Blind Spot Warning

[Johnologue]

I don't trust BSW systems. My car has the extra convex mirror in the corner, and that increases my visibility/awareness significantly. On a newer car, I've seen the light-up indicator in the same corner.

I think their perceived effectiveness is in reducing driver awareness and creating situations in which they "prove" themselves as a result. Any time they go off (that isn't immediately obvious as a false positive) is them "working".

I do consider the Slate's manual-adjustment mirrors problematic. I accept them because they got so many other things right and because I expect it to be one of the easiest vehicles to refit with adjustable mirrors given the general simplicity/hackability of it all.
I expect mainstream cars will somehow tie mirrors in to the self-driving/infotainment computer and make them "off-limits" for modification.

 

[cadblu]

The fact that they're not even offering a power mirror option like they are power windows is doubly disappointing, especially considering the number of gimmicky non-value-added accessories they've spent the effort to create over this.

Yea, like the gunmetal accents for the HVAC control knobs and lower door trim...magma throwback decals... bronze accented door cranks...and don't get me started with those Slatelets...

 

[AZFox]

If the fingers on your hands are called digits, does that make them Digitally Operated Mirrors?

 

[ValkorTheOptimistic]

It's wide because there's some frame inside.

My general experience led me to expect a pillar of the approximate dimensions of the more solid-looking part of that pictured frame. Some google searching supported that, but it also showed that newer F150s have a similarly wide pillar on their crew cabs.
¯\_ (ツ)_/¯

If the fingers on your hands are called digits, does that make them Digitally Operated Mirrors?

I've certainly heard of "digital communication" in response to poor driving behavior...

 

[GaRailroader]

I definitely appreciate power mirrors. I had an F-150 and Ranger that didn’t have them and the passenger mirror is particularly a pain because you have to trial and error due to not reaching it from the driver’s seat. That being said, many of these will be 1 driver vehicles and so it is a set it and forget it scenario. I do like the circular convex mirrors for blind spot detection. A good cheap solution for sure.

 

[Twisted Santa]

That being said, many of these will be 1 driver vehicles and so it is a set it and forget it scenario. I do like the circular convex mirrors for blind spot detection. A good cheap solution for sure.

Completely agree. I adjusted the mirrors on my used Tacoma when I got it three years ago and haven’t touched them since. I have a couple of the small convex mirrors also, and they work great. Simplicity is best.

 

[KevinRS]

For a 1 driver vehicle I can see the manual adjustment, but if even occasionally another drives it, it's going to be a pain. Roll down the passenger window, adjust it, sit back in the driver's seat, check view, stretch over and adjust again, repeat until it's right. At the very least cars starting many years ago had a lever inside even if it was 1 on each side, that bypassed the window, shortening the stretch by 6 inches or so.
We don't seem to be going back to 80s small trucks here with the external adjustment, but like the 50s.
I'm not complaining about those cosmetic mods: most of those took little effort compared so something like controlling the passenger side mirror from the driver's side, but that remote control has become standard.

 

[cadblu]

I recall that my ‘68 Olds Cutlass didn’t even have a passenger side mirror. Nothing to adjust. Now that’s simplicity! 🙂

 

[E90400K]

I recall that my ‘68 Olds Cutlass didn’t even have a passenger side mirror. Nothing to adjust. Now that’s simplicity! 🙂

AND we didn't ride in a baby seat and our moms smoked in the car!

Boomers unite!

 

[dark star]

Many cars back in “those days” only had a “driver side” side mirror… I started to drive in the 1960’s, and side mirrors on the passenger side of cars were usually reserved for ”sports cars.” Of course, way before, no side mirrors... less traffic, slower cars, etc. I think by late 60’s the gov’t started mandating driver side mirrors. Passing was typically a driver side thing to do… seeing on the right side of a car was thought of as less important. Also, car makers were always concerned about shaving costs, and a passenger side mirror added more steps/costs and repairs. With my first cars, everything was an add-on accessory, it seemed. But times change, cars and traffic and speeds changed. I think economics and the expectation of buyers forced change (our risk aversion increased?… one reason I bemoan no BSW in the Slate).

I did get a response from Slate regarding the option for BSW tech… I was informed as of now, not to be… (citing “simplicity”)… but I was also told “things are fluid”, and options can change).

 

[cadblu]

Ind

Many cars back in “those days” only had a “driver side” side mirror… I started to drive in the 1960’s, and side mirrors on the passenger side of cars were usually reserved for ”sports cars.” Of course, way before, no side mirrors... less traffic, slower cars, etc. I think by late 60’s the gov’t started mandating driver side mirrors. Passing was typically a driver side thing to do… seeing on the right side of a car was thought of as less important. Also, car makers were always concerned about shaving costs, and a passenger side mirror added more steps/costs and repairs. With my first cars, everything was an add-on accessory, it seemed. But times change, cars and traffic and speeds changed. I think economics and the expectation of buyers forced change (our risk aversion increased?… one reason I bemoan no BSW in the Slate).

Indeed, times have changed. More cars, more traffic, more hp, faster cars, and more aggressive drivers out there. I’m not expecting BSW technology from Slate any time soon.

 

[phidauex]

Despite the nostalgia, things have dramatically improved for the better - people used to not wear seat belts, and indeed they were a lot more likely to die on the road.

In 1969, the death rate per 100m miles was 5.21. In 2019 it hit a low of 1.2 deaths/100m miles. It has since bounced back up to 1.5 or so.

So while the technology creates costs and other problems, it is true that for every person that dies in a car crash today, there are 4 people who lived, compared to 1969 experiences. There are also multiple models of car that literally no one has ever died in, which is pretty surprising to consider.

Not every car can be a Volvo, but I'm generally happy to take any well studied safety technology and happy to pay a little more for it.

https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/historical-fatality-trends/deaths-and-rates/

 

[dark star]

…my feelings exactly, phidauex… as you can see from my posts on this thread. I still hope Slate changes gears on this, and offers it as an extra add-on.

 

[KevinRS]

The reason I can see that they would add it is the vague mention I find that it will at some point be factored into those 5 star ratings that Slate is going for. If that is going to happen in the near future, I expect Slate to add BSW as standard in the near future.

 

[Johnologue]

The reason I can see that they would add it is the vague mention I find that it will at some point be factored into those 5 star ratings that Slate is going for. If that is going to happen in the near future, I expect Slate to add BSW as standard in the near future.

I believe it was 5-star crash safety ratings.
Those can't be added aftermarket.