# Question about a new vehicles feature



## mark sr (Jun 13, 2017)

I assume it's like the door unlock button on the outside of my wife's Altima. The door unlock button won't work unless the key fob [car has no keys] is within 3' of the door. So I assume if the key fob wasn't in the lady's pocket/purse - the door wouldn't open.


----------



## de-nagorg (Feb 23, 2014)

But what's to stop a crook from using an RF generator to trick the system into thinking that the owner is nearby.

RF generator = a Radio Frequency generator, tunable to almost all frequencies.


ED


----------



## polarzak (Dec 1, 2008)

mark sr said:


> I assume it's like the door unlock button on the outside of my wife's Altima. The door unlock button won't work unless the key fob [car has no keys] is within 3' of the door. So I assume if the key fob wasn't in the lady's pocket/purse - the door wouldn't open.


That is exactly how it works. If you don't have the fob with you, it will not open.


----------



## SPS-1 (Oct 21, 2008)

de-nagorg said:


> But what's to stop a crook from using an RF generator to trick the system into thinking that the owner is nearby.
> 
> RF generator = a Radio Frequency generator, tunable to almost all frequencies.





A simple carrier signal is not going to unlock your car. Each car will have unique code that FOB transmitter must match. Otherwise my FOB would unlock your car also. It won't.


----------



## chandler48 (Jun 5, 2017)

A high school buddy posted last night that he was on the way from Calloway Gardens traveling up I85 when a piece of paper blew up in front of him due to passing traffic. It became what the vehicle considered a stationary object and locked the brakes down. This guy was traveling at 70 mph, luckily with no traffic near him. I can't imagine the problems a "feature" like this could cause on a busy thoroughfare.

Daughter went to buy a new Acura MDX and while test driving the mirrors lit up and a beep tone came on every time someone was in her "blind" zone. She asked the salesman if that beeping could be disabled. He said no. She drove back to the dealership and left. She wasn't having a noise machine.


----------



## polarzak (Dec 1, 2008)

de-nagorg said:


> But what's to stop a crook from using an RF generator to trick the system into thinking that the owner is nearby.
> 
> RF generator = a Radio Frequency generator, tunable to almost all frequencies.
> 
> ...


True, and as some wise person once said, "Locks are for honest people". Keep valuable out of view, and be less likely to be the victim.


----------



## Nealtw (Jun 22, 2017)

polarzak said:


> True, and as some wise person once said, "Locks are for honest people". Keep valuable out of view, and be less likely to be the victim.


But it's hard to hide a car in a parking lot.:biggrin2:


----------



## Drachenfire (Jun 6, 2017)

chandler48 said:


> A high school buddy posted last night that he was on the way from Calloway Gardens traveling up I85 when a piece of paper blew up in front of him due to passing traffic. It became what the vehicle considered a stationary object and locked the brakes down.


Is that supposed to happen? 

Imagine the horror of a multi-car pile up all because a piece of paper caused a car to lock up its brakes at 70 mph. I would definitely get that sensor checked.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

mark sr said:


> I assume it's like the door unlock button on the outside of my wife's Altima. The door unlock button won't work unless the key fob [car has no keys] is within 3' of the door. So I assume if the key fob wasn't in the lady's pocket/purse - the door wouldn't open.



I knew I was tech challenged. You mean now the FOB button like my wife and I have for our 2003 model cars, does NOT have to be pushed at all, but just in the vicinity of the vehicle to unlock it and it unlocks itself hands free ? Dang, I need to get out more.


----------



## mark sr (Jun 13, 2017)

Gregsoldtruck79 said:


> I knew I was tech challenged. You mean now the FOB button like my wife and I have for our 2003 model cars, does NOT have to be pushed at all, but just in the vicinity of the vehicle to unlock it and it unlocks itself hands free ? Dang, I need to get out more.


That's how the fob works on my wife's Nissan. It still has buttons to lock the doors or open the trunk along with a panic and remote start buttons. If the fob is in the car - it will start.


----------



## SeniorSitizen (Sep 10, 2012)

Drachenfire said:


> Is that supposed to happen?
> 
> Imagine the horror of a multi-car pile up all because a piece of paper caused a car to lock up its brakes at 70 mph. I would definitely get that sensor checked.


Adaptive cruse control will prevent that if all have that ACC feature, but there within lies a problem again where the human brain has no common sense about following distance. I'd like to see ACC mandatory and once again the idiot drivers would be the first to complain.


----------



## Guap0_ (Dec 2, 2017)

> But what's to stop a crook from using an RF generator to trick the system into thinking that the owner is nearby.






> Each car will have unique code that FOB transmitter must match. Otherwise my FOB would unlock your car also




de-nagorg & SPS, good points by both of you. However, the hacker mentality could very well find a way to generate codes to match the frequency. I'm sure or at least I hope that the manufacturers thought of that.


----------



## SPS-1 (Oct 21, 2008)

...and after 15 minutes of unsuccessfully trying to hack the codes, the perp picks up a rock, breaks the window, and steals the new track-saw you left in he back.


----------



## Guap0_ (Dec 2, 2017)

Actually, the people who would throw a rock are not the same people who would try to crack the code. The people who would try to crack the code may not want to steal the car or anything in it. It would just be to prove that the code can be cracked.


----------



## Oso954 (Jun 23, 2012)

A crook who wants valuables out of the car breaks a window.
If using a code cracker, he is usually trying to steal your car.

The difference between key fob that requires you to push a button or one that can remain in your pocket is a moot point.

The car key is on the way out. If it sticks around, it will be primarily an emergency entry tool (eg dead battery) 
A lot of cars today do not have an ignition key. They have a start button that works in the presence of the key fob.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

Just my opinion here, but where I see all of these built in driver safety devices going (lane change alerts, front object auto braking) is our nation slowly ending up with even less attentive drivers, than we have today.

Every year it seems the new vehicle manufacturers keep piling more and more, electronic distractions on their vehicles dashboard's. 

It does not take long while someone knows that someone or something, will protect them...for that person to gradually let their alert senses down. 

I cannot believe the amount of fatal crashes happening now in my state daily, not between say a 1950 Chevy sedan and a 1950 Ford pickup, as they took all of a person's attention driving them to shift gears, brake and steer them. ...

The crashes today, are between modern vehicles that have the full safety packages of everything possible on it, to help keep the driver from crashing and to stay alive, if they do crash. 

Yet about every 4 days or so, I see a local TV skit showing where two vehicles hit head on or got T-Boned with fatalities, on a two lane straight stretch of highway. HUH ??? JMO


----------



## Oso954 (Jun 23, 2012)

The pure number of deaths is only a little higher than it was in 1950.
The peak of auto fatalitities was in the late 70's early 80's.

When you look at the death rate per X miles driven or by x population it is substantially lower today.

In 1950 the vehicle death rate per 100,000 was 21.794. 
In 2016, it was 11.59.

IMO, the safety features are working, because a lot of the drivers seem to be getting worse.


----------



## ZTMAN (Feb 19, 2015)

I bought a new Jeep Wrangler in 2016 for a weekend driver in nice weather, manual locks and windows. Just a simple key, no remote. It is great.

Most of the time the top and doors are off anyway. No security and no one bothers it.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

ZTMAN said:


> I bought a new Jeep Wrangler in 2016, manual locks and windows. Just a simple key, no remote. It is great.
> 
> Most of the time the doors are off anyway.



And you are really going to LOVE , not having to take it to a dealership and get hit with a huge bill for them fixing the, " Warning,Warning, Will Robinson " !! CEL code which may some day read like this when scanned .... .

" The frontal impact alarm system has a malfunction which must be repaired immediately or this vehicles engine will shut down in 60 minutes and go in to the hard lock mode. "


----------



## polarzak (Dec 1, 2008)

Gregsoldtruck79 said:


> Just my opinion here, but where I see all of these built in driver safety devices going (lane change alerts, front object auto braking) is our nation slowly ending up with even less attentive drivers, than we have today.


I agree fully. Unfortunately the season of the inattentive drivers is already upon us, and perhaps is the reason for creating all of these alerts. Last year I was looking for a new car, and did the dealer circuit, I weeded out everything that was automatic or sensor guided as I could. I did enjoy the backup camera in my 2013 so having gotten used to it, I did not complain much when the new vehicle came with it. Unfortunately the camera in the new car sucks. It is at least 18 inches off, based on the camera lines (the 13 was dead on, and the same car by the way) The dealer put in a new camera, still the same. Tells me there is nothing else they can do. Point is, if you depend too much on automation, you just might nearly take your mirror off backing into the garage, as I almost did.


----------



## chandler48 (Jun 5, 2017)

> Is that supposed to happen?


I should think not, for the same reason you mention. Similar to the publicized A320 computerized take off in France. The computer did not want to nose up after being airborne, slowed speed and eventually crashed at the end of the runway.

There's just so much I trust to computers running my life and a car moving at 70 miles per hour or a plane at V-1, no thanks.


----------



## DR P (Dec 16, 2017)

Gregsoldtruck79 said:


> Just my opinion here, but where I see all of these built in driver safety devices going (lane change alerts, front object auto braking) is our nation slowly ending up with even less attentive drivers, than we have today.
> 
> Every year it seems the new vehicle manufacturers keep piling more and more, electronic distractions on their vehicles dashboard's.
> 
> ...


I know a man whose mom died recently from a fatal head wound in a car
where she drove broadside up under a tractor trailer going under 30 mph... 

The truck had just pulled out onto the road & was still moving slowly...
The mom had one bad eye & a waiver from doctor's screw-up with cataract surgery... 

police believe she did not see the stop sign 
because the morning sun was in her *eye*- 
obviously she did not see that truck trailer...

I have personally experienced that intersection, that time of day 
& to coin a phrase - that sun can be murder (on at least your eyes)...

part of his closure process was to try research & understand if anything
differently could have been done to have prevented this tragedy... 

according to him there is now a movement afoot to modify the sides of trailers 
& particularly lg/medium sized city box trucks that do not any side impact protection...

most of you can remember when the back of trailer bumpers 
didn't match up with cars and the impacts were also deadly...

she had a 2003 Impala w/70K miles that had been well cared for since new
& evidently he had initially decided that if her car had crash 
avoidance technology she could still be alive today?
the car did have air bag technology but since the bumper didn't impact...

only to learn that in her instance since there was no visible barrier in front 
of where the car looks for impact, it is highly unlikely the technology 
would have worked flawlessly as designed... he did say that those
aerodynamic skirts on the sides should have satisfied the crash avoidance
issue but none were installed as this was a "city" trailer used to move goods
from a manufacturing location to another warehouse/storage facility...

he accepts that the accident was his mother's fault & nothing is bringing her back 
& while I can see where others could focus in on the *accountability* of others
he now is focused on requiring some form of side barrier technology that could 
better help the crash avoidance issues that are not in place especially on our city streets...

Oh & as to head on collisions, according to my friend,
there are debates & questions still because most of the 
technology *works* under the assumption that the obstacle 
in front of the vehicle is stopped; not moving. 

This is why head on potential is possibly the worst case scenario; 
followed closely by broadside impact from a vehicle instantly appearing...

as we learned way back, not only is the impact/damage doubled 
for both vehicles involved during head on collisions... 
but even if both vehicles have a crash system in place, 
those computers may not be able to intelligently measure/react 
to the much shorter distances involved & stop in time to 
prevent injury, much less damages to the vehicles involved...

yet folks are driving around with a high sense of security in these smart cars.

go figure

Peace


----------



## SeniorSitizen (Sep 10, 2012)

So what this mostly boils down to is that technology is necessary because of inattentive, aggressive and sometimes physically impaired drivers. Reminds me of the days in history when we see how driving evolved during the change over from horse and buggy days. The one big difference is rather than mostly fender benders then the crash speeds are now often in the 70 mph range.


----------



## Oso954 (Jun 23, 2012)

Some people are confusing assisted steering with autopilot.
This article talks about 2 Tesla incidents last month.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2018/01/23/a-tesla-owners-excuse-for-his-dui-crash-the-car-was-driving/?utm_term=.4d5db6a9ea5f


----------

