ACC (Adaptive Cruise) Retrofit >> Underway, PSA

[CrazyCooter]

I talked to the dealer about something similar - he said "liability". If you mess up and the FCW doesn't work as expected, you made a change in the safety equipment.

I totally get it......

Maybe no shop should be performing chassis modifications or installing larger tires especially on vehicles with adaptive cruise, collison avoidance , or lane assist equipped vehicles because of liability?

I've seriously thought about liability with my business of tuning shocks and suspension since my work makes the vehicle drive more controlled and comfortable at higher speeds. Is that a liability in itself since a person can now drive faster than OE equipped?

Sponsored

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Maybe no shop should be performing chassis modifications or installing larger tires especially on vehicles with adaptive cruise, collison avoidance , or lane assist equipped vehicles because of liability?

It's quite possible some shop will get into a tangle after an accident.
It's sort of like - it's not illegal to haul more than your rated payload, but if something happens, "attorneys are standing by to take your call".
There will be some creative attorney out there.
Or what could happen - someone sue FCA because of an accident involving those systems, FCA get their shot at discovery and finds that a shop made changes that caused the systems to not function properly.

I've seriously thought about liability with my business of tuning shocks and suspension since my work makes the vehicle drive more controlled and comfortable at higher speeds. Is that a liability in itself since a person can now drive faster than OE equipped?

Very different, IMO. Anyone can swap springs and shocks (like done here many times) and say hey my changes made it really smooth at high speeds.........
You aren't causing them to go faster, they made that choice.
A stock JT will do over 100 easy peasy............. does that mean FCA is liable in case of an accident at that speed?

Apples and oranges.
You aren't defeating or "causing to not function" safety equipment.
If you cause TPMS to not function, yes,. you are breaking federal law and could be in trouble in case of an accident.

 

[CrazyCooter]

It's quite possible some shop will get into a tangle after an accident.
It's sort of like - it's not illegal to haul more than your rated payload, but if something happens, "attorneys are standing by to take your call".
There will be some creative attorney out there.
Or what could happen - someone sue FCA because of an accident involving those systems, FCA get their shot at discovery and finds that a shop made changes that caused the systems to not function properly.


Very different, IMO. Anyone can swap springs and shocks (like done here many times) and say hey my changes made it really smooth at high speeds.........
You aren't causing them to go faster, they made that choice.
A stock JT will do over 100 easy peasy............. does that mean FCA is liable in case of an accident at that speed?

Apples and oranges.
You aren't defeating or "causing to not function" safety equipment.
If you cause TPMS to not function, yes,. you are breaking federal law and could be in trouble in case of an accident.

I'm sure a good attorney could argue that different shocks and springs alters requirements of the original programmed algorithm for stability control?

Bottom line is we're all one incident away from losing everything we have worked for and business owner are 3x+ targets. Humans are becoming more of a wildcard daily.

 

[WILDHOBO]

I'm sure a good attorney could argue that different shocks and springs alters requirements of the original programmed algorithm for stability control?

Bottom line is we're all one incident away from losing everything we have worked for and business owner are 3x+ targets. Humans are becoming more of a wildcard daily.

Two words. Umbrella Policy.

 

[CrazyCooter]

Two words. Umbrella Policy.

There isn't a policy large enough that one can afford IF a life is lost.

Funny the standard liability policy is 1m/3m, but that's nothing in today's dollars and the minimum auto policy is 15k/30 still here in CA. When was the last time a decent vehicle could be replaced or even repaired for $15k?

I think the cheapest insurance is a corporation or three.

 

[WILDHOBO]

There isn't a policy large enough that one can afford IF a life is lost.

Funny the standard liability policy is 1m/3m, but that's nothing in today's dollars and the minimum auto policy is 15k/30 still here in CA. When was the last time a decent vehicle could be replaced or even repaired for $15k?

I think the cheapest insurance is a corporation or three.

I’m not suggesting that an insurance policy should cover lost life. But business owners are targets of law suits, and should be responsibly covered for well above their net worth. Anything can happen to anyone, even the most responsible people. And usually umbrella policies require a rather high coverage number on the auto insurance policy as a prerequisite to bind the policy.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

There isn't a policy large enough that one can afford IF a life is lost.

Funny the standard liability policy is 1m/3m, but that's nothing in today's dollars and the minimum auto policy is 15k/30 still here in CA. When was the last time a decent vehicle could be replaced or even repaired for $15k?

I think the cheapest insurance is a corporation or three.

S corp
That's what my wife and I did when we had our store.

 

[rhill2901]

Once we are able to change vin, Legit shops will scrub alignment data also. If a shop does something that causes themselves problems, well, there are existing laws that deal with that. I doubt more than a handful of shops would be that stupid anyways. Wrongful death lawsuits tend to convince most that they won't go that path. FCA only makes it difficult because they want the lost revenue. That's the ONLY reason iMHO. The dealer won't install ANY used parts, period. Why? because they will lose money. Claiming liability is just an excuse.

 

[rhill2901]

What did this one end up being, and is it ruled completely out?

It’s marked A0D. No idea…

 

[rhill2901]

The arrow symbol is for a company called Analog Devices. They don’t make memory chips.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Once we are able to change vin, Legit shops will scrub alignment data also. If a shop does something that causes themselves problems, well, there are existing laws that deal with that. I doubt more than a handful of shops would be that stupid anyways. Wrongful death lawsuits tend to convince most that they won't go that path. FCA only makes it difficult because they want the lost revenue. That's the ONLY reason iMHO. The dealer won't install ANY used parts, period. Why? because they will lose money. Claiming liability is just an excuse.

Ah, the old conspiracy theorist.
They ain't losing any money over this - the tiny handful of people that would even go this route is nothing for them, not worth messing with. Out of the tens of thousands of Jeeps sold - you think they care about money from a part that's hard to get, and that even if available, they might sell a couple hundred of those Jeep owners? .A fraction of a percent? Then the liability......
They couldn't care less. The average buyer takes it as it is and drives it. Only a few on forums and fakebook care about this and would buy parts. It's not worth the effort. It wouldn't be the salary for one mid-level employee. (BTW - it ain't just a Jeep thing)

 

[WILDHOBO]

Once we are able to change vin, Legit shops will scrub alignment data also. If a shop does something that causes themselves problems, well, there are existing laws that deal with that. I doubt more than a handful of shops would be that stupid anyways. Wrongful death lawsuits tend to convince most that they won't go that path. FCA only makes it difficult because they want the lost revenue. That's the ONLY reason iMHO. The dealer won't install ANY used parts, period. Why? because they will lose money. Claiming liability is just an excuse.

This is not the same as adding self driving tech. If the ACC doesn’t brake on time due to bad calibration or a failed retrofit, the brake pedal is right under one’s foot. Forward collision tech is there to “potentially” help with distracted driving, and straight up human nature. If it helps avoid an impact, great. If it doesn’t, it’s like all the cars out there without it to begin with.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

This is not the same as adding self driving tech. If the ACC doesn’t brake on time due to bad calibration or a failed retrofit, the brake pedal is right under one’s foot. Forward collision tech is there to “potentially” help with distracted driving, and straight up human nature. If it helps avoid an impact, great. If it doesn’t, it’s like all the cars out there without it to begin with.

Have you ever been keeping your distance on the road and suddenly from out of nowhere a guy comes flying up at 20 over and pissed because his missed his exit ramp, cuts over in front of you with half a car length, hits the brakes so he can further swerve over to take that exit he's by now almost past?
I have - you can be extremely careful, leave plenty of room, and still there's no time to humanly react. Humans react faster to sound than visual things. It's why track events use a starter pistol.
Drag racers can only get their reaction times down so far because it's humanly impossible to use visual stimuli as fast as audio stimuli.
Trust me, there's times when even YOU could not react to the assholes out there, thus, FCW (which isn't ACC - and has nothing to do with it other than using the same radar/camera array)

I wasn't just saying "what if" above - that was real. We'd have had a really nasty accident, really bad, had FCW not been working perfectly in my JT. My wife was even with me and she can spot trouble before almost anyone else, and they clown popped out of nowhere. The JT's FCW and active braking saved the day.
Today's traffic is almost beyond the ability of humans to handle every possible combination of events. The guy to your right isn't watching and starts changing lanes into you - you are watching for that, you are looking for your exit or when you need to change lanes safely for your exit, then you get some moron.......
It's not for ME being distracted, it's for what happens when idiots have a license and do stupid stuff in what's already an almost impossible combination of events.
BTW - did you know that humans can't possibly multi-task? It's a lie perpetuated by management. It's just can't happen - so for you to pay attention to the guy beside you or ahead of you, you can't pay full attention to the one on the other side.
University studies prove it. For every task, and that includes watching things visually, that you add, you cut the attention to the other task by 25% and when you add yet another thing to monitor, do or watch, now it's cut by 50%. And the memory of the other tasks drops by that much as well. So in other words, you can't pay full attention to everything around you while driving. You shift attention, but can't double it.
And ironically, studies have also found by the devices like lane departure, FCW, ACC and other safety devices, it causes drivers to actually be MORE observant and pay more attention to the driving. They notice things better, are more observant and can relate better details of the drive when it's over.

 

[rhill2901]

Not sure why you pulled out the old conspiracy thing. Not sure how that would apply.

its capitalism. I worked for companies that did the same thing. They said they were protecting their propriety rights. Well, yea, they were. Nobody is stealing their rights. Reusing parts is good for the environment isn't it? They are choosing to use it in another vehicle. If I made a business, reverse engineered the product, and mass produced them and sold them, well, that would be a problem. If I take a used module, put it on a used vehicle, nothing was lost or taken except the revenue of selling another part at an inflated price. Locking a module to a VIN doesn't protect anybody. Its only done for the dollar. This is my experience in the companies I have worked for. We had meetings on how we can prevent our customers from using parts from "their machines" on other machines. Your experiences may differ, and I would like to hear them.

You are leaving out all those vehicles that have ACC, and it needs a replacement module because theirs is defective and they get it from a wrecked car. I would say its more than just a few hundred. $1500 per module is absurd anyways. If they were more realistic about the price, nobody would consider using a used module when the new module could be had for a more realistic price.

 

[WILDHOBO]

Have you ever been keeping your distance on the road and suddenly from out of nowhere a guy comes flying up at 20 over and pissed because his missed his exit ramp, cuts over in front of you with half a car length, hits the brakes so he can further swerve over to take that exit he's by now almost past?
I have - you can be extremely careful, leave plenty of room, and still there's no time to humanly react. Humans react faster to sound than visual things. It's why track events use a starter pistol.
Drag racers can only get their reaction times down so far because it's humanly impossible to use visual stimuli as fast as audio stimuli.
Trust me, there's times when even YOU could not react to the assholes out there, thus, FCW (which isn't ACC - and has nothing to do with it other than using the same radar/camera array)

I wasn't just saying "what if" above - that was real. We'd have had a really nasty accident, really bad, had FCW not been working perfectly in my JT. My wife was even with me and she can spot trouble before almost anyone else, and they clown popped out of nowhere. The JT's FCW and active braking saved the day.
Today's traffic is almost beyond the ability of humans to handle every possible combination of events. The guy to your right isn't watching and starts changing lanes into you - you are watching for that, you are looking for your exit or when you need to change lanes safely for your exit, then you get some moron.......
It's not for ME being distracted, it's for what happens when idiots have a license and do stupid stuff in what's already an almost impossible combination of events.
BTW - did you know that humans can't possibly multi-task? It's a lie perpetuated by management. It's just can't happen - so for you to pay attention to the guy beside you or ahead of you, you can't pay full attention to the one on the other side.
University studies prove it. For every task, and that includes watching things visually, that you add, you cut the attention to the other task by 25% and when you add yet another thing to monitor, do or watch, now it's cut by 50%. And the memory of the other tasks drops by that much as well. So in other words, you can't pay full attention to everything around you while driving. You shift attention, but can't double it.
And ironically, studies have also found by the devices like lane departure, FCW, ACC and other safety devices, it causes drivers to actually be MORE observant and pay more attention to the driving. They notice things better, are more observant and can relate better details of the drive when it's over.

My point was NOT that ACC, FCW, and active braking are bad. I know exactly what they are, as both of our vehicles have them. My point was that there isn’t much liability with retrofitting it. That’s it.

Sponsored