<VV> Neutral Safety switch - somewhat off topic

[J R Read_HML]

Seth,

Thank you for your ever so accurate observations.  I take it from your 
comments that you may feel the Toyota shim under the gas pedal is pretty 
much a hoax?  I'm certainly inclined to think that way.

Think we'll ever get to the point where the E "Parking" brake has to be 
engaged before the engine will crank?  Big Brother taking our "protections 
against ourselves" just one step further?

And for electric cars (somewhere in our future), they will have to emit an 
audible sound - similar to that of an internal combustion engine - so that 
pedestrians can hear them?  What will that do to the already limited mileage 
per charge?

Later, JR


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Sethracer at aol.com>
To: <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 12:21 AM
Subject: <VV> Neutral Safety switch


>
>
> I always wondered about the usefulness of a neutral safety switch - the
> actual requirement. Of course, all new cars, sticks or automatics, have
> something you have to do in order to let the engine crank. Beyond that, 
> the most
> obvious is the newer "Audi switch". That is the interlock which requires
> you  push on the brake pedal to allow the automatic trans to be placed 
> into
> gear.  Thank You to the numb-nut Audi drivers! As far as the Corvair-era
> cars, did the car companies think that automatic transmission drivers were
> stupider than manual transmission drivers? Is that the reason for the 
> neutral
> safety switch? That era had no "depress-clutch to crank" switch. That 
> didn't
> show up until the 80's or so.  I guess the companies assumed the stick
> drivers would push in the clutch. Now our newest cars will be saddled with
> another electronic big-brother circuit - closes the throttle when the 
> brake is
> fully applied, or something like that. Should we call it the "Toyota
> switch"?  Thank You to the numb-nut Toyota drivers!
>
>
> Seth  Emerson
>
> C's the Day! - Corvair, Camaro,  Corvette
>