Fisker Buzz Forums banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've had my Fisker for 3 months now. My friend has had her's a similar amount of time. She's having problems and I'm not. After talking to her, I believe her problems are mostly self induced. She never read the manuel that came with the car. She moves to fast for the onboard computer, so as she's frantically hitting one button after another, faster than the computer works, its no wonder she locks up. After my upgrade to V1.5 software, I've had an absolute minimum number of problems. The only problem is one time the backup camera didn't come on, but there was no green screen, only a screen that said it was trying to connect with the camera. I love my Fisker and look forward to driving it every day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
I'm sure you are correct as to why she has problems. My bet is that the Consumer Reports drivers did the same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
854 Posts
Fisker1212 said:
She moves [too] fast for the onboard computer, so as she's frantically hitting one button after another, faster than the computer works, its no wonder she locks up.
Honestly, though, the computer should be designed and specced to accommodate this kind of user. The hardware is such a small percentage of the overall cost of the car, there really is no excuse for lag.

If something does take a moment, the screen should show an immediate response to the button press, show a wait message, and not allow new button presses until it's ready.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
457 Posts
Right, you don't blame users for poor product design. And does the manual really say to slowly press the screen and wait for something to happen before pressing again?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
556 Posts
I'm not an automobile designer, so won't comment on what should have or could have been done. However, once used to the cadence of the comand center, I've had no problems with it. No need to double touch, or getting screens I hadn't intended. Actually it works just fine for me. Improvements are welcome, but I'm enjoying the Karma, including the command center.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
EVer1 said:
I'm not an automobile designer, so won't comment on what should have or could have been done. However, once used to the cadence of the comand center, I've had no problems with it. No need to double touch, or getting screens I hadn't intended. Actually it works just fine for me. Improvements are welcome, but I'm enjoying the Karma, including the command center.
I'm not an automobile designer either, but have made my living on computers. One needs to be very patient when your computer with four wheels loads all it software. Of course it would be nice that the Karma screen showed a boot up screen to see how long one has to wait, but I have learned the time it needs before I start pushing on buttons.

-jeff
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
744 Posts
It seems to me that Fisker developed a car ahead of its time. I am curious to see if Tesla will have these issues too. The CAN bus architecture is severely outdated and the entire auto industry needs to step up to something better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
913 Posts
kabalah70 said:
It seems to me that Fisker developed a car ahead of its time. I am curious to see if Tesla will have these issues too. The CAN bus architecture is severely outdated and the entire auto industry needs to step up to something better.
I heard from someone with an ear in those waters (to mix a few metaphors) that BMW, at least, are in fact going for the "step up to something better", using optical fiber Ethernet (and probably TCP/IP as well although we only touched on physical layer stuff). That won't help cars that are out now though (including current BMWs and the Karma).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,661 Posts
ct-fiskerbuzz said:
kabalah70 said:
It seems to me that Fisker developed a car ahead of its time. I am curious to see if Tesla will have these issues too. The CAN bus architecture is severely outdated and the entire auto industry needs to step up to something better.
I heard from someone with an ear in those waters (to mix a few metaphors) that BMW, at least, are in fact going for the "step up to something better", using optical fiber Ethernet (and probably TCP/IP as well although we only touched on physical layer stuff). That won't help cars that are out now though (including current BMWs and the Karma).
A lot of cars are now basically rolling WiFi hubs, so why can't the car makers move less mission-critical communications (Nav, Traffic, Entertainment, Cameras) to a different network protocol to free up the CAN network for basic operational functions for the car. Is CAN the only possible communication network option for everything in a car?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
854 Posts
Fabulist said:
A lot of cars are now basically rolling WiFi hubs, so why can't the car makers move less mission-critical communications (Nav, Traffic, Entertainment, Cameras) to a different network protocol to free up the CAN network for basic operational functions for the car. Is CAN the only possible communication network option for everything in a car?
In the Model S, supposedly the computer that runs the instrument cluster display (a Tegra 2) and the computer that runs the 17" touchscreen (a Tegra 3) communicate with each other via ethernet.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,183 Posts
Fabulist said:
A lot of cars are now basically rolling WiFi hubs, so why can't the car makers move less mission-critical communications (Nav, Traffic, Entertainment, Cameras) to a different network protocol to free up the CAN network for basic operational functions for the car. Is CAN the only possible communication network option for everything in a car?
There certainly are other options, and have been even before WiFi. My Mercedes for example used a fiberoptic ring to communicate data and video between systems. They used a MOST bus which is not uncommon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOST_Bus

I don't know if the Karma has something similar, or if it really is trying to use CAN for high-volume, sequenced data like video.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,661 Posts
LonePalmBJ said:
Fabulist said:
A lot of cars are now basically rolling WiFi hubs, so why can't the car makers move less mission-critical communications (Nav, Traffic, Entertainment, Cameras) to a different network protocol to free up the CAN network for basic operational functions for the car. Is CAN the only possible communication network option for everything in a car?
There certainly are other options, and have been even before WiFi. My Mercedes for example used a fiberoptic ring to communicate data and video between systems. They used a MOST bus which is not uncommon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOST_Bus

I don't know if the Karma has something similar, or if it really is trying to use CAN for high-volume, sequenced data like video.
IFRC, the Karma has multiple CAN networks to speed up traffic but they all use CAN protocol.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,661 Posts
kabalah70 said:
I am guessing that a MOST network is very expensive compared to CAN.
From my experience with non-automotive networks, the other big issue is the availability of components that can communicate using a particular protocol.

For example, the very expensive and highly sophisticated grid-tied inverter I purchased just 4 years ago as part of my solar PV system, can only communicate with the outside world using low speed serial RS232. So in order to collect production data from my inverter, I have to use a RS232 to USB adaptor and a dedicated netbook sitting in the garage. By contrast, my Blink charger is on my home WiFi network and updates the data automatically without me having to do anything other than use it.

My point is that if all the available components only talk CAN (or USB 2.0 or SCSI or RS-232) the car maker is stuck with that protocol until component makers start making engine controllers, instrument clusters, ABS sensors, etc. that can support the newer protocol. MB can afford to design make all of its own stuff or force Bosch to make MOST components so they don't have to worry about component compatibility, but Fisker is not quite there yet.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,183 Posts
Fabulist said:
From my experience with non-automotive networks, the other big issue is the availability of components that can communicate using a particular protocol.

For example, the very expensive and highly sophisticated grid-tied inverter I purchased just 4 years ago as part of my solar PV system, can only communicate with the outside world using low speed serial RS232. So in order to collect production data from my inverter, I have to use a RS232 to USB adaptor and a dedicated netbook sitting in the garage. By contrast, my Blink charger is on my home WiFi network and updates the data automatically without me having to do anything other than use it.

My point is that if all the available components only talk CAN (or USB 2.0 or SCSI or RS-232) the car maker is stuck with that protocol until component makers start making engine controllers, instrument clusters, ABS sensors, etc. that can support the newer protocol. MB can afford to design make all of its own stuff or force Bosch to make MOST components so they don't have to worry about component compatibility, but Fisker is not quite there yet.
I agree in concept, but in this particular case I don't think it applies. MOST is not a proprietary MB mechanism. MOST technology is used in almost every car brand worldwide, including Audi, BMW, Hyundai, Jaguar, Land Rover, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo. (Lifted from the Wikipedia article)

It's not all that new either, even the newest iteration of MOST, MOST 150, is almost 5 years old. There's no shortage of suppliers and maufacturers that make MOST-compliant products.

Of course, when I killed the audio system in my Mercedes (eventually traced to a shorted head unit) it took a village to troubleshoot it because there were several suspects on the MOST ring, plus the MOST ring itself to consider.

Brent
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Granted there is a steep learning curve to anything as technologically advanced as my new Karma but why would the operating system lock me out just by unplugging the charger, opening the door, pressing the brake and pushing the start button? I was able to exit the car by using the manual release, closed the door and now the doors will not open nor will the manual key open the passenger door. I'm totally locked out and will wait for a tow truck to drag the car back to the dealer.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
556 Posts
I'm sure this is a very disturbing incident for you Karnut. The simple answer is that it shouldn't happen. Unfortunately, it did, and yes, there is a learning curve for the manufacturer to insure this doesn't happen to others. I hope the problem is solved quickly for you so that you'll be back into your Karma soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
The manual key is linked mechanicly to the door latch, it might be a little stiff but it will open the door no matter what the car thinks or wants to do :D
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top