In 2016, nearly 37,500 people died in automobile related accidents. Adaptive vehicle technologies promise tremendous lifesaving potential, argues the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. These innovations are transforming how repairers are treating autos that are directly impacting the aftermarket says the president of a collision repair trade association. Despite these two group’s efforts to prioritize Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems (ADAS), practical concerns regarding awareness, repairability, and accessibility demand critical review.
Integrated features like parking assist, automated braking, lane changing should total $59 billion in global market value by 2021. The five-year compound growth rate is trending 20 percent. Hardware devices including cameras and lasers that stream data into sensors will be software wired into 95 percent of 2017 and newer vehicles. Given enormous coverage into the crashworthiness of ADAS, why is the level of awareness so low?
The Wall Street Journal reported that neither new vehicle shoppers nor dealership sales people are pouncing on safety upgrades. Price or time often factor in why they are slow to embrace ADAS. On a recent visit to a NH Volkswagen dealership, one service advisor requesting anonymity said that their sales team are sheepish about pressuring their customers to buy safety gear. The VW training modules are skimping on rich content to help seal the deal. Some auto makers like Honda, Subaru and Toyota, however, are giving their buyers no choice wrote the WSJ. These manufacturers are proactively embedding forward collision, blind spot and land departure detectors into their mass-market models.
Awareness about emerging vehicle technologies in the after sales space is equally worrisome. The hard truth is that those on-board devices face obsolescence once the owner drives off the dealership lot. During the life of the vehicle, something will require fixing. There’s no guarantee that the workmanship will restore the device to the manufacturer’s specifications. At a trade show last year, a reporter for Aftermarket Business World revealed supplier and technician ambivalence about ADAS heading mainstream. Rightfully so, the reporter found it interesting that those businesses and installers were not discussing what the implications of ADAS will mean to them for the short-term.
Thankfully though, one trade group felt an urgency. Dedicated to competent repair work, the Inter-Industry Conference on Auto Collision Repair (I-CAR) recognizes that the wrench turners must be adept with working with the on-board computer systems. When an ADAS unit has been impacted, a technician must follow a damage analysis to pinpoint where the problem lies. Last year, I-Car introduced an array of educational courses to 11,000 U.S. auto body shops as part of this organization’s goal to keep these techs apace of growing safety features. But aptitude has its limits.
Take gaps in standardized equipment. The same Volkswagen employee noted that their ADAS service equipment is incompatible with other models made by General Motors or Nissan. It only works with Audi and VW cars. He also doubted the soundness of aftermarket parts. The receptor tips may vary from the original specifications resulting in compromised electronic data transfer, thus making calibration more daunting.
I presented these repairability claims to Kaleb Silver, Senior Product Manager for Hunter Engineering, www.hunter.coma leading ADAS equipment supplier. Installers of all stripes are challenged by each auto maker’s unique configuration designs, contended Silver. Education in the “how to” reset process from brand to brand must improve. While a dealership or an independent installer may have the advantage of owning the necessary equipment, not all calibrations are equal. What’s missing in the pre-scan and post-scan analysis process is a common reset procedure. Sometimes the software won’t read every model. To be able to duplicate an OE solution across the spectrum, repair businesses must invest in more tools and obtain additional procedure information to service their customers.
This crazy quilt dynamic described by Silver is economically inefficient, if not a potential driving hazard for all. Silver favors a one-size-fits-all standard practice. As for safety, implementing a universal pre-scan and post-scan for each ADAS procedure will for sure minimize any mobility risk the moment the car is discharged by the mechanic. And the shop will save on expense too. Consider the disincentive: failure to comply with OEM repair standards either because of inability, negligence or pressures (from insurance companies) may result in legal entanglements.
Everyone agrees that as ADAS is increasing in complexity so is driver safety. Sadly, however, there’s no collective consensus of what the greater good should mean. At a panel discussion in November 2017 that included Silver, the Auto Care Association, and some manufacturers, a General Motors representative preached the benefits in following their ADAS repair manual features. When done properly, the dealership will cut cycle times and slow call backs. But many experts object that sourcing service and program information is either incomplete or too costly to do a thorough job envisioned by GM. The Auto Care Association who represents the repair segment contends that every vehicle maker should be more transparent in releasing service information, and supplemental resources rather than raising the barriers. Only one outlier stood out during the forum. Honda declared that aftermarket shops can buy the calibration equipment and proper tools at the same price as the dealers. Honda showed guts to set their proprietary secrets aside to do what is right to keep the U.S. roads safe and the professional installer out of trouble.
To advance Honda’s precedent, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) can play a leading role. In a 2016 editorial, The Los Angeles Times urged NHTSA to impose a strict criterion before an autonomous vehicle hits the public roads. Without independently verified stress-testing on sensor technologies, roads become uncontrolled labs where crashes and fatalities may occur while distracted driving is worsening wrote the LA Times. Similarly speaking, drivers of semi-autonomous cars and trucks should be entitled to the same level of safety once a car leaves the repair shop. As NHTSA works with manufacturers and suppliers to ensure a crash-free environment, the same guideline should apply during the life of the vehicle. Any manufacturer and supplier currently working with NHTSA who deprives an installer the knowledge to fix any ADAS system violates NHTSA’s mission of “dedicating to advancing the lifesaving potential of vehicle technologies.”
Imagine the benefits touted by NHTSA. A reduction in crashes saves money for the long-term. In a 2010 report the administration found that almost $300 billion in economic productivity and $594 billion in fatalities could have been avoided. And of course, personal injury law suits stand to fall too. It would be interesting to know who might oppose NHTSA’s involvement if there could be a way to promise this outcome without forcing anyone to compromise their competitive edge.
Thankfully there are some industry players willing to do what is right for ADAS, but they need to coalesce. Under the best scenario, opinion leaders like Hunter Engineering continue to pump out more reasons to create an open-source level playing field for exchanging content and information. Well intentioned I-CAR commands respect for tech training. Honda’s stance is a brave step forward. One thing is for sure―bringing NHTSA under this umbrella coalition would prove formidable and worthwhile.
Subscribe to Aftermarket Business World and receive articles like this every month….absolutely free. Click here.
