How to disable the Prius "Artificial Engine" sound?

U don't. U either stream the sound vis Bluetooth or through the aux jack to ur speakers

 

If I were blind, I would want to feel and be as independent as possible when moving through my daily life. I would think that a request that "silent" cars have sound making devices installed is similar to the chirping traffic signals at crosswalks. It's not, exactly, about preventing accidents, but about helping the blind be autonomous and safe. Even if one isn't really worried about being run over, I imagine it's nice to know that a car exists in space near you. To the blind, a non-noise making Prius is invisible, and invisible things that actually exist can be frightening.

Just a thought.

--JES

 

But when is a Prius truly non-noisemaking? I'm not blind, but my aging ears can still hear the inverter whine. The whine of other hybrids has helped me spot numerous uncommon hybrid models passing on the street.

Yes, ambient noise can mask and hide this whine on noisier streets. But I have found this street racket masking the noise of many approaching modern quiet non-hybrids as well. Why should the later, still much more common that hybrids, be exempt from minimum noise requirements?

 

Autonomous is not the same as being safe. Anecdotal, during this period, there was a blind man in St. Louis who was run-over by a Jeep driven by a drunk banker. Noisy vehicles are hitting and killing the blind all the time. According to FARS, about five blind die each year and so far, none by Prius.

Automatic collision avoidance systems can be mandated for all vehicles, starting with the hybrids would be OK with me. These could save not only blind but ordinary pedestrians and even the occupants of cars. It becomes a solution that makes a significant, measurable reduction in all accidents and deaths including the blind.

We have blind voters in my precinct and the all carry scars, bruises and scrapes. They live in a world of hazards but their organizations have decided blind lives will be perfectly safe if only they can "Bell the Hybrid." I attended the NHTSA session and heard a blind leader claim that without this law they would never leave their houses again. But the accident and injury numbers don't support this claim and their solution, noise makers, is just as effective as the SUVs and pickups that are killing them dead every year. They detect the mote of hybrids while ignoring the beam of SUVs and pickups.

I'm open to metrics that show the Prius to be a hazard which is why I've read the two NHTSA reports. But both suffer from flaws:

1. Absence of fatality data supporting their hypothesis
2. Terribly small numbers used to make these claims, well below the threshold of credibility
3. Contradictory claims of what Prius maneuvers are hazardous

Regardless, this bad law was passed and IMHO, the experiment has begun. It will take a couple of years to increase the noise-generating hybrid and EV population enough to do a differential study between 'sounded' and 'silent' cars. This will be the first indication that the law is wrong. But the experiment is already in place called 'ordinary traffic metrics.'

What is probably delaying the final regulations is the NHTSA team charged with defining the final regulation. I have no doubt it complicated by the disconnect between trying to write a 'standard' based upon evidence and finding the traffic evidence contradicts what they are trying to do. For example, if they make the hybrids as loud as an SUV or pickup, won't that means the same accident rate . . . one that is higher than the 'quiet' cars are today?

Using the ambient noise levels from non-hybrid cars, it soon becomes evident that noise plays a vanishingly small role in pedestrian-vehicle, accident avoidance. Not zero but so small as to be all but impossible to credibly claim. In contrast, accident avoidance systems are becoming more common regardless (in spite of!) S.841.

The experiment is begun so let's let the data accumulate. I could be wrong but nothing we've seen so far supports the claim that these noise makers are more effective than a noisy SUV or pickup . . . the true pedestrian killers.

Actually there is a noise generator design that would work:

• spectral flexible, ultrasonic generators on the front right and left of each bumper
• array of sensitive microphone tuned to the ultrasonic wavelengths
• DSP processor that calculates distance and azimuth to objects
• calculate impact risks
• tie results to: brakes, electric steering 'trim', and horn

I have no problem with what is in effect an audio 'sonar' system tied to the car brakes and control systems. Sound travels at ~1,100 ft/sec and typical stopping distances at speed are in the 140 ft range at 60 mph. Easily, a 100 msec. resolution time is well within the capabilities of today's electronics. Using ultrasonic modulated pulses allows use of what otherwise might be painful sound levels in urban settings.

There are some sophisticated techniques that allow two, offset ultrasonic sources to generate an audio or inaudable range, beat frequency. Regardless of audible or inaudible, this can simplify the detection and ranging problem.

Bob Wilson

 

I don't mind the sound... my roommate actually comes into the garage to just to hear it and he affectionately named the car "the spaceship from Planet Zok."

 

Yeah, some startled folks might soil themselves listening to that noise coming from a Prius... but picture this: imagine the silence of the Prius coupled with the FIAMM freeway blaster when you need to clear the folks walking down the center aisle of a parking lot... Depends, anyone?!

I am so going to Hell....

 

Bob,
You're looking at it waaaaaaayyyyy too logically. You already know, I'm sure, that most people don't base decisions off of logic but emotions. If you want to make something happen, you have to appeal to people's emotions and not to their logic. This is why the argument that "its needed for blind people" is so successful (it appeals to emotions). I'm not saying its wrong or right so please don't blast me JE Sukura.

I learned this when I was being trained to become a Navy recruiter. They told us, don't try to get someone to join for logical reasons but appeal to emotions. I found they were exactly right. No amount of logic ever convinced someone to join.

 

Why would I blast you, usnavystgc? I don't mind the sound, personally, and I can understand why associations for the blind would want cars to be detectable by sound. However, I also understand Bob Wilson's point that the logic in the argument about sound leading to safety is neither sound nor valid. Basing decisions on emotion is not necessarily a bad thing, either: it's the way many people, if not most, choose their romantic partners--one of the most important decisions a person makes. Of course, making decisions based on reason is also not a bad thing. Toyota probably reasoned it would be cheaper to add the spaceship noise than to battle the blind in court. ;-)

 

Well, I guess I'm just gunshy b/c I seem to get blasted for a lot of things I say on here.

 

Next, bicycles will be required to have noisemakers in the spokes. Joggers will have to have a slight whistle as the approach crosswalks... Sorry but it still falls on the driver of the car to watch out for pedestrians. In my state, Georgia if you hit someone in a crosswalk you better have a lot of witnesses swear they fell out of the sky onto your hood.

 

You don't need to be blind to appreciate the noisemaker. Parking lots are a good example: barring eyes in the back of your head, it is very easy to be unaware of a hybrid running on electric. I've had several instances of people walking ahead of me, not aware that I was overtaking them.

 

As a pedestrian, I have been surprised more by traditional but quiet cars than by hybrids.

As a driver, I've also had instances of people walking in front of me, not aware of my approach -- immediately AFTER I tooted the horn. Deep concentration on one thing, such as a conversation or a handheld device, can make people deaf to the rest of the world. Some local tragedies have shown that some teenagers can be oblivious to even freight train horns.

 

Lack of situational awareness kills, whether as pedestrian or driver.

 

Exactly!

This is why we need a never tired, never ill, always on, computers and sensors to augment what our cars do. Humans are terrible at being always alert and paying attention. But if we off-load collision detection and avoidance to sensors and computers, we'll make a significant safety improvement not only in avoiding car-pedestrian collisions but also car-to-car and car-to-object collisions.

Bob Wilson

 

Some day, assuming away the programming issues, which have yet to be assumed away. Precisely the reason drones are not welcome in the airspace system, due to their inability to "see and avoid" as well as the situationally aware Mark 1 eyeball.

 

At the risk of offending some sensibilities:

Source: Arraignment in Nipomo hit-and-run delayed | Times Press Recorder

Noise played no part in this fatal, Prius-pedestrian accident on a stretch of road posted greater than 45 mph. This is why lane following and collision avoidance needs to be universal.

Throwing the book at this dumb driver:

will not bring Christopher Tietjen (described as similar to a Linney Small) back from the grave. However, Toyota has the technology to minimize the chance of adding more 'Christopher Tietjen' and Congress and the NHTSA need to replace S.841 with effective, anti-collision legislation. Toyota could show a commitment by offering lane-following and collision avoidance as a separate option on ALL trim levels of their hybrid electric cars.

Source: Nipomo hit and run 11/12 | KSBY.com | San Luis Obispo, Santa Maria, Santa Barbara, Paso Robles

So, is this emotional enough?

Bob Wilson

 

It could. At what cost, though? Not to mention the cost/benefit. If DOT thought the functionality essential, it would be mandated.

 

just clip the wire to the noisemaker, problem solved.

 

In March 2009, the incremental cost was ~$2,000 . . . after adding ~$5,000 in upscale trim. I found a 3d party, after-market but they withdrew their product at $1,700 before I could lock in the deal. We are now over three years later, about two, 18 month intervals so I would expect the retail costs to be between $500-800. More importantly, Toyota's competitors offer similar systems. But 'cost/benefit' ratio is important:

	Column 1	Column 2	Column 3	Column 4
0	[th]Risk[th]audio[th]avoidance[tr][td]2% blind vs 2% Prius[td]same as SUV/pickup[td]2-3x lower SUV/pickup[tr][td]98% pedestrians	100% cyclists vs 2% Prius[td]same as SUV/pickup[td]2-3x lower SUV/pickup[tr][td]tree	power pole	ditch vs 2% Prius[td]same as SUV/pickup[td]2-3x lower SUV/pickup[tr][td]other vehicles vs 2% Prius[td]same as SUV/pickup[td]2-3x lower SUV/pickup

Source: accident reports via Google and FARS.

Given the option of a collision avoidance system for $500-800 and this becomes a non-brainer option . . . especially if insurance costs are required to be proportional to the reduced risk. This provides a significant pay-back not only for the owners but also police and medical services.

Late thought but "cost/benefit" is insightful. This is just my estimates of the relative costs of:

• $50,000 - injury, the only metrics in the NHTSA studies
• $1,000,000 - death, a metric not found in the NHTSA studies

Bob Wilson

 

Why cut it when u can just unplug it.