Key Fob Leaving Vehicle While Engine Is On

[Northeastbst]

hahaha

i'm good on that.

have a good one.

You too buddy

Sponsored

 

[sanman357]

That is not true. When the engine is stopped in start/stop mode, as soon as you open the driver’s door, it fires up. Try it.

Never realized. I just sit in the jeep and wait for the family to come and go. It stays off until I press the clutch pedal. I just happen to shut the power off when leaving. Go figure. I'll try opening the door.

 

[Slowpoke]

When we test drove our JL the salesman pulled it up to the door, we jumped in and drove off.
Ten miles later we noticed the display said "fob has left the vehicle". Still running...

 

[rockadile]

youre*

and "own" - credit aint for everyone...

If you're going to correct others' spelling, at least do it correctly.

 

[BillG]

If you're going to correct others' spelling, at least do it correctly.

Wouldn’t that be grammar, not spelling

 

[roaniecowpony]

The keyless pushbutton start has enough hazards that I think it's a fool's errand. My wife had the fob to her Flex in her handbag and she made me drive to Costco. She bails out and goes to the store and told me to get gas. I get to the gas lanes and turn off the vehicle. Guess what happened for the next 20 minutes while the car sat in the gas lane with a line behind it? You guessed it. It can't be pushed. It sat right there while I ran into the store and searched for my wife (she never picked up her phone, because of the noise in costco and the fact that she had her phone in her handbag, muffling the ringer. Pushbutton start just pisses me off.

 

[Northeastbst]

If you're going to correct others' spelling, at least do it correctly.

Actually, its yours

He was referring to me not owning the Jeep.

He was joking...

 

[multicam]

Okay, Internet keyboard catfighting aside, let’s bring this back to the realm of seriousness because it’s actually a really interesting topic with serious implications (spoiler: I’m going to bring up Anton Yelchin).

Earlier in this thread someone said something about how it’s our responsibility to operate the vehicles safely, not Jeep’s. Thanks for posting this because it brings up the interesting philosophical question I’m going to raise with regard to design: what obligation does the manufacturer have to design a car that is safe to operate? Where’s the line between intuitive, familiar design and innovative design that is needlessly changed for no measurable benefit? Is there a point where change for change’s sake can be harmful?

Let’s set aside key fobs for a moment and examine the automatic transmission selector lever. For decades, automatic transmissions tied the physical location of the shifter to the gear you’re in (Park, reverse, neutral or drive, most commonly). With your eyes closed you could grab the shifter, push it forward, feel it move through the gates and hit the limit of advance- park. You could then exit the car with your eyes still closed and be certain it wouldn’t roll nowhere. The design communicated something to you and you naturally can operate it without thought, much like the entire process of a daily commute. Then FCA engineers changed that and removed the physical connection to the gear you’re putting the car in. A Grand Cherokee was erroneously left in Neutral and killed Chekov.

Could this tragedy theoretically have happened with a traditionally-gated shifter? Sure. Is that likely? Hell no. To be fair, this wasn’t likely either- but it was enabled by a needless design change. FCA quickly changed the GC’s shifter design (if memory serves).

Bring the topic back around to key fobs and it gets a little muddied. There IS a measurable benefit to not having to remove a key from your pocket or purse, insert it in the ignition, and turn it. Pushing a button IS faster. That’s fine. But then you add the “feature” of ESS and it muddies the water again: you park your car, the engine shuts off, and maybe you even touch the push-start button, but not hard enough for it to register and your car is still on. Later the engine kicks back in to maintain the HVAC temp, and your garage fills with CO. Once again, removing the physical act of twisting a key counter-clockwise and pulling it to the right- something you can do with your eyes closed and be sure you did it and be sure it registered- removes an analog step and replaces it with a digital one that must be verified with your eyes and a conscious thought.

Is it worth the time saved by not having to remove the key from your pocket? I’ll let you decide.

 

[Northeastbst]

Okay, Internet keyboard catfighting aside, let’s bring this back to the realm of seriousness because it’s actually a really interesting topic with serious implications (spoiler: I’m going to bring up Anton Yelchin).

Earlier in this thread someone said something about how it’s our responsibility to operate the vehicles safely, not Jeep’s. Thanks for posting this because it brings up the interesting philosophical question I’m going to raise with regard to design: what obligation does the manufacturer have to design a car that is safe to operate? Where’s the line between intuitive, familiar design and innovative design that is needlessly changed for no measurable benefit? Is there a point where change for change’s sake can be harmful?

Let’s set aside key fobs for a moment and examine the automatic transmission selector lever. For decades, automatic transmissions tied the physical location of the shifter to the gear you’re in (Park, reverse, neutral or drive, most commonly). With your eyes closed you could grab the shifter, push it forward, feel it move through the gates and hit the limit of advance- park. You could then exit the car with your eyes still closed and be certain it wouldn’t roll nowhere. The design communicated something to you and you naturally can operate it without thought, much like the entire process of a daily commute. Then FCA engineers changed that and removed the physical connection to the gear you’re putting the car in. A Grand Cherokee was erroneously left in Neutral and killed Chekov.

Could this tragedy theoretically have happened with a traditionally-gated shifter? Sure. Is that likely? Hell no. To be fair, this wasn’t likely either- but it was enabled by a needless design change. FCA quickly changed the GC’s shifter design (if memory serves).

Bring the topic back around to key fobs and it gets a little muddied. There IS a measurable benefit to not having to remove a key from your pocket or purse, insert it in the ignition, and turn it. Pushing a button IS faster. That’s fine. But then you add the “feature” of ESS and it muddies the water again: you park your car, the engine shuts off, and maybe you even touch the push-start button, but not hard enough for it to register and your car is still on. Later the engine kicks back in to maintain the HVAC temp, and your garage fills with CO. Once again, removing the physical act of twisting a key counter-clockwise and pulling it to the right- something you can do with your eyes closed and be sure you did it and be sure it registered- removes an analog step and replaces it with a digital one that must be verified with your eyes and a conscious thought.

Is it worth the time saved by not having to remove the key from your pocket? I’ll let you decide.

 

[multicam]

"Is it worth the time saved by not having to remove the key from your pocket? I’ll let you decide."

...time saved?? To take a key out to start the car.

Weee oooo, weee oooo, weeee ooooo....

Do us a favor and dont write long drawn out posts...save us the waste of time and space

Oh I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you paid for these forums’ servers and that the server host charges by the kilobyte, making my long post a waste of forum resources.

Or are you under some kind of legal obligation to read every single post on this forum, and I’m keeping you from something important with my long post?

Either way, it must be rough being you. What a horrible inconvenience, a long post on an internet forum...

 

[rockadile]

Wouldn’t that be grammar, not spelling

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar

 

[BillG]

Okay, Internet keyboard catfighting aside, let’s bring this back to the realm of seriousness because it’s actually a really interesting topic with serious implications (spoiler: I’m going to bring up Anton Yelchin).

Earlier in this thread someone said something about how it’s our responsibility to operate the vehicles safely, not Jeep’s. Thanks for posting this because it brings up the interesting philosophical question I’m going to raise with regard to design: what obligation does the manufacturer have to design a car that is safe to operate? Where’s the line between intuitive, familiar design and innovative design that is needlessly changed for no measurable benefit? Is there a point where change for change’s sake can be harmful?

Let’s set aside key fobs for a moment and examine the automatic transmission selector lever. For decades, automatic transmissions tied the physical location of the shifter to the gear you’re in (Park, reverse, neutral or drive, most commonly). With your eyes closed you could grab the shifter, push it forward, feel it move through the gates and hit the limit of advance- park. You could then exit the car with your eyes still closed and be certain it wouldn’t roll nowhere. The design communicated something to you and you naturally can operate it without thought, much like the entire process of a daily commute. Then FCA engineers changed that and removed the physical connection to the gear you’re putting the car in. A Grand Cherokee was erroneously left in Neutral and killed Chekov.

Could this tragedy theoretically have happened with a traditionally-gated shifter? Sure. Is that likely? Hell no. To be fair, this wasn’t likely either- but it was enabled by a needless design change. FCA quickly changed the GC’s shifter design (if memory serves).

Bring the topic back around to key fobs and it gets a little muddied. There IS a measurable benefit to not having to remove a key from your pocket or purse, insert it in the ignition, and turn it. Pushing a button IS faster. That’s fine. But then you add the “feature” of ESS and it muddies the water again: you park your car, the engine shuts off, and maybe you even touch the push-start button, but not hard enough for it to register and your car is still on. Later the engine kicks back in to maintain the HVAC temp, and your garage fills with CO. Once again, removing the physical act of twisting a key counter-clockwise and pulling it to the right- something you can do with your eyes closed and be sure you did it and be sure it registered- removes an analog step and replaces it with a digital one that must be verified with your eyes and a conscious thought.

Is it worth the time saved by not having to remove the key from your pocket? I’ll let you decide.

But it won’t restart for the temperature. If your vehicle is off by auto stop, and you place vehicle in park, it restarts immediately. Assuming the vehicle is in park, and the system is working correctly, the vehicle will never restart by itself without input from either the remote start, or the push button.

To me, that’s the most annoying thing about ess. I’ll press the brake on to park, the engine stops. Put it in park and it restarts, and I then have to shut it off again.

 

[Litfuse]

JLwranglerforums is quickly turning into Pirate4x4. Lol

 

[IronScott]

JLwranglerforums is quickly turning into Pirate4x4. Lol

New round of troll additions.

 

[InvertedLogic]

But it won’t restart for the temperature. If your vehicle is off by auto stop, and you place vehicle in park, it restarts immediately. Assuming the vehicle is in park, and the system is working correctly, the vehicle will never restart by itself without input from either the remote start, or the push button.

To me, that’s the most annoying thing about ess. I’ll press the brake on to park, the engine stops. Put it in park and it restarts, and I then have to shut it off again.

It'll also restart as soon as you lift your foot off the brake if for some reason you forgot to put it in park. What happened here not caused by Jeep's design. The same thing would have likely happened with a key in the ignition as this was failure to notice a running vehicle.

I think that people need reminders about how serious operating a motor vehicle actually is. We do it every day so it loses its seriousness and it's easy to get complacent. This is also why routines exist. Putting the vehcive in park and/or setting the park brake then turning off the engine is done every single time without thinking, just like putting on a seatbelt on start up is for me.

Sponsored