I like having a physical key to start the engine. There was never any confusion in our household about "who has the keys" like there is now.
I despise the start-stop nonsense. Let me use the pedals to start and stop.
I don't need my car to broadcast a wifi signal.
Etc etc etc
Sometimes manufacturers should just "version-lock" their devices and keep going with it -- a lot of customers would be happier.
the wi-fi hot spot craze that manufacturers bought into never made much sense to me except as a revenue source for the same. I do know that GM though OnStar sells such services and they are seriously over priced, Onstar is near theft level just for monitoring services which is separate from data service!
As for keys, I love that my phone works as my key for my Tesla Model 3. For added security I can simply have PIN to drive setup in the car. Now some will say you lose security as all they need is your phone, well that is no different than just having your key too. I would be curious if the BT connection on the TM3 can be opened via signal boosting between phone and car. I do believe the optional key fob can be.
Now myself, though I had and tried it, I am not a fan of letting my phone take over the car UI no matter how dreadful a UI can be. I used it on my second generation Volt but in the end it really didn't not make much sense. First off, like I have found in my TM3 I really don't use much of the display or buttons while driving so any added features are moot. I did like that it would tell me my text messages, but some cars do that as well and let you voice transcribe replies.
The advantage for cars other than Tesla is that in those cars maps are never updated or only for money and infrequently. Let alone all other features.
In an automatic car, you stop with your foot on the brake, and as soon as you start lifting your foot, the car is supposed to start moving. You need a much more responsive and tuned S/S system to give a good experience when it has much less time to react.
Or the OP simply meant he didn't like the button with the label "start/stop" present on many "keyless" systems (wireless keys) :-)
I put my money on the first. If you're not used to it - it can be quite unnerving when the engine suddenly stops at an intersection.
Even more unnerving when it doesn't start right away, and you're already pushing the gas when it does, causing the car to lurch forward unexpectedly fast. All you can do is hope the person in front of you doesn't stop quickly, before you can get your foot back over to the brake.
This is a feature every car should have, and one that'd make much more sense to mandate over rear-view cameras.
Gas mileage is simply an op-ex of a car, and does not make more "sense" over a rear view camera, because increased c pillars decrease overall glass and visibility.
I rather pay a few bucks more in gas then have a featureset unused in my car or have to go through disabling it every time I operate it.
What's this in regard to? Hybrid engines starting and stopping?
Especially if you are at an intersection waiting for a gap in traffic, you take your foot off the brake and the engine starts, you start to ease up a bit for a better view then the engine stops again. Now there is a gap in traffic, and you want to go "right now", but if feels like there is that slight hesitation as the engine starts up again before you can start accelerating.
Now on the technical side, then the engine stops, the engine is positioned at a part of the combustion cycle so that it takes very little effort for the starter to get the engine to pop off. And the starter motor is an upgraded version, designed for the frequent use, so overall it is very reliable. But from a psychological viewpoint, it is very hard to shake the feeling that your car engine just died and you are about to get hit by an oncoming car.
Here's a description of the Apple Watch Mac unlock process
Let's say it took someone 60 seconds in the past, is 10 seconds really that big of a change as far as committing the crime goes?
Now the question is - is this actually safer? If some thieves arrive at my house to steal my car and their relay gadget doesn't work, are they going to give up, or are they going to break in and threaten me for the key? Now that's a question I don't like to think about too much.
If you find a burglar in your home, the burglar is generally more likely to flee as quickly as possible, than pull a gun on you. Escalating to (the threat of) violence will likely make it harder for them, not easier.
Someone whose logic is so flawed that they think “oh well, felony” is probably not just stealing cars. At that point they might as well break into your house, murder you for your stuff, and then do the same for every house on the block. “Because felony”, right?
Car thieves don’t generally commit war crimes.
>Once you’re committing felonies the primacy of rational thought could be called into question.
This is what you're saying i said:
>Your point seems to state that committing a felony implies that a criminal is automatically willing to escalate to any other crime, as if anything resembling rationality is impossible.
See the difference?
The question was whether someone who’s willing to break into a parked car to steal it is willing to break into a house to assault the car owner in order to take their keys to steal the same car. You said yes, or at least you implied “yes” extremely strongly. If you don’t believe the answer is “yes” then I don’t know what the point of your comment was.
PS: The fact that you thought my absurd extrapolation of your statement was making the same point tells me that you do indeed believe a car thief is likely to escalate to far worse crimes “because felony”.
Two questions that immediately come to mind are 1) Is there feedback that the double-click was executed correctly? 2) If so, do you still get that feedback if the mechanism for disabling the keyless feature is interfered with in some way, e.g. by jamming?
They didn't touch my car even though it was newer, probably because it was a Kia. I am happy with my choice.
Spending a bunch of money on a luxury vehicle is usually idiotic and most people who do so usually can't afford it in proportion to their income sheet and balance sheet. Plus, it advertises the owner and the vehicle as targets for all sorts of criminal intrigue.
We put our car keys in a metal tin near the door now which stops all this anyway.
Isn’t that the same as “not stolen”?
The definition of stolen seems fuzzy here.
And I blame car manufacturers and dealerships for this. For introducing and advertising these features without explaining to less saavy buyers what are the risks.
It is also trivial to be this attack by adding an accelerometer to the fob. If the fob isn't moving, don't respond to the broadcast from the car. You could also be more extreme and have the car check constantly. If fob disappears, kill the engine.
That would have to be a pretty sensitive accelerometer but you'd still end up with voodoo stuff like "I have to shake my purse while starting the car". Killing the engine if the fob disappears means you need to be polling the fob. See the lawsuits over heavy keys wearing out the ignition lock and steering column locking up to see what happens when the polling fails. Probably not a good idea, IMHO.
They make them just for that purpose.
But also how are manufacturers still selling vulnerable cars? This seems like a class-action lawsuit waiting to happen. Relay attacks have been a known vulnerability with known solutions for years.
Car missing + all keys accounted for in your house + no smashed glass = relay attack.
That’s a valid question for the other victim, but I’m pretty sure cars are still occasionally stolen without the keys nearby by defeating the immobilizer.