Navel-gazing foretells the future of automotive technology
Automotive News sat down with its crystal ball and industry contacts to come up with a list of emerging technologies that are likely to find a place in the cars of tomorrow. While some, like steer-by-wire and new takes on the digital dash, have been discussed ad nauseum, others proved a bit more interesting.
The image above is a rendering of what "bumper bags" might look like, where traditional airbags are used on the exterior of SUVs to soften the blow to both passengers and low-riders alike. Biometrics are also likely to replace traditional keys and fobs in the future, with either a fingerprint or retinal scan deterring unauthorized use of the vehicle – no good for the youngins out for a late night cruise.
Inevitably, hydrogen power and individual motors mounted in the wheel wells make an appearance, although a system currently under development by Siemens VDO includes not just motors, but the steering rack, shock absorbers and brake parts all integrated directly into the wheel.
Some of this technology is already being employed, including a facial recognition system used on the Lexus LS 460 that detects when the driver isn't paying attention to the road, while the rest of the prognostications are quoted by AN to come to market "after 2010," which could mean 2011 or something like 2091.
[Source: Automotive News – Sub. Req.]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Tsunami Racer 7:36PM (11/26/2007)
how about a 'dumbass detection system' or "DDS" installed in all hybrid cars that prevents the driver from using the HOV lanes if they're going at the same speed or slower than the flow of traffic? now that would be a great innovation!!
Reply
Marvelous 9:40PM (11/26/2007)
I feel sorry for the people that think finger print and retina scans are a good idea. No thanks big brother, I'm already fighting to stop that chip from going up my a$$.
Reply
John 10:04PM (11/26/2007)
do any of the new technological "advancements" include better driver's license exams?
Reply
paul34 12:05AM (11/27/2007)
So, with these biometric systems, what does that do for valet guys like me?
Reply
cowboy bob 6:58AM (11/27/2007)
Many of us do not like the direction automotive technology is taking us. I for one do not want things like GM's "Onstar" which is standard in all GM vehicles now. The presence of this technology means I will think twice before I buy GM. Add to that all the posible problems to maintain or repair all the new things put into these automobiles. Just the issues with present engine sensors cause extream expense to maintain. Example-Electric fuel pumps inside the gas tank vs. pumps on the side of the engine, $500 vs. $50. McPhierson strut and manditory front end alignment-$650 vs. shock replacement of $75. Mass air flow sensor replacement-$550 vs. .... oh wait, we never even had anything like that stuff before. Yes, new cars are good, but not necessarly better in reguard to repair. I see fairly good vehicles worth about $3000 go to the junkyard because it costs more to fix them than they are worth. Complexity breeds problems. The more there is to go wrong, the more that will go wrong, and the more it will cost. The idea of simplicity has been erased in the minds of the engineer of today. Convience of the present overides the problems of the future. Yea, I know some of these things are nice to have, but the wallet doesn't like it when it gets sucked dry for repairs to some of these "extras". I believe the Chineese will offer less complex automobiles for their market, and will surprise the manufacturers here with unexpected sales to people who just want a "simple" car.
Reply
sledge 8:15AM (11/27/2007)
While I do see your point, and agree that spare parts cost a fortune these days, you may have a rather myopic view of the progress made.
Generally speaking, cars these days are more reliable than those made 20 years ago. By using all the latest and greatest electronic and mechanical widgets, I believe manufacturers are reducing lifetime running costs such as fuel consumption, costs of oil changes (by increasing the interval between them), costs of replacing spark plugs, engine/transmisson tuneups/rebuilds etc. Now, I actually haven't seen any studies on this, so I could be wrong, but just some quick math on a napkin, seems to point to that conclusion.
Additionally, a good chunk of the cost of cars these days is due to the safety equipment such as ESP, airbags, side impact beams, etc. which I doubt you can argue is making it for likely that you will survive an accident.
Most cars involved in major accidents usually turn out to be writeoffs, because something like a passenger airbag going off means you will have to replace the entire dash panel, which is obviously expensive. However, personally I am willing to trade the cost of replacing a car (especially since I will get a good chunk of money back from the insurance company anyway), with my personal safety.
Going back to the point though, I wonder if anyone has done a study to compare the lifecycle and accident (including costs of injury/death) costs of cars now and from 20 years ago.
cowboy bob 9:06AM (11/27/2007)
1. I never said I didn't like airbags or argued the merit of safety. 2. I never alluded to replacement costs of safety devices in accidents. 3. I DID talk about the costs of modern technology. 4. "Myopic view of progress made"???" I hardly think so. As far as the cost, longevity and economy of modern autos vs. those of decades ago, there are studys that show the cost per mile of modern transportation vs. those of some twenty or thirty years ago to have increased when factored for inflation. This information is available from the NTIS databank.