The fragility of car computers revealed.
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: GT on 21 May 2010 06:58 "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:85n6obFn9gU22(a)mid.individual.net... > "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > >> With regard to the toyota thing - I believe it was a automatic gearbox > > So move the lever to "N" Not sure you can physically do that on a automatic when its moving? >> and ignition control was a start/stop button so the key wasn't a >> tradition 'stick it in and turn it' job - pulling it out isn't possible >> while the engine is going. Bit of a safety oversight by Toyota really! > > If people bothered to read the handbook, they'd know that pressing the > button for a couple of seconds over-rode the software control - just as > it does on a locked-up PC. A very useful piece of information - this should be more widely broadcast/. I am sad enough to actually read the manual for my car, but I'll bet that 98% of people never even open theirs!
From: Adrian on 21 May 2010 07:01 "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> With regard to the toyota thing - I believe it was a automatic gearbox >> So move the lever to "N" > Not sure you can physically do that on a automatic when its moving? Have you ever driven an automatic? Of course you can. As with fail-safe brakes and steering, it's a legal requirement. >>> and ignition control was a start/stop button so the key wasn't a >>> tradition 'stick it in and turn it' job - pulling it out isn't >>> possible while the engine is going. Bit of a safety oversight by >>> Toyota really! >> If people bothered to read the handbook, they'd know that pressing the >> button for a couple of seconds over-rode the software control - just as >> it does on a locked-up PC. > A very useful piece of information - this should be more widely > broadcast/. I am sad enough to actually read the manual for my car, but > I'll bet that 98% of people never even open theirs! You're right. They should broadcast it more widely. They could put it on a piece of paper, with similarly important information, and provide a copy with each and every new car sold. Maybe bind it in book form, and stick it in the glovebox?
From: Adrian on 21 May 2010 07:04 Scott M <no_one(a)no_where.net> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> "...It is thought that modern vehicles have about 100 megabytes of >> binary code spread across up to 70 ECUs..." > <cough> Bollocks. > > The only system in a car that would have anything in the way of hefty > amounts of code would be the in-car Nav/UI job (like BMW's I-Drive, > etc.) Whilst I'd agree that 100MB is probably OTT, you might want to read up on the complexity of modern engine management, especially on common-rail diesels. > And $DEITY knows what they're counting for ECUs - everything down to the > PICs in the memory seats presumably. Given that multiplexed electronics are ubiquitous in modern cars, I don't find it at all difficult to believe. Many modern brake/tail lights are LEDs which are merely pulsed more regularly to vary the intensity, f'rinstance. Then there's the auto- dimming LED front fogs used for "cornering lights" or dimming the DRL to allow the indicator to be seen, or just to play tunes when switching between sets of lights as a tailgate's opened (electronically...)
From: Mrcheerful on 21 May 2010 07:13 Adrian wrote: > "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > >>>> Try a Prius, they are really quite a revelation after a >>>> conventional car, and well worth a drive. > >>> No, they're not. They're utterly bland. They're dull, they're slow, >>> they're noisy internally, they're not even particularly economical >>> if driven so as to keep up with traffic - I averaged about 35mpg in >>> a one hour test drive. > >> I'll second that. They are only efficient when 'trundling' round on >> the electric motor. This is of course ideal for some people, but for >> others the petrol engine kicks in over a certain speed and they are >> no longer the wonder vehicle that they are made out to be. My 2.0 >> alfa is more economical on an out of town run!! > > I should add that I got a very similar figure out of a MkV Golf > 1.9TDi in a week of commuting on the same route that I regularly get > about 25 out of a 1990 Saab 900T16... > > I've been using 'erselfs '90 Pug 205 (1.1 4spd) for the commute for a > while - and getting around 35 from that. Despite it being not only > petrol, but having a carb. my friends last prius showed just over 60mpg as lifetime average, the latest one that he has shows 68mpg, but it is not really run in yet, his use is commuting on back roads about 30 miles a day. the performance is certainly adequate for any normal use, the new ones are quieter internally. there will always be something that you can find which is more economical on certain usage, particularly diseasels, but so what, it is horses for courses.
From: Squashme on 21 May 2010 07:19
On 21 May, 11:11, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like > they were saying: > > >> > "Cars benefit from the fact that they are (hopefully) not connected > >> > to the internet (yet) and currently are not able to be remotely > >> > accessed," said Rik Fergson > >> The sooner they can be remotely accessed the better. External controls > >> on speed must come. > > You can often accelerate out of dangerous situations better than > > slamming the anchors on, which only reduces the severity of the > > subsequent crash. Please leave drivers with some discretion as to their > > actions, and God help us if Big Brother takes over completely! > > Rather more relevantly to this discussion, can you imagine the > consequences of malicious tampering with remote vehicle speed control? > <shudder> > > Not to mention that many drivers will very rapidly become acclimatised to > just slapping the pedal straight down and turning brain off. That's > really going to be a boon to road safety on roads shared with pedestrians > and cyclists, isn't it? Sorry, is that now, or then? |