This is disturbing! (new Cutwater boat)

ssobol said:

If I had this in my car and the sensor failed, I'd probably just turn the system off and carry on (especially if the warranty is over). So far I've driven for 40 some years without lane change assist. I can probably manage without it.

Click to expand...

What happens if there is an accident and a victims attorney wants to know why you choose not to repair government mandated safety equipment? I would also check the fine print on your policy about maintaining your vehicle in safe working order and the implications of consciously deciding not to do so. If your car came with a backup camera, it breaks and you decide not to repair or replace it and you back over a toddler, what do you suppose a jury would think? Particularly if you are getting up in years.......?

psneeld said:

Insurance companies may dictate what you have in your car or not...already discounts can add upfast for even systems that have been around for decades now.

Click to expand...

Wifey B: I thought some of the new gadgets and systems were silly and who needed that and oh my god wonder what we paid to have that and such. Then you get in a car with it and drive it. You realize it might just save your life sometime. You get back in a car without it and find yourself missing it. The prices will come down and you won't have a car without it.

It's definitely a trend in today's world, real risk management though comes from understanding the need to be aware, gizmos just make it easier to spot dangers.....only some gizmos now override human mistakes.

Till everything is automated, it's like a disconnected pilot/copilot to some degree and with not all, but many people.

It's is interesting how much stock insurance companies do put into some automation.

We have a 2003 MB E320 that has been a great car for all of these years. Last fall I was driving on I55 during heavy rain and started hydroplaning - had never experienced this - a bit terrifying. Then i felt the car take control, applying braking to individual wheels, turning the steering wheel, and guiding us out of trouble straight back in our lane. Had completely forgotten that this 15 yr old car has 'traction control' that has never been called for, but worked great when needed.

Had it not worked at least it that instance, and you didn't expect hydroplaning or how to handle it yourself ...then it's better the car does everything automatically.

That is as long as it can...if not,bit puts you and others on the road in jeapordy as much as not having the system...and it lulls an undertrained population into a false sense of security.

psneeld said:

Had it not worked at least it that instance, and you didn't expect hydroplaning or how to handle it yourself ...then it's better the car does everything automatically.

That is as long as it can...if not,bit puts you and others on the road in jeapordy as much as not having the system...and it lulls an undertrained population into a false sense of security.

Click to expand...

It’s not false security if the systems work. And they do work. No more a false security than air bags, 3 point seat belts, anti-lock brakes, collapsible steering columns, padded dashboards etc. Ditto roofs that don’t collapse in a rollover, radial tires and even safety glass, all could give a false sense of security if you think they give you permission to drive like an a$$hat.

First, I apologize for getting this thread so far off track. But it does seem to be something people are interested in. Two stories, the first I read about and the second I was involved in. 1: a car went off the road backwards into a tree. The owner sued because he said the traction control should have prevented that. At the speed he was going, captured by an on board computer, he would have gone off the road even if he had been on rails. The laws of physics still apply. 2: A man was upset and wanted to sue because his sister, riding in his passenger seat, was injured during an accident. He said the airbag should have kept her from being injured. We were able to show him the airbag only works in the initial impact, not the second, third, or fourth. He entered a curved tunnel at high speed, lost control, and bounced off the tunnel wall multiple times.

Woodland Hills said:

One thing that is becoming apparent is that what were once simple fender benders are now significant financial events. The number of sensors, radars, cameras, etc. in the fenders and bumper covers of even economy cars is astounding. A fender that once cost $800 now is filled with as much as $10,000 of electronics that are easily damaged in even minor bumps. Putting all of these sensors on the periphery of the vehicle may be necessary but it also puts them at greater risk.

We are not far from the day a nearly new compact car needing a couple of fenders and a bumper cover will be a total loss.

Click to expand...

Not far?

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a23582753/salvage-title-2005-lotus-elise-for-sale/

Woodland Hills said:

It’s not false security if the systems work. And they do work. No more a false security than air bags, 3 point seat belts, anti-lock brakes, collapsible steering columns, padded dashboards etc. Ditto roofs that don’t collapse in a rollover, radial tires and even safety glass, all could give a false sense of security if you think they give you permission to drive like an a$$hat.

Click to expand...

Totally missing the point.... there's a huge difference in active versus passive systems.

I have enough safety and risk management training to know the difference between safety systems that eliminate the human element and those that may or may not whether functioning correctly or not.....especially those requiring active measures.

Nothing to do with how you are driving, but recognizing potential weaknesses in those systems whether fully funtional or not can be the diffetence in an accident or not.

You are in my world of operational risk mangement and a search of a thousand accidents can show where some cases active systems helped and others, the llack of human training or experience when the system failed or was inadequate definitely hurt.

Just ask Sully and a bunch of other heroes that proved training and experience, plus no false sense of security can be invaluable.

For everyone that seems so pro extended warranty......there is a reason that the auto companies push them so hard. They are huge profit generators for them. They know that they will collect more from you than they will have to put out in claims. Standard warranties are 5 or 6 years or more. If something was faulty it probably would have failed in the first 5 years. If something just wears out, that's part of the cost of driving a car. Insuring against that may not be a sound financial decision.

Benthic2 said:

For everyone that seems so pro extended warranty......there is a reason that the auto companies push them so hard. They are huge profit generators for them. They know that they will collect more from you than they will have to put out in claims. Standard warranties are 5 or 6 years or more. If something was faulty it probably would have failed in the first 5 years. If something just wears out, that's part of the cost of driving a car. Insuring against that may not be a sound financial decision.

Click to expand...

If life were solely determined by sound financial decisions it would be quite boring. No boats , no sports cars, no big screen TV etc. Dull for sure.

Major thread drift, but an interesting discussion. I will continue the drift. I am not so sure about that Sunchaser. Some on here will likely ridicule this, but I have read a few of the Dali Lamas books. One key aspect he discusses is pleasure vs. happiness. He would argue many of our toys produce short lasting pleasure, not happiness. I would say a boat does fall under the happiness category as many of us use them with our families, escape the worlds pressures to get off the grid, or simply enjoy the solitude of a sunset. We are better for it.

Benthic2 said:

For everyone that seems so pro extended warranty......there is a reason that the auto companies push them so hard. They are huge profit generators for them. They know that they will collect more from you than they will have to put out in claims. Standard warranties are 5 or 6 years or more. If something was faulty it probably would have failed in the first 5 years. If something just wears out, that's part of the cost of driving a car. Insuring against that may not be a sound financial decision.

Click to expand...

My personal feelings mirror what you have posted. I never buy the extended warranties. My wife's Jeep Commander (a SUV that she has loved since new) is now 12 years old. With only 65,000 miles, while I don't relish spending money on major repairs, $2000 for a major repair every couple of years is still a bargain! When I retire in a couple of years, she will get whatever she wants, and I will happily sign the bill, without an extended warranty.

Jim

Extended Warranty

I think the choice has to be based on how long you plan to keep the car, what it's manufacturer's warranty is, miles you drive, whether you intend to get serviced at a dealer, and what kind of deal you can g et on the extended warranty.

Toyota and Honda offer excellent all inclusive service plans which cover everything for five years or 100,000 miles. Their regular warranties have varied, were 3/36000, now 3/36000 but 5/60000 powertrain. Now I knew someone who when it was 3/36000 for Toyota paid $2400 for the five year plan. We accompanied her next time and the finance manager kept coming down and she got it for $1000, financed with the car on a 0% interest deal.

I don't think you can say they are universally good or bad. We extend warranties on marine engines. One thing I never extended on was home appliances like washers and dryers. Well, now it's almost blackmail that you better. A single repair on a $500 washer will often run $350-400. The extended warranty is in the range of $100.

Another bargain is on electronics at Costco. They have a very good discount on Square Trade warranties. Walking out with a $800 television and having it fully recovered for five years for $65 is appealing to me. Of course never overlook what your credit cards may offer if you use them.

On the other hand, I am never tempted by the service plans on most low priced items. You get offered an extended warranty on a mouse now. No thanks.

Extended Warranties

I have been in the trade for 30 years, and ran a boat yard for over a decade; I've had my share of experiences with extended warranties. While running the yard, from time to time an owner would want to use a 3rd party extended warranty to cover repairs or a failure. Typically, the only plans a non-dealer could act on were the after-market, 3rd party versions, and in virtually every single case, they had so many loop holes and outs for the warrantor that they were all but worthless.

Reading a policy, something I did recently for a client who was considering one, is very enlightening. For instance, coverage is void if you do any work yourself, on any part of the engine, including oil changes, it all has to be done by a dealer and documented. Sort of makes sense, but unless you read the policy you may expose yourself to denial of coverage.

We never accepted them in lieu of payment, we would bill the customer and they would submit the claim to the warrantor, and were nearly always denied or only a small fraction was covered. It's truly a case of buyer beware, if you are offered a marine extended warranty, first determine if it's provided by the OEM or a third party, and if the latter do your due diligence, including reading the policy and independent reviews before proceeding.

Years ago, when I was working as a mechanic, a client's Mercury Bravo stern-drive had a catastrophic failure of the internally lubricated parts, a clearly covered item, on a very pricey part. He submitted the claim to the warrantor and they said, "You don't have a policy with us". The dealer from whom he purchased the policy pocketed the premium and never submitted the paperwork to activate the policy. The dealer had also closed its doors since selling him the boat, however, he was very resourceful (pre-internet) and tracked the principal down, who had opened a new dealership in a different part of the state and basically said, "cover the repair or I'm calling the state insurance bureau". He had a check in short order. Bottom line, if you pay for an extended warranty, confirm it's been activated.

OEM extended warranties from engine manufacturers are another matter entirely, all the examples I've encountered are legitimate and cover legitimate failures without a lot of loop holes. For modern, electronically-controlled diesel and outboards they do, in many cases, make good sense and are cost effective.

Woodland Hills said:

What happens if there is an accident and a victims attorney wants to know why you choose not to repair government mandated safety equipment? I would also check the fine print on your policy about maintaining your vehicle in safe working order and the implications of consciously deciding not to do so. If your car came with a backup camera, it breaks and you decide not to repair or replace it and you back over a toddler, what do you suppose a jury would think? Particularly if you are getting up in years.......?

Click to expand...

There is a difference between mandated equipment and whizz bang features. Right now anyway, lane assist is only an option in more expensive vehicles. Perhaps someday it will be mandated.

If you get in an accident because you were relying on the autopilot feature of your Tesla, you'll probably be in more trouble, not less. If you watched 60 Minutes last night, the interview with Elon Musk showed them driving a Model S on autopilot. The car performed a lane change by itself. Looked to me like it cut off the car in the adjacent lane when it did so. If I was making a lane change in that situation, I would have given the other car more room. It is possible that the camera angles used gave the wrong impression, but it still looked kind of close IMO.

Steve, I totally agree with your statements about 3rd party extended warranties. We almost always required the car owner to pay us directly and collect from the company themselves. Quite often the claims were denied or only partially paid. We also heard about policies that were paid for and never turned in. There was also a company that did business in Seattle that sold policies for 2 or 3 years and then went out of business.

psneeld said:

Just ask Sully and a bunch of other heroes that proved training and experience, plus no false sense of security can be invaluable.

Click to expand...

But there have been recent accidents where pilots cannot operate the airplane when the automatic systems fail or where the pilots do not actually understand what the system actually does (this does not include the recent Lion Air accident). A senior captain who can not manually fly a visual approach on a clear day in calm weather in a perfectly operating aircraft is just inexcusable.

sunchaser said:

+1. Which is why on our latest P purchase we went for the 7 year warranty.

Click to expand...

Exactly. I went with the 7 year on my Honda for the same reason. Just wish I'd done the same on my Mercedes E550.

Steve DAntonio said:

OEM extended warranties from engine manufacturers are another matter entirely, all the examples I've encountered are legitimate and cover legitimate failures without a lot of loop holes. For modern, electronically-controlled diesel and outboards they do, in many cases, make good sense and are cost effective.

Click to expand...

We only do OEM on autos and boat engines. Now, the place we have done third party is on electronics with Square Trade and their performance and reputation is very good.

ssobol said:

But there have been recent accidents where pilots cannot operate the airplane when the automatic systems fail or where the pilots do not actually understand what the system actually does (this does not include the recent Lion Air accident). A senior captain who can not manually fly a visual approach on a clear day in calm weather in a perfectly operating aircraft is just inexcusable.

Click to expand...

Totally agree, and a lot of that is poor training and a lack of good company policy and pilots that get promoted that have no clue what needle, ball and airspeed is. I could argue to fly MOST visual approaches in good weather, manually... it's just more fun.


Now, there's been a few really screws ups in aircraft manufacturing that can certainly make the pilot's job a bit more challenging.

ssobol said:

But there have been recent accidents where pilots cannot operate the airplane when the automatic systems fail or where the pilots do not actually understand what the system actually does (this does not include the recent Lion Air accident). A senior captain who can not manually fly a visual approach on a clear day in calm weather in a perfectly operating aircraft is just inexcusable.

Click to expand...

So you are agreeing with me?

My point is that mandating a whole bunch of automatic equipment, whether cars or planes, does not assure greater safety. It is possible that it may at first because it is assisting experienced operators. But as time goes on, the automation tends to dumb down the operators who get the mindset that the automation will operate the vehicle and they are just along for the ride. Then when the automation malfunctions (and it will someday) the operators are not equipped with the basic skills to operate the vehicle.

As somebody previously posted, the engineers want to automate the vehicle as much as possible to protect it from the operator. This has shown to have unintended consequences. The engineering answer to that is to have more complex automation to protect the vehicle from itself, leaving the operator further out of the loop.

As the old joke goes, soon flight crews will consist of a pilot and a dog. The pilot is there to feed the dog. The dog is there to ensure that pilot doesn't touch anything.

ssobol said:

But there have been recent accidents where pilots cannot operate the airplane when the automatic systems fail or where the pilots do not actually understand what the system actually does (this does not include the recent Lion Air accident). A senior captain who can not manually fly a visual approach on a clear day in calm weather in a perfectly operating aircraft is just inexcusable.

Click to expand...

Heck the Air France 447 crew couldn't even fly the plane straight and level, stalled in from 40,000 ft.

DDW said:

Heck the Air France 447 crew couldn't even fly the plane straight and level, stalled in from 40,000 ft.

Click to expand...

AirAsia 8501 was pretty much the same thing. The pilots held the plane in a stalled condition from about 37000 until they hit the ocean because they didn't understand (or forgot) how the control system on the A320 works and did not have a sufficient understanding of aerodynamic stalls to recognize the condition they were in.

"Now, there's been a few really screws ups in aircraft manufacturing that can certainly make the pilot's job a bit more challenging."

The automation on Air Bust is a long term problem , even for experienced pilots.

One crashed at the Paris Air Show because the auto system did not like the pass the Test pilots attempted to show off the aircraft.

A couple of years later another pair of Test pilots at the Paris show crashed , doing a similar stunt.

The AF 447 crew could have saved their aircraft if they had simply departed the cockpit and went back and had some wine with the cabin crew.


Sad Sad Sad,

Wow, Talk about thread drift...... but

As far a warranties, extended or not, or any insurance products, generally they are a poor way to spend your money and don't pay off. If you're the "average" person and can afford to self insure, you'll come out ahead in the long run. You'd be better spending the premiums on a lottery.

Occasionally, a manufacturer will give you a free extended warranty as an incentive to buy which is fine, but I rather take the discount of the warranty value. Same with zero percent financing.

Greetings,
Years ago we bought a new VW Jetta and purchased the extended warranty. Well, the valves eventually burnt and wouldn't ya' know it, the only engine items NOT covered by the warranty were....Yup, valves and valve seats.

No more water cooled VW's for me. I still have our '71 type 2 (van) and expect to will it to our son.

Seevee said:

Wow, Talk about thread drift...... but

As far a warranties, extended or not, or any insurance products, generally they are a poor way to spend your money and don't pay off. If you're the "average" person and can afford to self insure, you'll come out ahead in the long run. You'd be better spending the premiums on a lottery.

Occasionally, a manufacturer will give you a free extended warranty as an incentive to buy which is fine, but I rather take the discount of the warranty value. Same with zero percent financing.

Click to expand...

Seevee

If you're buying, not leasing, a new high end car with all manners of electrical wizardry and plan on keeping well beyond normal warranty, a dealer sponsored relatively cheap extended warranty seems logical.

BTW, wouldn't it be nice if Cutwater offered a warranty for a rigorous re-design due to a flooding episode? Whether by flooding or fire, a high percentage (by automotive standards) of Cutwater 302s have suffered catastrophic failures.

Extended Warranties

On the subject of warranties, item 10 in this list, "A Boat Buyer’s ‘Top Ten’ Guide to a Pre-Offer Evaluation " goes into some detail on coverage, and extended warranties...

https://stevedmarineconsulting.com/a-boat-buyers-top-ten-guide-to-a-pre-offer-evaluation-part-ii/