Automakers have all sorts of ideas, but what kind of technology does Average Joe really want in his car? Well, premium audio came in second and wireless connectivity finished third to the frontrunner -- remote vehicle diagnostics -- in J.D. Power and Associates' 2011 U.S. Automotive Emerging Technologies Study. Based on responses from nearly 18,000 car owners, the study measures interest and purchase intent of 21 automotive technologies before and after the price is revealed.
After knowing what it would cost, 55% of those surveyed were interested in remote vehicle diagnostics. This compares to 52% that were interested in "non-branded premium sound systems" and 50% for "wireless connectivity systems."
While Ford Sync's Vehicle Health Report provides a combination of the first- and third-ranked technologies and automakers such as GM via OnStar provide remote diagnostics using a smartphone app, a Scottish design grad has devised a way to deliver engine-diagnostics in real time using an iPhone. It takes the idea of the idiot light and moves it to a smartphone in an effort to make it idiot-proof.
Sam Grosset, a graduate of the University of Dundee's Interaction Design department, put together a concept that literally takes the pulse of a vehicle and uses a simulated heartbeat to tell a driver if the car's in poor health. The more serious the problem, the faster the heartbeat. But the fact that the iPhone is embedded in the steering wheel makes an idiot light more appealing.
While this is an extreme example of smartphone integration, the J.D. Power study found that connectivity in the car has a significant appeal to those who own such a device. The majority of smartphone owners (86%) indicated that they use their device while in the vehicle. The two most common activities include making or receiving calls and getting directions from a nav app.
The study also found that interest remains strong across age groups -- and not just among texting teens. While 57% of 18-25 year olds expressed interest in smartphone connectivity, 43% of 57-65 year olds did as well. So the next time you see a gray-hair weaving in traffic, blame it on the iPhone.
stovebolter says:
11:55 AM, 06/ 1/11
I always thought it would be really cool to have some sort of in-car diagnostics. Some sort of displays in front of the driver that could indicate how the car is performing. Simple things, like the coolant, oil, and transmission temperatures, oil pressure, manifold pressure (at least in forced-induction engines), electrical system voltage, etc. If only there was a way to get all of this information to a driver...
kevm14 says:
12:46 PM, 06/ 1/11
@stovebolter,
Don't most cars today have mpg displays along with the information you cited? I thought they did...
Or are you being silly...I can't tell.
stovebolter says:
06:52 PM, 06/ 1/11
To be honest, I'm mostly just whining. Many of today's cars omit a lot of potentially useful information from the various gauges/displays, despite the many sensors detecting the info and the engine control module recording it.
It would be very easy to have a digital readout of most data, even if it was buried in a few menus so it wasn't normally displayed. I'd much rather have that option than being forced to plug in a computer or go through some sort of remote diagnostics program.
finn4723 says:
09:43 AM, 06/ 2/11
I don't get it...in second place at 52% is "non-branded premium sound systems"...in brand conscious America, this seems odd at best. Where then, do "premium" branded systems like Bose fall? Are people finally catching on that brand name does not always equal quality sound? Maybe I am not giving people enough credit, but I find it hard to believe that over half of survey respondents have picked up on this little tidbit. Interesting.
Falconx84 says:
01:46 PM, 06/ 2/11
@ Finn - they were also shown what cost the option would add to the vehicle price. Remember that "brand sensitive" America is currently price sensitive. Kind of like when switching to store brands when grocery shopping - you can get 90% of the quality for 50% less cost