Car Computer wish list

[bakagaijin]

It is my understanding that the 2003 Mini Cooper S I am driving has the following Engine Conrol Unit (ECU), an EMS 2000 made by siemensauto:

http://www.siemensauto.com/siemens/p.../ec_gehp1.html

If allowed to over simpify, the control unit is an embedded computer takes input from 2 places. Input comes from signals from the throttle by wire system [the driver] and its oxygen sensors. Since the system has to take in all driving conditions the software is designed for general purpose.

This is not good enough for me.

I want new software on car computer that allows for three seperate reliable modes of driving that can be toggled from the console.

More specifically, I want to be able to choose bettween three modes of driving:

I want economy mode, high speed mode, and high acceleration mode. Why can't we get this in a car computer ?

I also want a graphical toggle display that shows all the OBD II codes.

http://www.siemensauto.com/siemens/p.../ec_gehp1.html

http://www.bsr.uwaterloo.ca/research.html

[macncheese]

because what YOU want is not what 95% of the buyers want!

--
Cheese

[MiniMan7]

Sounds like you might want to check out the new BMW 7 series.

[Humourl3ss]

Bah!

I'm still waiting for the day when someone implements my "programmable CVT" idea to keep cars in the sweet spot of the rev band for performance-oriented driving.

-CW

[gt4pete]

That is not plausible on so many different levels I don't know where to begin.

Yes, it can be done. The means to reach the end would defy anyone's logic in the final analysis.

1. Getting around CARB when it comes to programmable DMEs.
2. Reliability
3. Cost of tuning individual motors, after break in
4. Warranty? (if one were actually going to do it properly)
5. Hardware issues
6. Software issues
7. Training a fleet of techicians that can handle every different facet of this endeavour.
8. Cost of hardware
9. Cost of R&D
10. And of course, the reality of this whole thing, demand?

Everyone assumes that because there are a bunch of technology companies that build various mainframes, databases, PDAs, cellphones, etc. that automobiles can run the same way.

There's a fundamental flaw with that idea. When commercially based business like those have a product issue, they can duck and dive better than anyone. No one ever really pays attention or considers it such a dire problem when a dotcom or telecom company has a product issue (cellphone coverage, customer service, a random flaw in some no name company's human resources software).

If a car company did that, consumers would reel them right back with lemon law suits.

Who can count the number of times their home PC has had a general protection fault and crashed since they started using it?

My brother does programming for the avionics in the Boeing 777. He has to plan out how he's going to write the most tedious sections of code anytime he even thinks of a subroutine or anything that would remotely involve doing any sort of programming. The FAA is all over him for how his arranges his procedures and how he tests each section.

If I were a vehicle manufacturer, I wouldn't worry about the NTSB or any other government agency. I would be worried about the legions of people that would scream bloody murder if they had to restart their car once because of a engine computer issue.


Yes, it can be done, but at a cost that most of the car buyers (the only people that car manufacturers actually care about) are not willing to pay.

Sorry, but us motoring advisors have to blow off steam every now and then.

Ah, better now

[dkstone]

gt4pete I have to disagree with you on this issue, if they can program one mode of operation they can program many all that is required is enough ROM space to hold the code, the idea of a toggle switch is no big deal and as for all the issues that you stated, those same issues are present today with only one mode of operation. If I recall correctly the monster corvette a few years back had a key that did exactly what we are discussing here, they woer able to have a performance mode and a valet mode. I think its a just marketing at this point why most cars don,t come programed with multiple mode of operation.

just my 2 cents

[gt4pete]

Changing eproms in the middle of operation only serves to confuse the adaptation aspect of the programming.

The mode you refer to on the corvette is merely a basic form of traction control coupled with a minor change in the timing of the motor electronics (so the valet can't kill himself quite as quickly).

It is certainly easy enough to create a toggle button. But what it really connects to is another story.

Changing the EMS programming to make any sort of significant gain would result in a gain in emissions and a loss of reliablility. To create a program that would be worthwhile enough to have a toggle switch for would require proving to the EPA that the mode is smog legal and fuel efficient (which it would not be).

If this mode is smog legal, then why not leave it in this mode all the time? Because it eats more fuel.

Then which fuel economy figure do you disclose as the actual fuel consumption figure? What about horsepower? Which horsepower figure do you disclose as the real horsepower the car is capable of? What about people that leave it in the more aggresive mode all the time without regard to emmisions or fuel consumption?

But all of that doesn't mean anything in the first place because the gain made by installing something of this nature only serves to feed the "video game" marketing cars get these days.

You can change cam timing and lift, intake runners, exhaust runners, effective compression, timing, spark voltage, fuel mixture, throttle adaptations. Hell eventually there'll be an instantly modifiable valvetrain adjustment for each valve in the car (to the point that you wouldn't need a starter, you could spark the cylinder closest to it's power stroke). But keep in mind, everytime you add another component, you have to do exponentially more R&D.

It is just more electronics, more stuff to break, more product and warranty testing dollars down the drain. Even the germans are clear on that.

The more driver input you have with exactly how the motor operates, the easier it is to break things and blow stuff up. That will always be true.