Just one example of why I plan to keep my old cars going for as long as I can...

I'm not picking on the Uconnect or whatever it is called in whatever you drive.
The single control point is good for the car manufacturer not the consumer.
The possibility of internet corruption of physical controls of your vehicle is IMO unacceptable. They should only be able to be seen by a hard wired computer for updates, corrections, etc.
The fact that the same screen can download multi-media info from a wireless source and give you control over your lane departure choices is playing with fire.
I'm not a fan of babysitting devices on these new cars but I'm the minority. Do I think that having the radio and HVAC controlled from a big screen on the dash is okay, sure why not. Big screen, little screen nobody is paying attention anyways.
I just think wadding that all up into a central control is a cheap bad idea.
 
When I was test driving SUVs before I bought my 2011 Highlander, one of the vehicles I drove was a Volvo. I wasn't seriously interested, but the salesman offered me a test drive so I figured what the heck. It had a fancy screen and I was unable to simply and intuitively adjust the heater settings...sitting still, forget about trying while moving. Sure I could've figured it out if I sat there and worked at it, but damnit that stuff should be instantly understandable and accessible. I guess maybe I'm in the minority too, but I think it's stupid BS to have controls that you may commonly adjust, hvac and radio in particular, bundled into a screen with no tactile controls, that requires you to take your eyes off the road for more than a brief moment. I have not experienced every modern interface, so maybe there are some that are better, but that experience really turned me off.

Oh, and it had blind spot warning and the dumb thing went off as I was pulling into the parking lot with nothing around that I could figure would've set it off, except maybe one of those precast parking curbs that I drove by. Another turn off...
 
I'm not picking on the Uconnect or whatever it is called in whatever you drive.
The single control point is good for the car manufacturer not the consumer.
The possibility of internet corruption of physical controls of your vehicle is IMO unacceptable. They should only be able to be seen by a hard wired computer for updates, corrections, etc.
The fact that the same screen can download multi-media info from a wireless source and give you control over your lane departure choices is playing with fire.
I'm not a fan of babysitting devices on these new cars but I'm the minority. Do I think that having the radio and HVAC controlled from a big screen on the dash is okay, sure why not. Big screen, little screen nobody is paying attention anyways.
I just think wadding that all up into a central control is a cheap bad idea.

The fact that auto makers are literally taking the human element out of driving is a very dangerous thing! I trust my reactions & instinct's over a computer any day! Just look at On-star, it tracks your every move, it probably knows the route you're going to take regardless of where you're going! No thanks!
 
Just look at On-star, it tracks your every move, it probably knows the route you're going to take regardless of where you're going! No thanks!
Warranty work has been denied because dealers have access to your OnStar collected data on service claims.
Race on Sunday.
Rejected on Monday.
 
My 2014 T&C has about 80K on it. I reckon I should get a fluid and filter change. I bought it at about 50K.

Anyone we’ll versed in these vans? I need to change out the drivers mirror, fogged and defroster don’t work, and maybe a rear shock leaking too.

The transmission may not have a drain plug or filler tube. I have seen kits online to address this
 
Just to follow-up on the discussion about Tesla which kicked-off this thread. I had speculated about the root cause based on what was in the news. I read another news article with more technical details.

As I said before, that 8GB flash chip was acting as the computer's hard drive. According to the article, the programming of the system was writing lots of log files, which would have been written and later deleted from the drive. That wore out the memory cells.

If Tesla had caught this problem early on, they could have probably fixed it proactively with an over-the-air software update to reduce the amount and/or frequency of logs being written to the drive. A hard lesson for them I guess.
 
Just to follow-up on the discussion about Tesla which kicked-off this thread. I had speculated about the root cause based on what was in the news. I read another news article with more technical details.

As I said before, that 8GB flash chip was acting as the computer's hard drive. According to the article, the programming of the system was writing lots of log files, which would have been written and later deleted from the drive. That wore out the memory cells.

If Tesla had caught this problem early on, they could have probably fixed it proactively with an over-the-air software update to reduce the amount and/or frequency of logs being written to the drive. A hard lesson for them I guess.
The bottom line is that Tesla has architected a flawed system design that will have a guaranteed failure.
I worked with guys who did this type of systems engineering / architecture and one time, a coworker called them on the carpet in that their design (the item in question was an electronically erasable ePROM) that all of the test mules that were going to be used would fail halfway through the test program or sooner, based upon a firmware update rate of once every 2 weeks.
The program manager ignored the issue and proceeded. Sure as the sun rises every day, the test mules started failing about 40% through the test program.
The fix cost us weeks of delay in the test program and the customer was furious.

The EPROMs had to be unsoldered from the motherboard to have them replaced and we didn’t have a flight qualified spare, so the test program slipped.

I realize that a car is not the same as a fighter jet, but I suspect that the system design of vehicles regarding the life of a product is often disregarded for vehicles.
If one would bring this up to someone working on a vehicle system, I suspect that you would get the ‘deer in the headlights’ stare...
 
8 gig sounds low for all the stuff that central computer is supposed to work.
I'm not a computer guy whatsoever.
 
8 gig sounds low for all the stuff that central computer is supposed to work.
I'm not a computer guy whatsoever.
Most times, if it’s pure coding, it takes up less storage space than a typical pc operating system.

I would hope that the engineers would have calculated for a minimum of a 10 year life span but it’s difficult to predict this.
Having worked in IT data storage planning, I usually got a dirty look from the management when I presented my forecasts over a 36 month period. I would regularly be told that I was way off over-estimating then having the storage capacity clawed back (to save money for other things like their salary and bonuses)
Then in about 18 months have to do an emergency addition of Storage space which always increases the cost over the original forecast...
 
Most times, if it’s pure coding, it takes up less storage space than a typical pc operating system.

I would hope that the engineers would have calculated for a minimum of a 10 year life span but it’s difficult to predict this.
Having worked in IT data storage planning, I usually got a dirty look from the management when I presented my forecasts over a 36 month period. I would regularly be told that I was way off over-estimating then having the storage capacity clawed back (to save money for other things like their salary and bonuses)
Then in about 18 months have to do an emergency addition of Storage space which always increases the cost over the original forecast...
Those that can, do. Those that can't, manage.
 
Back
Top