[ashis89]

Originally Posted by silverado

This is all I wanted to tell you buddy and you eventually agreed to it
You wont make a mistake with this system once you get accustomed to it, since its not that complex at all.

People who buy their cars are fully aware of this premium feature and how it works. Complaining about it after you buy a car amounts to bad research or awareness, since this is not a new feature anymore.

Personally, this is the feature why I bought ZETA over Delta.

If you go through my post in detail, you will see that neither me nor my friend have grown accustomed to the feature. And let me clarify again, I am not the owner of the said KESS equipped car but drive it 8-10 times in a month (have driven for ~4k kms out of the total 10.5k kms in past 7 months). And after such long usage, I love many features in the car but KESS is not one of them. And since I am not the buyer, there is no question of research.

I never complained about failing to understand the KESS feature due to its complexity. Pardon me if I was not clear enough. I was talking about the convenience of the feature and the lack of it in certain cases when we are unmindful.

PS: I own and drive a WagonR. Although I have driven many cars over the years, Baleno was my first exposure to KESS system, less than a year back. That's why my comments about KESS vs. non-KESS.

[Holyghost]

Originally Posted by pramodkumar

we can have multiple permutations and combinations of what can happen,

Regarding people forgetting to turnoff their cars and dying due to CO inhalation is simply a coincidence, no system is stupid proof, Idiots will leave their cars with traditional keys on and still die due to CO inhalation, cars like any machinery do carry health hazards, blaming stupidity on technology is nothing but supreme stupidity

Disclaimer: The above statement is intended at the person who sued the car company.

pramod

This is another mentality that has to change. Every person on earth will be Careless, absent minded or be stupid atleast a few times in their life.
If there is a scope of fatality due to the so called stupidity and if that can be prevented by a simple fix, then there is no excuse for the manufacturer to not implement that fix.

Hence the person who did the supreme stupidity (according to you) by suing the manufacturer atleast has bring about a positive change and people need not die from now on for being stupid by forgetting to switch off the engine while taking the key out.

[Nav-i-gator]

The "not getting used to" of KESS is also accentuated by the fact that it is not homogeneous in all cars. Some cars have it left of Steering wheel, some have it at the right. Some might even have it at some other place. Plus, every car may have different algo of how KESS will work - as in effective distance, boot release and other things.

What I am still confused about is - why can't the cars be designed to stop after some time/distance if the key is not inside? What would be the potential risks/thinking behind not programming it this way?

[sukhoi30]

Originally Posted by abhishek46

I would say, it is the fault of the system, as practical situations like this may arise, if multiple members of family travel together to office and all of drive in parts/phases.

Seriously!!

Originally Posted by abhishek46

If the key is not there in the vehicle, then ideally it should not allow the car to be driven. AC/Audio/engine idling is okay for convenience, but the car should not allow the user to drive forward.

That's impossible. If the battery of the key dies, you can start the car by touching the keyfob to the start/stop button, but it will stop again when you are idling. That is why you cannot have the vehicle stop when the key is outside the vehicle.

[sukhoi30]

Originally Posted by Nav-i-gator

What I am still confused about is - why can't the cars be designed to stop after some time/distance if the key is not inside? What would be the potential risks/thinking behind not programming it this way?

Just replied in the previous post. If the key battery is dead, you cannot use the car at all.

Just to clear the air ... the contact between the key and the start/stop button does not happen all the time. It happens only during the start or stop action. ONLY when you press the start/stop button, the car will be transmit the code to the key and vice versa.
If they program it to always check the presence of key in the car, there will be considerable drain on the battery, not only for the car but also for the key.

[Holyghost]

Originally Posted by sukhoi30

That's impossible. If the battery of the key dies, you can start the car by touching the keyfob to the start/stop button, but it will stop again when you are idling. That is why you cannot have the vehicle stop when the key is outside the vehicle.

That cannot be the reason behind it. For this issue, all they need is to provide a dummy key hole or a secure place near the sensor so that the dead key can be kept there throughout the journey. That way the car will not stop.

There should be some other reason for this implementation.

[abhishek46]

Originally Posted by sukhoi30

That's impossible. If the battery of the key dies, you can start the car by touching the keyfob to the start/stop button, but it will stop again when you are idling. That is why you cannot have the vehicle stop when the key is outside the vehicle.

I have a ridiculous jugaad for this situation. Tape the key fob to the switch and drive off!
On a serious note, Will it work?

Also, did not completely understand, why the engine will die if keyfob battery is low?
It appears to me that the role of the keyfob is only during start-up in some cars, whereas in some other cars it needs to be present all the time. Is that true?

[Nav-i-gator]

Originally Posted by sukhoi30

Just replied in the previous post. If the key battery is dead, you cannot use the car at all.

Just to clear the air ... the contact between the key and the start/stop button does not happen all the time. It happens only during the start or stop action. ONLY when you press the start/stop button, the car will be transmit the code to the key and vice versa.
If they program it to always check the presence of key in the car, there will be considerable drain on the battery, not only for the car but also for the key.

That cannot (or rather should not) be the reason for this. a simple RFID chip inside the fob (which doesnt use any battery power) and a radio transmitter cum receiver inside the car can do the job. When key is near the car, car will move forward. As soon as it is at a distance outside the range, the car stops.

There has to be some other seasons behind manufacturers not programming the car to stop when key is not inside the car.

[Holyghost]

Originally Posted by sukhoi30

Just to clear the air ... the contact between the key and the start/stop button does not happen all the time. It happens only during the start or stop action. ONLY when you press the start/stop button, the car will be transmit the code to the key and vice versa.
If they program it to always check the presence of key in the car, there will be considerable drain on the battery, not only for the car but also for the key.

Actually, in current implementations, it continuously check the presence of key in the car. My current key battery is weak and once in a while during my drive, i get key not found error.

[kutoos]

Originally Posted by avdhesh15

My Ciaz key got left at home accidentally and I went out for dinner to a restaurant 45 minutes away. When I got off, I realized that I didn't have the key and hence asked someone to get it from home. Unfortunately, the valet stalled the car right in the middle of a main road (the JW Marriott road in Juhu) and we were helplessly creating traffic (steering got locked in the opposite direction) until the key came from home.

@avdesh15,

How did you manage to start & dive to JWM if the car keys were at home? Just curious as i believe that you need teh key fob with you to start the car?

Cheers

[pramodkumar]

Originally Posted by Holyghost

This is another mentality that has to change. Every person on earth will be Careless, absent minded or be stupid atleast a few times in their life.
If there is a scope of fatality due to the so called stupidity and if that can be prevented by a simple fix, then there is no excuse for the manufacturer to not implement that fix.

Hence the person who did the supreme stupidity (according to you) by suing the manufacturer atleast has bring about a positive change and people need not die from now on for being stupid by forgetting to switch off the engine while taking the key out.

Why are you questioning the mentality here? Do you know how many people die due to fires from cigarette lighters in the car? Has that stopped manufacturers from providing those in the car?

Yours is a stupid argument that anything that can be dangerous needs to be eliminated, there is something called evolution of and it's based on many things, probability of fatalities is just one of the parameters and the weightage of depends on how many cases gets reported.

Most know the lawyers work in US there was a time they used to chase ambulances, so anything cannot be deemed dangerous just because there are few law suites against it.

So far people against key less entry systems have only brought lame things against it. You will still find people who still like to buy traditional push button or dial based phones and are forced to upgrade because they are no longer available in the market, they are called laggards, you can read more about them by googling " Diffusion of innovations". Not being an innovator or early adopters is not a choice, it's a natural thing.

Pramod

[landcruiser123]

Originally Posted by pramodkumar

Reminds me how the Government took a decision in the 80s weather the country needs a color television or not,..... user adoption issue, initially I too had issues while I started using an automatic from a manual.

With due respect, those lines of comparison are absurd.

Color TV v/s B & W TV is a world of difference, so is AT v/s MT.

If I have to keyless entry and go systems on the same lines, it would having a padlock and manual crank to start the engine.

I sincerely feel this threads have turned into more of finding faults than list out genuine shortcomings........

With all due respect, you're entitled to your opinion. My experience with these systems is limited as I drive cars that are a decade old. On reading the experiences of various users on the thread, I think there's a consensus that these systems have some loopholes which can be exploited easily.

Note to Mods: Can we have a poll if possible?

[sukhoi30]

Originally Posted by Nav-i-gator

That cannot (or rather should not) be the reason for this. a simple RFID chip inside the fob (which doesnt use any battery power) and a radio transmitter cum receiver inside the car can do the job. When key is near the car, car will move forward. As soon as it is at a distance outside the range, the car stops.

Ok, let me try to explain this in a better fashion.

In my office, we have a security system called RSA secureid token. This is used when I need to connect to my office network from an outside network like my home or from a client's place. For this, I am given a small device which has a rolling 8 digit code generated every 30 secs. When I login to the office network, I need to put in this code along with my username and password. The server computer also generates a rolling 8 digit code based on my username. These two codes has to be same suggesting that I am the authorized person to login to the office network. After connecting, my RSA device or the server do not continuously check for the codes. So, if after I login to my office network, if someone else takes over my computer, what should happen? Well, nothing, right?

Similarly, with the smart key system, the keyfob generates a rolling code. When you press the door open knob or the keyfob button to unlock the car, the computer in the car too generates a rolling code. If the key belongs to your car, then the codes match and the door is opened. When you start the car, again the codes are matched and the proximity sensor checks the presence of the key inside the car before starting the engine. The proximity sensor is a different thing and checks presence of key inside the car when you lock/unlock the car. It is used only to ensure that the car doesn't get locked with the key inside the car. The car doesn't have to have the key inside the car to drive the vehicle. Okay, they can program the car to stop running if the key is not inside the car, but for that the sensor should keep checking the keyfob all the time. The keyfob should also relay its presence all the time which would drain its battery very soon.

You are mentioning RFID, but RFID need a line of sight scanner. Which means you will have to put your key somewhere in the car where it is visible to the scanner. With people here talking about the difficulty in handling a keyfob, fat chance they will accept this.

[silverado]

Our Mods have aptly named this as "DEBATE" over keyless entry and go , rather than disadvantage
This is on TOP of HOT THREADS section now.

I am done with this debate as I have tried to explain/share as much as I can regarding this system.

[Nav-i-gator]

Originally Posted by sukhoi30

Ok, let me try to explain this in a better fashion.



You are mentioning RFID, but RFID need a line of sight scanner. Which means you will have to put your key somewhere in the car where it is visible to the scanner. With people here talking about the difficulty in handling a keyfob, fat chance they will accept this.

I know how it works. However RFID does not need line of sight scanner. Like, when you check out of a shopper stop with rfid tag not removed from a cloth u bought, the scanner at the gate will start beeping, while the cloth is stil inside the bag. It is a simple reflecting chip. As long as it is in range, it will respond.