Black boxes: Congress doesn’t know cars?
Save 'em for airplanes?
More harm than good?
Automobiles are safer than they have ever been, and the majority of auto-related deaths are caused by bad driving, not bad automotive engineering. Nonetheless, black boxes sound like a great idea to increase auto safety even further, but are the costs worth the rewards?
More important, might not black boxes decrease consumer interest in fuel economy?
I am a big fan of computers in cars. Thus, I’ve supported black boxes as a further evolution of the computerized car – assuming such devices would only have a minimal effect on overall vehicle costs.
Unfortunately, according to some reports, black boxes could increase the cost of cars by as much as $4,000. If true, how are consumers to afford both increased safety measures and better fuel economy? More important, already a plethora of studies indicate that while technology can make autos much more fuel efficient, most consumers are not willing to pay much extra for such improvements. Thus, if energy prices increase, consumers would rather buy cheaper cars rather than invest in fuel-saving technology.
Consequently, making cars significantly more expensive, it seems, will only decrease interest in fuel economy even further. Yet, fuel economy, and its implications upon foreign oil dependency and pollution, seem a far more pressing issue than the safety black boxes can provide.
Certainly, if auto deaths were spiking, such black boxes would seem a much better idea, but auto-related deaths are in fact decreasing.
Ultimately, Congress made a mountain out of a mole hill that was the Toyota-gate recall scandal and now Congress appears on the verge of spending a massive amount money – via the taxpayer – to possibly achieve very little at the same time Congress is trying to increase overall fuel economy and usher in a new era of battery-powered vehicles.
I guess Congress can always offer $15,000 tax credits for buying black-boxed plug-in vehicles. Besides, the money is in the bank, right?
“after the fact” is good folks. How many folks do stupid things and “after the fact”, they get a hefty ticket and premium increase on their insurance?
using you alls logic, there would be no reason to have them on airliners… because we’d only find out “after the fact” what happened.
back to the idiots.
I can guarantee you that “after the fact” penalties will affect their future driving ESPECIALLY if someone can “pull” their data recorder and check it for more bad habits.
event data recorders are also like security cameras… which also don’t tell you anything until “after the fact”.
so how about youse guys come back and explain how “after the fact” is not really useful?
“I’d just like to have a recorder of their dumbass antics sometimes.” you and me both, larry.
I’d also like to have someone explain the economics of $4k black boxes as well. unfortunately, the article I linked to didn’t really offer too many details, aside from the strict requirements for maintaining the integrity of the box in essentially every kind of extreme crash imaginable. but i don’t see how that ads up to $4k, or even $1k.
inevitably, however, i think congress should just get out of the way on this one. this is not a major threat to the well being of most Americans. there are many other issues before congress that have much greater impact on most americans.
besides, in my opinion the sensor data is an add-on value for auto owners, and automakers should sell this feature, minimally, as a competitive advantage. with the advent of OnStar, Sync, etc. ever more sensor data seems inevitable regardless of any Congressional intervention.
Tom-
Not yet at least. I’m pretty sure that the way genetic research is evolving, someone will soon try.
I agree with sheckyvegas – the information obtained is AFTER the fact.
Now let it be known; MOST Cars AND Trucks manufactured in the last 10 years or so have on-board computers which accumulate data which can be read with a code readers. In fact that is exactly what is done when you take your vehicle to a mechanic. They plug in a code reader which reads the computer failure codes so they know where to look and what to fix. My Dodge truck [and probably other vehicles as well] makes it even easier. You just turn the ignition key off and on 3 times and the computer codes appear on the dashboard mileage indicator. You go look up the codes on the web and you can tell what is wrong with your vehicle.
In most cases, if you want more advanced data such as; miles per gal. max. RPM’S, max. speed, fuel mixture, and all kinds of other stuff, there is a cable you can buy to connect your laptop.
But to quote from one of Ron White’s stand-up comedy routines – “you just can’t fix stupid”.
Tom G.
The black boxes would do nothing to educate about, or reduce, vehicle deaths. Since there is no auto-pilot in cars, the decision to turn right or left is strictly in the hands of the driver. All these boxes would tell us is that there are a lot of stupid drivers out there and some are going to die becuase of it.
And I just told you that so you can now skip the box. Your welcome.
hello,
Excellent article i must say.Iam not there for a debate.I think all these things should be there for a safety.
Dont look for the cost.go for your safety
well.. someone will have to explain to me the difference between an event data recorder and a $4K black box and I vote for whatever level of functionality that can be had for about what we’re putting into the EDRs right now but let’s standardize them.
I like the EDRs. I have a scan-guage myself that captures a pretty good array of sensor data and it cost but about $100.
I’d like to see the car industry define a standard they recommend be adopted,
I’d like them to be plug-ins (but the car won’t run without them plugged in) and every time there is a significant accident.. the police collect them..put them in a computer and then recreate the accident scenario from the replicated data.
if they had them in those Toyotas they would have probably stopped the shark feeding frenzy cuz the scumbags would know the data recorder would tell the truth (of course Toyota (other car manufacturers) might have a dog in that kind of a hunt also.
OR.. we could make them optional…
you could get a 20% break on your insurance if you agreed to have one…
or if you had too many accidents and/or found at fault – then the insurance company or the courts could order them – just like they do with GPS ankle bracelets right now.
anyhow.. I support them even tho they have a bit of a big brother aspect …
I’ve run out of patience with some of the smart butts on the highways now days.
I’d just like to have a recorder of their dumbass antics sometimes.
Tom, I’m with you brother.
Sounds like something to earmark funds to.
I only have a few choice word that can be published on this website to explain how I feel about this issue.
THIS IS STUPID.
Tom G.