scandalized that cruise control is not standard...

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
People dislike leather because it's as hot and sticky to sit on as vinyl.
I'm not a fan for that reason, and I hate it on airline seats.
OTOH, it's also as easy to clean as vinyl.


That or if you bring your dog with you. Dog's nails plus leather seating = BAD IDEA!

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Just another thing to go wrong; it is up there with cigarette lighters on option desirability.


If Cruise Control goes wrong guess what. It has no effect on the operation of the vehicle especially modern ones.

Your response is interesting. When I used to own basic vehicles in terms of options I used to feel the same. Made me feel better about my car with missing features. That is until I got a vehicle (95 Civic) with every power amentity that ran flawless for 9yrs/255 miles. Interestingly I had more issues with manual windows/locks breaking vs power ones(never). I think you can spin a manual window frozen and stretch out the cables break them vs a power motor with a load that stop it.

 

[Spazdog]

Car with no cruise control? I'll be online for a Rostra kit or something similar and plug one in myself.

I don't often use the cruise control, but when I do I can cruise through little speed trap towns at exactly the posted speed limit. You can point that LIDAR gun at me all day long Barney Fife! All you are going to get is the posted speed + or - my speedometer error. (in my experience, most speedometers are a little optimistic)

 

[whip]

Of all the things that could break or cause an accident, the cruise control is at the bottom of both list. I'm always amazed at the things people come up with.

 

[exranger06]

I was going to make a post that said, "In before the 'one more thing to break/all car options are evil' crowd gets here," but I was too late.

Even if the cruise control DID eventually break, you would essentially have a car with no cruise control. Which is what those "simple/bare bones-car enthusiasts" wanted anyway. So, what's the big deal if it breaks?

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: exranger06

Even if the cruise control DID eventually break, you would essentially have a car with no cruise control. Which is what those "simple/bare bones-car enthusiasts" wanted anyway. So, what's the big deal if it breaks?


You would have wasted hundreds of dollars on something you didn't really want or need in the first place.

 

[exranger06]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: exranger06

Even if the cruise control DID eventually break, you would essentially have a car with no cruise control. Which is what those "simple/bare bones-car enthusiasts" wanted anyway. So, what's the big deal if it breaks?


You would have wasted hundreds of dollars on something you didn't really want or need in the first place.

Considering some here have said they would pay extra to NOT have it, they would actually save money by just getting a car with cruise and let it break (IF it ever broke)....

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: exranger06

Even if the cruise control DID eventually break, you would essentially have a car with no cruise control. Which is what those "simple/bare bones-car enthusiasts" wanted anyway. So, what's the big deal if it breaks?


You would have wasted hundreds of dollars on something you didn't really want or need in the first place.

Considering some here have said they would pay extra to NOT have it, they would actually save money by just getting a car with cruise and let it break (IF it ever broke)....

LOL...

 

[crinkles]

DUnno, I find it really useful and keeps me from getting tired.

Was a great assistance when I drove across the continent in 4 days 2007.

I tend not to use it when driving alone (in case i drop off, at least there's a chance the vehicle would decelerate rather than holding speed), and definitely not in the wet.

As for having other cars around, well it's called sharing a public road. use it sensibly.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: crinkles

As for having other cars around, well it's called sharing a public road. use it sensibly.


It's hard to use cruise or just drive sensibly when many others simply won't though.

Around here, people will do any speed in any lane they feel like. The interstate is a mess. It's impossible to set the cruise at 70 something when other cars around you are doing anywhere from 50-90 MPH, not to mention merging at 25 MPH. And a bigger part of the problem is so many people are not even remotely consistent with their speed...one second they are doing 50 MPH in the left lane, then 70 in the right lane. It seems like they are focused on a lot of things other than driving until someone tries to get in front of them.

For me, using cruise usually involves tapping set/accel, then coast repeatedly until I finally just give up, tap the brake, and use the right pedal.

Sometimes though you can encounter another driver who is awake and help each other out. I remember once in NC when a random other driver in an Isuzu Amigo and I basically helped each other do 80 MPH down I-85 for almost two hours after we both got slowed by comatose drivers around Burlington...we kept paths open and made room for each other to pass slower vehicles. It worked great, that was my quickest trip from the Triangle to Charlotte.

 

[Zako2]

If the car doesn't have cruise control, I am not buying it plain and simple. CC gives me more comfortable, less stressful drive. The last thing I need is constantly worry, "I am going 10mph over the speed limit?" because the car is now going downhill, etc.


However, I am not surprised that people buy cars without CC. A lot of them have no idea when and how to use it. I am always annoyed with cars that are unable to maintain a constant speed on long stretches of highway with no traffic. They go 70mph, then 55 mph, and then back to 70mph for no apparent reason.

 

[Zako2]

Originally Posted By: jigen
For me, cruise control with a manual trans car has always felt weird. My last four cars all had it, all manual transmissions. Only used it once on a 6 hour trip where my leg was literally falling asleep (pins and needles).

With my driving style, I could live without it.


I frequently drive cars with manual trans and I never had problem with cruise control. It works the same as in the other cars. The only issue is that the car will not downshift or up shift automatically, which is not a big problem unless you're driving in hilly terrain (where I personally wouldn't want to use cruise even with autos.)

 

[supton]

My TDi works great with cruise. Once above 60 it'll tackle huge hills and not be found wanting. Oddly enough, our Camry seems to be in the same boat: torquey motor, works just fine with cruise.

My truck though likes to double-downshift on cruise. Probably because I'm driving too slow--rev's too low. Small engine, lots of overdrive. I find I can keep it in top gear off cruise, although I do find myself intentionally letting my speed drop to do so. No loss there--I don't drive it during rush hour.

I won't buy a car anymore without cruise. That said, I use it like 1% of the time. It's that 1% of the time that would drive me batty if it wasn't there. I suspect though as I get older I will use it more.

 

[Clevy]

I've fount that cruise control on some vehicles will just floor the accelerator once it senses load increase,or speed decrease,and keeps it floored until it re-achieves speed.
I think I'd prefer a throttle lock over cruise control simply because fuel flow would remain constant even though speed would fluctuate slightly when going up or down hills.
My Harley has a throttle lock and I can almost time fuel fills on a watch during long highway rides. Yes speed fluctuates slightly and if on a steady decline I do need to adjust the throttle position til the road levels out again however I like that it keeps fuel flow constant,and fuel consumption consistent.
Now if only I could rig something like that on my vehicles. An actual mechanical lever that would keep the throttle body held at a specific position.
Could maybe do it with a cable off a bike or something but I doubt it would be pretty.
My hemi at least wasn't the full throttle type cc,unless it sensed rapid speed loss. It gradually applied throttle however even at 1700rpm that truck had great torque and even small throttle position changes affected speed quite a bit.

 

[supton]

Yeah, there seems to be a lag, then it pours on the throttle a bit fast. For myself, I suspect I just need to reserve cruise for the highway--my manual transmissions don't mind cruise on the backroads, but then again I generally only use at 60 or above, since lower posted limits usually mean the speed is going up/down every few miles anyhow.

 

[Win]

I think every car I've owned since 1983, save the Jetta GLI, has had cruise. And the Jetta might have, I just don't recall for sure.

Around here you can tell the cars that lack cruise because they don't hold speed on the grades, or they're the morons that come up to pass you, and then match your speed and drive alongside you in perfect formation.

I don't know why anyone would not want cruise. On an analog system, if it quits working, the car goes along just fine without it.

The only issue I've ever had with a cruise system was on an older analog system. The little switch on the brake pedestal that disconnects cruise when you apply brakes had gotten slightly out of adjustment. On a modern digital system with a drive by wore throttle, I can't think of anything that could go wrong other than the brake pedal switch or the mechanical switches on the controller. All of that would be easy, cheap, fixes.

 

[TFB1]

The cruse on my '07 Grand Marquis maintains within a couple mph either up or down hill... Of course it does the downshift thing and scurries up the mountain if speed is dropping, holding a lower gear till it crests the top(never hunts)... What's really interesting is it also downshifts to use engine braking going down hill if speed is increasing, that was a bit surprising the first time I had it in the mountains...

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: whip
Of all the things that could break or cause an accident, the cruise control is at the bottom of both list. I'm always amazed at the things people come up with.


Exactly. Im vocally against stuff like nav screens... But other stuff is simple and tested enough that it is a no-brainer.

 

[Scum_Frog]

Originally Posted By: Zako2
Originally Posted By: jigen
For me, cruise control with a manual trans car has always felt weird. My last four cars all had it, all manual transmissions. Only used it once on a 6 hour trip where my leg was literally falling asleep (pins and needles).

With my driving style, I could live without it.


I frequently drive cars with manual trans and I never had problem with cruise control. It works the same as in the other cars. The only issue is that the car will not downshift or up shift automatically, which is not a big problem unless you're driving in hilly terrain (where I personally wouldn't want to use cruise even with autos.)


I have cruise on my Jetta with 6MT and I use it all the time.

 

[itguy08]

Not really a fan of regular cruise but love the Adaptive Cruise in my Taurus. Set it for 75 and if someone cuts you off, it slows automatically and then goes back up when it's all clear. Traffic starts slowng, it does too. Sometimes it's a little hard on the brakes but all in all, love it!