Does anyone know if the RX has one of these?
====================================
A 'Black Box' for Your Car

Safety Board Says All New Vehicles Should Have Devices That Record What Went Wrong in a Crash

By AMY SCHATZ
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
August 4, 2004; Page D1

The National Transportation Safety Board yesterday recommended that black boxes be required in all new cars and trucks.

Although many drivers don't realize it, most new cars already come equipped with them. The current generation of devices mostly tells whether an air bag inflated before a crash, but more advanced ones also record a host of other data, including the speed of the car, when the driver started to brake, and whether the headlights and driver's seat belt were on.

Currently, about 30 million passenger cars and trucks on the road have black boxes, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates. As many as 90% of all 2004 model vehicles, including all General Motors Co. and most Ford Motor Co. cars, have some sort of recorder, and an even greater percentage will have them in 2005. They are generally part of the front air-bag system.



However, the data collected from these systems vary widely, and because there's no standard technology for accessing the boxes, crash-scene investigators have had difficulty recovering information that could help them determine why an accident occurred.

In addition, the recommendations are raising concerns among privacy advocates, who say the devices record too much information without the driver's knowledge.

In June, the NHTSA proposed standards for all black boxes, requiring them to record 42 separate pieces of information about the car's performance in the final seconds before an accident by 2008. The standards would also require auto makers to make it easier for crash investigators and researchers to access the information and make auto makers inform consumers the systems are in their vehicles.

The federal auto-safety regulator hasn't mandated that the recorders be installed, saying it isn't necessary because auto makers are putting them in most new cars. However, the NTSB, an independent agency that investigates transportation accidents and makes safety recommendations, disagrees, saying that without a mandate, there can be no guarantee that cars will be equipped with the black boxes.

The black boxes on cars are far less sophisticated than those found on commercial airliners and store much less information. They don't, for example, record audio from inside the car. Nor are they actually boxes, but tiny modules attached to electronic sensors embedded in the car that help trigger air bags. Those sensors can also store information about the vehicle's performance in the seconds before a crash.

Because the technology is relatively new and insurers haven't seen how black boxes affect claims history, they haven't had an impact on auto-insurance rates, according to an Insurance Information Institute spokeswoman.

Privacy advocates and consumer groups worry about who owns the information gathered by the recorders. Although police and safety investigators say the information is helpful in reconstructing accidents, it could also be used against drivers in court by insurance companies or lawyers.

In January, California became the first state to regulate black boxes, requiring all cars made after June 2004 to contain information for drivers on the types of information being recorded by their vehicles. The law was passed because of privacy concerns. The law also says consumers control the release of that information, except in a few situations, such as a court order.

"At a minimum, there ought to be something like the California law that says the owners of vehicles have to be told that the recorders are in their cars and should be able to disable them," says Barry Steinhardt, director of technology for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Ford began installing the systems in 1997 on the Econoline full-size van, although they were originally designed for internal use at Ford, so technicians could monitor the vehicle's performance in a crash. "We just wanted to make sure we recorded some information to make sure our vehicles' systems performed correctly in the event of a crash," said Rick Ruth, a Ford design analyst.

Today, most Ford cars now come equipped with sensors that record information on the vehicle's deceleration and air-bag deployment in a crash.

A few Ford vehicles, including the Lincoln LS, F series pickups, Thunderbird and Explorer, have a more advanced recorder that's part of an electronic throttle system that also stores vehicle speed and braking information for the last five seconds before a crash. In 2005, Ford's Navigator, Expedition, E series vans and Aviator will also have the system.

All General Motors vehicles have had the recorders since 2000, the company says.

The safety board made the recommendation Tuesday during a hearing about a 2003 crash involving an 86-year-old driver who lost control of his car and drove into a farmer's market in Los Angeles, killing 10 people and injuring 63 others. The driver's lawyers refused to allow NTSB investigators to interview him, since there are several lawsuits pending, according to the safety board. If the man's 1992 Buick LeSabre had come equipped with an event data recorder, investigators might have been able to explain why the accident happened, said Joe Osterman, the NTSB's director of highway safety.

 

I know the computer thati s in there now records alot of different things that can be "pulled" from the computer by the dealer. I don't know each thing it records, but I think they can see average speeds, shifting points,etc.
My friend blew his engine on his RSX (misshift)and they could see from teh computer that he was driving like an ***.

 

once again big brother wants to abuse technology.


the more i hear about this kind of stuff the more i want to buy an old 50's classic.

 

How does one "drive like and ***" from vehicle performance data?
Run the engine to redline?
Brake hard?
Excede speed limits?
Exert high cornering forces?
All of these things can be recorded by the PCM, but none of them violate your waranty. All are within the design parameters of your vehicle. If you "miss" a shift (i.e. - 3rd instead of 5th) you might break, but you might not have done it under "racing conditions" either.
That is a load of crap.

The above-referenced article is about law-enforcement and it further colusion with the insurance companies to rase your rates and reduce your coverage.

 

For what it's worth I've read about dozens of instances where insurance companies have refused to pay claims after crashes due to the manner in which the vehicles were operated. Data extracted from the black boxes was all it took to negate the claim. They had some lincoln or caddie owner going about 130 when he lost it (his insurance too) - the guy was out his car and had major medical bills.

 

They stated that he misshifted because he was racing around at high speeds and made a mistake and shifted into the wrong gear. They would have honored the warranty if it happened on accident . AKA driving like an old person ( hell that is a dangerous thing now a days LOL)

He was pretty pissed

 

This is getting scary because it can get to the point where the insurance company can someone was driving 67 in a 65 zone thus they wont cover it.

I see lots of lawsuites and litigation coming..

 

Why was ur friend pissed? He did misshift the car and that's a driver's error, not a defect. FYI the RSX's ECU records the RPM when something goes wrong.

 

Wokuku,

I agree that the driver made a crucial mistake BUT if you were driving 70 in 6th gear and your transmission fell out, would you want Mazda to tell you that you were abusing the car thus they wont cover it under warranty?

The problem is that the companies can abuse the information and most people are not even aware there is a box recording information about their driving habits.

At the very least, the car dealer should be required to explain what information is being recorded and give you the option to disable it.

Dean29

 

I agree that the companies will likely abuse the information, like they do with everything. But this technology has a place.

There was an accident by my house, a 17 year old crashed his car and killed a guy in the process. He said he was doing the speed limit etc. The crash data recorder had ALL the info from 5 secs before the crash until the car came to rest. It showed that he was doing 1.5 times the speed limit and still accelerating. He was charged and convicted with manslaughter if I am not mistaken.

For purposes like that I have no problem with this technology. But if I have to get my sports car fixed and they tell me it isnt under warranty because i was driving sporty I would flip out.

 

Interesting article.

The real question is whether the benefits that can be obtained from a device like this outweigh the potential for privacy violations.

 

I am almost sure it will get to the point where the dealers must warn people about the black boxes and the data can only be used with court approval for suspected criminal activities such as the tragedy mentioned here.

However, my concern is in the meantiime with no legislation in place and it being a legal gray area. I am afraid the technology will be abused until the courts decided on appropiate use. And it may actually take throwing out cases like the one shiggins mentioned because they could argue the evidence was not obtained legally obtained.

Dean

 

Interesting article. I've read several others about this issue.
For me this is a privacy issue. I regard the car as my property black box included. Could one argue that the use of the black box against its owner is a form of self incrimination that is already protected by law? I'm not an attorney ... might be weak argument? For instance one's DNA cannot be used to deny insurance by law. Seems this is another case of technology speeding past existing laws.