• Full Story

Hands-free cellphone kits just as distracting - Consumer

Email
Print

Mon, 09 Nov 2009 1:11p.m.

Consumer magazine says using hands-free car kits are just as distracting as hand-held phones

Consumer magazine says using hands-free car kits are just as distracting as hand-held phones

Using a hands-free phone to comply with a new ban on using a cellphone while driving is as distracting as using a hand-held phone, Consumer magazine says.

The ban, as part of new road rules under the Land Transport (Road User) Amendment Rule 2009, took effect on November 1.

Those caught breaking the law face $80 fines and 20 demerit points on their driving licence.

Drivers can still use hands-free devices and two-way radio under the ban.

There is an exemption for 111 calls.

Consumer magazine trialed a wired earpiece, Bluetooth headsets, Bluetooth speakerphones and a phone cradle to determine the best way to make and receive phonecalls under the new law.

Its test found holding a conversation on any of the hands-free kits was distracting – especially when dialling a number while driving.

"It took our attention away from navigating intersections, parking, changing lanes – not to mention cyclists, pedestrians, and other cars doing strange things," the magazine said.

"Using a hands-free phone wasn't any different from using a hand-held one."

The wired earpiece was the easiest to use, but voices sounded muffled, while the Bluetooth headsets didn't feel stable against the ear and voices sounded muffled, crackly and faint, the magazine said.

Bluetooth speakerphones didn't respond very well to New Zealand accents when attempting to voice-dial, and had distorted sound.

Trying to dial on the phone while in the cradle was distracting, and mistakes were made while dialling.

The magazine said it was sensible to pull over and stop before making a call – even with voice-recognition dialling and a hands-free phone.

Police reported few incidents of motorists being caught on hand-held phones in the days after the ban came into force.

National road policing manager Superintendent Paula Rose said although officers have been instructed to use discretion as motorists adjusted to the ban, it should not be taken to mean a free-ride period for dangerous practices.

Police were initially focusing on educating drivers rather than punishing them.

NZPA

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

09 Nov 2009 04:44p.m.

Andrew wrote:

Maybe they’re not perfect but it’s something we are just going to have to learn to live with. Consumer magazine (and other critics) would do well to reflect on how the whole cellphone phenomenon began. It was the carphone that kicked-off the first generation of cellular phones. Someone recognised a need in the 1980's and that need hasn’t gone away.

09 Nov 2009 02:42p.m.

Shan Azvi wrote:

I beleive there are more nagative consequenses of using mobile phones while driving than positives.
So it's a good thing to implement this law in order to make our roads safer place for every road users.

09 Nov 2009 02:38p.m.

ACCSUX. NOTCOVERED wrote:

Yea pull ovr.. No excuses. and accountability.. is wat we need. but ya should see what is going on, driving down the himatangi straights.. car/ 4 wheel drive in front of me.. gets phone call. phone to ear while pulling ovr . B 4 to long that same 4 wheel drive ,, came past several cars and then me at way ovr 100 kms per hour .. ovr took me , and .. on double yellow lines.. another murderer driver.Like the one that hit me head on . but hey the dangerous.driver would hav been fully covered by the acc act ,.. if an accident had happened. Just like the guy that hit me while dangerous driving did, hes covered for life.where as the victim, of this driver would more than likely had a life long fight, just like me.., to get the cover from acc was guaranteed when they took my rights to hold the guilty person guilty. oh and then they would be told there levies were going up. to protect the dangerous driver from having to pay the costs of there negligence. the idiot, dangerous driver. trying to catch up .. with the car that was in front of it. when they got the phone call . now in front of me...the car . pulled in again in front of me .. funny how its obey one law.. but ignore a whole lot more.. accsux

09 Nov 2009 01:56p.m.

cherie wrote:

Of course they are just as bad.
So are loud stereos, and badly behaved children.
It was a stupid law for stupid people.
Looking in your handbag is the same. So perhaps we should of made it that drivers need to be educated about paying attention while driving a missile.
I will be really p***ed if they change the law again to suit thenselves. Stop inflicting all the crapp upon the masses when it is only the halfwits that need sorting