12 ms·

Studies find automatic braking can cut crashes over 40%

103 points by bubblehack3r 4y ago

KptMarchewa 4y ago
Sure, but try to convince people who are okay with accepting (other) deaths just to feel "in control" of a two ton vehicle.
- trgn 4y ago
  Why is this downvoted? This desire to be in control of a car, or the belief one should be in control of a car, is a true curse on the public realm. People who actively think of themselves of good drivers, are invariable the ones who drive aggressively. It's never the ones that drive slow, boring, and predictable that reject safety measures. For example; seatbelts were fought, the fetishization of things like acceleration or top speed capabilities of a car, traffic calming measures that reduce top speeds are always fought, speed limiters are way out of the overton window, just mentioning automated speed cameras cause aneurysms, ... People have unhealthy attachment to the brand of driving, the dumb shit that they see on car advertisements. It's primarily a male ego thing, and it's pathetic and needs to go. Safety measures that prevent so-called spirited driving should be mandatory on cars: speed limiters, auto-braking, and lane keeping are a good start.
  - vinyl7 4y ago
    The more boring driving is, the more likely i am to look at my phone or fall asleep, find other distractions. If I drive aggressively then i must stay focused. It wouldn't surprise me if these safety features end up increasing collisions because people start feeling safe that the blockchain ai machine learning sensors of the future will do all the work for them. We already see this happening with teslas.
    - KptMarchewa 4y ago
      That's a common false sentiment. People driving slower, in a safer cars cause less accidents, less deaths, and they themself die less. On the other hand a lot of "aggressive" drivers slip up earlier or later. The risk is too high. Also, looking at a phone is entirely your choice, not a boredom/distraction moment. Listen to audiobooks if your mind needs to do something while driving. >It wouldn't surprise me if these safety features end up increasing collisions because people start feeling safe that the blockchain ai machine learning sensors of the future will do all the work for them. I'm all for them but properly tested and validated, not the tesla cowboy approach that musk espouses. I fear that he will discredit the idea before we have serious autonomous driving products.
  - lazide 4y ago
    I’ve had auto braking nearly cause collisions twice with other vehicles when it got confused in construction zones (in heavy traffic) and jammed on the brakes. I also drive pretty carefully and provide a ton of space, but others don’t. Also see Tesla phantom braking. It isn’t just diesel bros.
Midnight1938 4y ago
Cut to clip of car stopping in front of the murderer
- Zigurd 4y ago
  Even better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP2DK4pEYS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP2DK4pEYS4
bhouston 4y ago
It feels like a simple thing but I also suspect it is effective from my personal experience. We have automatic braking (fixed: breaking) on my Toyota Rav4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbnoFbb8G8Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbnoFbb8G8Q It is a simple thing but the PCS has been triggered 4 times in the last 5 years and never incorrectly. I think I would have stopped soon enough without it (as I've never hit anything in my 20+ years of driving), but it was always in those unexpected situations like a car rapidly slowing down in the middle of the highway for something I can not even see. It feels like initializing values to 0 automatically. You shouldn't need it if everything else goes perfectly, but it doesn't hurt to have it.
- heynowheynow 4y ago
  Hope it doesn't break automatically since dealers are expensive.
- consp 4y ago
  My car (not a toyota) does it too and I've never had it actually brake but the very audible + visual warning signs definitely makes you act tiny fraction sooner (at least that is how it feels). I'm pretty sure it would have stopped otherwise on its own but a bit less pleasant. edit: it also triggers when you go down a steep parking lot onto a flat surface a bit too fast which is interesting but at least valid (with respect to suspension compression and hitting the ground).
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - JTbane 4y ago
    >it also triggers when you go down a steep parking lot onto a flat surface a bit too fast that's a great feature, I always have to remind friends and relatives to slow down when going down an incline onto the road (they invariably scrape the underside of the car)
- mattgreenrocks 4y ago
  We have it our 2016 Forester and I won't buy a new car without it. I'm a pretty careful driver most of the time but I had one incident where I went into a road trance right as the car in front of me braked very abruptly to make a turn and I didn't register it in time. Was going about 35mph and there were a few car lengths in front of me. Automatic braking kicked in along with a loud chime and I slammed on the brake and stopped within inches. Amazing technology that saved my ass and my car.
dsfyu404ed 4y ago
Headline claim only pertains to rear end collisions (which to be fair, are a large portion of collisions on our modern cell-phone filled roads). AEB won't save you from losing your shit in the woods trying to dodge that deer or road debris you couldn't see until last minute nor will it save you from entering a corner too hot.
- nradov 4y ago
  True, but the latest generation of electronic stability control systems with brake-based torque vectoring are pretty good at handling those situations. Many cars already include that feature and it will probably be universal in a few years. https://www.motorbiscuit.com/do-you-know-what-torque-vectoring-in-a-car-is/ https://www.motorbiscuit.com/do-you-know-what-torque-vectori...
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    Nothing will save you from physics. The tires can only apply so much force to the vehicle in order to change direction or speed. A stability control system fundamentally trades distance traveled forward in exchange for not getting sideways. ESC is good at preventing people who don't know how hard their vehicle can actually turn from going "all in" with the brakes and winding up off the road because they robbed the car of all the tractive force it was using to turn. For example, if you whip around a turn at a high rate of speed and there's a deer there ESC will keep you on the road, you're still gonna hit the deer though. I think all these technologies are beneficial because they bridge the gap between the hapless dolt and the driver who can get the most out of their vehicle but no amount of breathless hand wringing and low effort internet comments will ever change the rules of physics.
    - nradov 4y ago
      I think you missed the point. Adding brake-based torque vectoring to ESC does more for crash avoidance than just ESC alone. It allows the vehicle to rotate faster by maximizing use of the available traction at all four wheels. Even drivers who know how to get the most out of their vehicles aren't able to selectively brake the inside wheels while turning. This isn't magic and won't prevent all crashes, but will prevent some.
JonChesterfield 4y ago
I had a rental with automatic breaking. Gave the really strong impression it wanted to kill me on empty roads. Not keen.
- speedgoose 4y ago
  Not all cars want to kill you. Selecting a car based on the software should become more important in the future.
NVHacker 4y ago
I wonder how many extra crashes will something like this trigger and who will pay when accidents happen because the car decided to break for no apparent reason. I've seen PCS working well at slow speeds and, arguably, they would be more helpful at higher speeds. But would you trust such system with your life at high speed on a busy motorway ?
- consp 4y ago
  > who will pay The person hitting you from behind would be at fault anyway, at least where I live you are required to keep enough distance to stop even for no apparent reason, if driving in a lane and not moving to another. If you do it whilst moving in front of another car as it could be on you as you are required to yield and leave enough space to not hinder or endanger the driving of the other vehicle. This also includes brake-checks as your obligation to yield does not stop after you have merged into another highway lane and continues for an unspecified amount of time. So there should not be an issue there, only problem is people can and will not understand the stopping distance of a car driving 100+kph and do not leave enough space. YMMV with respect to the laws involved as it's entirely possible you could be at fault at the place you are living.
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    The rules for accident liability aren't as rigid and naive as you are implying. The rear ender having to pay is just the base case that is used in the absence of other facts. If you drive "in an asinine manner" (the definition of asinine is subject to discretion and negotiation between the relevant insurance companies) and manage to make the front of someone else's care meet the rear of yours in the process AND there are witnesses, dashcam footage or other evidince you will almost certainly wind up having to pay up. Everybody knows that traffic doesn't follow the rules. Pretending like it does is a convenient legal fiction we use in order to make rule making easier. There is intentionally tons of redundancy baked into the rules to cover for all the edge cases where people routinely don't follow the rules. Hence why other people's obligation to not crash into stuff isn't a blank check to do whatever. In cases where two people are breaking the rules usually whoever's breaking them in the more typical and predicable manner is the one given a pass (e.g. someone speeding "a normal amount" will likely not be found at fault if you roll a stop and get t-boned).
erisian 4y ago
Fuck no. I had to deal with a rental that had driver assist technology and it damn near killed me. There was a boulder on the road around a blind corner and the car fought me trying to swerve out of the way, I barely avoided it. Imagine auto braking on black ice or because of a faulty sensor. We're giving immature technology too much control of the vehicle.
- melling 4y ago
  Yeah, everyone’s got that one story in a billion that tries to be the counter example. I remember back in the day when seatbelts were controversial because someone was thrown free from a car.
  - erisian 4y ago
    It's a bit of a stretch to compare software overriding intentional input from the driver to the introduction of seatbelts.
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    AEB is absolute magic for preventing rear endings by distracted drivers in stop and go traffic. People who's behavior doesn't tend to come with much risk of this will experience mostly false positives from AEB hence why "everyone" has a story.
    - mrguyorama 4y ago
      Also, as shown in this very comment section, lots of people swear "the machine is just wrong" while being terrible drivers and tailgating
  - macintux 4y ago
    Many of us are quite familiar with the reliability of software, and have serious concerns about trusting it to make the right decisions in a complex real-world situation.
    - 4y ago
branon 4y ago
Oof, my experience with with auto-brake in a 2021 Subaru Crosstrek (anecdotal, sample size of one, all that good stuff) is much the opposite. It's too sensitive and tends to brake shockingly hard during fairly mundane maneuvers. When backing up near a wall/obstacle, the auto-brake seems to kick in when anything is closer than three or four feet away from the bumper. I use my mirrors and have an accurate impression of where the four corners of the vehicle are - I don't need the computer slamming on the brakes when I am reversing in a tight spot. It feels _more_ dangerous and I fear that one day, my knee-jerk reaction will be to fight the machine (press the gas harder, or get distracted looking at the console which emits lights and sounds every single time auto-brake kicks in) and wind up wrecking with even more force than I might have otherwise. Also, in traffic, I'll often take my foot off the gas and coast/idle, letting the vehicle slow down naturally. I try to do this instead of braking sometimes as I believe it assists with keeping the flow of traffic predictable for others. Usually this is no problem because I follow the next person at a safe distance. Sometimes, while decelerating as described above, I will allow the distance between myself and the next car to close, for example, if they're turning and will be gone in a second anyway. The Subaru then ruins my slowdown maneuver by slamming on the brakes because it thinks I'm approaching the vehicle ahead of me too quickly. Well, yes, maybe, but they're also halfway out of the lane already so it's not terribly significant that I'm closing the distance. Another half-second and they'll be gone, restoring my follow distance. (This has only happened once or twice but I imagine it gives the person behind me quite the unnecessary shock.) I wish there was a way to fine-tune the sensitivity, or at least an option to say "I am an attentive driver, please switch auto-brake to a lower sensitivity level." Currently the only option is to disable it each time the engine starts, which feels wrong to do...
- s0rce 4y ago
  I just bought a 2023 Crosstrek and haven't really noticed it kicking on too aggressively, it does beep sometimes. The only time I get annoyed is when its in adaptive cruise control and someone is merging off the highway it will think they are slowing a lot but its clear they will be out of the way.
  - branon 4y ago
jacurtis 4y ago
The title is a tiny bit misleading. Here are the stats from the article: Automatic braking has demonstrated the ability to: - reduce rear-end automobile crashes "in half" (technically 49%) - reduce Rear-end crashes with injuries by 53% - vehicles without automatic braking, but with collision warnings only cut accidents by 16% (compared to 49% with automatic braking) - pickup trucks are less effective at preventing crashes, only preventing 43% of accidents and reducing injuries by 42% (compared to above numbers for other vehicles) - lane departure systems reduce crashes by 8% and reduce injuries by 7% - A consortium of 20 auto manufactures have voluntarily committed to offering automatic braking technology to 95% of their light-duty models during the 2023 model year
IanDrake 4y ago
kleiba 4y ago
I don't have an automatic brake in my car, but a sensor that warns me when I'm about to crash into something. There has so far been a single incident where this was actually helpful. In >95% of the cases, it's false positives. I can only imagine what driving would be like if the car did indeed autonomously brake in those situations.
- saiya-jin 4y ago
  Same here, previous generation of bmw 5 series, the warnings happen often in non-standard but completely safe situations that human can easily assess (ie full parking lane starting on the right in lane that was driving one 50m before, with very clear signs and good visibility). Or in situation when I am already breaking ie to full stop hard with enough breaking room and it still pops up the warnings. Sometimes just warnings out of blue, in the middle of an empty road. Me and my family are very happy no automated breaking is integrated into that car, its current state would kill us sooner or later.
specialist 4y ago
Someone recently opined that the boffins should have started with collision avoidance. Then build up to FSD. Facepalm slap. Seems so obvious once said out loud. That'd be like a Rodney Brooks inspired actionist strategy, right? Our vehicles as boids, with implicit coordinated action, like flocking, herding, pacing, station keeping, etc. Maybe a bottom-up emergent behavior strategy has potential. Or a hybrid strategy. When it comes to AI, FDS, etc. I obviously know nothing about nothing, so please chime in.
- n8cpdx 4y ago
  I always thought Tesla should have both. When I had a Toyota with automatic braking, it only kicked in in very rare circumstances; truly an emergency feature rather than a driver assist you rely on. It would have, as a separate system, probably saved several of the Tesla drivers who drove directly into obstacles at highway speeds, which for whatever reason a purely optical system will screw up. Similar to how it saves human drivers that rely on sight.
imdsm 4y ago
In my experience, I only had my car activate this once in 8 years. I was on the M6, and it was slowing down, I changed lane and start slowing, and somehow just miscalculated, and was still going 10 mph when the other car was stopped. I was just too relaxed, and it kicked in and braked for me. Saved me a rear end, and became worth the money.
WXLCKNO 4y ago
Got a new M340i a month ago, first day driving it I get cut off by some 90 year old in a buick who didn't want to miss his turn. Was really glad to have automatic braking, by the time my foot had lifted off the gas it was already braking.
- mgraupner 4y ago
  Such a great feature, both of my last cars had this "presense" breaking. I was never really in a situation where it was critical, but the feeling that the breaks are already in a ready state (touch it slightly and you knew a little bit more will do hard breaking instead of going all the way) when I was touching it felt pretty reassuring and a little magic at the same time.
  - HPsquared 4y ago
    There's also a more basic version of something like this in older cars, "emergency brake assist", which senses a hard application of the brakes (determining from the nature of how the pedal is pressed) and applies full brakes. Apparently most drivers don't actually apply the brakes fully when emergency braking, so this helps with that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_brake_assist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_brake_assist
- jliptzin 4y ago
  It should be mandatory on all new vehicles
- sidewndr46 4y ago
  This sounds great, except it just encourages other drivers on the road to drive even more aggressively. They begin to realize that drivers will either voluntary brake or the automatic braking will do it. The net of this becomes a loss, because roads actually become more dangerous.
- jnwatson 4y ago
  Good to know. My 440i has warned a few times, but never triggered. Looks like BMW has calibrated it pretty well.
sublinear 4y ago
I have a 2017 Outback and there exists a cluster of switches on the dash for easily toggling all the EyeSight features. They actually recommend to disable the "pre-collision braking" feature before driving through an automated carwash. Apart from that situation, I also disable it when I'm facing highly congested traffic for the reasons indicated in the other comments. It's very easy to do. I don't understand why this is a big deal. I think the system works very well and has saved me several times over the years while approaching intersections and on the highway.
- mikeyouse 4y ago
  It's more startling but dangerous, but also, disabled the Reverse Automatic Braking when pulling a trailer. If you try to back into a parking spot with it engaged, the car will freak TF out and make an awful noise as it jams on the brakes. Or so I've heard.
  - mritun 4y ago
    Again I have one on my 2017 Forester, and never turned its safety features including AEB off. All it does when reversing is beep because the sonar sensor is confused. It never behaved unpredictably. (and yes the AEB did save me from backing into things at least twice in these years, so I know it works)
    - mikeyouse 4y ago
      I was just making a joke about how you basically can't back up a trailer with AEB turned on since it sees the trailer behind you and senses an imminent collision. I've got a 2020 Outback and the only other safety feature I turn off is the driver detection or whatever it's called so it doesn't constantly beep at me when I'm looking at cornfields or whatever on road trips. Super satisfied with the system otherwise though. Lane keeping and adaptive cruise control are good enough to ease the burden on longer trips but just bad enough that I never "fully" trust them and completely divert my attention.
- mritun 4y ago
proggy 4y ago
Implementation matters. The automatic braking on my compact SUV has falsely triggered hundreds of times over the course of 3 years, usually when transitioning from a moderately-pitched-down driveway into a roadway. The result of this scenario is the car coming to a dead stop with its front end halfway into a traffic lane, putting me and my passengers at greater risk of a collision from oncoming traffic approaching from the left hand side. It’s happened so often I’ve made a habit of disabling it whenever I exit certain commonly used driveways know to trigger the behavior.
- athorax 4y ago
  Low hanging branches heading up to our house trigger ours when it is breezy out. Super annoying.
- Tade0 4y ago
  Toyota has a good one: it gives me a beep and turns the screen red, but I have to start braking by myself, at which point it takes over and adjusts braking force so as to not hit whatever is in front of me. False positives usually happen when there are cars parked along a turn, but I ignore this completely. Over the course of the five years I had this car it prevented a collision twice this way.
  - KptMarchewa 4y ago
    > Toyota has a good one: it gives me a beep and turns the screen red, but I have to start braking by myself, at which point it takes over and adjusts braking force so as to not hit whatever is in front of me. This way takes away the biggest advantage of this systems - that they can react before you do.
    - Tade0 4y ago
      Thing is it does react before I do - in those two situations I would have probably continued on my path for too long and brake too late to avoid a collision.
troydavis 4y ago
Consumer Reports has a good summary of active safety features, then a breakdown of which models include or offer each feature: https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/cars-with-advanced-safety-systems-a7292621135/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/cars-with-advance... The features most related to this article are: FCW, AEB, CAEB, HAEB, and PD. Note that some manufacturers have much better implementations than others, so after you settle on a few models, investigate how good their implementations actually are.
count 4y ago
"Can" is doing a LOT of heavy lifting there.
sidewndr46 4y ago
Doesn't seem to help those Teslas driving full speed into stopped cars. Or the ones that intentionally steer towards barriers on the highway.
cryptonector 4y ago
One time my car decided that I was going to crash into one of those water tank things at a fork in a highway (actually, this was at a merge, on a curve, which is odd because you don't expect that) and it started doing it's alerting thing, and I had to swerve just so it would stop thinking I was going to crash into it. It was a curving merge, so briefly the car thought that I was driving towards an obstacle, but as long as I stayed in my lane that was never going to happen. That incident gave pause. If the brakes had engaged, might that have caused a crash?
hoffspot 4y ago
I have to back out of my driveway in a 2021 Ford Explorer on a fairly busy street. I am typically very cautious because there are parked cars along the street obstructing visibility and you have to be real careful backing out. Even with this heightened caution level, one time I missed a small, gray car that happened to be perfectly obstructed by the rear left pillar as I elected to back out. The "collision avoidance autobraking" kicked on and definitely saved an accident. I may get false positives now and then, but that one instance of a saved accident makes up for all the random quirks as the manufacturers work to improve these systems. I'm a believer.
garyrichardson 4y ago
I have a 2018 VW Atlas and its automated braking system has done the right thing 99.9% of the time. It's definitely saved me from 5-6 accidents -- being cut off a number of times, a racoon jumping in front of my car, and that one time my attention waned. My Tesla, on the other hand, get's it right about 10% of the time. I wanted to type a higher percentage, but phantom breaking happens so often. The number of times I've seen the red X on the atlas in the entire time owning it is about the number of times the M3 loses its mind on a monthly basis. The other interesting thing: I could probably write the algorithm for the adaptive cruise control on the Atlas. It's so predictable that I know exactly what it's going to do in reaction to traffic around me. If a car ahead of me slows down, I slow down at a constant rate. If the car speeds up, I know exactly how much it's going to speed up. Same with people changing lanes ahead of me, etc. The M3 OTOH feels like a buggy machine learning model. I have no idea why it's at the current speed it's at. If I set it to 120KM/H and there's no car in front of me the chances of it being 120KM/H is about 30%. If a car pulls away from and my car should speed up there is no rhyme or reason to when and how quickly it speeds up. All that being said, I'd still take the Tesla automated braking over nothing at this point. Reading the other posts, it sounds like VW is doing something right.
CobaltFire 4y ago
Anecdote here: 2015 Chevrolet SS was slightly aggressive, but overall I'd say tuned extremely well and saved me once when someone drove through a stop sign without looking onto my freeway offramp and then stopped dead. I was already on the brakes but it went into full panic stop a touch faster than I would have and that made the difference. A few times I noticed it preapplying the brakes when someone cut me off, but it never kicked them in during those situations. Side note, that car has astoundingly good brakes.
lamontcg 4y ago
> The group found front-to-rear crashes were cut 49% when the striking vehicle had forward collision alert plus automatic braking, when compared with vehicles that didn’t have either system. I wonder about front-to-rear crashes when the struck vehicle has automatic braking when the rear one doesn't. I worry about people with automatic braking not paying attention and being on their phone and letting the automatic braking keep them from hitting people in front of them, while coming to abrupt stops and getting hit more from behind.
Ptchd 4y ago
Automatic braking on my Mazda almost caused me 2 accidents.... because it breaks to almost a full stop on the highway for almost no reason sometimes (and someone was right behind me)

103 points by bubblehack3r 4y ago

Sure, but try to convince people who are okay with accepting (other) deaths just to feel "in control" of a two ton vehicle.

trgn 4y ago
Why is this downvoted? This desire to be in control of a car, or the belief one should be in control of a car, is a true curse on the public realm. People who actively think of themselves of good drivers, are invariable the ones who drive aggressively. It's never the ones that drive slow, boring, and predictable that reject safety measures. For example; seatbelts were fought, the fetishization of things like acceleration or top speed capabilities of a car, traffic calming measures that reduce top speeds are always fought, speed limiters are way out of the overton window, just mentioning automated speed cameras cause aneurysms, ... People have unhealthy attachment to the brand of driving, the dumb shit that they see on car advertisements. It's primarily a male ego thing, and it's pathetic and needs to go. Safety measures that prevent so-called spirited driving should be mandatory on cars: speed limiters, auto-braking, and lane keeping are a good start.
- vinyl7 4y ago
  The more boring driving is, the more likely i am to look at my phone or fall asleep, find other distractions. If I drive aggressively then i must stay focused. It wouldn't surprise me if these safety features end up increasing collisions because people start feeling safe that the blockchain ai machine learning sensors of the future will do all the work for them. We already see this happening with teslas.
  - KptMarchewa 4y ago
    That's a common false sentiment. People driving slower, in a safer cars cause less accidents, less deaths, and they themself die less. On the other hand a lot of "aggressive" drivers slip up earlier or later. The risk is too high. Also, looking at a phone is entirely your choice, not a boredom/distraction moment. Listen to audiobooks if your mind needs to do something while driving. >It wouldn't surprise me if these safety features end up increasing collisions because people start feeling safe that the blockchain ai machine learning sensors of the future will do all the work for them. I'm all for them but properly tested and validated, not the tesla cowboy approach that musk espouses. I fear that he will discredit the idea before we have serious autonomous driving products.
- lazide 4y ago
  I’ve had auto braking nearly cause collisions twice with other vehicles when it got confused in construction zones (in heavy traffic) and jammed on the brakes. I also drive pretty carefully and provide a ton of space, but others don’t. Also see Tesla phantom braking. It isn’t just diesel bros.

Midnight1938 4y ago

Cut to clip of car stopping in front of the murderer

Zigurd 4y ago
Even better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP2DK4pEYS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP2DK4pEYS4

bhouston 4y ago

It feels like a simple thing but I also suspect it is effective from my personal experience. We have automatic braking (fixed: breaking) on my Toyota Rav4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbnoFbb8G8Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbnoFbb8G8Q It is a simple thing but the PCS has been triggered 4 times in the last 5 years and never incorrectly. I think I would have stopped soon enough without it (as I've never hit anything in my 20+ years of driving), but it was always in those unexpected situations like a car rapidly slowing down in the middle of the highway for something I can not even see. It feels like initializing values to 0 automatically. You shouldn't need it if everything else goes perfectly, but it doesn't hurt to have it.

heynowheynow 4y ago
Hope it doesn't break automatically since dealers are expensive.
consp 4y ago
My car (not a toyota) does it too and I've never had it actually brake but the very audible + visual warning signs definitely makes you act tiny fraction sooner (at least that is how it feels). I'm pretty sure it would have stopped otherwise on its own but a bit less pleasant. edit: it also triggers when you go down a steep parking lot onto a flat surface a bit too fast which is interesting but at least valid (with respect to suspension compression and hitting the ground).
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- JTbane 4y ago
  >it also triggers when you go down a steep parking lot onto a flat surface a bit too fast that's a great feature, I always have to remind friends and relatives to slow down when going down an incline onto the road (they invariably scrape the underside of the car)
mattgreenrocks 4y ago
We have it our 2016 Forester and I won't buy a new car without it. I'm a pretty careful driver most of the time but I had one incident where I went into a road trance right as the car in front of me braked very abruptly to make a turn and I didn't register it in time. Was going about 35mph and there were a few car lengths in front of me. Automatic braking kicked in along with a loud chime and I slammed on the brake and stopped within inches. Amazing technology that saved my ass and my car.

dsfyu404ed 4y ago

Headline claim only pertains to rear end collisions (which to be fair, are a large portion of collisions on our modern cell-phone filled roads). AEB won't save you from losing your shit in the woods trying to dodge that deer or road debris you couldn't see until last minute nor will it save you from entering a corner too hot.

nradov 4y ago
True, but the latest generation of electronic stability control systems with brake-based torque vectoring are pretty good at handling those situations. Many cars already include that feature and it will probably be universal in a few years. https://www.motorbiscuit.com/do-you-know-what-torque-vectoring-in-a-car-is/ https://www.motorbiscuit.com/do-you-know-what-torque-vectori...
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  Nothing will save you from physics. The tires can only apply so much force to the vehicle in order to change direction or speed. A stability control system fundamentally trades distance traveled forward in exchange for not getting sideways. ESC is good at preventing people who don't know how hard their vehicle can actually turn from going "all in" with the brakes and winding up off the road because they robbed the car of all the tractive force it was using to turn. For example, if you whip around a turn at a high rate of speed and there's a deer there ESC will keep you on the road, you're still gonna hit the deer though. I think all these technologies are beneficial because they bridge the gap between the hapless dolt and the driver who can get the most out of their vehicle but no amount of breathless hand wringing and low effort internet comments will ever change the rules of physics.
  - nradov 4y ago
    I think you missed the point. Adding brake-based torque vectoring to ESC does more for crash avoidance than just ESC alone. It allows the vehicle to rotate faster by maximizing use of the available traction at all four wheels. Even drivers who know how to get the most out of their vehicles aren't able to selectively brake the inside wheels while turning. This isn't magic and won't prevent all crashes, but will prevent some.

JonChesterfield 4y ago

I had a rental with automatic breaking. Gave the really strong impression it wanted to kill me on empty roads. Not keen.

speedgoose 4y ago
Not all cars want to kill you. Selecting a car based on the software should become more important in the future.

NVHacker 4y ago

I wonder how many extra crashes will something like this trigger and who will pay when accidents happen because the car decided to break for no apparent reason. I've seen PCS working well at slow speeds and, arguably, they would be more helpful at higher speeds. But would you trust such system with your life at high speed on a busy motorway ?

consp 4y ago
> who will pay The person hitting you from behind would be at fault anyway, at least where I live you are required to keep enough distance to stop even for no apparent reason, if driving in a lane and not moving to another. If you do it whilst moving in front of another car as it could be on you as you are required to yield and leave enough space to not hinder or endanger the driving of the other vehicle. This also includes brake-checks as your obligation to yield does not stop after you have merged into another highway lane and continues for an unspecified amount of time. So there should not be an issue there, only problem is people can and will not understand the stopping distance of a car driving 100+kph and do not leave enough space. YMMV with respect to the laws involved as it's entirely possible you could be at fault at the place you are living.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  The rules for accident liability aren't as rigid and naive as you are implying. The rear ender having to pay is just the base case that is used in the absence of other facts. If you drive "in an asinine manner" (the definition of asinine is subject to discretion and negotiation between the relevant insurance companies) and manage to make the front of someone else's care meet the rear of yours in the process AND there are witnesses, dashcam footage or other evidince you will almost certainly wind up having to pay up. Everybody knows that traffic doesn't follow the rules. Pretending like it does is a convenient legal fiction we use in order to make rule making easier. There is intentionally tons of redundancy baked into the rules to cover for all the edge cases where people routinely don't follow the rules. Hence why other people's obligation to not crash into stuff isn't a blank check to do whatever. In cases where two people are breaking the rules usually whoever's breaking them in the more typical and predicable manner is the one given a pass (e.g. someone speeding "a normal amount" will likely not be found at fault if you roll a stop and get t-boned).

erisian 4y ago

Fuck no. I had to deal with a rental that had driver assist technology and it damn near killed me. There was a boulder on the road around a blind corner and the car fought me trying to swerve out of the way, I barely avoided it. Imagine auto braking on black ice or because of a faulty sensor. We're giving immature technology too much control of the vehicle.

melling 4y ago
Yeah, everyone’s got that one story in a billion that tries to be the counter example. I remember back in the day when seatbelts were controversial because someone was thrown free from a car.
- erisian 4y ago
  It's a bit of a stretch to compare software overriding intentional input from the driver to the introduction of seatbelts.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  AEB is absolute magic for preventing rear endings by distracted drivers in stop and go traffic. People who's behavior doesn't tend to come with much risk of this will experience mostly false positives from AEB hence why "everyone" has a story.
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    Also, as shown in this very comment section, lots of people swear "the machine is just wrong" while being terrible drivers and tailgating
- macintux 4y ago
  Many of us are quite familiar with the reliability of software, and have serious concerns about trusting it to make the right decisions in a complex real-world situation.
  - 4y ago

branon 4y ago

Oof, my experience with with auto-brake in a 2021 Subaru Crosstrek (anecdotal, sample size of one, all that good stuff) is much the opposite. It's too sensitive and tends to brake shockingly hard during fairly mundane maneuvers. When backing up near a wall/obstacle, the auto-brake seems to kick in when anything is closer than three or four feet away from the bumper. I use my mirrors and have an accurate impression of where the four corners of the vehicle are - I don't need the computer slamming on the brakes when I am reversing in a tight spot. It feels _more_ dangerous and I fear that one day, my knee-jerk reaction will be to fight the machine (press the gas harder, or get distracted looking at the console which emits lights and sounds every single time auto-brake kicks in) and wind up wrecking with even more force than I might have otherwise. Also, in traffic, I'll often take my foot off the gas and coast/idle, letting the vehicle slow down naturally. I try to do this instead of braking sometimes as I believe it assists with keeping the flow of traffic predictable for others. Usually this is no problem because I follow the next person at a safe distance. Sometimes, while decelerating as described above, I will allow the distance between myself and the next car to close, for example, if they're turning and will be gone in a second anyway. The Subaru then ruins my slowdown maneuver by slamming on the brakes because it thinks I'm approaching the vehicle ahead of me too quickly. Well, yes, maybe, but they're also halfway out of the lane already so it's not terribly significant that I'm closing the distance. Another half-second and they'll be gone, restoring my follow distance. (This has only happened once or twice but I imagine it gives the person behind me quite the unnecessary shock.) I wish there was a way to fine-tune the sensitivity, or at least an option to say "I am an attentive driver, please switch auto-brake to a lower sensitivity level." Currently the only option is to disable it each time the engine starts, which feels wrong to do...

s0rce 4y ago
I just bought a 2023 Crosstrek and haven't really noticed it kicking on too aggressively, it does beep sometimes. The only time I get annoyed is when its in adaptive cruise control and someone is merging off the highway it will think they are slowing a lot but its clear they will be out of the way.
- branon 4y ago

jacurtis 4y ago

The title is a tiny bit misleading. Here are the stats from the article: Automatic braking has demonstrated the ability to: - reduce rear-end automobile crashes "in half" (technically 49%) - reduce Rear-end crashes with injuries by 53% - vehicles without automatic braking, but with collision warnings only cut accidents by 16% (compared to 49% with automatic braking) - pickup trucks are less effective at preventing crashes, only preventing 43% of accidents and reducing injuries by 42% (compared to above numbers for other vehicles) - lane departure systems reduce crashes by 8% and reduce injuries by 7% - A consortium of 20 auto manufactures have voluntarily committed to offering automatic braking technology to 95% of their light-duty models during the 2023 model year

IanDrake 4y ago

kleiba 4y ago

I don't have an automatic brake in my car, but a sensor that warns me when I'm about to crash into something. There has so far been a single incident where this was actually helpful. In >95% of the cases, it's false positives. I can only imagine what driving would be like if the car did indeed autonomously brake in those situations.

saiya-jin 4y ago
Same here, previous generation of bmw 5 series, the warnings happen often in non-standard but completely safe situations that human can easily assess (ie full parking lane starting on the right in lane that was driving one 50m before, with very clear signs and good visibility). Or in situation when I am already breaking ie to full stop hard with enough breaking room and it still pops up the warnings. Sometimes just warnings out of blue, in the middle of an empty road. Me and my family are very happy no automated breaking is integrated into that car, its current state would kill us sooner or later.

specialist 4y ago

Someone recently opined that the boffins should have started with collision avoidance. Then build up to FSD. Facepalm slap. Seems so obvious once said out loud. That'd be like a Rodney Brooks inspired actionist strategy, right? Our vehicles as boids, with implicit coordinated action, like flocking, herding, pacing, station keeping, etc. Maybe a bottom-up emergent behavior strategy has potential. Or a hybrid strategy. When it comes to AI, FDS, etc. I obviously know nothing about nothing, so please chime in.

n8cpdx 4y ago
I always thought Tesla should have both. When I had a Toyota with automatic braking, it only kicked in in very rare circumstances; truly an emergency feature rather than a driver assist you rely on. It would have, as a separate system, probably saved several of the Tesla drivers who drove directly into obstacles at highway speeds, which for whatever reason a purely optical system will screw up. Similar to how it saves human drivers that rely on sight.

imdsm 4y ago

In my experience, I only had my car activate this once in 8 years. I was on the M6, and it was slowing down, I changed lane and start slowing, and somehow just miscalculated, and was still going 10 mph when the other car was stopped. I was just too relaxed, and it kicked in and braked for me. Saved me a rear end, and became worth the money.

WXLCKNO 4y ago

Got a new M340i a month ago, first day driving it I get cut off by some 90 year old in a buick who didn't want to miss his turn. Was really glad to have automatic braking, by the time my foot had lifted off the gas it was already braking.

mgraupner 4y ago
Such a great feature, both of my last cars had this "presense" breaking. I was never really in a situation where it was critical, but the feeling that the breaks are already in a ready state (touch it slightly and you knew a little bit more will do hard breaking instead of going all the way) when I was touching it felt pretty reassuring and a little magic at the same time.
- HPsquared 4y ago
  There's also a more basic version of something like this in older cars, "emergency brake assist", which senses a hard application of the brakes (determining from the nature of how the pedal is pressed) and applies full brakes. Apparently most drivers don't actually apply the brakes fully when emergency braking, so this helps with that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_brake_assist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_brake_assist
jliptzin 4y ago
It should be mandatory on all new vehicles
sidewndr46 4y ago
This sounds great, except it just encourages other drivers on the road to drive even more aggressively. They begin to realize that drivers will either voluntary brake or the automatic braking will do it. The net of this becomes a loss, because roads actually become more dangerous.
jnwatson 4y ago
Good to know. My 440i has warned a few times, but never triggered. Looks like BMW has calibrated it pretty well.

sublinear 4y ago

I have a 2017 Outback and there exists a cluster of switches on the dash for easily toggling all the EyeSight features. They actually recommend to disable the "pre-collision braking" feature before driving through an automated carwash. Apart from that situation, I also disable it when I'm facing highly congested traffic for the reasons indicated in the other comments. It's very easy to do. I don't understand why this is a big deal. I think the system works very well and has saved me several times over the years while approaching intersections and on the highway.

mikeyouse 4y ago
It's more startling but dangerous, but also, disabled the Reverse Automatic Braking when pulling a trailer. If you try to back into a parking spot with it engaged, the car will freak TF out and make an awful noise as it jams on the brakes. Or so I've heard.
- mritun 4y ago
  Again I have one on my 2017 Forester, and never turned its safety features including AEB off. All it does when reversing is beep because the sonar sensor is confused. It never behaved unpredictably. (and yes the AEB did save me from backing into things at least twice in these years, so I know it works)
  - mikeyouse 4y ago
    I was just making a joke about how you basically can't back up a trailer with AEB turned on since it sees the trailer behind you and senses an imminent collision. I've got a 2020 Outback and the only other safety feature I turn off is the driver detection or whatever it's called so it doesn't constantly beep at me when I'm looking at cornfields or whatever on road trips. Super satisfied with the system otherwise though. Lane keeping and adaptive cruise control are good enough to ease the burden on longer trips but just bad enough that I never "fully" trust them and completely divert my attention.
mritun 4y ago

proggy 4y ago

Implementation matters. The automatic braking on my compact SUV has falsely triggered hundreds of times over the course of 3 years, usually when transitioning from a moderately-pitched-down driveway into a roadway. The result of this scenario is the car coming to a dead stop with its front end halfway into a traffic lane, putting me and my passengers at greater risk of a collision from oncoming traffic approaching from the left hand side. It’s happened so often I’ve made a habit of disabling it whenever I exit certain commonly used driveways know to trigger the behavior.

athorax 4y ago
Low hanging branches heading up to our house trigger ours when it is breezy out. Super annoying.
Tade0 4y ago
Toyota has a good one: it gives me a beep and turns the screen red, but I have to start braking by myself, at which point it takes over and adjusts braking force so as to not hit whatever is in front of me. False positives usually happen when there are cars parked along a turn, but I ignore this completely. Over the course of the five years I had this car it prevented a collision twice this way.
- KptMarchewa 4y ago
  > Toyota has a good one: it gives me a beep and turns the screen red, but I have to start braking by myself, at which point it takes over and adjusts braking force so as to not hit whatever is in front of me. This way takes away the biggest advantage of this systems - that they can react before you do.
  - Tade0 4y ago
    Thing is it does react before I do - in those two situations I would have probably continued on my path for too long and brake too late to avoid a collision.

troydavis 4y ago

Consumer Reports has a good summary of active safety features, then a breakdown of which models include or offer each feature: https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/cars-with-advanced-safety-systems-a7292621135/ https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/cars-with-advance... The features most related to this article are: FCW, AEB, CAEB, HAEB, and PD. Note that some manufacturers have much better implementations than others, so after you settle on a few models, investigate how good their implementations actually are.

count 4y ago

"Can" is doing a LOT of heavy lifting there.

sidewndr46 4y ago

Doesn't seem to help those Teslas driving full speed into stopped cars. Or the ones that intentionally steer towards barriers on the highway.

cryptonector 4y ago

One time my car decided that I was going to crash into one of those water tank things at a fork in a highway (actually, this was at a merge, on a curve, which is odd because you don't expect that) and it started doing it's alerting thing, and I had to swerve just so it would stop thinking I was going to crash into it. It was a curving merge, so briefly the car thought that I was driving towards an obstacle, but as long as I stayed in my lane that was never going to happen. That incident gave pause. If the brakes had engaged, might that have caused a crash?

hoffspot 4y ago

I have to back out of my driveway in a 2021 Ford Explorer on a fairly busy street. I am typically very cautious because there are parked cars along the street obstructing visibility and you have to be real careful backing out. Even with this heightened caution level, one time I missed a small, gray car that happened to be perfectly obstructed by the rear left pillar as I elected to back out. The "collision avoidance autobraking" kicked on and definitely saved an accident. I may get false positives now and then, but that one instance of a saved accident makes up for all the random quirks as the manufacturers work to improve these systems. I'm a believer.

garyrichardson 4y ago

I have a 2018 VW Atlas and its automated braking system has done the right thing 99.9% of the time. It's definitely saved me from 5-6 accidents -- being cut off a number of times, a racoon jumping in front of my car, and that one time my attention waned. My Tesla, on the other hand, get's it right about 10% of the time. I wanted to type a higher percentage, but phantom breaking happens so often. The number of times I've seen the red X on the atlas in the entire time owning it is about the number of times the M3 loses its mind on a monthly basis. The other interesting thing: I could probably write the algorithm for the adaptive cruise control on the Atlas. It's so predictable that I know exactly what it's going to do in reaction to traffic around me. If a car ahead of me slows down, I slow down at a constant rate. If the car speeds up, I know exactly how much it's going to speed up. Same with people changing lanes ahead of me, etc. The M3 OTOH feels like a buggy machine learning model. I have no idea why it's at the current speed it's at. If I set it to 120KM/H and there's no car in front of me the chances of it being 120KM/H is about 30%. If a car pulls away from and my car should speed up there is no rhyme or reason to when and how quickly it speeds up. All that being said, I'd still take the Tesla automated braking over nothing at this point. Reading the other posts, it sounds like VW is doing something right.

CobaltFire 4y ago

Anecdote here: 2015 Chevrolet SS was slightly aggressive, but overall I'd say tuned extremely well and saved me once when someone drove through a stop sign without looking onto my freeway offramp and then stopped dead. I was already on the brakes but it went into full panic stop a touch faster than I would have and that made the difference. A few times I noticed it preapplying the brakes when someone cut me off, but it never kicked them in during those situations. Side note, that car has astoundingly good brakes.

lamontcg 4y ago

> The group found front-to-rear crashes were cut 49% when the striking vehicle had forward collision alert plus automatic braking, when compared with vehicles that didn’t have either system. I wonder about front-to-rear crashes when the struck vehicle has automatic braking when the rear one doesn't. I worry about people with automatic braking not paying attention and being on their phone and letting the automatic braking keep them from hitting people in front of them, while coming to abrupt stops and getting hit more from behind.

Ptchd 4y ago

Automatic braking on my Mazda almost caused me 2 accidents.... because it breaks to almost a full stop on the highway for almost no reason sometimes (and someone was right behind me)