With cars essentially becoming computers that hold your life in there hands, its going to be interesting seeing how software development strategies evolve to build software rapidly but without the fall back of knowing you can simply send out a large firmware update to fix an issue. Cars can't afford to be stuck parked because someone made a small coding issue that got pushed before it was caught.
At least one of the configurations of the 2012 Ford Focus/Fiesta transmission had issues. The mechanic at the dealer agreed it was a problem. Ford never acknowledged their fault as far as I know. A firmware update about a year later seemingly fixed the issue. Why wouldn't they acknowledge the issue and tell people they're working on it? Liability issue?
"Ford has acknowledged the potential for transmission problems in letters to owners and dealers. It has extended the warranty but has not recalled the vehicle."
>> The glitch had been reported by drivers of new Volvos who said the engine could cut out without warning, creating a brief absence of steering and braking.
Created by Volvo - who wants to be death proof by 2020...
>> ">> The glitch had been reported by drivers of new Volvos who said the engine could cut out without warning, creating a brief absence of steering and braking."
Do they just mean the power steering cuts out and brakes lose hydraulics? Because there's a pretty huge difference between that and 'a brief absence of steering and braking'.
Still, losing those functions is an issue. When it rains, my old Town & Country's power steering stops working and turns become difficult. I would hate to be driving and suddenly have it cut out on me, say, when I'm making a turn, or even just switching a few lanes.
My power steering went out once. The car was drivable, but just barely. Likewise if you've ever pumped the brakes while the engine is off, you know that braking power drops to almost nothing.
If that happened suddenly on the road 'loss of steering and brakes' is exactly how I would describe it. Sure it might not be completely accurate, but it is definitely a dangerous situation whatever you call it.
Eh, my car has a finicky engine and I've learned that it's perfectly drivable without power steering or brakes. I've lost power while taking tight turns, and while it was a bit surprising the first time or two I had no trouble keeping it under control. Unless the driver has significantly less strength than the average person, or is unwilling to drop whatever might be in their off hand to get it too the wheel, I'd say it's more scary than dangerous.
That being said, I certainly wouldn't be happy if my new volvo did that; they should definitely be held to higher standards than my $500 beater.
Newer cars generally have a much lower steering ratio (forgot the actual term for it) so steering without the power assist is a lot more difficult since turning the wheel fully in one direction might be only 1 full rotation of the wheel on a newer car vs 3-4 on an older one. Newer cars are also generally heavier making it even more difficult to steer.
How new are you defining newer to be? My car is a '96 mazda 626. I have driven around a '68 volvo, with no power steering and that definitely was much easier than my car when the engine dies. Has typical steering setup changed that much since '96? (Legitimately asking the question here, not trying to be rhetorical)
Cars have definitely gotten heavier as you say, and volvos have always been on the heavier side.
A 96 626 is on the older side as far as steering goes, and from what I recall driving that generation 626 it has a lower/looser steering ratio than most cars these days, though I can't seem to find any numbers with a quick search.
As far as how much steering systems have changed, many are still more or less the same variable ratio rack and pinion systems, but most have moved to electronic steering assist instead of hydraulic, which allows for a higher steering ratio since you can adjust the strength of the assist on the fly (to have more control/less of an assist at higher speeds and with the wheel centered but a stronger assist when slower and turning the wheel) so low ratios aren't needed to keep the wheel easily turnable at low speeds. On top of that some cars are going full on steer by wire now, though not many due to the understandable reliability issues.
Why don't any of the luxury car brands (other than Lexus) focus on reliability? It seems so strange that the market is willing to pay ~$40-$80k for a car totally indifferent to its engineering quality. If I were to own a luxury car, I'd want to know its engineering is rock-solid first and foremost. I'd want to be proud of it as a machine not just a symbol. Maybe that's just a techie thing, though.
Volvo has been notorious for extremely difficult-to-diagnose and expensive-to-repair electrical system problems for at least a decade.
I've always thought, if I was rich, I would hire one or more developers who's job was to educate me on software (empowering me), and write and run software I was interested in. Wonder why I haven't heard of any rich people doing that?
Your comment reminds me of the question: The Greeks invented the steam engine, why didn't they have an industrial revolution?
One answer is that slave labor made a steam engine unneeded: any work the engine could do was already being done by slaves. Similarly, Cicero had no need for a printing press, any time he wanted to print something (election pamphlets, for example), he had an army of slaves copy it over and over by hand.
So maybe rich people have the same thing: they don't need someone to code them a train schedule app (or whatever to empower them), they just tell someone to figure out their schedule for them.
> I'd want to be proud of it as a machine not just a symbol.
As a machine and as a symbol aren't necessarily independent of each other. Being less reliable and more expensive to fix can make it more prestigious in some cases:
Putting this kind of safety-related issue aside, the first purchaser probably won't keep the car long enough to have any real problems (at this price level it's probably a lease). Even if they do, the dealer will give them a loaner (and may even pick up the car) so problems aren't much of an inconvenience.
It's much more of an issue for those of us who like to buy several year old luxury cars -- they have become much harder and more expensive to repair in the last 10 years or so.
Can you explain "it's usually a lease?" Doesn't it defeat the purpose of signaling wealth if you don't actually own it? How common actually is leasing at this price level?
It's simply that no one can tell whether or not you own the car, just by seeing you drive by in it, or seeing it in your driveway...
The true "equity" in a great number of cars on the road--those financed, or leased, is held by a bank, institution or business....
Remember the old false-fronted buildings in the frontier towns portrayed in numerous westerns...?
The wherewithal of those business was likely much smaller than the storefront indicated...
In other words, some consumers will go to great lengths to project "success" when in actuality they haven't quite "made it"...leasing, even renting, a luxury car for that reason is quite common around the world...
It's common because people can't really afford them :-), and don't want to finance the full amount if they're not going to keep the vehicle past 3 years anyway.
I don't follow the line of reasoning that leasing is cheaper than buying outright. Via a lease you still pay interest on the full value of the asset, plus a negotiated cost having a relationship to depreciation. If leases were bad deals for the auto manufacturers they would probably stop writing them.
One nice thing that a lease offers is a defined cost. If your luxury sedan turns out to be a basket case, the warranty covers the problems during the lease, and you can simply wash your hands of it at the end of the term. Trying to sell a depreciated-to-$40K car with problems is not easy.
> If leases were bad deals for the auto manufacturers they would probably stop writing them.
Like 0% financing, it's possible that they're irrational from the perspective of a financial institution but overall good for the manufacturer because more cars get sold.
Certainly agree that leasing won't be cheaper in the long run in most cases. But in the short run it will get you a lower monthly payment, and that's all many care about.
Also agree that leasing helps fix the cost. Besides reliability issues, you win if depreciation is higher then was estimated up front (the one time I leased, the car ended up worth several thousand less then the final balloon payment so I simply turned it back in).
Leasing is cheaper if you have to pay VAT (10% of the sale price in Washington) - you only pay it your lease payments, as opposed to the full price of the car.
If you want to drive a new car every three years, and you buy & resell, VAT will cost you a lot more then a lease.
Many luxury car shoppers are not that concerned with reliability since they plan on only owning the car for a few years. 3 year leases are common and even those who buy a vehicle outright may trade in long before reliability becomes a real concern.
> Why don't any of the luxury car brands (other than Lexus) focus on reliability
The Mercedes-Benz/Puch G-Class hasn't changed that much since 1979. It's a mid-size four-wheel drive luxury SUV, a real cross country vehicle. Deer hunters, various military, VIPs, presidents and the pope, many use the G-Class.
Buy used. If you have a healthy budget, give it to a shop for an overhaul/rebuild, new upholstery, paint, etc. That'll still cost less than new, and no computer b.s.
No computer BS, and none of the safety improvements made in the intervening time.
I don't understand why some people say that they prefer older cars because they're afraid the computers in newer ones will get them killed. Cars are overall much safer. Buy your older car, and sure, the computers won't kill you, but if and when you do crash it may well kill you where you could have walked away from it in a newer car.
I'm not afraid the computer will get me killed. I'm also not afraid other drivers are going to get me killed. I agree the cars a much safer than 30 years ago. By older car I'm thinking something 15 years old or newer, so they still have computers in them, they still have most modern safety features, but they don't have full blown OS's with the most craptastic manufacturer proprietary UI's known to man that never get updated and never will be updated.
The safety potential, I recognize. In this case it's an inconvenience. And this transitional period we're in right now where cars can have major bugs like this, but still aren't autonomous (probably a good thing, in the context of this particular flaw) is something I personally don't want to be involved in. I understand the process won't be free of flaws, and good that Volvo isn't downplaying or hiding the issue. When the software is mature enough that it's not needing constant updates, and we're not concerned about needing an SLA for 10 or 20 or 30 years to keep car computers secure... OK fuck, I'm screwed it's going to be a long time before I can get a new car.
The inconvenience seems pretty small compared to the inconvenience of maintaining an old car. Required updates at the dealer aren't exactly common, and in day-to-day use you can mostly ignore the systems if you don't want to use them.
I don't know too much about vehicle side of things but my understanding is the following:
MISRA is not on the same level as DO-178. DO-178 covers a lot of ground, from testing, documentation, requirements, that sort of thing, and it's made by a government agency which enforces it during certification, where every single hardware and software component in the aircraft related to flight operations is certified individually. So you will actually have engineers from the FAA sit down and look at code coverage, how requirements are written, how they map to tests, see if the tests cover a lot of cases in your requirements, see if the code implements the requirements, that sort of thing.
MISRA on the other hand are treated like guidelines that car manufacturers generally want you to meet when you deliver them a vehicle component.
There is the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards you have to meet on a vehicle as a whole, but I do not know if they have to prove that they meet the following during a formal certification process.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/FMVSS/
So as far as I know, there's big approval process at the end for vehicles, while there's a formal certification process for all components in an aircraft, as well as a big approval process at the end for aircraft.
Someone please correct and fill in the blanks for the vehicle side of things.
I have a theory that software is so hard, that internet startups win simply because they can actually do software, and thereby obtain its benefits.
It's not that the start ups have such disruptive business models; but simply that software is great, and incumbents can't do it.
Web startups are good at software because that's what they focus on, and are selected for. So we're in this strange situation where getting software to do it is more important than doing it. It's the flexibility.
I'm afraid even my anecdatum is scanty: taxi calling is terrible. Uber could only be better.
Jeep had a very similar recall. I have a 2007 Jeep Wrangler, the first year of the major redesign. This was the first Wrangler with modern electronics, including stability control. In the first year, there were three recalls for software updates.
The worst one was a tendency for the system to crash while going uphill at slow speed in hot weather. The crash caused the engine to quit and restart, the dashboard would blank, light up for self-test, and reset, the transmission would downshift, and the CD player would stop. However, everything did recover within one second. That sounds very similar to Volvo's problem.
I've rented a Volvo V70 for the weekend that sounds like it's just the model that they're recalling. So far, no issues, and given the ice patches on the road today I'd hope it stays that way. It's a pretty cool car otherwise, lots of nifty features to make driving easier and safer, like adaptive cruise control, lane warnings, dead angle warnings, automatic break (at low speeds) when detecting obstacles, like a car suddenly stopping ahead. If this thing would steer by itself I wouldn't have to do anything – if this is the way of the future then sign me up!
Update: I'm still alive, and the car returned. Never had an issue, so I guess the model wasn't affected or its not easily reproduced in the kind of casual cross country driving I did.
67 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 36.5 ms ] threadAnd so far car manufacturers have done a piss poor job.
Hell, they are even insisting on using dbus for IPC as they replace QNX with Linux.
http://pixelscommander.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/P10.pd...
This was published _20_ years ago. http://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-stuff
Yes they did, they sent letters out and and they extended the warranty on the transmission. Twice.
http://www.mcall.com/news/local/watchdog/mc-ford-fiesta-tran...
"Ford has acknowledged the potential for transmission problems in letters to owners and dealers. It has extended the warranty but has not recalled the vehicle."
Created by Volvo - who wants to be death proof by 2020...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3409102/Volvo...
Do they just mean the power steering cuts out and brakes lose hydraulics? Because there's a pretty huge difference between that and 'a brief absence of steering and braking'.
If that happened suddenly on the road 'loss of steering and brakes' is exactly how I would describe it. Sure it might not be completely accurate, but it is definitely a dangerous situation whatever you call it.
That being said, I certainly wouldn't be happy if my new volvo did that; they should definitely be held to higher standards than my $500 beater.
As far as how much steering systems have changed, many are still more or less the same variable ratio rack and pinion systems, but most have moved to electronic steering assist instead of hydraulic, which allows for a higher steering ratio since you can adjust the strength of the assist on the fly (to have more control/less of an assist at higher speeds and with the wheel centered but a stronger assist when slower and turning the wheel) so low ratios aren't needed to keep the wheel easily turnable at low speeds. On top of that some cars are going full on steer by wire now, though not many due to the understandable reliability issues.
Volvo has been notorious for extremely difficult-to-diagnose and expensive-to-repair electrical system problems for at least a decade.
One answer is that slave labor made a steam engine unneeded: any work the engine could do was already being done by slaves. Similarly, Cicero had no need for a printing press, any time he wanted to print something (election pamphlets, for example), he had an army of slaves copy it over and over by hand.
So maybe rich people have the same thing: they don't need someone to code them a train schedule app (or whatever to empower them), they just tell someone to figure out their schedule for them.
As a machine and as a symbol aren't necessarily independent of each other. Being less reliable and more expensive to fix can make it more prestigious in some cases:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_the_Leisure_Clas...
It's much more of an issue for those of us who like to buy several year old luxury cars -- they have become much harder and more expensive to repair in the last 10 years or so.
The true "equity" in a great number of cars on the road--those financed, or leased, is held by a bank, institution or business....
Remember the old false-fronted buildings in the frontier towns portrayed in numerous westerns...?
The wherewithal of those business was likely much smaller than the storefront indicated...
In other words, some consumers will go to great lengths to project "success" when in actuality they haven't quite "made it"...leasing, even renting, a luxury car for that reason is quite common around the world...
It's common because people can't really afford them :-), and don't want to finance the full amount if they're not going to keep the vehicle past 3 years anyway.
One nice thing that a lease offers is a defined cost. If your luxury sedan turns out to be a basket case, the warranty covers the problems during the lease, and you can simply wash your hands of it at the end of the term. Trying to sell a depreciated-to-$40K car with problems is not easy.
Like 0% financing, it's possible that they're irrational from the perspective of a financial institution but overall good for the manufacturer because more cars get sold.
Also agree that leasing helps fix the cost. Besides reliability issues, you win if depreciation is higher then was estimated up front (the one time I leased, the car ended up worth several thousand less then the final balloon payment so I simply turned it back in).
If you want to drive a new car every three years, and you buy & resell, VAT will cost you a lot more then a lease.
The Mercedes-Benz/Puch G-Class hasn't changed that much since 1979. It's a mid-size four-wheel drive luxury SUV, a real cross country vehicle. Deer hunters, various military, VIPs, presidents and the pope, many use the G-Class.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_G-Class
http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/2015...
http://www.benzworld.org/forums/attachments/g-class/209746d1...
http://olive-drab.com/images/id_mb_gclass_03_700.jpg
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--qAO8Ma4i...
http://spintires-mods.lt/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Mercedes... (CGI)
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_DobFdTEMh3Y/TDoii7WEbZI/AAAAAAAABB...
http://cars-pics-db.com/pics/steyr-puch/steyr-puch-g-290/ste...
http://s1.cdn.autoevolution.com/images/testdrive/gallery/108...
http://car-from-uk.com/ebay/carphotos/full/ebay1416702369969...
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/4a/bc/16/4abc163c1...
http://www.papercraftsquare.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/D... (Paper Model)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/3d/84/04/3d84040cc...
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s---M1k3rjO...
I don't understand why some people say that they prefer older cars because they're afraid the computers in newer ones will get them killed. Cars are overall much safer. Buy your older car, and sure, the computers won't kill you, but if and when you do crash it may well kill you where you could have walked away from it in a newer car.
MISRA is not on the same level as DO-178. DO-178 covers a lot of ground, from testing, documentation, requirements, that sort of thing, and it's made by a government agency which enforces it during certification, where every single hardware and software component in the aircraft related to flight operations is certified individually. So you will actually have engineers from the FAA sit down and look at code coverage, how requirements are written, how they map to tests, see if the tests cover a lot of cases in your requirements, see if the code implements the requirements, that sort of thing.
MISRA on the other hand are treated like guidelines that car manufacturers generally want you to meet when you deliver them a vehicle component.
There is the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards you have to meet on a vehicle as a whole, but I do not know if they have to prove that they meet the following during a formal certification process. http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/FMVSS/
So as far as I know, there's big approval process at the end for vehicles, while there's a formal certification process for all components in an aircraft, as well as a big approval process at the end for aircraft.
Someone please correct and fill in the blanks for the vehicle side of things.
And as there is no way to see the source or replicate the build process no one can easily tell if the guidelines have been followed.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9643204
Toyotas Unintended Acceleration and the Big Bowl of “Spaghetti” Code (2013) (safetyresearch.net)
http://www.safetyresearch.net/blog/articles/toyota-unintende...
It's not that the start ups have such disruptive business models; but simply that software is great, and incumbents can't do it.
Web startups are good at software because that's what they focus on, and are selected for. So we're in this strange situation where getting software to do it is more important than doing it. It's the flexibility.
I'm afraid even my anecdatum is scanty: taxi calling is terrible. Uber could only be better.
The worst one was a tendency for the system to crash while going uphill at slow speed in hot weather. The crash caused the engine to quit and restart, the dashboard would blank, light up for self-test, and reset, the transmission would downshift, and the CD player would stop. However, everything did recover within one second. That sounds very similar to Volvo's problem.
Regardless – great car, 10/10 would rent again.