QOTD: Automotive Tech Flops - Past, Present, and Future

Corey Lewis
by Corey Lewis

TTAC commenter Bruce suggested today’s Question of the Day, and he wants to talk tech features. Specifically, the kind which are all the rage for a short period of time, then fizzled into nothingness.Today we ask you to tell us about automotive tech flops – past, present, and future.

Here’s a snip of Bruce’s email.I’ve noticed that car manufacturers have stopped advertising automatic parking features on cars (is the feature even available anymore?) Back in the 90s, four-wheel steering was the rage for a few years. I’m wondering what other tech didn’t last and why (reliability or lack of a selling point, I’m guessing). Also, what current tech in our tech-laden cars do the editors (or readers) think will be dead in coming years.

Bruce’s four-wheel steering suggestion is a great example of a tech flop. I can think of four-wheel steering vehicles from the ’80s through the ’00s, and none of them gained much by having the feature. The ’80s brought us the four-wheel steering Honda Prelude, and the ’90s the tech-laden Mitsubishi 3000GT. GM got in the game in the early 2000s, offering the complex Quadrasteer system between 2002 and 2005 (usually on high-end Denalis). Then it was gone.You turn if you want to. These wheels are not for turning.

Another example from the ’80s — voice alert systems. Available notably on Chrysler products throughout the decade, a Electronic Voice Alert (EVA) shouted warnings from the car’s electronic brain. Leave the door open? Well your door is probably a jar. Turn your headlights on? A voice confirms what your eyes have already observed. This feature/gimmick fizzled out sometime around the dawn of the 1990s, and I don’t think anybody missed it.

From the nearer past, hands-free parking was advertised in high-line cars starting around 2006 or so. There was a memorable segment on old Top Gear from 2007, where Richard Hammond attempted rather unsuccessfully (per his own error) to park a Lexus LS460 in the studio. Autonomous driving capability has stolen the spotlight from hands-free parking, but perhaps the parking capability will just get folded into the larger autonomous system, rather than fade away entirely. To that point, what are some of the current tech trends you see falling away?

Take to the comments, and list your picks for past, present, and future technology flops in cars.

[Images: Honda, GM, Chrysler, YouTube]

Corey Lewis
Corey Lewis

Interested in lots of cars and their various historical contexts. Started writing articles for TTAC in late 2016, when my first posts were QOTDs. From there I started a few new series like Rare Rides, Buy/Drive/Burn, Abandoned History, and most recently Rare Rides Icons. Operating from a home base in Cincinnati, Ohio, a relative auto journalist dead zone. Many of my articles are prompted by something I'll see on social media that sparks my interest and causes me to research. Finding articles and information from the early days of the internet and beyond that covers the little details lost to time: trim packages, color and wheel choices, interior fabrics. Beyond those, I'm fascinated by automotive industry experiments, both failures and successes. Lately I've taken an interest in AI, and generating "what if" type images for car models long dead. Reincarnating a modern Toyota Paseo, Lincoln Mark IX, or Isuzu Trooper through a text prompt is fun. Fun to post them on Twitter too, and watch people overreact. To that end, the social media I use most is Twitter, @CoreyLewis86. I also contribute pieces for Forbes Wheels and Forbes Home.

More by Corey Lewis

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 230 comments
  • The Comedian The Comedian on Nov 09, 2017

    Mitsubishi also put 4-wheel steering in the Galant VR-4.

  • RobbieAZ RobbieAZ on Nov 09, 2017

    The automatic seat belts in my '91 Laser were incredibly annoying. I'm glad those didn't catch on.

    • See 1 previous
    • La834 La834 on Nov 10, 2017

      @Jeff Weimer IIRC the Rabbit "passive restraint" setup had only the shoulder belt and no lap belt, instead adding extra crash padding beneath the dashboard. The Chevette briefly offered a similar setup optionally circa 1980. Later in the '80s GM skirted the passive restraint law by mounting the seatbelts at the rear of the front door rather than on the pillar, so theoretically you could slide in and out of the car without disengaging the belt. In real use it was difficult to do this, so it was almost always unbuckled and used like a regular seat belt. The shoulder straps reduced sideways visibility on 4 door sedans and wagons, but worked quite nicely on coupes with their longer doors where they also made rear seat ingress/egress easier since the front seat harness wasn't in your way when climbing in or out of the rear seat.

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next