WSJ: Cars are oh so scary
The Wall Street Journal plots the journey of automobiles into the digital age, from efforts ca. 1970 to comply with the Clean Air Act to today’s lane-departure warnings, collision-avoidance systems, and adaptive cruise control. Writes Joseph B. White, “The transformation of cars from their roots as mechanical devices, with controls operated by cables and levers and shafts, is gathering speed, pushed by regulators and consumers who want it all-efficient, yet powerful; big, but not too heavy; luxurious, but not too expensive.”Sounds good to me. Yet White sees the glass as half empty: “The downside of this 30-year evolution is that for many people, cars are becoming scary again. The new, electro-digital automobiles are difficult for laymen to comprehend or repair. Their failures can be impossible for even experts to diagnose.” He cites the uproar over the Toyota recalls, with Toyota attributing problems to floor mats and sticky pedals, although government officials suspect problems with electronics and software. Says White, “…where there’s software there are often bugs.”
But despite the fact that cars today may be less amenable to do-it-yourself repair, does anyone seriously contend, despite Toyota’s problem, that cars 40 years ago were safer and more reliable than cars today?
In a UK Guardian item titled “Stop the Toyota hysteria,” Edmund King writes, “It is a fact that cars and drivers can be dangerous. Despite our ‘good’ road safety record in the UK some seven people are killed every day on our roads. Each day 3500 people will die on the world’s roads and 65,000 will be injured. These deaths are not generally anything to do with faulty cars but are down to dangerous drivers, often on dangerous roads. In fact, in the last 10 years since the advent of Euro NCAP crash testing, the actual cars have become considerably safer.”
That fact that drivers and road conditions are much more often the cause of traffic accidents than faulty cars does not absolve manufacturers of ensuring there automobiles are not unsafe–whether due to mechanical or electrical problems. But it would be unfortunate indeed if the “Toyota hysteria” cast significant doubt on the electronics and software systems that have made cars as safe, reliable, and efficient as they are.
Rangler commented:
It's a joy to find somonee who can think like that
Les commented:
Back in the old days my dad would keep a tool box in the trunk "just in case." Also, we were taught "1 car length for every 10MPH." Many times I'm in one lane and glance over to see a car just in front of me and just behind me in the other lane at 55 -- barely 2 car lengths - no margin for error.
Joe Jasniewski commented:
It's true! When you have a computer control vital function such as "steering", soft errors in this system may exhibit problems that the older technology - with its solid mechanical connection - simply did not have. (Steering is coming BTW, see the Nissan "Leaf") Even a LM741 has the caveat "not authorized for use as a critical component in a life support devices". I would consider an automobile to be such a "life support device" - my life and that of others on the same road. So what OS has my gas pedal and - perhaps - steering wheel under its control? Has this been certified in some way? Does the manufacturer brag about its relibility, or is there trully no need to, as most consumers simply drive out of the showroom having no idea what's actually between their foot and what makes the thing go? The computer industry could have told us that when you make an OS and replicate it by the millions, they dont ALL work exactly the same way, much to our chagrin. How did they think they'd get away with putting control of a "crtical component in a life support system" under some OS, replicate it by the millions and expect a different outcome regarding soft errors?
Paul Syndergaard commented:
Ok, so the cars are more reliable in general today. The concern is that Toyota automobiles using throttle by wire systems have a known problem that has been reported to the company that still is not corrected. The sticking gas pedal and the floor mat impeding the gas pedal are problems, but do not seem to be the cause of all the failures. Multiple reports of unexplained acceleration have appeared in the recent press. In fact, one of my co-workers has a Toyota that they are afraid to drive because his wife was driving it one day and it suddenly accelerated. No solution has been offered for this occurrence. The sticking gas pedal, whether from the floor mat or from the pedal assembly, does not explain this behavior. In the "old days", the throttle had a strong spring to return the carburetor to a closed position. Some instances of broken springs or mechanical binding of the linkage did occur, but these were very rare and when they did occur it could be easily diagnosed and explained (broken spring = no throttle return). The understanding of soft errors in electronic systems seems to be overlooked in efforts to re-create the failure for electronic systems. Soft errors are often very hard to diagnose as the exact conditions that led to the soft error is hard to find, let alone duplicate. Unintended acceleration is a scary situation for any driver. The thought process is usually to do what has always been done, continue pushing the brake. Unfortunately, most engines have enough torque to overcome the maximum braking ability of the car when the engine is at full throttle and the car is already moving. Rational thought to shift into neutral or shut off the engine when confronted with the unintended acceleration is asking a lot of a driver that is in panic.
Oh so scary DRIVERS commented:
Of course the cars of today are safer. Trouble is, back then you knew if you did something stupid you would get hurt (as in metal dashboard!). Now everyone drives like they can't get hurt. OUTTA MY WAY!!
conscious driver commented:
I need a rubber cushioned car....
Techbook commented:
I's say that the resale value of older Toyotas like my 1999 just went up. Of course, the likelihood that they'll get stolen also goes up.
Jon commented:
Sorry Gentlemen this is mental masturbation direct comparison is not possible given the varibles and the alteration in view points.
interactive_ace commented:
Only if you count in the stats of people being kicked in the head by old trigger just because you stood in the wrong spot.
Bill Alexander commented:
I speak as someone who was a driver of earlier cars. In those days drivers assumed that something could indeed go wrong! Now drivers think that a car will never malfunction and thus are caught unaware.
Capriracer351 commented:
While I certainly love my '60's Muscle Cars, I would certainly not give up my fuel injection, traction control, knock sensors, anti lock brakes etc.. etc.... to go back to the '60's.
The old Muscle cars are fun too drive around or race in on the weekends, but when it is 5 below zero with 20 inches of snow, I certainly like to turn the key and have the thing pretty much fire right up.... That didn't happen in the old days.
Andy T commented:
If you want to be safe, stay home. You know, like the victims in Haiti did.
Life is a terminal disease that we all carry, with some more susceptible to its outcome than others - get over it or buy a Volvo.
Meredith Poor commented:
It might be interesting to compare the safety of cars with horses and horse drawn vehicles. Of course, we didn't have an National Highway Traffic Safety Agency then, so side by side statistical comparisons might be a reach.
