2 steps forward, or 3 steps back?

The 3G network shut down, plus the ongoing vehicle chip shortage, got me thinking - should the automotive industry take 2 steps forward (to bring themselves and the electronic equipment in vehicles up the current level of technology (and keep it there), so that they use the same chips as consumer electronics, and can interface with, and be easily upgraded to, as consumer electronic technology improves?

Or, would it better to simplify? Go BACK 3 steps, and get rid the majority of "comfort and convenience" electronics (dual-zone automatic climate control, self-parking, lane-keeping, 360 degree cameras, etc, etc, etc? Vehicles run just fine with plain old ordinary air conditioning, keys to unlock doors, even (GASP) roll-up windows.

Case in point: The new Broncos have been, currently are, and will be in the future, delayed due to the "chip shortage". Now obviously, there are some systems that are needed, and some that are required by law - fuel injection, safety systems - but seriously, the Bronco should be a basic, no frills, simple vehicle. A good solid frame, durable running gear, enough of a body to (usually) keep rain off of you...but even the BASE model is loaded up with so much electronic crap that they can't build them without hundreds of silicon chips.

I know I'd like to buy a NEW vehicle, with zero miles and a warranty, that's basic, simple, durable, and fun. If it means I have to use a key to unlock the doors, turn a knob on the radio to select a different station, and crank a handle to roll down the window, that'd be ok if it meant it could actually be built and delivered, for a good price.      

In reply to earlybroncoguy1 :

A lot of GRM would agree, but we are a tiny, tiny minority. The public LOVES features. Ball warmers, cappuccino machines, Facebook apps, kegorators, all of it.

FWIW, there's a huge difference between what a Bronco should be and what people actually buy.  I'm helping a friend in Florida get one, and he's getting a winter package in it, as he likes heated seats- helps his back.

Vehicles like the Bronco and Jeep are more image vehicles than real hard core off road things.  Just like BMW's and Porsches.  So they get all of the modern conveniences.

One other issue people miss WRT vehicles- new consumer electronics are not hardened for vehicle use.    So it takes time for that to happen.  Less time than planes or, worse, space craft.  But there are a lot of requirements to make sure they are reliable enough.  Which is why cars are always behind consumer electronics.

I hate myself for liking heated seats and rear view cameras. And 1 touch windows. 

In reply to Teh E36 M3 :

I'll admit I like them too. But I don't/won't go out of my way to procure them.

Teh E36 M3 said:

I hate myself for liking heated seats and rear view cameras. And 1 touch windows. 

Yup. I like heated seats, feel good when my lower back acts up, but I'd still rather ride on 2 wheels most days. I'd love a simple car but as more and more high tech features are mandated by law we are running away from simplicity. Shoot, I'm actually a little miffed that they haven't mandated front view cameras for pickups, I don't know how you can see anything in front of you with a hood that tall even before you lift it.

I don't know why an automaker couldn't sell the brain of the car (infotainment hunk of junk doodad) specifically as a consumer electronic from the dealer shop. Make it approach the simplicity of replacing your worn out, 1yr old Samsung and nobody would bat an eye. Particularly if you make sure to pay C&D to write favorably about it. 

Oddly, any time I have to deal with a parasitic draw, 9.5 times out of 10 it is caused by something in the infotainment system.  They seem to be the least "hardened" systems in a car, probably because there is a lot less development time.

There is a whole lot of electrical noise flying around in a car! Everything from alternator ripple to voltage spikes from solenoids switching off to RF noise getting picked up by the network of wiring in the car acting as an antenna...

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

As a racer I yank all that stuff out to reduce weight and simplify.  
     However the tow vehicle hauling the trailer with the car in it I love that stuff.  Yeh, I'm probably more than a little exhausted getting the car ready, loaded, and on the road. So that lane attention gizmo?  Thanks I appreciate the help same with the smart cruise control  that keeps me from creeping up too close. And Blind spot detector?  That too helps  me get to the track safely. 
     I don't ace to use those sides most of the time but when they help It's nice.  
     Besides I've got my Wire wheel, hand crank starting, manual shifting MG for the times when I want to be in control. 

earlybroncoguy1 said:

The 3G network shut down, plus the ongoing vehicle chip shortage, got me thinking - should the automotive industry take 2 steps forward (to bring themselves and the electronic equipment in vehicles up the current level of technology (and keep it there), so that they use the same chips as consumer electronics, and can interface with, and be easily upgraded to, as consumer electronic technology improves?

Or, would it better to simplify? Go BACK 3 steps, and get rid the majority of "comfort and convenience" electronics (dual-zone automatic climate control, self-parking, lane-keeping, 360 degree cameras, etc, etc, etc? Vehicles run just fine with plain old ordinary air conditioning, keys to unlock doors, even (GASP) roll-up windows.

Case in point: The new Broncos have been, currently are, and will be in the future, delayed due to the "chip shortage". Now obviously, there are some systems that are needed, and some that are required by law - fuel injection, safety systems - but seriously, the Bronco should be a basic, no frills, simple vehicle. A good solid frame, durable running gear, enough of a body to (usually) keep rain off of you...but even the BASE model is loaded up with so much electronic crap that they can't build them without hundreds of silicon chips.

I know I'd like to buy a NEW vehicle, with zero miles and a warranty, that's basic, simple, durable, and fun. If it means I have to use a key to unlock the doors, turn a knob on the radio to select a different station, and crank a handle to roll down the window, that'd be ok if it meant it could actually be built and delivered, for a good price.      

Admit it. You're a closet Luddite.  Most people like progress.  
      Do you still watch an old Black and white TV with rabbit ears?   Get your mail from the post office not this new EMail stuff? 
    Or are you selective about things you buy?   That's OK it's your money, use it however you wish.  I'm sure you can find a horse and buggy if that's what you want. 

earlybroncoguy1 said:

The 3G network shut down, plus the ongoing vehicle chip shortage, got me thinking - should the automotive industry take 2 steps forward (to bring themselves and the electronic equipment in vehicles up the current level of technology (and keep it there), so that they use the same chips as consumer electronics, and can interface with, and be easily upgraded to, as consumer electronic technology improves?

Or, would it better to simplify? Go BACK 3 steps, and get rid the majority of "comfort and convenience" electronics (dual-zone automatic climate control, self-parking, lane-keeping, 360 degree cameras, etc, etc, etc? Vehicles run just fine with plain old ordinary air conditioning, keys to unlock doors, even (GASP) roll-up windows.

Case in point: The new Broncos have been, currently are, and will be in the future, delayed due to the "chip shortage". Now obviously, there are some systems that are needed, and some that are required by law - fuel injection, safety systems - but seriously, the Bronco should be a basic, no frills, simple vehicle. A good solid frame, durable running gear, enough of a body to (usually) keep rain off of you...but even the BASE model is loaded up with so much electronic crap that they can't build them without hundreds of silicon chips.

I know I'd like to buy a NEW vehicle, with zero miles and a warranty, that's basic, simple, durable, and fun. If it means I have to use a key to unlock the doors, turn a knob on the radio to select a different station, and crank a handle to roll down the window, that'd be ok if it meant it could actually be built and delivered, for a good price.      

None of those features require the cellular connection. We had electric windows for a few decades before infotainment systems. So I'll pass on that. 

Keith said it best in another thread, make the "infotainment" system have a radio and the ability to use Apple Play or Android. The navigation systems are worse than phones, etc. 

In reply to z31maniac :

But then you won't be able to close your windows with an app! 

I can't help but think a standardized module design across an entire make would be a better solution for upgradability/repair. A singular BCM/TCM/ECM/WhateverCM could just run different software depending on the vehicle it's in. But I guess automanufacturers don't really design cars with the long haul/repair in mind so it's a moot point.

Personally, I absolutely refuse to own anything as a daily driver with manual windows and locks if it has more than 2 doors.  Heck, my current DD is wide enough that it's a serious challenge to reach the passenger door from the driver's seat.  Forget the rear doors. 

I'd like to see things simpler too.

Most interior features were around long before comupters. A couple of relays work better longer , and cheaper than a computer.

Most of the tech stuff you need a computer for ( Safety Nannies, infotainment, etc) I'd happily do without.

Just give me one PCM for the fuel injection and a little board on the radio so I can plug in a USB stick.

My current daily driver is an '09 Pontiac G8 GT with 225,000 miles on it - so far. It's actually pretty basic for a late model car - no Bluetooth, no Wifi, no app for it...it does have some comfort/convenience options on it (I didn't order them, I bought it slightly used) - remote start, remote trunk unlock, heated seats, dual-zone climate control.

The remote start is kinda handy in the middle of August when it's 105 outside and car interior is like 145 - start it while I'm walking out to it and let it cool down a little before I toast my buns on the seats - but the range isn't that great, have to be within 50 feet or so for it to work. Limited usefulness. Remote trunk unlock is again, kinda handy when I'm carrying my tools back to car after taking a service call, but still have to pull the trunk lid open. I think I've used the heated seats like maybe 3 or 4 times in the 10 years I've driven the car, and then just for a few minutes. Interesting, but not really useful. Same with the "dual-zone" climate control - 99.9% percent of the time, it's just me in the car - I turn off the dual-zone crap, adjust the temp like I want (with a knob - left for hot, right for cold - intuitive, simple, and logical) and leave it there.

Are these things nice? Kinda. Useful? Sorta. Necessary? No. Would I have bought the car if didn't have those things? Sure. Main thing for me was the 6.0L V8, rear wheel drive. Anything else was fluff.

My point is, I'd rather have a basic, simple, useful vehicle that I can drive, rather than a complex, loaded, all the bells and whistles, computer network on wheels that can't get built because there's no chips to make them all work.      

I am an old car guy.  I just don't get it when someone buys something like a vintage British sports car and starts trying to remake it into a modern car.

I have to be careful not to say what idiots the owners are (in my view) when they want to add electric windows, power door locks,  automatic trabsmission or power steering (unless they are physically impaired and really need it)  to cars like MGBs.

I often have similar thoughts. Cars are too complicated these days, too many things to go wrong, I tell myself.  It would be nice if cars were de-contented and only had the things that I really want or need. But as others have pointed out, that's just not what the general public wants.

Realistically, it's very unlikely that we will see cars become less dependent on computers as time goes on. I do think there is a bit of tie in with this post and what some folks have to say when it comes to the right to repair. It does feel like in the computer world, and more and more the automotive world, things are becoming proprietary and that's not very friendly to the consumer. I think that is the feeling a lot of new cars give me. I don't know how I would go about fixing a lot of these systems when an inevitable fault occurs. Maybe that fear is unfounded. 

Most likely I'll drive something modern as a daily, like my MK7 GTI, and then have old analog cars for the miles that really matter.

wspohn said:

I am an old car guy.  I just don't get it when someone buys something like a vintage British sports car and starts trying to remake it into a modern car.

I have to be careful not to say what idiots the owners are (in my view) when they want to add electric windows, power door locks,  automatic trabsmission or power steering (unless they are physically impaired and really need it)  to cars like MGBs.

Or even a modern engine.  
  My MGTD is fun because of its basic nature.  Not because it's fast or comfortable. 

iansane said:

I can't help but think a standardized module design across an entire make would be a better solution for upgradability/repair. A singular BCM/TCM/ECM/WhateverCM could just run different software depending on the vehicle it's in. But I guess automanufacturers don't really design cars with the long haul/repair in mind so it's a moot point.

That kind of IS how things are.

I saw three Broncos parked in front of Whole Foods in suburban Atlanta today, at 1pm on a Friday. I don't think their target demographic is who you think it is. 

Funny how many times I read how people worry that new cars are so complex to be less reliable, when new cars are more reliable than they ever have been. 

alfadriver said:

Funny how many times I read how people worry that new cars are so complex to be less reliable, when new cars are more reliable than they ever have been. 

But you can't fix them on the side of the road...........................errr maybe because you don't have to.

I love old cars but when people tell me they don't build them like they used to I'm the first to mention how much better modern cars are for everyday use.

I recently saw a video from a Mercedes dealer who was amazed that he had SUV's on the lot with manual seats. He hadn't seen manual seats on a Mercedes on over 20 years, but they would rather sell vehicles than wait so they are cutting out things that need chips.  I for one would like to see that trend continue, for a while, let's save money on stripped-down cars that are lighter and less complex. (assuming that dealers pass the savings along...) 

I am also wondering why each thing in a vehicle needs a chip? Why can't we just connect everything into a central brain? I admit, I am not savvy on these things, but I like the 2 steps forward approach. 

Thinking about it, I'm not against complexity in vehicles.  But there are 2 things I hate: useless complexity and poorly engineered complexity. 

If you gave me an auto climate system that required digging through a touchscreen menu to adjust and required frequent fiddling, I'd be annoyed.  But give me the system BMW built with a few buttons for controls and logic that makes it work almost as well as a house thermostat so it often goes weeks without any manual adjustment and then the thing has earned its place (provided it's reliable). 

alfadriver said:

Funny how many times I read how people worry that new cars are so complex to be less reliable, when new cars are more reliable than they ever have been. 

FAR MORE reliable than ever, safer than ever, more fuel efficient than ever, more capable than ever, etc.