Fisker's Ocean SUV investigated for doors that won't open
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
Nissan Serena is not sold in the US
If you want a minivan where the doors can still be opened with no power, most of them can.
At least the Kia mentions non-power doors, so even if not available in the USA they're made somewhere for some market. If you really wanted to, you could probably import the parts and swap.
edit: replied before reading further down the thread, have replied more usefully further down.
I think they're trying to come off as futuristic, luxury, and exotic, and I guess that requires making things different for the sake of differentiation.
Perhaps it's also a bit of arrogance, thinking that they can make a better door handle than the old, stodgy automakers (and then finding out the hard way that sometimes things are the way they are for a reason).
On the other hand, I've noticed on my last few cars that the door handles sometimes feel like they're going to break if I pull too hard, like when the doors are frozen shut during freezing rain conditions. Maybe the traditional handles aren't that great either (though none have actually broken on me yet).
Take my money! That is exactly what I want. I want a basic car that does car stuff. Cut the networking. Cut the touchscreens. I want a car that starts and moves reliably with some basic comforts. I would pay more for a car without touchscreens. I would pay more for an electric car without bluetooth.
It shares a platform with the ICE Niro, and aside from the charging port and obvious lack of exhaust pipe it doesn't look like an EV.
Give me a basic EV that looks like a normal car and I'd be happy.
All the standard buttons and controls are there. The button to push the trunk, the child lock enable/disable, the mirror adjusts, the (electric) parking brake, you name it. Nothing that was a physical control on my previous cars has been touchscreened. The car even has a completely separate menu system, with a completely separate gauge-cluster LCD, for the "core" stuff. Not touch screen. Steering wheel buttons. That menu system isn't the greatest, but you also don't need it day to day.
So if you get a ... I'm not particularly Honda inclined, so I'd say, if you go for anything in the price range of Civic or vicinity, and made sure there's separate physical A/C knobs that aren't connected to the center screen, you should be able to just later install a 2035 Adobe CarPlayAuto 23.4 compliant head unit when the time comes, and keep the car just as you wish(dc I'm not a car manufacturer rep, dyor required).
An electric only latch would reduce parts count, simplify assembly, and ease door panel design for a new manufacturer. I'm also strongly in the "keep things mechanical" camp but I see the appeal to engineers making a new model car and wanting to keep things simple.
Is it?
Happy to be proven wrong since I'm far from an expert on FMVSS, but what I've seen specifies capabilities like ability to lock and amount of force it must endure, not the actual implementation (mechanical/electrical/etc).
Regardless the article only tells us the "emergency override mechanism did not work". Whether that is electrical or mechanical we can only guess (one would hope mechanical).
FMVSS No. 206 does not directly regulate either interior or exterior door handles. It does, however, impliedly require both interior and exterior door handles or other release mechanisms in its regulation of door locks (see generally, 49 CFR 571.206, S4.1.3 and S4.4.2).
Also UNECE R11[1] soft-require mechanical external door handles.I think there are also other implied requirements from other sections/directives, such as in crash safety that the doors are required to be locked while crashing, unlocked after a crash, can be opened but not unlatched and flopping. Meanwhile, electrical systems would be required not to pose hazards. I’m guessing those together are ruling out all but flap type manual handles, at least on front side doors.
0: https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/24393rbm
1: p.23 https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp29/wp29regs/201...
I disagree. Dozens of parts are needed simply to bring an electric wire into a door. Every penetration needs grommets and strain relief. A flexible weatherproof system needs to get the wire from the door to the rest of the car. Relays. Fuses. It all adds up. I cannot believe that a manually-actuated lever would require any more parts.
Then there are those who say "every wire complicates compliance testing, every automation complicates failure modes, every custom part complicates supply chain", and they are the ones that prefer in-house mechanical parts with conservative materials and tooling.
I think it's an age thing, maybe it's a hipster vs greasy-elbows-shop-floor guy thing, but honestly it can be hard to tell who's right.
Obviously I'm speaking generally and individuals vary greatly.
When things go wrong, i.e in a crash, you still want to guarantee an undammaged door latching mechanism can still be operated independent of other parts of the car being damaged (likely). To satisfy this for a purely electrically actuated latch you would need a battery and independent controller in every door.
It's hard to beat the reliability of a mechanical latch and a human hand to satisfy that requirement.
So using the electricity already present for the door handles has to be entirely tempting.
You mean the grommets and strain relief that are already present for windows/speakers/locks? In most cases it's probably not even additional wires as power and control (either can bus or lin bus) are already established from the door to bcm (body control module).
Why did this become a feature? My old Mini Cooper had this and I hated it. Passengers would pull on the area they were used to pulling on and often this is where the metal frame is, but in the absence of a frame they pull on the glass and it had a very concerning look to it.
TSLA: check out my yoke!
Even with manual latches, people are advised to keep a hammer in the car to break a window if necessary.
I would pay extra for a car with those features! If only. Alas, your point stands, because there are (apparently) very few people like me.
And at the same time, height of the front hood - why haven’t regulators had anything to say with trucks having hoods well above the height of many pedestrians?
There's a number of things promised (like proximity unlock) that haven't been delivered, otherwise the latest 2.0 OTA is acceptably stable.
It has been a rollercoaster of an experience and the initial software my vehicle was delivered with was quite bad.
I wish others would understand there are many that do not want to see them succeed and, while Fisker has made many mistakes, some of these reports are very much sensationalized.
On topic of not being able to exit the vehicle, the details are unclear. When child lock isn't enabled, there's supposed to be an emergency exit procedure (two long pulls on the door latch should release the door, independent of electronics). I was locked out of my vehicle once with a very early software release and that lasted 20min. Upon opening the windows remotely via the app, the manual latch procedure worked to open the door from the inside handle (and set off the car alarm).
This is absolutely the very last thing in the world I want to say/hear about a car. We're literally trusting our lives with these software updates, and this bar doesn't sound nearly high enough.
And agreed, the bar needs to be higher.
They're dead, Jim.
My guess is that Fisker and others thought that the market would be much larger, Tesla wouldn't be able to ramp up their production that quickly, and battery prices would have dropped faster. Fisker gets a little bit of a pass since it's from a CEO who tried to sell EVs back in 2009, and may be living in that same mindset.
On the one hand, Fisker had already tried it once and failed, why did they think they could succeed the second time? On the other hand, there are lots of success stories out there that make it seem like the time is ripe (Tesla of course, Rivian, Lucid, Bddy, Li, I'm still optimistic about Canoo...)
Canoo has been interesting, over the last 2 years up to a few months ago it had dropped 98% in stock price. Over the last two months it's grown quite steadily. It has what looks like a great vehicle, a good story for it, strong interest and orders (including fleet interest from Wal Mart and USPS and others). But, it's hanging on by a thread.
1) the car has unique features/design
2) standing out due to having a little known and rarely seen car
3) showing that you can afford to spend that car's worth of money without worrying about the money being wasted
Status? Once everyone old money and new money already has a Tesla how else can you stand out and start a conversation, but by buying more niche but equally expensive EV brands that look cool and nobody ever heard of.
Whenever I read of the build quality of upstarts like Tesla and Rivian, I'm reminded if this.
Having software that is understandable, testable, submitted for code review to also ensure devices are not only bug-free, but also not being used for surreptitious activities etc. There could be numerous functions for such a body. Obviously, that will create a "bottleneck" for innovation/product to market but not if you make the companies who want to release the products, fund it.
This group could also legislate certain classes of smart devices/features need to be able to fallback to manual mode when electronics are inoperable. i.e. door handles on cars, power/input/volume on TVs, Fridges must continue to cool even their smart display/features etc.
I'm probably guilty of overreach.
[1] https://slickdeals.net/f/17387397-2023-fisker-ocean-trim-pri... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xWXRk3yaSw