Man dies trapped in Corvette

Boost_Crazy wrote: Is anyone else concerned that a man that lacked the capacity to find the way out of his own car was behind the wheel of a 400hp sports car?

Have you seen the way old men trundle around in Corvettes? They're the slowest thing on the road. Seriously.

Wait people read manuals?

I thought we were men goddamn it.

Nick_Comstock wrote:

wbjones wrote: one last observation, then I'm gone … too many self righteous folk in this for me … for all y'all that claim that you have always read every page of every owners manual for every car you've ever had (first off I call BS … most of y'all/us are buying used cars … few of which still have an owners manual with them) how many of your wives/girlfriends/children have read every page of every owners manual that they might ever drive ?

Every car I have bought has either had a manual or I have bought a manual for it. Before the internet I went to swap meets and such to find them. The only one I never found was for the 86 GMC pickup. Even the 64 Electra had it's manual. It's just something I like to do. I don't think my wife has ever read anything in an owners manual. This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread though, I'm just the guy that has read my owners manual cover to cover. Since it was said that no one does.

Really? I get a new company car every year. NEver once read the manual and I guarnetee my wife who drives it daily hasn't either. I've had my Volvo 7 years ago and the only time I've ever looked at the manual is to check capacities while changing the oil. I bet I'm in the 99.9%. Hey, look on the bright side, you are part of the 0.01%, screw those plebeian 1%'s

RossD wrote:

Datsun1500 wrote: How many people made it out of their Corvette just fine this week alone? One death does not make a bad design. A bad design would be if there was no lever at all, much less one right there. Why is no one asking how they "know" he got trapped in the car, and that's the cause of death? Maybe, just maybe, an older guy died while sitting in his car, with the key on, and by the time anyone noticed the battery was dead.... When you hear hoofbeats, don't think Zebras.....

As someone that designs mechanical systems with regards to life safety, I completely disagree. One death is completely unacceptable.

+1 ,

Datsun, refer to my previous posting regarding the Takata airbag thing going on, 30 MILLION vehicles recalled over 7 deaths and 100 injuries. When you compare that statistically with GM C6 Corvette production, they are launching the recall of 30 million vehicles on something less statistically significant than this one case.

When would you think something is valid, after two deaths, ten, a hundred? Think about it some and I believe you will find that your presented view is overly callous.

Also remember, for all we know this is not an isolated one off thing. This is just the one story we have seen.

Many people on here are serious proponents of personal responsibility and I get that. Thing is that no matter what, you have to say that the complicated door system possibly (and likely) contributed to his death in this case. How much of a contribution is rather open to debate and could be debated forever with no end. Fact remains that if it was a normal/traditional door system, the man would likely have lived.

Court cases/lawsuits and a whole debate about liability ASIDE,

Should complex door systems like this be on newer vehicles?

Adrian_Thompson wrote: Really? I get a new company car every year. NEver once read the manual and I guarnetee my wife who drives it daily hasn't either. I've had my Volvo 7 years ago and the only time I've ever looked at the manual is to check capacities while changing the oil. I bet I'm in the 99.9%. Hey, look on the bright side, you are part of the 0.01%, screw those plebeian 1%'s

I agree. Honestly, I'm probably more inclined to read a manual than the average guy, and I can't get past the way the info is presented. Give me a good index. Screw the safety info. Tell me how to reset the service reminder!

Fueled by Caffeine wrote:

SVreX wrote: Many of you are engineers, or at least think a lot like them. You need to understand more about social and behavioral sciences to design products that will meet the needs of average consumers. It's not about complaining that someone will always design a better idiot. It's about understanding how people think, and meeting their needs.

Straight mechanical engineers did not make this decision. It was made by the designers and marketers and brand managers. Engineers just make others concepts and designs work(for this specific application). Body stuff, etc.. is all designed and then made to work to the design by an engineer. But everyone blames the engineer for the "poor design".

I didn't say it was the engineer's fault, nor that he made the decision.

I said it was a piss poor design. That's the fault of the entire design team.

I then went on to say that many people on this site think like engineers, and that this problem should not be viewed that way.

No reason to get defensive, Mr Engineer!

The only defense anyone has had to it being a piss poor design is that he should have read the owner's manual.

Piss poor design. Followed by blame the victim.

Whether anyone died or not is irrelevant. It's still a piss poor design.

In reply to SVreX:

That is not the case. I've said I never read the manual and I'm saying its a perfectly reasonable design. Read the replies.

In reply to Adrian_Thompson:

I have read every post in this thread.

Why would you conclude that I have not read, as opposed to you have not communicated?

In reply to Adrian_Thompson:

I'm still gonna call you out.

You've made the case that the manual backup was intuitive. Though I disagree, I'll give you that. But you are still answering the wrong question.

You are coming at the problem from your perspective and understanding that an electric system should have a manual backup.

I am saying that intuitive for the average user would not be about considering the existence of a secondary system at all. The primary system needs to function intuitively.

So, I asked my wife. "What would you do if your door handle didn't work?" She gave lots of answers, as I knocked them down. She said window, passenger door, call for help, even crawl through trunk.

I even suggested to her that the latch was electric.

She never considered a secondary system.

It's not intuitive.

SVreX wrote: So, I asked my wife. "What would you do if your door handle didn't work?" She gave lots of answers, as I knocked them down. She said window, passenger door, call for help, even crawl through trunk. I even suggested to her that the latch was electric.

But the secondary system isn't electric and this isn't the first time something has been said similar to crawl out the trunk...

Flight Service wrote on page 2: I would guess 98% of the people in that situation would pull the lever thinking instinctively that it opened the trunk. So by accident they would escape.

I have had mechanical door latches fail on cars less than a year old (stupid little plastic clips.)

So at this point, I have to ask, what is your root of all this anger? You usually aren't this irrational about a topic.

Because after the comments you have left, it would seem the thought process you have put forward would eventually lead to only two conclusions. Either completely autonomous systems that are network connected and monitored with full fail safes or the litigious extinction of the automobile. Because that is exactly what happened to private aviation.

I don't think you want either of those, so what is your real issue here?

In reply to Flight Service:

Yeah, you are reading WAAY too far into this.

No anger, no issue.

I am simply saying GM goofed. It's not a good design, because average folks can't figure out how to use it.

Don't overcomplexify it.

I'm not reading anger from anybody here. Pretty much rational thoughts being spilled, and even explained.

Here is my $0.02

1: The release is not hard to find. I've been in several C6s, and it was downright obvious.

2: Even if he couldn't have found the handle, he could have taken off the targa roof (link to article with pics of the actual Vette.).

This thread is beginning to smell like a diaper.

SVreX wrote: In reply to Flight Service: Yeah, you are reading WAAY too far into this. No anger, no issue. I am simply saying GM goofed. It's not a good design, because average folks can't figure out how to use it. Don't overcomplexify it.

I don't think average people have any trouble using this design. That being said, I do feel sorry for the man and especially the dog.

In reply to Datsun1500:

Oh. I thought it was the RH diagram.

The left one is obviously a pair of pliers cutting a wire. Or maybe a desk stapler.

Why do people feel worse about a dog dying than a man? I don't get it.

How the hell did we get up to 8 pages to discuss this topic?!?

In reply to Datsun1500:

The Xterra example does not work.

It's not the location nor the orientation. Neither one matters.

When you approach the car, you KNOW it has a door. Which means it MUST have a method to open it. So, there must be a handle.

If you reach for it and find nothing (which probably happens a lot), it's not a big deal. You will look again, and see it, because it was reasonable to presume a door has a door handle.

But that's not what happened.

Let's say the Xterra had a handle in a normal location, but when you went to open it, it didn't work. There is absolutely no reason you would look for a second one, because there is no logical reason a door would have 2 handles. You wouldn't see it, regardless of where it was located.

It's not the location of the latch that is intuitive or not. It's the existence of a secondary system at all.

But, (sigh)... whatever...

Beer Baron wrote: How the hell did we get up to 8 pages to discuss *this* topic?!?

How about that womens soccer?

In reply to tuna55:

dog had no choice and was completely dependent on the man.

Higher evolved primate caused the death of lower creature which had unconditional love for said primate.

That's why it's sad.

Beer Baron wrote: How the hell did we get up to 8 pages to discuss *this* topic?!?

The same way cars sell for way too much at Barrett-Jackson. Two or more people really, really want something ( in this case, to prove a point) and neither side is willing to back down.

Trans_Maro wrote: In reply to tuna55: dog had no choice and was completely dependent on the man. Higher evolved primate caused the death of lower creature which had unconditional love for said primate. That's why it's sad.

Sure, but the loss of a human life is a bit more important. We eat cows, but not people, ya know?

In reply to tuna55:

Why do you hate animals???