backtop


Print 77 comment(s) - last by 91TTZ.. on Mar 17 at 11:25 AM

The report said V2V "will increase the cost of a new car that, on average, cost almost $31,000 in 2013"

While vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication is seen as a potentially life-saving technology (which happens to be gaining traction, thanks to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA), some worry what the costs to implement V2V will mean for the auto industry and consumers. 

A new report from The Detroit News raises some questions on the topic, saying that V2V will add weight and higher costs to future cars and trucks. 

The extra weight is problematic because fuel standards are tightening, and that weight won't help autos meet such regulations. In August 2012, the White House finalized the long-discussed 54.5 mpg fuel efficiency standards, which will boost fuel economy in cars and light trucks by the year 2025. 

Aside from weight, the report said V2V "will increase the cost of a new car that, on average, cost almost $31,000 in 2013." That's in addition to the estimated extra $3,000 added to the cost of a new car or truck by the year 2025 thanks to the fuel regulations. 

The Detroit News went on to say that V2V regulation may not be necessary since the auto technologies we have today, such as lane assist and blind-spot warnings, are enough to warn us of impending accidents.


In other words, the government is forcing a technology that not everyone will want or maybe even need. Automakers have voiced concerns in the past regarding V2V communications, saying that such technology could add thousands of dollars to the price tags of new vehicles, making them more difficult to sell. 

Automakers like Audi, Volkswagen, BMW, Ford, General Motors, Honda and Toyota have all started developing some type of V2V technology, but NHTSA's new push for making such technology required in new vehicles will likely put forward some sort of standard to ensure that everyone is on the same page and that vehicles from different automakers can communicate with one another effectively. 

V2V communications allow cars and trucks to "talk" with one another and their surroundings. The tech uses a 360-degree view of a vehicle’s surroundings, allowing the car to detect what the driver cannot. A dedicated short range radio network is also used to allow vehicles to communicate with each other up to 300 yards away. 

According to DOT, V2V could prevent 70 to 80 percent of vehicle crashes involving unimpaired drivers, which could help prevent thousands of deaths and injuries on U.S. roads annually.

The Detroit News report mentioned other potential V2V issues, such as the government's ability to handle the extra infrastructure and hacking. 

Last month, the NHTSA said it wanted to put V2V in all future cars and trucks. Transportation secretary Anthony Foxx wants to have new regulations ready by January 2017. 

Source: The Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: We will eventually need this
By Strunf on 3/14/2014 9:15:02 AM , Rating: 2
I don't see how it helps with congested traffic when traffic within a city is regulated by the traffic lights, they could decrease the chances of having congested traffic by just making the traffic lights smarter and this for a fraction of the cost of the V2V.
I still wonder why very often I'm faced with red lights when there's no car coming on the other road, or why it turn green at a crossing when it's completely blocked, it's really annoying how some idiot drivers keep advancing when it's clear they will block the crossroad. If it wasn't for the fact that most drivers are complete idiots I would be all for removing every single traffic light within a city.


RE: We will eventually need this
By Mint on 3/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: We will eventually need this
By spamreader1 on 3/14/2014 2:09:37 PM , Rating: 2
I don't drive in cities, I can't image how difficult it would be to program a pick up to handle farm to market roads, or gravel roads safely without some poor farmer ending up in a ditch, culvert, or tree while pulling a loaded trailer around.

Why is it nearly every state the last few years seems to want to force the 35ish % of Americans that live in rural areas to do things that don't make any sense for those of us that live in rural areas?

It's no wonder several states keep having these grumbling matches of wanting to split their state up into smaller states. I have no problem with the 65ish % having autonomous vehicles, and I completely understand how beneficial they can be to the overcrowded cities. I'm just saying why force something on everyone because even if it's not wanted by a large population of people. If it's going to come to v2v why not just make it a city tax, and everyone use v2v in a taxi or mass transit type system? Then you won't have to own a vehicle at all.

I just don't understand how the rights/privileges of the metropolitan cities have to outweigh mine when the rural population are the ones that basically feed the cities anyway. Without the rural infrastructure, city life would be nearly impossible. We're already being taxed out of existence or forced off our land by eminent domain laws anyway. Why keep putting the thumb down on us hard working folks to provide for everyone that enjoys many amenities of the cities?

I'm ending my rant now of someones prediction of v2v. And I'm not focusing on your post specifically Mint, you said nothing wrong at all.


RE: We will eventually need this
By Mint on 3/15/2014 6:58:43 AM , Rating: 1
The mandatory part of V2V is going to be little more than an "I am here" beacon for safety, and certainly not going to send a farmer into a ditch or a tree. You aren't doing a favor to the image of rural folk by making such silly assumptions.

For things this cheap, it makes no sense to make it "city only". If, to appease people like you, they made a regulation that cars made after 2018 need to have V2V to drive in cities, then how many people will choose not to have it? How much will resale value go down for a car without it? How pissed will people be when they get tickets for driving in town without V2V on their new car?


By spamreader1 on 3/14/2014 2:09:45 PM , Rating: 2
I don't drive in cities, I can't image how difficult it would be to program a pick up to handle farm to market roads, or gravel roads safely without some poor farmer ending up in a ditch, culvert, or tree while pulling a loaded trailer around.

Why is it nearly every state the last few years seems to want to force the 35ish % of Americans that live in rural areas to do things that don't make any sense for those of us that live in rural areas?

It's no wonder several states keep having these grumbling matches of wanting to split their state up into smaller states. I have no problem with the 65ish % having autonomous vehicles, and I completely understand how beneficial they can be to the overcrowded cities. I'm just saying why force something on everyone because even if it's not wanted by a large population of people. If it's going to come to v2v why not just make it a city tax, and everyone use v2v in a taxi or mass transit type system? Then you won't have to own a vehicle at all.

I just don't understand how the rights/privileges of the metropolitan cities have to outweigh mine when the rural population are the ones that basically feed the cities anyway. Without the rural infrastructure, city life would be nearly impossible. We're already being taxed out of existence or forced off our land by eminent domain laws anyway. Why keep putting the thumb down on us hard working folks to provide for everyone that enjoys many amenities of the cities?

I'm ending my rant now of someones prediction of v2v. And I'm not focusing on your post specifically Mint, you said nothing wrong at all.


RE: We will eventually need this
By MrBlastman on 3/14/2014 12:56:21 PM , Rating: 1
It helps with congested traffic by forcing those maroons to take action!

I live in Atlanta and we have some of the worst traffic in all of North America. It is bad here, no, really bad. We have all types of people driving: young kids, elderly, incompetents, sky-watchers, daydreamers, people so fat their foot stays on their brake while they use the gas pedal, crazies, foreigners who never drove a car in their life until recently moving to America, women drivers... asian women drivers (my asian friends tell me these are the WORST and to watch out for them), cabbies, shuttles, buses, truck drivers, pizza delivery guys, bicyclists, motocycle suicide bikers, texters, drive-it-like-you-stole-it proponents, turbo spoolers at 12 mph (see car through house), cautious paranoids... and more! (Apologies if I left out any sterotypes--I'm trying to be as un-PC as possible while proving a point). Throw them all together and what do you get? Madness!

So by taking the biggest responsibility out of their hands when entering city limits while forcing them to sit back, relax and let the car do the work--you're helping traffic immensely! Those that don't pay attention normally... can keep living in space. Those that are too afraid to act to save their own lives (see: people who stop on the highway on-ramp at the white line where it merges onto the freeway and panic), assholes (see: Dennis Leary drive really slow in the ultra-fast lane) can scream out of their... assholes as they are forced to go fast, merge or change lanes (yes, some people are AFRAID to change lanes)... the list goes on.

You get the idea.

Most of these imbeciles couldn't navigate their way out of a kitchen pantry stuffed full of Hostess cup-cakes, Beanie-Weenies and a sack of Dog Food. If they see a scorpion they scream for mercy, jump on a stool, dance like a bear riding a beach-ball and chant fifty-thousand kumbayahs hoping the 911 operator will send police immediately to save not only themselves but their poor dog fluffy. Or, imagine for a moment, that fluffy is instead a 22 lb cat that is trying to attack them and they have barricaded themselves inside their bedroom, afraid for their lives. (Yes, that DID happen this week on the West Coast).

If you seriously thing all of the above have the capacity... no, the ability to efficiently flow through the asphalt system, unimpeded with civil respect for everyone else... well you have something coming for you. Here's news to ya: That traffic light, it might as well be the hot light at the local burrito stand yelling "Hey guys! Extra queso and hot sauce if you hurry!" (Because some will want it and others will remember that demon named Montezuma who paid a visit to their rear-cavity last month).

No, I can't see any reason at all why we should have automated traffic control with computer-assisted driving!


RE: We will eventually need this
By sorry dog on 3/14/2014 1:38:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
young kids, elderly, incompetents, sky-watchers, daydreamers, people so fat their foot stays on their brake while they use the gas pedal, crazies, foreigners who never drove a car in their life until recently moving to America, women drivers... asian women drivers (my asian friends tell me these are the WORST and to watch out for them), cabbies, shuttles, buses, truck drivers, pizza delivery guys, bicyclists, motocycle suicide bikers, texters, drive-it-like-you-stole-it proponents, turbo spoolers at 12 mph (see car through house), cautious paranoids... and more! (Apologies if I left out any sterotypes--I'm trying to be as un-PC as possible while proving a point).


Well, I've spend sometime in your I-20/75/85/285 paradise and if your trying to be UN-pc - then you left out Hood Rats in hoopties, Segal wanna-be cops, Jesse James wannabe harley bikers, clueless texting teenage girls, wal-mart dwelling rebel flag waving rednecks, mexicans that are illegal in Mexico too, left lane hogging 6 offspring soccer moms, maybe once attractive but now walking skeleton methheads, and to cover everybody else... all those that participate in the daily running of the Atlanta 285 race... where the cops don't bother to fight through the 80 cars glued to your ass unless your at triple digits and maybe not even then.

Gotta say that you're right....Atlanta is the worst. I wish I had videos of wu-tang weekend motorcycle club that needs 3 lanes of worth of swerving to maintain their un-synchronized wheelies or the mexican Cheby with all windows (including windshield) airbrushed and proceeding to dispose of their single wide grade living room suite on I-20 which pretty much then disintegrates into a million splinters as 80mph.



RE: We will eventually need this
By MrBlastman on 3/14/2014 1:54:00 PM , Rating: 2
Haha! A fellow survivor of the blackened southern rivers of despair--well said, sir. :)


RE: We will eventually need this
By Omega215D on 3/14/2014 2:10:59 PM , Rating: 2
Those hood rats on bikes are the worst and make things bad for the rest of us.


RE: We will eventually need this
By Jeffk464 on 3/14/2014 5:26:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
mexicans that are illegal in Mexico


Legality is a lot more flexible in Mexico.


RE: We will eventually need this
By Motoman on 3/16/2014 9:01:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No, I can't see any reason at all why we should have automated traffic control with computer-assisted driving


The answer isn't automating the vehicles. It's raising the standards to be able to get a driver's license to the point where the f%cktards are off the roads.

We seem to think we have a "right" to a driver's license. You don't. It's not a right. It's a privilege, and it's well past time that we started treating it as such.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki