars, the other point mentioned in Adrian’s introduction. Each car I have owned has been more reliable than the previous one and my present car has not needed anything more than routine servicing in the four and a half years I have owned it. The last time I had to call a breakdown recovery company was in 1989. I cover only about 8k miles a year.

My first car – a Vauxhall Viva HC – was forever needing repair. The engine failed rather spectacularly after less than 40k despite being serviced more frequently than recommended. I rebuilt it with help from my father and a neighbour after the block had been rebored and the crankshaft and camshaft had been reground. The front wings had rusted through after three years despite having been rustproofed shortly after purchase. (Back in the 70s, cars rusted so fast that it was common to have them rustproofed in the hope they would last longer.)

Although I am very happy with my more recent cars I am concerned that others have not been so lucky. In another Conversation we have discussed the problem of problems with warning lights that can lead to MOT failures. Problems can be difficult to diagnose and expensive to fix.

Mechanical wear and tear usually results in a breakdown, not an accident. Car safety and reliability has come on leaps and bounds in the last few decades, helped of course by more stringent testing and health and safety legislation.

I suspect that an analysis of insurance company and police accident reports would indicate driver fault or some other exceptional event as being the principal cause of accidents today, not mechanical breakdown.

In France a first MOT (Contrôle Technique) is due four years after first registration of a new car, then every two years thereafter. I cannot recall reading of any accident in the French press that was a result of a faulty vehicle that should not have been on the road, or of any demands to tighten up the level of testing – apart from exhaust pollution, which is also happening in the UK.

I believe the test should also reflect todays dangers rather than those of nearly forty years ago e.g. how about a compulsory driving test for those who still remember how to double clutch?

As a low mileage driver, I think it should be considered making the MoT mileage dependent – for example “every 15,000 miles or 12 months, whichever occurs later”. Also, to avoid the “licence to print money” incentive, ALL MoT testing should be taken away from garages and should be done by independent organisation(s) (as is the case in New Zealand). There also needs to be a review of what is covered in the MoT e.g. failure of the SRS system should not be an automatic failure – as its name states, it is only a “supplemental restraint system” – it does not contribute to preventing an accident in the fist place – I had to scrap (environmentally bad) an otherwise perfectly good car just because the parts could not be found to replace an SRS module – bonkers. Cars are far too sophisticated these days and it is not right that a perfectly safe/sound car, mechanically speaking, should be scrapped because some electronic control module has failed, or a dashboard warning light has failed to illuminate – for example it shouldn’t matter that the ABS electronic module has failed/or failed to light up on the dashboard when the underlying mechanical brakes are still perfectly sound – these electronic modules are just “extras” to the underlying essential basics – the car is still mechanically safe. We need to get back to basics – presently I’m all for finding an old classic, devoid of all of this needlessly fault prone sophistication.

I took my VW Golf in for modification to correct the well known emissions problem and the main agent did a vehicle health check. This identified slight leakage of oil from both rear shock absorbers, which would have been an advisory point on an MOT. This was on a four and a half year car that had covered 35.5k miles and no problem was reported at the MOT last July. I will have the shock absorbers replaced because loss of significant oil could affect the handling.

When I got home I found an email from the dealer with a link to a video that clearly showed the problem and also that the car was otherwise in good condition.

Driver complacency is the most dangerous – Jeremy Clarkson once said that the most potentially effective contribution to road safety would be the addition of a large sharp spike to the centre of the steering wheel boss to spear the driver in the event of a collision! Also, many improvements to vehicle reliability are down to Materials Engineering – eg when did you last replace a radiator coolant hose or ‘fan belt’ [better synthetic rubbers], exhaust system [better steels and reduced sulphur in fuels reducing sulphuric acid in exhaust condensate] and tyres with improved performance in terms of rolling resistance [hence improved mpg] noise, wet/cold/ice performance at the same time as lasting longer due to tyre developments. Also, SatNavs do not need to be distracting – they talk to you!