MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Automakers want to dump AM radios from n...

Automakers want to dump AM radios from new cars

posted 2 years ago by brux (14840)
21 replies | jump to latest

Washington Post reports:
AM radio is being removed from many cars,
potentially ending its century-long love affair with the American automobile

The breakup is entirely one-sided, a move by major automakers to eliminate AM radio from new vehicles because the signal interferes with electrical engines. Station owners, listeners, first-responders and politicians from both major parties are protesting.

--

How can the AM radio signal interfere with electrical engines? The "signal" is in the air, all around us. It is up to the electrical engines to shield from AM in the air.

I think what they might actually mean is that the electrical engines generate signals that interfere with the radios - because sometimes stray signals from regular IC engines will mess up the AM signal.

[–] FredBurroughs (22261) 2 years ago

Maybe AM radio isn't the selling feature it once was?

[–] MaximRecoil (4836) 2 years ago

"I think what they might actually mean is that the electrical engines generate signals that interfere with the radios"

Yes, that's what they mean, because that's exactly what they said in the Washington Post article that you mentioned:

Automakers, such as BMW, Volkswagen, Mazda and Tesla, are removing AM radios from new electric vehicles because electric engines can interfere with the sound of AM stations. And Ford, one of the nation’s top-three auto sellers, is taking a bigger step, eliminating AM from all of its vehicles, electric or gas-operated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/05/13/am-radio-electric-cars/

I couldn't care less what they do with their new clown cars. If, for whatever reason, I had to have/drive any new car in existence, I'd consider it a punishment, especially if it were an electric car (old technology that died off over 100 years ago that they're, laughably, touting as the latest thing); not as bad as going to jail/prison, but worse than, say, probation or community service.

[–] brux (14840) 2 years ago

Read some truth and real history. The electric cars were preferred by many people, but like most of the mass transit systems in the US were put out of business ... not because of the genius of our competitive free enterprise system, but from lobbying and bribes from the oil industry. Plenty of books and documentation on this.

Why do all of you Right-wing liars have to be so insulting, and mad and pejorative when you express your opinions. If you are going to comment like a clown maybe you should be driving a clown car.

[–] MaximRecoil (4836) 2 years ago

"Read some truth and real history."

Your non sequitur is dismissed.

"The electric cars were preferred by many people"

So were lots of marketplace failures. What of it?

"not because of the genius of our competitive free enterprise system, but from lobbying and bribes from the oil industry."

Uh huh. Gasoline/diesel engines have a real and blatantly obvious advantage over electric, i.e., they can be refueled to maximum capacity in very little time. Depleted batteries take far longer to recharge all the way than it takes to fill an empty gas tank. Have you ever had to wait in line at a gas station behind a couple/few cars ahead of you? It sucks, even though the wait will only be a couple/few minutes for each person ahead of you. Imagine how much worse it would be when you have to wait, say, 45 minutes for each person ahead of you to recharge their batteries.

"Why do all of you Right-wing liars have to be so insulting, and mad and pejorative when you express your opinions."

Your non sequitur (again) is dismissed.

"If you are going to comment like a clown maybe you should be driving a clown car."

Your non sequitur (again) is dismissed.

[–] brux (14840) 2 years ago

>So were lots of marketplace failures. What of it?

Can't you read or think or both. The electric cars were legislated against, and oil was given huge subsidies ... that is not the market. You are thus proved a liar.

[–] MaximRecoil (4836) 2 years ago

"Can't you read or think or both."

Comical Irony Alert, you know, coming from the rube who misquoted a newspaper article, and then called the newspaper's writers stupid because of his own misquote (lol).

"The electric cars were legislated against, and oil was given huge subsidies ..."

Your mere (and vague) assertion is dismissed.

"that is not the market."

Yes, it is the market. Electric cars were only ever [somewhat] popular in certain cities, which had short travel distances and some recharging stations. The Model T Ford is what pretty much killed them off here, since it was about 1/3 the price of a typical electric car, and the burgeoning Texas oil industry in the early 1900s made gasoline affordable all across the US.

Electric cars were a marketplace failure everywhere, not just in the US. I've already pointed out the real and blatantly obvious advantage over electric that gasoline/diesel engines have, and since you failed to address that at all, your tacit concession on that matter is noted.

If you were to go on a road trip with a group of people driving multiple cars, and you were driving an electric car, they would soon realize that they've been saddled with a buffoon, having to wait 45 minutes or more every time your Barbie car runs out of juice.

[–] brux (14840) 2 years ago

Trolling AI that doesn't quite get the English language or lying.

[–] MaximRecoil (4836) 2 years ago

"that doesn't quite get the English language"

Comical Irony Alert: Part II

"or lying"

Comical Irony Alert: Part III, since you proved yourself a liar when you said:

"You are thus proved a liar."

You proved no such thing, obviously.

In any case, your post is a non sequitur, and since you have no arguments whatsoever, your tacit concession on the whole matter is noted.

[–] brux (14840) 2 years ago

And by the way, this is how the article was written - a direct cut-and-paste:

AM radio is being removed from many cars, potentially ending its century-long love affair with the American automobile
The breakup is entirely one-sided, a move by major automakers to eliminate AM radio from new vehicles because the signal interferes with electrical engines.

Shove that into your porky face and read it - "eliminate AM radio from new vehicles because the signal interferes with electrical engines"

The signal in this case refers to the AM radio signal.

In the English language an ambigous noun or pronoun refers backward to the last reference, in this case AM radio, and then it said it interferes with the electrical engines.

Washington Post has idiots writing for it, and apparently at least some misreading it or misquoting it, or defending it wrongly.

[–] MaximRecoil (4836) 2 years ago

"And by the way, this is how the article was written - a direct cut-and-paste:"

No, the article wasn't written that way. I already posted a direct copy-and-paste from the Washington Post article (which was published today at 9:00 AM) along with a link to it. Where's your link?

"Shove that into your porky face and read it - "eliminate AM radio from new vehicles because the signal interferes with electrical engines""

As I already told you, simpleton, the article doesn't say that. I already told you what it actually says, and I included a link to it.

"The signal in this case refers to the AM radio signal. In the English language an ambigous noun or pronoun refers backward to the last reference, in this case AM radio, and then it said it interferes with the electrical engines."

Thank you, Captain Obvious. What the words of your misquote mean isn't a point of contention.

"Washington Post has idiots writing for it"

Nothing you've posted establishes, nor even suggests that's true. You've misquoted their article, and it isn't just a slight misquote either. Your misquote says the opposite of what their article actually says.

"and apparently at least some misreading it or misquoting it,"

Yes, you are misquoting it, obviously. "[...] eliminate AM radio from new vehicles because the signal interferes with electrical engines" appears nowhere in the Washington Post article, and what they actually say about it ("[...] because electric engines can interfere with the sound of AM stations") is true and the opposite of what your misquote says.

[–] Bloodshot77 (14216) 2 years ago

Let it die. Do you know anyone who listens to AM? Even FM sucks 15 minutes of commercials 2 minutes of music.

Signed, million man.

[–] brux (14840) 2 years ago

OK, but then the next step has to be public, free, interactive digital radio merged with the internet.

When I was a new driver there are so many interesting radio programs, call in, interviews, in-depth news. I kid you not. If you were a fan of that sort of thing,
and I was, you'd listen to one show until a commercial or break, and then quick
switch over to another, preset buttons, not crappy touch membranes and try
to follow the most interesting shows.

Because unless you went to major trouble there were no such thing as downloading
or even recording a show.

Now they seem to be setting things up to maximize the profits. Only rich people
can afford to subscribe to 50 different newspapers, podcasts, or whatever, and
because of that the programming is all about giving out the least amount of
content because only scarcity creates profit in a digital world of diversity ... and of
course strong emotions.

[–] Bloodshot77 (14216) 2 years ago

Yeah I've been spoiled by satellite radio.

Signed, million man.

[–] brux (14840) 2 years ago

Never had Sat radio, how is it?
How does it compare to just having a smartphone and it's many apps and channels?

[–] Bloodshot77 (14216) 2 years ago

It's pretty repetitive in the music department. I find using YouTube alot for music. I'm only subscribed because I've been a Stern fan since I've lived in NYC. They do have some pretty decent music channels though, and no fucking commercials. I just find that it repeats about every 3 hours. As soon as Stern retires I'm dumping it. He makes my morning commute bearable.

Signed, million man.

[–] ClementinaSpur (1322) 2 years ago

Agree about the music repetition. I wasn't expecting to pay $20 a month to hear the same song going to and from work.

[–] Bloodshot77 (14216) 2 years ago

I swear the DJs must think we're dumb. They must have a block list that's about 3 to 4 hours long and they just hit play when it's their turn to come on. I've even heard them say the same things over and over. I pay closer to 30. I wish it was 20. It used to be like 12 when it first started. Also I find the DJs to be very annoying.

Signed, million man.

[–] GlenEllyn (21653) 2 years ago

I still listen to AM radio when I'm running errands around town, but when I'm on a longer trip, I pop in a CD.

[–] Keelai (36087) 2 years ago

It's the opposite. Electric car system interferes with AM radio.

My work PC and fan interfere with my AM radio if they're too close. I don't believe car manufacturers have a choice.

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

i assume you will still be ale to get am radio on a smartphone while driving.

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21706) 2 years ago

That’s a good work around right there.