10 ms·

This looks like the "Sensing" feature that Honda has implemented on some of their other vehicles. I just bought a 2016 Accord that does the same thing -- there

by ben1040 11y ago

This looks like the "Sensing" feature that Honda has implemented on some of their other vehicles. I just bought a 2016 Accord that does the same thing -- there's a camera mounted on the windshield, another camera in the front grille, and a radar sensor on the front bumper. Calling it "self-driving" is kind of a misnomer and I think the article kind of blows it out of proportion. It will track the car in front of you and keep a safe following distance, keeping either the maximum cruise control speed you've set, or whatever speed the vehicle ahead of you is driving, whichever is slower. It will accelerate or brake accordingly. It will also attempt to stay in the lane by using the onboard cameras for tracking the lane markings. The lane keeping assist is not nearly as autonomous as the article makes it out to be. It does not like to work on sharper curves on the freeway, for one -- the system will disengage and tell you to steer manually. It still wants you to keep your hands on the wheel. It must be looking for very very subtle movements on the wheel, because the system will yell at you if you take your hands off the wheel for longer than 10-15 seconds. All in all it's a pretty cool feature for longer road trips (keeping in your lane can just get kind of tiring, even with cruise control) but it's not the sort of autonomous driving that the article here paints it out to be.

akama 11y ago
I would guess you are correct about how they make sure your hands are on the wheel. I've done some car hacking and one of the things that surprised me was how sensitive some cars steering wheels are to pressure. It was impossible to keep it in the same position according to the car's internal electronic systems with my hands on it. This is car is 4 years old, so it's probably only gotten more sensitive.
- osteele 11y ago
  I have a Tesla, that also requires hands on the wheel from time to time. I'd assumed it was capacitive. It hadn't occurred to me that it might be subtle movements, because the wheel is unresponsive until you make a purposeful movement, at which point it starts moving with your hands; and you can just rest your hands against it lightly to let it know they're there. But of course it could be sensing subtle forces, even if it switching modes only on larger forces. Is there a test for whether it's capacitive? Like, does the fact that it works with gloves on mean it's not capacitive? (That's diagnostic for capacitive touch screens, but they're smaller and trying to detect finer motion and from just the fingers.)
  - bri3d 11y ago
    According to this article, Tesla's system is not capacitive : http://www.wired.com/2015/10/tesla-self-driving-over-air-update-live/ http://www.wired.com/2015/10/tesla-self-driving-over-air-upd... One interesting thing to try, still, would be to stuff a full water bottle into the gaps in the steering wheel to emulate a hand, like so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi2oIRMwmZY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi2oIRMwmZY This definitely works for many capacitive systems, but I think this might also work for some of the movement-based systems, since it will add extra mass/inertia to the wheel and the water sloshing around could emulate small hand movements.
Someone1234 11y ago
I just want to say, I have a similar vehicle system (Eyesight, rather than Honda Sensing) and I agree with everything you are saying. It isn't self-driving, it is just a bunch of really cool driver assist technology. Unfortunately the reason why these systems fail on sharp turns is that the lane-line literally falls outside of the camera's vision. Aside from adding two more cameras (which I'd welcome) I cannot see them fixing it in software. I totally would have purchased a 2016 Accord but no all-wheel-drive option. To me AWD, Blind Spot, Cross Traffic, and Eyesight made for one amazing overall safety package. The Accord has some nice unique features (e.g. Android Auto) but they need more than just Honda Sensing as OPTIONS.
- sxcurry 11y ago
  Agreed - my wife just bought a new Subaru with the Eyesight package. I was very dubious at first, but after a few long freeway trips, I'd much rather drive her car than my older vehicle. I believe that Subaru in Japan has published some impressive statistics about accident reduction with the Eyesight package. IMO, these technologies should be mandated on all new cars.
- MBCook 11y ago
  I'm impressed Honda is offering it on all models (LX, Sport, EX, EX-L, Touring) instead of saying "Sorry, Touring only". Now that I've had Honda Sensing for a few months I really like (in a rental right now and miss parts of it), but I'd like real blind spot indicators and the cross traffic alert. Either way, serious upgrade from a 'dumb' car.
- olympus 11y ago
  Subaru has the best overall value with their Eyesight system when considered with the rest of the car IMHO. It's why I bought my Forester (not in the price range of the Civic). Definitely not self driving, but adaptive cruise control works in steady traffic- it has a tendency to "rubber-band" when traffic changes speeds- and has saved my bacon by preventing a collision when the car in front of me stopped. The only downside is that it is fully camera based and has no radar at all, and on a road trip heading west this winter the setting sun killed the Eyesight system and the cruise control completely disengaged and I had to manually control my speed for about an hour.
Gratsby 11y ago
Mercedes has had the ability to keep a safe following distance for a decade or more. The lane assist is not something I've heard of, but I stopped staring at the latest and greatest features on cars around the time that Mercedes came out with the follow feature.
- samcheng 11y ago
  Mercedes also has active lane-keeping assist functionality.
- adrianN 11y ago
  But do they have it in such a cheap car? I know that the feature existed for a long time in very expensive cars.
  - Gratsby 11y ago
    I don't think they have such a cheap car (not in the US anyways). But it is my understanding that they offer it in their lowest end models.
    - cgriswald 11y ago
      The Driver Assistance Package ($2500) on the CLA250 brings the total of the base model to ~$35K. It includes DISTRONIC PLUS (which regulates distance and speed), Blind Spot Assist, and Lane Keeping Assist. I'm not sure what that entails in the newer models. My 2013 MB seems to only alert me if I'm drifting onto the shoulder. I don't think it corrects it for me.
      - henrikschroder 11y ago
        I have a 2014 E-class with DISTRONIC PLUS, and it turns the steering to stay in the lane. I'm assuming a current CLA has the same if it has DISTRONIC PLUS. The shoulder drifting feature is a different feature, at least on my car, and it's not tied to whether cruise control is engaged or not.
    - 11y ago
akamaka 11y ago
I blame Elon Musk for this shift in the meaning of "self-driving". It used to be a term that was only applied to driverless cars, but last year Elon announced that they plan to make the Tesla a self-driving car at the same time as announcing similar driver assistance features. While Tesla's driver assistance features are much more advanced than these, it's not much of a stretch after Elon already fired the first marketing shot by shifting the goalpost of what it means to be "self-driving" so much.
- mikeash 11y ago
  When did he shift the goalpost? People are indeed quite confused about what current driver assist features are capable of, but Tesla has been quite clear about exactly what they offer now, what they plan to offer in the near term, and what they hope to offer in the longer term. The main problem I've seen people complain about is the use of the word "autopilot" to describe Tesla's features. And that's only because people don't understand what a real airplane autopilot does. I blame the general population for jumping to conclusions.
  - akamaka 11y ago
    I agree with everything you say, and to me the goalposts shifted because he was purposely ambiguous in the way he announced autopilot at the same time as promising a fully self-driving car soon. So now a self-driving car isn't going to be a whole new product, but an accumulation of added features, one of which is autopilot. The implication is that cars with radars and lane detection are already self-driving cars that just need a few more upgrades to cover that other 20% of the time that you're not on the highway.
- lbenes 11y ago
  Language is organic and constantly changing. I used to insist on calling my drone, a remote controlled quadcopter, as drones were those autonomous military vehicles dropping bombs on weddings in the Middle East. But everyone now from the news to the FAA calls my little RC toy, a drone. Sure, it bothers me to watch words like self-driving and hoverboard lose their meaning. If someone as influential as Obama can't protect my favorite Egyptian god, Isis, there's no point in blaming anyone or trying to fight it.
jklowden 11y ago
Free-market ideology if you ask me. The first sentence suggests the hapless government wants to spent $4 billion on research for something you you can have today for $20K. A little later it mentions Washington's "time and billions" spent on fuel-efficiency instead of "saving lives". The government has also funded electric-car research and encouraged Detroit to build them. Contrasting self-driving with electric drive is just another way to suggest the dead hand of bureaucracy is impeding the invisible hand of the market. By the way, the government has saved drivers' lives, too, by the thousands, more often than not over industry objection. Seat belts, unleaded fuel, crumple zones: it's a long list. The article's bias isn't just bias; it slants away from the facts.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- superuser2 11y ago
  How is this in any way a reply to the parent comment?
  - mirkules 11y ago
    As ben1040 put it, "the article blows [self-driving] out of proportion." Jklowden hypothesizes that WSJ blew it out of proportion in order to paint a picture that the government is wasting money at best and not letting the free market innovate at worst. It wouldn't surprise me that a publication like Wall Street Journal would advocate in favor of a free market.
- blisterpeanuts 11y ago
  Yes, the WSJ is known for its free-market ideology :) But I think they have a point. The gov't has largely focused on fuel economy for decades now, while tens of thousands of people continued to die or suffer horrible injuries in cars. Sure, seat belts, crumple zones -- a good start. Unleaded? Not sure how that saves you in a crash.
  - mikeash 11y ago
MBCook 11y ago
I've got the same car and you're dead on. I really wanted the automatic cruise control but the truth is it's a hassle in the city on the highway. I don't want to constantly adjust the distance between the car in front of me and my car as conditions change so I end up just managing it myself without cruise control or setting it 'classic' mode where it doesn't use the radar. That said shortly after I bought the car I drove it across state and the automatic cruise control and lane keep were FANTASTIC. I know the lane keep seems kind of lazy but when you're driving across the plains with heavy cross winds it makes things SO much easier. Really a road trip feature. The 'you must steer' alert is fun. I've discovered one or two places near my house where the street is straight enough (along with the alignment on my car) that it will briefly trigger some times. Note that it's ALWAYS active (unless you turn it off), it's not only in use when you're using the lane keep function. EDIT: Also, sadly, Honda doesn't have a full-stop automatic cruise control like some other brands. If the traffic gets too slow it will disengage and warn you that you're in control. It's never something you could use on a standard street, highway only.
- ben1040 11y ago
  >I really wanted the automatic cruise control but the truth is it's a hassle in the city on the highway. Yeah, that's one thing I've noticed. Of the three options you get for following distance, even the "closest" one leaves a pretty long gap between you and the vehicle ahead of you. So people will pass you, pull into that gap, and then your car will slow down to open up a long gap between them and you. Lather, rinse, repeat.
  - MBCook 11y ago
    It still works well for long drives or when traffic is quite light. I'm glad I have it. Just not the panacea I was hoping for. I REALLY wanted the automatic breaking, and I'm glad I have that.
    - ben1040 11y ago
      yeah, the automatic braking is worth it. Yesterday someone abruptly cut me off; the car hit the brakes to avoid a collision more quickly than I would have reacted myself.
dominotw 11y ago
I got a mazda that does the same thing.
libraryatnight 11y ago
I just bought the 2016 Civic Touring last week and it came with this. It certainly seems to be getting ahead of things to say it's self-driving. Your description is accurate, it's more of a helper than truly autonomous. I will say I was concerned, because there was a Car and Driver review where they seemed to indicate it had issues thinking you were drifting and trying to correct when you were fine, but I haven't had a problem. It detects the lane very well, and the cruise control works like a champ. I am glad to see features like this coming to less expensive vehicles.
- massysett 11y ago
  I have the 2016 Accord with Sensing and occasionally the road departure mitigation system will freak out and warn you even where there is no drifting at all. At one point on my drive the pavement goes from asphalt to concrete and the lane markings lighten, and this fools it nearly every time. Overall, the whole system was worth it for the forward collision mitigation system alone. It can be a bit of a nanny but it can save me from rear-ending someone. I find the lane keeping assist system to be of dubious utility. It can't completely drive the car--it doesn't like relatively mild curves on the freeway--so if it can't completely drive the car what good is it? The adaptive cruise control is nice for those situations when highway-speed cruise control is actually useful--which is to say, it's not too useful in a congested city. What would be more useful is if the thing could automatically follow the car in front of me in a traffic jam. I hope the government requires these forward-collision mitigation systems as standard equipment in a few years. They are that useful. The rest of it? Meh.
  - libraryatnight 11y ago
    I'll have to test it out on a different bit of highway, perhaps one of our older more weathered areas where lines are less defined to see how it really holds up. I'm fortunate in that I usually only drive off peak hours, so cruise control is usually an option. I typically only use it on long drives, but my wife is a cruise control junkie and she loves the features on the new Honda. I'd agree, the most useful bit seems to be the collision mitigation, but I still find the other stuff cool :) Oh, and the lane change camera is pretty awesome (though not relevant to our self-driving topic).
devy 11y ago
What this WSJ article described definitely seems more like a Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC)[1] than true autonomous driving [2]. Note that ACC has been around for LONG time - as early as 1992. And the new Honda Civic's tech package's ACC + Lane keeping is only considered to be Level 2 Autonomous driving, whereas Tesla has achieved Level 3 autonomy [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_cruise_control_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_cruise_control_syst... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car
ma2rten 11y ago
I have the 2016 Honda Civic LX with Sensing. It doesn't require me to keep my hands on wheel. However, it keeps losing the lane, requiring you to steer manually. Maybe the lane markings are not clear enough here in Los Angeles. Also, the adaptive cruise control often brakes abruptly, even making the front collision warning system go off. I also don't know if it activates the brake lights when it brakes (since traditional cruse controls don't). This means that I usually brake manually. All those things make this feature less useful than it should be. Before I bought this car, I actually did some research on this, but I haven't found any test that compares how well these features do in practice.
- Domenic_S 11y ago
  > (since traditional cruse controls don't) of course they do, where are you getting that?
  - saiya-jin 11y ago
    traditional cruise control is just about keeping constant speed, no adaption to situation, road inclination etc. my 12 year old BMW has one, wonderful feature and keeps me still engaged with what's on the road
    - Domenic_S 11y ago
      Traditional cruise control will most definitely hit the brakes. Set a speed and then drive down a nice grade, you'll see it in action. The oldest vehicle I've seen this in was a 1989 Dodge Caravan, you could literally watch the brake pedal move.
  - ma2rten 11y ago
    I was under the impression that they use engine breaking, which does not trigger the break lights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking
    - Domenic_S 11y ago
plg 11y ago
To me this sounds horribly unsafe. You are lulled into this state where you don't have to pay attention to steering UNLESS you have to pay attention to steering, and you will find this out suddenly. So if you always have to pay attention, even when the system is active, then what exactly is the point of the system in the first place? Wouldn't it be safer to always pay attention? I guess this is an empirical question. Is it just as safe to (a) not pay attention until suddenly you have to pay attention, vs (b) pay attention all the time? I suppose the sudden aspect of (a) is the dangerous part. On the other hand the constant vigilance demand of (b) is also dangerous (we know people are bad at staying vigilant for long periods of time when a stimulus doesn't change much) Does anyone know of any peer reviewed published work on this?
- viraptor 11y ago
  I was actually thinking that may be the case, but (anecdata warning!) after switching to a car with lane assist + adaptive cruise control (so similar to the described one I think), I can concentrate on the road ahead much more now. I didn't realise how tiring the "normal driving" is until now. The ability to stop glancing at the dashboard to check speed and not working that hard to turn (even comparing to assisted steering) is amazing. You may think those things are in muscle memory, but actually they do tire you out. Even after a 1h drive, I'm much more relaxed than before - and that means I'm actually able to just look ahead and think about the road, not about what I'm doing.
  - saiya-jin 11y ago
    unless heavy traffic on highway, this is already achievable for me with usual cruise control (I did few home trips that are 1500km far within 1 day - tiring but doable... 1 hour is a breeze in good car). if in heavy traffic, I turn off cruise control anyway, you better focus properly.
- ghaff 11y ago
  Some references here: http://hal.pratt.duke.edu/sites/hal.pratt.duke.edu/files/u7/TR%20news%20Cummings%20MAR14.pdf http://hal.pratt.duke.edu/sites/hal.pratt.duke.edu/files/u7/... There are various other papers from the same lab.
SystemOut 11y ago
I have a 2016 VW GTI that has the same feature set. It's cool and all but more of a safety feature if you happen to fall asleep while driving than anything else. Just hope that if you fall asleep that there is sufficient contrast between the pavement and the lane markers.
userbinator 11y ago
the system will disengage and tell you to steer manually Does it make a sound like this when it disengages? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XxEFFX586k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XxEFFX586k

by ben1040 11y ago

akama 11y ago

I would guess you are correct about how they make sure your hands are on the wheel. I've done some car hacking and one of the things that surprised me was how sensitive some cars steering wheels are to pressure. It was impossible to keep it in the same position according to the car's internal electronic systems with my hands on it. This is car is 4 years old, so it's probably only gotten more sensitive.

osteele 11y ago
I have a Tesla, that also requires hands on the wheel from time to time. I'd assumed it was capacitive. It hadn't occurred to me that it might be subtle movements, because the wheel is unresponsive until you make a purposeful movement, at which point it starts moving with your hands; and you can just rest your hands against it lightly to let it know they're there. But of course it could be sensing subtle forces, even if it switching modes only on larger forces. Is there a test for whether it's capacitive? Like, does the fact that it works with gloves on mean it's not capacitive? (That's diagnostic for capacitive touch screens, but they're smaller and trying to detect finer motion and from just the fingers.)
- bri3d 11y ago
  According to this article, Tesla's system is not capacitive : http://www.wired.com/2015/10/tesla-self-driving-over-air-update-live/ http://www.wired.com/2015/10/tesla-self-driving-over-air-upd... One interesting thing to try, still, would be to stuff a full water bottle into the gaps in the steering wheel to emulate a hand, like so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi2oIRMwmZY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi2oIRMwmZY This definitely works for many capacitive systems, but I think this might also work for some of the movement-based systems, since it will add extra mass/inertia to the wheel and the water sloshing around could emulate small hand movements.

Someone1234 11y ago

I just want to say, I have a similar vehicle system (Eyesight, rather than Honda Sensing) and I agree with everything you are saying. It isn't self-driving, it is just a bunch of really cool driver assist technology. Unfortunately the reason why these systems fail on sharp turns is that the lane-line literally falls outside of the camera's vision. Aside from adding two more cameras (which I'd welcome) I cannot see them fixing it in software. I totally would have purchased a 2016 Accord but no all-wheel-drive option. To me AWD, Blind Spot, Cross Traffic, and Eyesight made for one amazing overall safety package. The Accord has some nice unique features (e.g. Android Auto) but they need more than just Honda Sensing as OPTIONS.

sxcurry 11y ago
Agreed - my wife just bought a new Subaru with the Eyesight package. I was very dubious at first, but after a few long freeway trips, I'd much rather drive her car than my older vehicle. I believe that Subaru in Japan has published some impressive statistics about accident reduction with the Eyesight package. IMO, these technologies should be mandated on all new cars.
MBCook 11y ago
I'm impressed Honda is offering it on all models (LX, Sport, EX, EX-L, Touring) instead of saying "Sorry, Touring only". Now that I've had Honda Sensing for a few months I really like (in a rental right now and miss parts of it), but I'd like real blind spot indicators and the cross traffic alert. Either way, serious upgrade from a 'dumb' car.
olympus 11y ago
Subaru has the best overall value with their Eyesight system when considered with the rest of the car IMHO. It's why I bought my Forester (not in the price range of the Civic). Definitely not self driving, but adaptive cruise control works in steady traffic- it has a tendency to "rubber-band" when traffic changes speeds- and has saved my bacon by preventing a collision when the car in front of me stopped. The only downside is that it is fully camera based and has no radar at all, and on a road trip heading west this winter the setting sun killed the Eyesight system and the cruise control completely disengaged and I had to manually control my speed for about an hour.

Gratsby 11y ago

Mercedes has had the ability to keep a safe following distance for a decade or more. The lane assist is not something I've heard of, but I stopped staring at the latest and greatest features on cars around the time that Mercedes came out with the follow feature.

samcheng 11y ago
Mercedes also has active lane-keeping assist functionality.
adrianN 11y ago
But do they have it in such a cheap car? I know that the feature existed for a long time in very expensive cars.
- Gratsby 11y ago
  I don't think they have such a cheap car (not in the US anyways). But it is my understanding that they offer it in their lowest end models.
  - cgriswald 11y ago
    The Driver Assistance Package ($2500) on the CLA250 brings the total of the base model to ~$35K. It includes DISTRONIC PLUS (which regulates distance and speed), Blind Spot Assist, and Lane Keeping Assist. I'm not sure what that entails in the newer models. My 2013 MB seems to only alert me if I'm drifting onto the shoulder. I don't think it corrects it for me.
    - henrikschroder 11y ago
      I have a 2014 E-class with DISTRONIC PLUS, and it turns the steering to stay in the lane. I'm assuming a current CLA has the same if it has DISTRONIC PLUS. The shoulder drifting feature is a different feature, at least on my car, and it's not tied to whether cruise control is engaged or not.
  - 11y ago

akamaka 11y ago

I blame Elon Musk for this shift in the meaning of "self-driving". It used to be a term that was only applied to driverless cars, but last year Elon announced that they plan to make the Tesla a self-driving car at the same time as announcing similar driver assistance features. While Tesla's driver assistance features are much more advanced than these, it's not much of a stretch after Elon already fired the first marketing shot by shifting the goalpost of what it means to be "self-driving" so much.

mikeash 11y ago
When did he shift the goalpost? People are indeed quite confused about what current driver assist features are capable of, but Tesla has been quite clear about exactly what they offer now, what they plan to offer in the near term, and what they hope to offer in the longer term. The main problem I've seen people complain about is the use of the word "autopilot" to describe Tesla's features. And that's only because people don't understand what a real airplane autopilot does. I blame the general population for jumping to conclusions.
- akamaka 11y ago
  I agree with everything you say, and to me the goalposts shifted because he was purposely ambiguous in the way he announced autopilot at the same time as promising a fully self-driving car soon. So now a self-driving car isn't going to be a whole new product, but an accumulation of added features, one of which is autopilot. The implication is that cars with radars and lane detection are already self-driving cars that just need a few more upgrades to cover that other 20% of the time that you're not on the highway.
lbenes 11y ago
Language is organic and constantly changing. I used to insist on calling my drone, a remote controlled quadcopter, as drones were those autonomous military vehicles dropping bombs on weddings in the Middle East. But everyone now from the news to the FAA calls my little RC toy, a drone. Sure, it bothers me to watch words like self-driving and hoverboard lose their meaning. If someone as influential as Obama can't protect my favorite Egyptian god, Isis, there's no point in blaming anyone or trying to fight it.

jklowden 11y ago

Free-market ideology if you ask me. The first sentence suggests the hapless government wants to spent $4 billion on research for something you you can have today for $20K. A little later it mentions Washington's "time and billions" spent on fuel-efficiency instead of "saving lives". The government has also funded electric-car research and encouraged Detroit to build them. Contrasting self-driving with electric drive is just another way to suggest the dead hand of bureaucracy is impeding the invisible hand of the market. By the way, the government has saved drivers' lives, too, by the thousands, more often than not over industry objection. Seat belts, unleaded fuel, crumple zones: it's a long list. The article's bias isn't just bias; it slants away from the facts.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
superuser2 11y ago
How is this in any way a reply to the parent comment?
- mirkules 11y ago
  As ben1040 put it, "the article blows [self-driving] out of proportion." Jklowden hypothesizes that WSJ blew it out of proportion in order to paint a picture that the government is wasting money at best and not letting the free market innovate at worst. It wouldn't surprise me that a publication like Wall Street Journal would advocate in favor of a free market.
blisterpeanuts 11y ago
Yes, the WSJ is known for its free-market ideology :) But I think they have a point. The gov't has largely focused on fuel economy for decades now, while tens of thousands of people continued to die or suffer horrible injuries in cars. Sure, seat belts, crumple zones -- a good start. Unleaded? Not sure how that saves you in a crash.
- mikeash 11y ago

MBCook 11y ago

I've got the same car and you're dead on. I really wanted the automatic cruise control but the truth is it's a hassle in the city on the highway. I don't want to constantly adjust the distance between the car in front of me and my car as conditions change so I end up just managing it myself without cruise control or setting it 'classic' mode where it doesn't use the radar. That said shortly after I bought the car I drove it across state and the automatic cruise control and lane keep were FANTASTIC. I know the lane keep seems kind of lazy but when you're driving across the plains with heavy cross winds it makes things SO much easier. Really a road trip feature. The 'you must steer' alert is fun. I've discovered one or two places near my house where the street is straight enough (along with the alignment on my car) that it will briefly trigger some times. Note that it's ALWAYS active (unless you turn it off), it's not only in use when you're using the lane keep function. EDIT: Also, sadly, Honda doesn't have a full-stop automatic cruise control like some other brands. If the traffic gets too slow it will disengage and warn you that you're in control. It's never something you could use on a standard street, highway only.

ben1040 11y ago
>I really wanted the automatic cruise control but the truth is it's a hassle in the city on the highway. Yeah, that's one thing I've noticed. Of the three options you get for following distance, even the "closest" one leaves a pretty long gap between you and the vehicle ahead of you. So people will pass you, pull into that gap, and then your car will slow down to open up a long gap between them and you. Lather, rinse, repeat.
- MBCook 11y ago
  It still works well for long drives or when traffic is quite light. I'm glad I have it. Just not the panacea I was hoping for. I REALLY wanted the automatic breaking, and I'm glad I have that.
  - ben1040 11y ago
    yeah, the automatic braking is worth it. Yesterday someone abruptly cut me off; the car hit the brakes to avoid a collision more quickly than I would have reacted myself.

dominotw 11y ago

I got a mazda that does the same thing.

libraryatnight 11y ago

I just bought the 2016 Civic Touring last week and it came with this. It certainly seems to be getting ahead of things to say it's self-driving. Your description is accurate, it's more of a helper than truly autonomous. I will say I was concerned, because there was a Car and Driver review where they seemed to indicate it had issues thinking you were drifting and trying to correct when you were fine, but I haven't had a problem. It detects the lane very well, and the cruise control works like a champ. I am glad to see features like this coming to less expensive vehicles.

massysett 11y ago
I have the 2016 Accord with Sensing and occasionally the road departure mitigation system will freak out and warn you even where there is no drifting at all. At one point on my drive the pavement goes from asphalt to concrete and the lane markings lighten, and this fools it nearly every time. Overall, the whole system was worth it for the forward collision mitigation system alone. It can be a bit of a nanny but it can save me from rear-ending someone. I find the lane keeping assist system to be of dubious utility. It can't completely drive the car--it doesn't like relatively mild curves on the freeway--so if it can't completely drive the car what good is it? The adaptive cruise control is nice for those situations when highway-speed cruise control is actually useful--which is to say, it's not too useful in a congested city. What would be more useful is if the thing could automatically follow the car in front of me in a traffic jam. I hope the government requires these forward-collision mitigation systems as standard equipment in a few years. They are that useful. The rest of it? Meh.
- libraryatnight 11y ago
  I'll have to test it out on a different bit of highway, perhaps one of our older more weathered areas where lines are less defined to see how it really holds up. I'm fortunate in that I usually only drive off peak hours, so cruise control is usually an option. I typically only use it on long drives, but my wife is a cruise control junkie and she loves the features on the new Honda. I'd agree, the most useful bit seems to be the collision mitigation, but I still find the other stuff cool :) Oh, and the lane change camera is pretty awesome (though not relevant to our self-driving topic).

devy 11y ago

What this WSJ article described definitely seems more like a Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC)[1] than true autonomous driving [2]. Note that ACC has been around for LONG time - as early as 1992. And the new Honda Civic's tech package's ACC + Lane keeping is only considered to be Level 2 Autonomous driving, whereas Tesla has achieved Level 3 autonomy [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_cruise_control_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_cruise_control_syst... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car

ma2rten 11y ago

I have the 2016 Honda Civic LX with Sensing. It doesn't require me to keep my hands on wheel. However, it keeps losing the lane, requiring you to steer manually. Maybe the lane markings are not clear enough here in Los Angeles. Also, the adaptive cruise control often brakes abruptly, even making the front collision warning system go off. I also don't know if it activates the brake lights when it brakes (since traditional cruse controls don't). This means that I usually brake manually. All those things make this feature less useful than it should be. Before I bought this car, I actually did some research on this, but I haven't found any test that compares how well these features do in practice.

Domenic_S 11y ago
> (since traditional cruse controls don't) of course they do, where are you getting that?
- saiya-jin 11y ago
  traditional cruise control is just about keeping constant speed, no adaption to situation, road inclination etc. my 12 year old BMW has one, wonderful feature and keeps me still engaged with what's on the road
  - Domenic_S 11y ago
    Traditional cruise control will most definitely hit the brakes. Set a speed and then drive down a nice grade, you'll see it in action. The oldest vehicle I've seen this in was a 1989 Dodge Caravan, you could literally watch the brake pedal move.
- ma2rten 11y ago
  I was under the impression that they use engine breaking, which does not trigger the break lights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_braking
  - Domenic_S 11y ago

plg 11y ago

To me this sounds horribly unsafe. You are lulled into this state where you don't have to pay attention to steering UNLESS you have to pay attention to steering, and you will find this out suddenly. So if you always have to pay attention, even when the system is active, then what exactly is the point of the system in the first place? Wouldn't it be safer to always pay attention? I guess this is an empirical question. Is it just as safe to (a) not pay attention until suddenly you have to pay attention, vs (b) pay attention all the time? I suppose the sudden aspect of (a) is the dangerous part. On the other hand the constant vigilance demand of (b) is also dangerous (we know people are bad at staying vigilant for long periods of time when a stimulus doesn't change much) Does anyone know of any peer reviewed published work on this?

viraptor 11y ago
I was actually thinking that may be the case, but (anecdata warning!) after switching to a car with lane assist + adaptive cruise control (so similar to the described one I think), I can concentrate on the road ahead much more now. I didn't realise how tiring the "normal driving" is until now. The ability to stop glancing at the dashboard to check speed and not working that hard to turn (even comparing to assisted steering) is amazing. You may think those things are in muscle memory, but actually they do tire you out. Even after a 1h drive, I'm much more relaxed than before - and that means I'm actually able to just look ahead and think about the road, not about what I'm doing.
- saiya-jin 11y ago
  unless heavy traffic on highway, this is already achievable for me with usual cruise control (I did few home trips that are 1500km far within 1 day - tiring but doable... 1 hour is a breeze in good car). if in heavy traffic, I turn off cruise control anyway, you better focus properly.
ghaff 11y ago
Some references here: http://hal.pratt.duke.edu/sites/hal.pratt.duke.edu/files/u7/TR%20news%20Cummings%20MAR14.pdf http://hal.pratt.duke.edu/sites/hal.pratt.duke.edu/files/u7/... There are various other papers from the same lab.

SystemOut 11y ago

I have a 2016 VW GTI that has the same feature set. It's cool and all but more of a safety feature if you happen to fall asleep while driving than anything else. Just hope that if you fall asleep that there is sufficient contrast between the pavement and the lane markers.

userbinator 11y ago

the system will disengage and tell you to steer manually Does it make a sound like this when it disengages? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XxEFFX586k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XxEFFX586k