Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   The International Automotive Scene (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/international-automotive-scene/)

-   -   10 automakers sued over keyless ignition not switching engine off (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/international-automotive-scene/167535-10-automakers-sued-over-keyless-ignition-not-switching-engine-off-2.html)

Quite simple. He needs the key to lock the car or his house keys linked to it. There is no way he can take out the key without switching off the car. In keyless, he can take the key without switching off the car. In manual car, the user is forced to switch off the engine to take the key out but not in a keyless car. Why is it that way in keyless car?

Another way to look at this issue as a whole is:
People forget to switch off music systems while getting out of cars. The sound of music is quite evident and still we forget at times. So mfgs has put auto switch off for music systems.

We forget to switch off head lights. Even at mid night, despite the head lights being so bright and easy to spot, people still forget to switch it off. So some new cars switch it off automatically. So is the case with each and every item that is operated by a switch or knob or anything. People do forget and it is not fair to call them dumb. You, me, everyone else misses to do something atleast once in your life.

The above mentioned ones are not life threatening. But in this case, Google it and you will find there has been 13 confirmed deaths since 2009 due to CO inhalation (most of them died in their bedrooms while asleep) which could have been avoided if keyless car acted the same way as a normal car. In all these cases, the car keys were found inside the house. And still you guys find it hilarious?

Really? With these reported deaths and numerous near fatal emergencies, you think of them as morons?

We complain about the pathetic state of our Legal system and compare it to how great it is to take on a manufacturer in the same good old US of A. A lot of safety systems incorporated in our daily lives are the results of such consumer cases fought in developed countries.

Not taking sides, but don't consumers have any sense of self-responsibility anymore? Keyless ignition is literally ONE click of a button to turn the car on/off. Most people spend a major portion of their waking day tapping phone screens for inane conversations (some even while driving), but are too lazy to tap ONE button when getting out of their cars?

Do user manuals of cars with keyless ignition actually say the car will shut itself off once the fob is removed a certain distance? Is this lawsuit about a 'claimed/documented feature that doesn't work as described' or 'a feature that our lazy bums demand but don't exist today'? If it's the former, sue the pants off the car-makers, but if it's the latter scenario, how is it a 'defect'?


P.S.Slightly :OT but the number of media ads that go "If <insert perceived offence of choice here> has happened to you, you may be entitled to HUGE compensation. Call us NOW!!" is so huge it's literally an industry in the US of A.

That you don't need to insert the key anywhere is just a convenience provided by the system. Otherwise, the procedure to start or stop the engine involves manual action whether you have manual key or keyless system (either turn the key or press a switch).

In the examples you mentioned, the auto switch-off is done when the car is already switched off. In other words, the system has detected an event (switching off the engine), which probably means that the other systems (lights, music system) are not needed.

There is no way the system can determine if the key is taken out of the car by a driver who is forgetful or by accident or by mischief. If the car switches off when the key is taken out by a miscreant, there will be another owner tomorrow who sues the manufacturer saying that he couldn't make an escape because the car switched off by itself when he did not want it to.

Why do the system has to determine the intention of the driver? In cars with manual keys which always has to shut down the engine to take the key out, (even if it is the miscreants who take it out) no one has had much issues over the past decades. Why the hue and cry if the same happens in keyless car?

It cannot, which is why it cannot determine if the intention of taking the key out of the car is to switch off the car or not. So, when the key is out of the car either the system can "blindly" switch the engine off or not switch it off. Both options come with their own set of issues - either option may not be correct in all scenarios. So the simple thing to do is to leave it to the driver. If the intention is to switch off the car, then switch it off when the driver gets out - just as he has been doing so far in a car with manual key. There is no "extra" expectation from the driver in a keyless entry/start car compared to one with manual key. Rather it is the driver who is now having some "extra" expectations from the car.

Drivers have been switching off the car themselves over the past decades. Why is there a hue and cry if the same is required in a keyless entry/start car?

If a person who is used to switching off a car by himself (using manual keys) expects that the engine will be on in a keyless car as long as he does not manually press the "Engine Start/Stop" button, is that the wrong expectation? There may be many owners who have that expectation.

Anyway, I was trying to illustrate how people may have different expectations from the car/system in different scenarios. In a car which does not need a key to be turned in a slot to switch it off, who is to say that switching off the car when key is not in the car is always the right choice?

We are debating on two different parallels which is never going to meet. :)

I had been talking about the action of taking the key out of the car. You are talking about the action of switching off the car. Fortunately or unfortunately this has been a single action until the arrival if keyless start stop.
Now it is two separate actions and debating on this 2 independent actions is not taking us anywhere.

I rest my case here. :)

You are correct that so far the order of actions has been (a) switch off car (b) take the key out. And (b) was not possible before (a). Now (b) is an independant action, and the debate is whether (a) should be performed by the car when (b) is performed by the driver. My view is that both actions have always been the responsibility of the driver, and it should remain so.

Personally, I have always thought of the start stop button system that tends to accompany keyless entry as a stupid gimmick. I don't see how it is advanced technology - if I remember right, my dad's 1957 Landmaster had a pull knob to start the car. Even with keyless entry, getting someone to pull a key out of a slot to shut the car down is a reasonable process - and could be done easily eliminating this risk.

But once someone builds a start - stop button in, and especially in cars with start stop technology that cuts the engine off at signals (but restarts it if the air conditioning temperature changes), having a total engine cut off if there is no motion in the car, and it has been stationary without running for a certain period is sensible, and not that difficult to implement. It's very easy to forget you have not switched off your car if the engine has turned itself off when you pressed the auto hold, and very dangerous if the same engine restarts because the temperature changes or for some other reason.

Of course, folks are careless and need to be protected from themselves. That's why many cars have motion sensors to detect a kid you may have forgotten in the car. This is just another similar technology.

Really? Silly me thinking these motion sensors were part of the anti-theft system, so it sets of alarm if somebody breaks into the car when parked and locked. But admittedly the kid could trigger the alarm as well!

Live and learn. I never realised that the motion sensors don't do a good job of detecting kids right now. A motion sensor to prevent theft (when you can detect a break in even in cars without one) seems like overkill to me - epitomises how we value things over people.

Of course they are. I mean, how stupid do you have to be to not realize your car engine is actually still running! It's just Darwinism at work.

Um, no. A lot of safety improvements in modern cars came about because of newer technologies and crash testing.

http://www.howsafeisyourcar.com.au/S...tion-Features/

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811572.pdf

The keyless ignition system in new xuv have an additional warning system. If the engine is running or if the vehicle is in ignition on position and key is taken away, the car produces a few loud beeps along with indicators flashing and visual warning on centre console. This ensures that you never miss to switch off engine or ignition.

When someone parks their car and shuts it off, in addition to the engine going silent, one would see that the speedometer console shuts down, the MID, heads up display, clocks, sound system and other screens would also turn off. It is literally impossible to not notice that the MID is on, the RPM needle is not on zero and other displays are still on even if the engine can't be heard. The car might not get locked either when you try and it might beep. Of course there would also be the beep for removing the keyfob with the engine runing.

I drove a Toyota Prius which was the first mainstream car with keyless entry and start in 2004 and even though its engine shuts off every time you stop or take your foot off the accelerator, I or anyone else was never ever confused about whether we had turned the car off or not as every sane driver would take care to ensure that they had pressed the stop button and that the MID said goodbye and the various displays turned off. Even if a car remained running in a garage, it is unlikely to cause poisoning in the adjoining house unless a person hapened to sleep in the garage in which case he/ she should hear the engine running.

Interested to know why you say so. According to news reports, one person died on the 3rd floor while the car was idling inside garage. Another person died in bathroom.

Well I could be wrong but my assumption was that in a large American house, the kinds I have owned and visited, the garage is normally connected to a lobby which connects to a large drawing room and then there are bedrooms further down. I assumed that there would be enough dissipation of the toxious gas by the time it travelled that far but it looks like I was wrong if these reports are accurate. Of course both these stories deal with condominiums which are smaller than a home and that could be a factor. Still, I wouldn't have thought the gas would kill someone three floors up from a car idling in the garage. CO2 detectors are also installed in most modern homes in the US.