Jump to content
TEAM SHELBY FORUM

"Black Boxes" rearing their heads again


68fastback

Recommended Posts

fyi, here's an excerpt:

 

"The devices collect a variety of data in the moments before, during and after a crash, such as speed and acceleration, whether the driver was wearing a seat belt and whether the driver hit the accelerator or the brake.

 

In August, the NHTSA unveiled its final rule for standardizing EDRs, which are now installed in most new cars and trucks, paring back some mandates in its original 2004 proposal to acknowledge concerns raised by automakers.

 

The final rule reduced the number of data elements required from 18 to 15, said data recorders must be able to record two events in very serious crashes, rather than three, and required data to be retrievable for 10 days instead of 30.

 

The NHTSA did not mandate that the devices be put in all vehicles. Rather, it followed California's lead in telling automakers they must inform customers if their vehicle has one."

 

...

 

"AAA, with 48 million members nationwide, blasted the final rule for delaying until 2008 the requirement that the auto companies inform drivers of the devices."

 

Here's the link to the article:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic.../610300388/1148

 

My understanding is that there has been at least one case where a federal judge ruled that you must be told IF YOU ASK (today). There's also been litigation in the vein of self incrimination preotections. I don;t remember the details... something to the effect that if you know you have a black box (because you asked and were told your car does), you can have it seized and held so that it cannot be used to incriminate you under certain circumstances. That was some time ago -- things could have changed and sounds like they are about to change a whole lot in the future.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried starting a thread on this subject a couple of months ago and no one seemed to pick it up. I think it should be clear whether or not your car has one and then you can disable it if you want. I don't want the insurance company finding out I was going 140 minutes before I filed the claim :shift::spiteful:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone validate this? Five Oh B , where are you?

 

 

Its in your owners manual, Page 6, Service Data Recording & Event Data Recording - Not the Supplement GT500 Manual but the Mustang Manual that you got.

 

Its a good idea to read this stuff, If you know what I mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

 

My understanding is that only a sampling of the cars have them (but I could be wrong) -- I think we would have to write to Ford to find out a specific VIN has it. Dunno where to write though.

 

My daughter's insurance company asked if they could put a box in their '03 Taurus. They said it would be used only for statistical purposes and would gather information about how/when/where the car is operated. In return they offered a slightly lower premium (they both have good driving records). They were ready to do it until I read the fine print -- essentially that the info can be turned over to a court if supoenaed. They turned the 'deal' down.

 

I think this whole notion of black boxes to better understand how accidents occur,etc, is a good idea -- I also think it WILL become MUCH more than that. Case law will effectively determine how and when it can be used to prosecute as well. If I knew my car had one I'd sure want it disabled.

 

Just thinking out loud, so long as the program is a sampling (as opposed to every car) I would think an owner has a right to have their vehicle disabled from participating -- if not I'd wanna just shoot the sucker :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

 

My understanding is that only a sampling of the cars have them (but I could be wrong) -- I think we would have to write to Ford to find out a specific VIN has it. Dunno where to write though.

 

My daughter's insurance company asked if they could put a box in their '03 Taurus. They said it would be used only for statistical purposes and would gather information about how/when/where the car is operated. In return they offered a slightly lower premium (they both have good driving records). They were ready to do it until I read the fine print -- essentially that the info can be turned over to a court if supoenaed. They turned the 'deal' down.

 

I think this whole notion of black boxes to better understand how accidents occur,etc, is a good idea -- I also think it WILL become MUCH more than that. Case law will effectively determine how and when it can be used to prosecute as well. If I knew my car had one I'd sure want it disabled.

 

Just thinking out loud, so long as the program is a sampling (as opposed to every car) I would think an owner has a right to have their vehicle disabled from participating -- if not I'd wanna just shoot the sucker :hysterical:

 

Yea.. i'd like more information. I too would want to disable it. I can't think of any good it could do for me. I don't care about the statistics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fyi, here's an excerpt:

 

"The devices collect a variety of data in the moments before, during and after a crash, such as speed and acceleration, whether the driver was wearing a seat belt and whether the driver hit the accelerator or the brake.

 

In August, the NHTSA unveiled its final rule for standardizing EDRs, which are now installed in most new cars and trucks, paring back some mandates in its original 2004 proposal to acknowledge concerns raised by automakers.

 

The final rule reduced the number of data elements required from 18 to 15, said data recorders must be able to record two events in very serious crashes, rather than three, and required data to be retrievable for 10 days instead of 30.

 

The NHTSA did not mandate that the devices be put in all vehicles. Rather, it followed California's lead in telling automakers they must inform customers if their vehicle has one."

 

...

 

"AAA, with 48 million members nationwide, blasted the final rule for delaying until 2008 the requirement that the auto companies inform drivers of the devices."

 

Here's the link to the article:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic.../610300388/1148

 

My understanding is that there has been at least one case where a federal judge ruled that you must be told IF YOU ASK (today). There's also been litigation in the vein of self incrimination preotections. I don;t remember the details... something to the effect that if you know you have a black box (because you asked and were told your car does), you can have it seized and held so that it cannot be used to incriminate you under certain circumstances. That was some time ago -- things could have changed and sounds like they are about to change a whole lot in the future.

 

.

 

 

I asked today & IT's their, It's a tattle tail box & can tell if you reprogram the CPU & reset back to original settings. Also records your speed at the moment of impact for accidents. If you try to disable it your car will not run! :rant:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soon enough...soon enough :shift:

 

 

I think you're right -- then they'll likely just plug in to validate history before accepting warranty work. They had to anticipate that anything can be gotten around, but it's harder to 'synthesize' history. Actually, it almost sounds like an extention (dunno) to the approach Roush takes with the Roushcharger kit. If it's been tampered with, no warranty work.

 

I know the manufacturers are not keen on a black box that puts self-induced liability on their customers, so I'm thinking maybe they decided [are deciding?] to implement it in such a way that they also get usefull info -- which is what they want all along -- like when not to accept warranty work or other signs of tampering that could obscure dealer service departments from diagnosing certain failures and notify customers of problems and service to drive work to their dealers vs the local garage.

 

GM is already using OnStar to flag and notify for certain engine/service conditions -- so is BMW on some models. Ford has been working for years on a similar approach but my understanding is that they have had real concerns over how the customer will perceive such "help.' Might be one instance where Fords conservative instincts work to our benefit -- at least if it's done right -- because I think [know] it's coming one way or the other.

 

Whether it's via e-mail, in-vehicle display or even snail-mail (initially), our relationship with Ford will be getting <ahem> 'closer' whether we like it or not.

 

But there are also potential benefits -- some I've heard talked about (e.g. notification/reminders for problems/services, etc) and some I'd like to see talked about (e.g. customer-set parametrics notification, like, date/time stamp and notify me if/when my A/F ratio ever falls out of this range etc) or a little of both: for example, the manufacturer setting up an inteface with information that they gather and, at our option, we can choose to monitor (or not) or capture info that usefull to us.

.

Aftermarket tuner boxes are starting to scratch the surface of this, but it would sure be a Bold Move if Ford, for example, got out in front of it and made it easy for those who have interest with a nice vehicle-integrated application. For those who don't, nothing is any different, or at least doesn't appear any different, than it is today.

 

Anyhow, just some thoughts -- of course a reliable wireless data link is needed for any reltime solution and even OnStar doesn't work at all in some rural areas. But I think we're moving into the advanced data-logging stage and information can be uploaded (if not in real-time) when a connection exists (like OnStar) or, for economy car owners (who might not opt such services as early as higher-end owners), each evening via a standard wireless connection to your home internet connection (not unlike a laptop that automatically acquires the connection when in-range).

 

One thing is certain -- there's more compute power in our cars now (or will be soon) than in most homes, and the integration of that mobile compute power with the rest of our automated lives in inevitable ...and possibly even desireable -- if done right.

 

Future shock:

---------------

HAL: "Mr Jones, are you sure you want to load those A/F ratios into the master table -- your warranty could be affected."

 

Mr. Jones: "*%&%^ you $#@%^ dirtbag computer -- yeah, I want to do that."

 

HAL: "Your settings have been loaded -- your warranty has been voided"

 

Mr. Jones: ">>>B*L*A*M!!!<<< [gunshot] take that you %^% $*^;$ little piece of silicon

 

 

--OR--

 

HAL: "Mr. Jones, we have observed that your GT500 motor was only putting our 499.25 HP on that last blast down I-80 [oh, yeah, GPS integrated too -- what did you expect!]. Would you like us to schedule a service appointment?"

 

Mr. Jones: "No, but can schedule a hour on the Mustang Dyno in Kansas City!"

 

:hysterical:

 

:hysterical2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or - "Ruf, I'm sorry. Full throttle is not available at this time." ??

 

Thanks, Hal. Go :censored: yourself, please. :hysterical:

 

 

Hal: "Mr. Ruf, I've located a dealer 21 minutes from your present location who can see you in 1 hour -- shall I confirm that appointment?"

 

Thanks, Hal. Go :censored: yourself, please. :hysterical:

 

HAL: "Sorry, Mr. Ruf, I did not recognize that word -- did you say you prefer to truck yourself there?"

 

Thanks, Hal. Go :censored: yourself, please. :hysterical:

 

HAL: "Ok, then, the appointment is confirmed and I;ve noted you intend to truck yourself."

 

Argh! %$@%$#% %^#%# B-L-A-M!

 

HAL: "Mr. Ruf, I'm detected an electrical malfunction....."

 

:hysterical:

 

---------------

 

Well, would ya look what's available already! $15,995 complete with harnesses, belts pulleys and oil filter: Damn!! Now that would make for a real Merc Marauder.!

http://karkraft.com/_borders/2007_54_sc_engine11.jpg

 

I guess s/c cooling system is extra?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...
...