The Truth About Automotive Electronics Pt 2: The Bad
Retired Israeli Air Force ace Giora Epstein flew Mirage, Nesher and F-16 fighter aircraft during his career. When asked by the History Channel which aircraft he preferred, he replied “In the Mirage and the Nesher, the pilot flies the aircraft. In the F-16, the computer flies the aircraft and the pilot is just another input to the computer.” Modern automotive electronics have transferred Epstein’s complaint to millions of cars. We may purchase and maintain our vehicles, but we no longer truly drive them. Increasingly, we’re mere inputs for the computers that do.
This experience may be mostly transparent, but it is real. Press on the ‘gas’ pedal of an electronic-throttle car and it doesn’t open the throttle; it simply tells the engine computer the desired torque output.The brake pedal of a Toyota Prius doesn’t activate the brakes; it tells the ABS computer how much braking to supply. Turn the steering wheel in an Active Steering-equipped BMW and the direction change ranges from barely-noticeable to “Holy s***!”, depending upon what the Active Steering system decides is appropriate.
Under most circumstances, drivers don’t know or care that computers are intermediating their driving. But sometimes it does matter. Lift off an electronic throttle pedal and the computer may ignore it, holding the throttle open to reduce smog emissions. Panic brake in deep snow and ABS may threshold-brake the car into an intersection, when locked brakes might have stopped it much sooner. Try to ‘rock’ a vehicle out of slush and the traction control system may steadfastly thwart the effort.
This lack of control particularly frustrates driving enthusiasts. They want engine braking at lift-throttle, not when the computer decides they can have it. They want to take their favorite corner in a lurid tail-out slide, not electronic nannies telling them that they can’t. It’s a real killjoy when the HAL 9000 controlling the transmission rejects a downshift with an “I’m sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that.” Or when the simple act of simultaneously pushing the brake and accelerator pedals sets off an electronic hissy-fit.
Even when the pocket-protector set tries to apply their dark arts for enthusiasts, they usually end up spoiling the fun. At the extreme end, Formula 1 banned electronic driver aids in the early 1990s (the ban has since been modified) because winning became more a function of software engineering than driver skill. Lower down the food chain, automakers have no qualms whatsoever about rendering their sports-oriented customers’ driving skills irrelevant.
Several high end automakers now offer transmission ‘launch control’ modes, where a driver simply selects the mode and floors the accelerator. Maximum acceleration is provided; no clutch modulation skills required. The new F430 Scuderia is equipped with F1-Trac traction control, which Ferrari test drivers admit allows ordinary drivers to nearly match their lap times around Fiorano.
Where is the pride in mastering driving skills when any Tom, Dick or Harriet can duplicate them by pushing a button? The piss-ant paradigm now extends to off-roading, where Land Rovers offer Fisher-Price type buttons that configure a vehicle’s various e-Nannies for various terrains. Hill Descent Control allows feet free operation. No muss. No fuss. No skill. No fun.
Ordinary drivers have a different interaction with all this automotive electronic wizardry. It makes them worse drivers.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that about 25 percent of all American automobile accidents are caused by distracted drivers. That’s plain to see. Cruise the freeways in any U.S. urban area. Clock how many drivers are talking on their cell phones, fiddling with their iPods, checking their navigation screens, playing with their iDrive/COMAND/MMI interfaces, or looking for the Teletubbies disc for the onboard DVD player. Their focus is everywhere but their driving.
ABS, panic brake assist and stability control can help prevent an accident, but they can’t make the car brake or steer. Only an attentive driver can do that.
Automotive electronics are also dumbing down drivers through the subtle action of moral hazard. The old anti-driver’s aids shibboleth says that cars should be equipped with sharp spikes instead of airbags, to encourage drivers to drive very carefully. Perhaps. Meanwhile, manufacturers give them an electronically expanded safety envelope. Drivers respond to this safety net by driving more aggressively. As a result, the safety benefits of technology are cancelled out by dumber driving.
Studies indicate that ABS-equipped cars have about the same accident rate as their non-ABS equivalents. Similarly, automotive forums bristle with stories about highway medians filled with flipped-over SUVs whose drivers thought 4WD was synonymous with “invincibility.”
History indicates that as drivers adapt to these new technologies, many of the problems associated with them will decline. But there are other ticking time bombs in the automotive electronic world. In our next installment, we’ll look at the long-term implications of these high-tech wonders.
More by Eric Stepans
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- Steve Biro I’ll try one of these Tesla driverless taxis after Elon takes one to and from work each and every day for five years. Either he’ll prove to me they are safe… or he’ll be dead. Think he’ll be willing to try it?
- Theflyersfan After the first hard frost or freeze - if the 10 day forecast looks like winter is coming - that's when the winter tires go on. You can call me a convert to the summer performance tire and winter tire car owner. I like the feel of the tires that are meant to be used in that season, and winter tires make all of the difference in snowy conditions. Plus, how many crazy expensive Porsches and Land Rovers do we see crashed out after the first snow because there's a chance that the owner still kept their summer tires on. "But...but...but I have all wheel drive!!!" Yes, so all four tires that now have zero grip can move in unison together.
- Theflyersfan One thing the human brain can do very well (at least hopefully in most drivers) is quickly react to sudden changes in situations around them. Our eyes and brains can quickly detect another driving dangerously, a construction zone that popped up while we were at work, dense fog out of nowhere, conflicting lines and signs on some highways, kids darting out between cars, etc. All of this self driving tech has shown us that it is maybe 80% of the way there, but it's that last 20% that still scares the crap out of us. Self driving computers can have multiple cameras feeding the system constant information, but can it react in time or can it work through conflicting data - think of construction zones with lines everywhere, orange signs with new exit information by the existing green exit sign, etc. Plus, and I think it's just GM's test mules, some systems require preexisting "knowledge" of the routes taken and that's putting a lot of faith in a system that needs to be updated in real time. I think in the next 15-20 years, we'll have a basic system that can self drive along interstates and highways, but city streets and neighborhoods - the "last mile" - will still be self drive. Right now, I'd be happy with a system that can safely navigate the slog of rush hour and not require human input (tapping the wheel for example) to keep the system active.
- Kcflyer night and day difference. Good winter tires save lives or at least body work. And they are free. Spend a few hundred on spare wheels on tire rack. Mount the winter tires on them. They replace your regular tires and save a commensurate amount of wear. Thus, over the life of the vehicle the only added expense is the extra wheels. I can usually find a set of used wheels for less than 400 bucks all in on craigslist or marketplace. Then swap the wheels yourself twice a year. TPMS has added a wrinkle. Honda has the best system that requires little or no expense. Toyota/Lexus has a stupid system that requires a shop visit to program every stinking time. Ugh (worth it over a honda since your valves don't need to be cleaned every 60000 miles)
- Bruce Purchased (in 2024) a 1989 Camero RS. I wasn't looking for one but I picked it up for 1500. I wanted to only pay 800 but the fellow I bought it from had a real nice family and I could tell they loved each other. They needed the money and I had to give it to him. I felt my heart grow like the Grinch. Yes it has the little 2.8. But the write up does not represent this car. It has never been messed with, all original, a real time machine. I was very fond of these 3rd gen Cameros. It was very oxidized but straight, interior was dirty but all there. I just retired and I parked in my shop and looked at it for 5 months. I couldn't decide how to approach it now That I can afford to make of it what ever I want. Resto mod? Engine swap? No reason to expect any finacial return. Finally I started just doing little things. Buffed and polished the paint. Tune up, Fluids. I am still working it and have found a lot of joy in just restoring what I have just the way I found it just fixed and cleaned up. It's just a cool looking cruiser, fun to drive, fun to figure out. It is what it is. I am keeping it and the author of this critical write up completely misses the point. Mabey the point is what I make it. Nothing more and nothing less.
Comments
Join the conversation
The F-16 flight control system system (computers) is necessary due to the limitations of the pilot and the built in instability of the bird. Current fighter design is working to further reduce the limitations of the pilot by removing him/her entirely. Humans cannot think fast enough, have relatively poor senses, cannot stand much more than 8 Gs, require all sorts of heavy expensive life support equipment, and cannot be counted on to do the right thing consistently. Elimination of the driver as the limiting factor seems to be the way car design is going as well. No driver, just passengers.
I couldn't agree more about badly done safety systems. My V6 Camaro nearly killed me more than once when I tried to whistle up oversteer and the traction control computer denied it by fiddling with the front brakes, leading to the car pushing instead of rotating, and me headed into a wall. If I'd just driven it like the idiot GM assumed I was, I'd have turned the wheel and let the traction control pull the front end around for me, which actually worked the few times it snuck up on me. However, I learned to drive in farm trucks, and rear-wheel handling is in my blood. I can feel the rear end snap out on me and fix it. With the traction control computer 'helping', the job gets a lot harder, as we fight each other and the rather coarse rear end. The killer, though, was that the alternator on that Camaro was not powerful enough to handle the traction control system for an extended period, so a session doing donuts in a parking lot burned up my alternator in the dead of winter. How's that for an unintended consequence?