Anyone Know Why Prius Has No Auto Off Feature?

What I responded to was
"I understand that some think I'm stupid, or maybe just OLD (53)....however I think it's stupid to have a car than can accidently be left on, I don't understand the reasoning in that at all."

I saw no mention of keyfobs, just cars that did not turn off automatically. Just about every car since the dawn of the auto industry had to be shut off.

Honestly, if turning off a car is such an issue then driving might not be a great idea. There are lots of important things that a driver must remember so they are not a menace to society.

 

The Tesla Model S does.
When you get out of the driver's seat, the car puts itself in park if you aren't already in park. It also turns itself off. If you set it to, it will also lock itself about 30 seconds after the key fob gets out of range.

Yes, it is new and so doesn't have decades of wear and tear on it. Of course, when the smart key was first available they didn't have decades of experience with that either.

 

we still love you pl!

yup, i wasn't going to mention it.

 

Yup, but you are comparing the Prius to a car that has both a vastly different power train as well as costs close to three times as much. I'd wager that it is an easier thing to do with a pure EV and the cost associated is much easier to absorb into a car that starts north of $60k (or is it $70k now that they decided against the base model) compared to a car that starts below $25k. I'd also bet that there is a very simple reason why Tesla added this to their car other than forgetful drivers - it helps to eek just a bit more range out of the battery.

 

Ah, so you didn't mean to ask "what car does this", you meant to ask 'what other comparably pried car that isn't a pure EV offers this'.

Perhaps you would like to narrow your requirements more??

New options quite often appear first in luxury vehicles, I don't see why you would disqualify examples based on price points.
I also don't see how a switch in the driver's seat is easier to do in a pure EV than a hybrid or ICE?

 

You may want to go back and read it a touch more carefully. The question that I posed was not what car would automatically switch itself off - I knew this as someone mentioned it earlier in this very thread. Rather your post said-

This does not really make sense - park is the setting where the wheels are no longer connected to the engine and the brakes are engaged. If the car was not in park it would just roll off. Are you sure that the car somehow knows that you are supposed to be stopped and are not just wiggling in your seat while stopped at a light? Are you saying that you can come to a stop and with the car in gear just jump out?

As to why it would be easier and less expensive in an EV is not the switch in the seat - of course the cost would be the same in both cases. It is all of the other parts that go into it. Shutting down an EV while in park is largely a matter of powering it down. Also think of this - what happens when/if that seat switch fails in an EV? Now what happens if it fails in a car with a gas engine? In one case you have the potential for a dead battery while in the other you have the potential for a building full of dead people.

 

Ok, I did. The entire paragraph containing your question was:

This is why when you started adding other requirements I wanted to ask if there were other stipulations you had not included.

Some cars, not all. Actually, and I realized standard automatic transmissions work that way, is the gear set in the Prius forced to work that way or does it just because that is what is familiar to people so Toyota duplicated it?
My car would not just roll off as it doesn't creep forward, it only moves if you press the accelerator (although this is a user defined option). My understanding is manual transmission cars also behave this way (although not user selectable).
And yes, if I had jumped out of the car after coming to a stop the car would put itself in park, engage the parking brake and shut itself off.
It is not recommended, just as I feel it would not be recommended to not use your seatbelt, but it is a nice extra level of security. As the OP discovered, it is possible for people to do this. Very rare, but it happens on occasion.

Good point, perhaps it is easier to do in an EV. One more reason to drive an EV

What if any part of a car fails? Sure, it is built by humans, so it is possible for it to fail. Why jump to conclusions? A building full of dead people? How in the world do you get a building full of dead people from a bad seat switch?
If the switch fails, it won't register an occupant and the car won't start. Sure, this is a pain and hopefully doesn't happen. Similar to what would happen if a starter failed except you could call Tesla and they might be able to fix it over the air.
If it fails in the on position, which I don't know if that is possible, the car would behave like any other car and you would need to turn it off manually using the touch screen. If you didn't it would turn off after x amount of time of inactivity (10 minutes I think).

 

What I meant was the entire thread - essentially you were jumping into an ongoing conversation and not taking into account what had already been discussed.

A manual does not work that way. When the car is in gear it is connected to the engine and will either creep or stall. In neutral it will roll like any car in neutral.

Think about the entirety of the car market. Virtually all of the cars sold in the history of the industry have worked one way. Only a tiny fraction of a percent work differently. Time will tell if the way that Tesla works will win out.

Honestly I don't see it as a problem that needed a solution but OK.

There is a huge distinction - you are looking at the wrong part of the system. Turning the car on is not the issue. This entire thread is about an auto off system. You really do not need to worry about the car starting as just about any modern car will need both a key turned/button switched and something else. Most automatics need the brake to be pressed and all of the manual cars that I owned had to have the clutch depressed all of the way.

Say that a Prius had an auto off feature. You drive into a garage and just get out of the car without turning it off figuring that the car will turn itself off. However there is a problem and the car stays on. It may run on battery for a while, but eventually the engine will start and start producing carbon monoxide.

 

Absolutely, which is an excellent reason an auto off option would be a nice safety feature.
Just because the safety feature breaks, doesn't mean that not having it in the first place is better, does it?

 

i miss the little guy with the popcorn.

 

No it is not. It would not be a fail safe but rather a point of failure which is the antitheses of what a safety feature should be. You have well over 200 million cars on the road in the US. Say they were equipped with such a "safety feature" - what sort of defect rate would be OK?

 

I don't get it.
What do you imagine happens if the auto off fails?

Case A, no auto off:
Owner forgets to turn off car results in engine running eventually with possible dire results.

Case B, auto off present:
Owner forgets to turn off car, resulting in car turning itself off.

Case C, auto off present and all triggers fail.
Owner forgets to turn off car, results in engine running eventually (if it has an ICE) with possible dire results.

What additional harm is done? All cases require that the owner first forgets to turn the car off.

 

Is the mod listening? I am gonna skip Monsters and watch this thread instead.
PS: The only thing I miss in my Prius is auto headlight on, when I drive in the dark into my bat cave.

 

it turns out that the best scientists and engineers in the world (and i'm talking nobel prize winners) have not been able to figure out out to accomplish this.

 

Or, you can remove the toxic fumes

 

... along with sealing the garage-house boundary sufficiently to prevent all the other fumes -- gasoline, pesticides, chemicals, and whatever other toxics people commonly stash in the garage -- from infiltrating the adjacent dwelling space. This is also needed to prevent intentional fume release, e.g. from suicide attempts, from spilling into the living space and harming innocent persons.

... along with keeping functioning CO detectors in the adjacent living space.

Split the liability multiple ways, assign the dwelling occupant as large a share of blame as the car maker, and the lawsuit should fall.

 

I really didn't want to install CO detectors, as there is nothing in our new house that produces it.
But in general, you have good points.

LEED gives point for a garage exhaust fan, which I think is a good idea for those that have garages with such fumes.
Oddly enough, they don't give points for not having CO producing devices in the garage.