2013 Infiniti JX35: Getting Us One Step Closer To A Driverless Car

[tuanies]

Infiniti tossed us the keys to its 2013 JX35 crossover, loaded with driver assistance technologies that almost have the vehicle driving itself. We took it out for a week and tested all of the company's innovative extras. Which ones do you really need?

2013 Infiniti JX35: Getting Us One Step Closer To A Driverless Car : Read more

 

[sscultima]

Oddly enough, with all the hype over this vehicle, I work for roadside assistance, and just myself alone i have had at least 3 dispatch's for this vehicle due to breakdowns and 1 was for an accident.

so i wonder really how many issues or accidents have happen all over the world so far for this vehicle

 

[xpeh]

Wow, that's a sexy looking vehicle!

 

[blackcat357]

"The audible warning does get annoying. However, if you need a feature like BSW to make safe lane changes, then the nag is probably appropriate." That was my favorite quote in the whole article. Personally i don't like or want any of these features. I love driving. If i stand on the brake pedal i want to lock them up. If i get road rage and want to push granny out of the fast lane i don't want my to tell me i cant.

Call me crazy but i like driving. I think its fun actually. It seems to me taking control from the driver is the wrong solution. This and Gun control have the same solution Limit who can get them. Some people shouldn't have a license (we all know the stereotypical ditsy blonde girl) so take these cars back and give us back the 2010 Viper that had no driver "aides" (i view them the same way as the disease)

Heres a solution. Make every one drive a standard transmission again. If your shifting your sure as hell not texting or reading facebook. Make the driver pay attention dont give them an excuse not too, which seems to be what this car is doing.
OH i didn't wreck, im a good driver my car made the mistake! i was sleeping.

 

[tuanies]

I'm the author of the article.

I agree with you blackcat357. I find the technology very fascinating and enjoy testing it, but I myself enjoy driving. I do find the full-range adaptive cruise control awesome. But at the other end of the spectrum is people who hate driving that are unattentive, I almost had a Chrysler Aspen plow into me on Saturday while driving the minivan. I'm not kidding, the guy tried to change into my lane while I was in view of all his mirrors, without signaling. People like that need these technologies to keep them from plowing into me.

But luckily there are still cars for people like us that enjoy driving, Mazda has a complete lineup and there's the Scion FRS and Subaru BRZ. Its a good time for cars IMO.

I miss having a manual though, need to eventually swap one into my BMW wagon.

@sscultima that's very funny. I wonder how much it costs to repair when one of those systems fail. I'd hate to see the bill. I honestly wonder how many people think its the holy grail of laziness and just plow into someone else anyways and try to blame the car.

 

[blackcat357]

Its not that i inherently have a problem with these technologies. Its this one simple question that gets me.

How long will it be until the Government makes all these "aides" MANDATORY

Think Will Smith in I ROBOT. Cars drive themselves and manual mode is frowned upon if not actually illegal.

 

[tuanies]

Yea, I'm not fond of the NHTSA trying to make back-up cameras mandatory either. I find them a nicety, not a necessity especially with how much cars cost nowadays. Most importantly they won't prevent anything if the person behind the wheel is a moron and won't use it, ie the lady that backed over her daughter because she heard the door close and assumed her daughter was in the car and didn't bother turning her head to make sure the kids were all in and buckled up. She still managed to back over and kill her child despite having the back-up proximity sensors on her Escalade.

You can't govern idiots or try to force technology on them.

 

[kevinherring]

$3/gallon? $3/gallon???? My heart bleeds for you

What I wouldn't give for $3/gallon. Just over $9/gallon here in blighty. 1992 was the last time we had such prices.

 

[mansfield]

[citation][nom]kevinherring[/nom]$3/gallon? $3/gallon???? My heart bleeds for youWhat I wouldn't give for $3/gallon. Just over $9/gallon here in blighty. 1992 was the last time we had such prices. [/citation]
$9 USD? I think you should do a conversion. and in florida where I live it's around $4 a gallon

 

[MU_Engineer]

Anything that takes the driver's eyes away from the path of the vehicle, their attention away from driving, and results in an unpredictable response from the vehicle is a very bad, very unsafe thing to have in a vehicle. The backup cameras are one such thing as you must be looking forward to use them, while the vehicle is traveling in reverse. That is a great recipe to back right into the path of another vehicle that was outside of the limited camera range/angle. All of the "infotainment" stuff is another distraction in a lot of cases- you are fiddling with it and not keeping your eyes on the road in most cases. The absolute worst is the "eco pedal" here. Pushing the throttle and getting a variable response dependent on the whims of the computer is very dangerous. You don't get enough warning in emergency situations to think about "oh, I need to go through the vehicle menu to disable the Eco Pedal, and then I can try to avoid hitting that guy who merged into my lane going 30 under the limit while not being hit by oncoming traffic." A fully self-driving car would be even worse as you would be paying NO attention in most cases to the driving. If it has a hiccup, you will crash before you even know what happened.

 

[tuanies]

[quotemsg=10448613,10,49412]Anything that takes the driver's eyes away from the path of the vehicle, their attention away from driving, and results in an unpredictable response from the vehicle is a very bad, very unsafe thing to have in a vehicle. The backup cameras are one such thing as you must be looking forward to use them, while the vehicle is traveling in reverse. That is a great recipe to back right into the path of another vehicle that was outside of the limited camera range/angle. All of the "infotainment" stuff is another distraction in a lot of cases- you are fiddling with it and not keeping your eyes on the road in most cases. The absolute worst is the "eco pedal" here. Pushing the throttle and getting a variable response dependent on the whims of the computer is very dangerous. You don't get enough warning in emergency situations to think about "oh, I need to go through the vehicle menu to disable the Eco Pedal, and then I can try to avoid hitting that guy who merged into my lane going 30 under the limit while not being hit by oncoming traffic." A fully self-driving car would be even worse as you would be paying NO attention in most cases to the driving. If it has a hiccup, you will crash before you even know what happened.[/quotemsg]

I didn't even think about the Eco pedal in that way, the response isn't variable, it just provides active resistance again trying to floor it, but that might be an issue when you need to in emergency situations. However, given how terrible drivers on the road are, they usually slam on the brakes to make situations worse at times. But in the argument for the car, it would slow down automatically when the guy merging at 30MPH pulls out .

[quotemsg=10448612,9,1031443]$9 USD? I think you should do a conversion. and in florida where I live it's around $4 a gallon[/quotemsg]

Its around $3.60 or so for regular in WA, but we have higher taxes but still nowhere near the levels in Europe, but at least you guys get awesome tiny fuel efficient diesel cars

 

[ubercake]

Pretty cool stuff under ideal conditions, though in most places conditions are not ideal.

I wonder how the intelligent cruise and brake assist or lane departure prevention work in rain, snow, slush. They all depend on light. When the light is distorted, how effective are these technologies?

Good stuff though. Really a step in the right direction.

 

[maxinexus]

56k for this? No thanks.

 

[cknobman]

Navteq maps based navigation, the single reason I would never choose to pay for their navigation system.

Not only is the nav system horribly overpriced but to pay $250 to get updated maps sucks hard. I have had 2 previous vehicles with Navteq maps navigation and hated both of them.

These automakers need to wake up and realize you can get free navigation from Google that always has 100% up to date maps.

 

[tuanies]

[quotemsg=10448615,12,299576]Pretty cool stuff under ideal conditions, though in most places conditions are not ideal.

I wonder how the intelligent cruise and brake assist or lane departure prevention work in rain, snow, slush. They all depend on light. When the light is distorted, how effective are these technologies?

Good stuff though. Really a step in the right direction.[/quotemsg]

They may have issues functioning in the rain or snow as it does rely on cameras that need to see the lane markers. Hell, even bright sunlight at the wrong angle could probably blind the cameras.

[quotemsg=10448616,13,115648]56k for this? No thanks.[/quotemsg]

Its not a car for everybody.

[quotemsg=10448617,14,59464]Navteq maps based navigation, the single reason I would never choose to pay for their navigation system.

Not only is the nav system horribly overpriced but to pay $250 to get updated maps sucks hard. I have had 2 previous vehicles with Navteq maps navigation and hated both of them.

These automakers need to wake up and realize you can get free navigation from Google that always has 100% up to date maps.[/quotemsg]

They do, that's why some companies are working on integrating Mirror Link. More phones just need to support it though. I feel ya about map updates. The Chrysler 430N unit in my minivan has a Garmin based system and maps cost $200. The navigation function will occasionally nag that the maps are out of date too. Not worth upgrading IMO.

 

[g-unit1111]

I have a '13 Altima which has the same LCD information display in the gauge. I'm surprised that considering the premiums that you pay for the JX that it doesn't include features like the navigation system integrated into it. My Altima does that and it was 1/2 the cost of the JX.

 

[tuanies]

[quotemsg=10448621,16,537231]I have a '13 Altima which has the same LCD information display in the gauge. I'm surprised that considering the premiums that you pay for the JX that it doesn't include features like the navigation system integrated into it. My Altima does that and it was 1/2 the cost of the JX.[/quotemsg]

The JX35 navigation system is totally different, it runs QNX and some SoC. The Altima system is a new generation that runs on Intel Atom. Which reminds me I need to schedule the Altima soon while its still available

 

[sanilmahambre]

Sounds like they have the technology that is used in Aeroplanes

 

[bak0n]

Can't wait to cut block one into a round about.

 

[wip99gt]

For that price I'll stick to my WK2 Grand Cherokee. It actually can go off road, has a low speed transfer case, gets just as good fuel economy, and doesn't have all those annoying safety features. As well the $15000 less I paid for it, $10000 less counting the modifcations I've done to it, is paying for my new motorcycle. It's not that this is a bad vehicle it's just that's too much of a premium for a lifted up all wheel drive car for me. I expect to see a lot of 60 year old people driving this 10kmph under the speed limit in my city real soon.

 

[wip99gt]

[/citation] The Chrysler 430N unit in my minivan has a Garmin based system and maps cost $200. The navigation function will occasionally nag that the maps are out of date too. Not worth upgrading IMO.[/citation]
I didn't like the 430N myself. I replaced it 2 months after buying my Jeep with a JVC one. Now my navigation runs through bluetooth from my phone to it. It works out really well for me as I can use the Oiltrax program off of my phone for finding pads and lease roads up here.

 

[tuanies]

[quotemsg=10448643,20,166931]For that price I'll stick to my WK2 Grand Cherokee. It actually can go off road, has a low speed transfer case, gets just as good fuel economy, and doesn't have all those annoying safety features. As well the $15000 less I paid for it, $10000 less counting the modifcations I've done to it, is paying for my new motorcycle. It's not that this is a bad vehicle it's just that's too much of a premium for a lifted up all wheel drive car for me. I expect to see a lot of 60 year old people driving this 10kmph under the speed limit in my city real soon.[/quotemsg]

I expect it to sell well among soccer moms who want a luxury brand with 7-seats without going for the Mercedes GL, which starts at 60kish.

I love the WK2 Grand Cherokee. We're trying to get a loaded 2014 Diesel up to the PNW this summer.

As for the 430N, its in my wife's car and she doesn't care enough so I haven't replaced it yet.

 

[wip99gt]

I'm also a little depressed that they ruined the pathfinder by making it on this platform. I thought that's what the Murano was for.
I think the 430N is fine for a lot of people. I just need Oiltrax for my work and am an audiophile so I needed to rip the whole stereo out. I never purchase a vehicle because of the stereo because that's the first thing I get out.

 

[tuanies]

[quotemsg=10448674,23,166931]I'm also a little depressed that they ruined the pathfinder by making it on this platform. I thought that's what the Murano was for.
I think the 430N is fine for a lot of people. I just need Oiltrax for my work and am an audiophile so I needed to rip the whole stereo out. I never purchase a vehicle because of the stereo because that's the first thing I get out.[/quotemsg]

Eh it was for the best. The Pathfinder became a soccer mom car anyways, they'll sell more with it as a crossover. There's still the Xterra for those that want to go offroad anyways.

3 years ago I was the same way, then had a kid, and another on the way. Car audio is not of much importance to me anymore, spent too much back in the day only to have it all stolen. Though the factory speakers on the Routan suck terribly and I might have to address that soon.

 

[madjimms]

[citation][nom]wip99gt[/nom]For that price I'll stick to my WK2 Grand Cherokee. It actually can go off road, has a low speed transfer case, gets just as good fuel economy, and doesn't have all those annoying safety features. As well the $15000 less I paid for it, $10000 less counting the modifcations I've done to it, is paying for my new motorcycle. It's not that this is a bad vehicle it's just that's too much of a premium for a lifted up all wheel drive car for me. I expect to see a lot of 60 year old people driving this 10kmph under the speed limit in my city real soon.[/citation]
Your first fail is jacking up your vehicle..... The second fail is claiming it gets "good fuel economy" (yes I know your comparing to the vehicle pictured).