danny08571234 wrote:
講那麼多幹嘛，那你...(恕刪)
放生吧~
他鬼打牆論點是轉不出來的
我們在說和泰不下放ACC很垃圾，把國人當次級公民看
他在那邊鬼打牆說有ACC也會出意外
根本就是強詞奪理鬼打牆還不自知
看來他很喜歡謝金燕
因為車主對ACC認知不夠所以不開放全速域ACC是合理的??
那怎不說拿智慧型手機卻不會用所有功能，所以不需要智慧型手機?
謬論歪理
個人積分：763分
文章編號：71354237
個人積分：428分
文章編號：71355997
個人積分：6461分
文章編號：71356183
個人積分：4853分
文章編號：71356981
個人積分：10172分
文章編號：71358631
重點就是這個啦
半套全套功能有差
半套全套安全沒差
所以回到這篇開文標題 半套全套有差嗎?
成長25%就告訴你買單的人根本覺得沒差 覺得差很多還會買喔?
銷售結果就是告訴你大部份消費者覺得沒差
danny08571234 wrote:
講那麼多幹嘛，那你...(恕刪)
最鬼打牆就你啊
前面幾個都看懂我要講的重點就是ACC跟安全無關了你就很在意半套全套一直要講這個 很在意就去買其他家全套車嘛 沒人強迫你買半套Lexus啊
自己想買又要亂喊Lexus放爛 你解釋一下放爛=成長25%是甚麼概念好嗎 一直裝沒看到還跳出來一直回
和泰就是賣半套一樣成長25% 嫌半套不好用真的不要勉強去買別家全套的
就真的很簡單嘛 方法都跟你講了你還在跳針 你去找一下有幾台半套還是沒ACC高速公路內線自撞
比例是多少比一下不就清楚了嗎
御影三千 wrote:
放生吧~他鬼打牆論...(恕刪)
Volvo跟特斯拉車主真的比起普羅大眾 不要講特例的話 算比較高知識份子跟相對道德觀比較高的族群了吧
所以就連這幾件事情Volvo車主跟特斯拉車主都這樣在用ACC 那其他現在平價進口車都有這個配備的族群
真的有多少人知道ACC怎麼作動怎麼使用才是對的?
我一開始就只想講這個啊 半套跟全套還是沒有ACC跟安全沒有關係
oxxx wrote:
原來要討論 心態....(恕刪)
真的要講到國外喔
美國沒有豪華車在全面標配ACC的 只有AEB是全面標配 跟台灣還相反喔
前面統計美國車主也跟你講比起倒車顯影跟盲點只有11%的新車主想要有ACC
ACC到底跟安全有甚麼關係 你解釋一下?
binyi888 wrote:
這論點就是全速域ACC...(恕刪)
個人積分：1618分
文章編號：71362547
個人積分：10172分
文章編號：71362975
目前只有凱迪拉克這套ACC是安全有差 因為他有攝影機在注意車主是不是有把目光放在路況上 沒有的話會警示
目前只有這家才叫做安全有差
Cadillac Tops Tesla in Consumer Reports' First Ranking of Automated Driving Systems
The top-rated Super Cruise by Cadillac tries to ensure that drivers stay focused by training a small camera on their eyes that assesses whether they’re watching the road. If the system determines that a driver isn’t paying enough attention, the driver gets red warning lights on the steering wheel, audible alerts, and/or a vibrating seat before the system starts to slow the car down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rxW68ADldI
其他家偵測方向盤的可以看到就是有駕駛人想辦法在鑽這些漏洞
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLCtgKm4KZE
看一下人家美國人在評分這些自動駕駛還有把這些系統能不能讓駕駛專注在路況上列入考量
這就是我要講的重點 不是甚麼英國研究 美國研究啦
Does the System Help Make Sure the Driver Is Paying Attention?
When steering and speed control are automated, the driver is more likely to stop paying attention or become distracted, research has shown. That’s why it’s critical that these systems have a way to ensure that the driver is still engaged with driving. We saw significant differences among the systems in how long they waited to warn the driver to respond, ranging from 4 seconds for the Super Cruise to 24 seconds for Autopilot. To put that in context, at 60 mph a car goes nearly the length of a football field in 4 seconds, and nearly six football fields in 24 seconds.
In CR’s testing we found that Cadillac’s Super Cruise’s eye-tracking technology ensures that the driver’s eyes are open and looking forward toward the road. None of the other systems we tested use eye tracking; rather, they prompt the driver to hold on to, or apply pressure to, the steering wheel. This is an insufficient way of measuring driver attention, and it provides little assurance that the driver is even awake. Because of the impressive ability of Tesla’s Autopilot to keep the vehicle centered in its lane, it’s easy for drivers to become overreliant on it. Pilot Assist from Volvo and Nissan’s ProPilot Assist are far less capable, and that forces drivers to stay involved with steering, or risk leaving the lane on all but the straightest roads.
joewang2003 wrote:
幫您補充說明一下套...(恕刪)
個人積分：1618分
文章編號：71382192
