Photo: Tesla Motors
In case you haven't read the news for the past week, Tesla's Autopilot has come under fire lately after it was revealed that in early May, a Model S driver lost his life in a crash while having the driving aid system active.
Last Friday, another incident involving a Tesla vehicle - this time a Model X SUV - was blamed by the car's owner on the Autopilot, with the NHTSA now investigating both cases. But while we wait for the agency's findings, let's have a look at a very interesting comparison made by Motor Trend.
Acknowledging the fact that, sooner or later, self-driving cars will be upon us, the journalists wanted to see where the industry stands at the moment, and how far away we are from Level 5 autonomous driving. They chose four cars for this test, and obviously, the one that makes the boldest claims about its abilities couldn't have been missing.
We're talking, of course, about Tesla, represented by a Model S electric sedan, the only car here that can make a case for the third level of automatization. The other participants were a Mercedes-AMG S65 with DISTRONIC PLUS and STEERING ASSIST (which, under the right circumstances, make the Merc a Level 2 car), a Cadillac CT6 without the soon to be launched Super Cruise feature, and a Genesis 3.8 (both still stuck at Level 1, meaning they only possess driver assistance systems).
Second, the journalists wanted to see how the four cars would do in a traffic jam or any other sort of stop-and-go situation. They measured the stopping reaction, the gap each car left to the one in front, and the time it took to accelerate once the forerunner got moving. The Mercedes-AMG S65 stopped the soonest (0.4 seconds) and left the shortest gap (9.5 feet), as opposed to the Genesis that stopped 13.2 feet away from the lead car. That's a huge space basically inviting all other drivers to cut in front of you. The Tesla had average values, but it was the quickest to follow the vehicle in front once it pulled away (0.6 seconds).
The second to last test checked the distance left from the car in front at different speed values. The results for all four vehicles were worse than the recommended two seconds, end even worse than what human drivers actually prefer - somewhere around 1.5-1.6 seconds. Out of them all, however, it was the Tesla that stood out as the most risk-taking, with the gap dropping to 0.7 seconds at 70 mph (as opposed to Cadillac's 1.1 seconds for the same speed).
On the first route, the Mercedes needed 140 touches accounting for 10% of the time, the Hyundai 141 and 11% while the Tesla was good with just 22 touches, equalling 2% of the time. The second run gave even more drastic results: 113 and 29% for the S65, 148 and 28% for the Genesis, and 12 and 0.5% for the Model S. These numbers make it sound like the Tesla is the more advanced of the three, and that may very well be the case, but it's also the one that allows its drivers to dose off, taking their eyes and minds off the road. And, as more and more situations begin to demonstrate, that can have very regrettable consequences. Should Tesla hold back progress just because its clients can't use the technology the way it's supposed to? No, but it should try to find more ways of convincing its drivers to keep their hands on the wheel.
Acknowledging the fact that, sooner or later, self-driving cars will be upon us, the journalists wanted to see where the industry stands at the moment, and how far away we are from Level 5 autonomous driving. They chose four cars for this test, and obviously, the one that makes the boldest claims about its abilities couldn't have been missing.
We're talking, of course, about Tesla, represented by a Model S electric sedan, the only car here that can make a case for the third level of automatization. The other participants were a Mercedes-AMG S65 with DISTRONIC PLUS and STEERING ASSIST (which, under the right circumstances, make the Merc a Level 2 car), a Cadillac CT6 without the soon to be launched Super Cruise feature, and a Genesis 3.8 (both still stuck at Level 1, meaning they only possess driver assistance systems).
Testing procedure
The test devised by Motor Trend included several trials, such as another car cutting in front dangerously close at highway speeds, with the emphasis put on the reaction time, the severity of the braking force applied and the time taken to accelerate back up to speed. Here, the Genesis was the slowest to react with 3.7 seconds elapsed until the maximum deceleration point, while the Mercedes-AMG S65 really shook those inside by generating -0.13 g, more than double that of the Tesla. The Model S, on the other hand, had the most balanced reaction, only slightly lagging behind when it came to gaining speed back up.Second, the journalists wanted to see how the four cars would do in a traffic jam or any other sort of stop-and-go situation. They measured the stopping reaction, the gap each car left to the one in front, and the time it took to accelerate once the forerunner got moving. The Mercedes-AMG S65 stopped the soonest (0.4 seconds) and left the shortest gap (9.5 feet), as opposed to the Genesis that stopped 13.2 feet away from the lead car. That's a huge space basically inviting all other drivers to cut in front of you. The Tesla had average values, but it was the quickest to follow the vehicle in front once it pulled away (0.6 seconds).
The second to last test checked the distance left from the car in front at different speed values. The results for all four vehicles were worse than the recommended two seconds, end even worse than what human drivers actually prefer - somewhere around 1.5-1.6 seconds. Out of them all, however, it was the Tesla that stood out as the most risk-taking, with the gap dropping to 0.7 seconds at 70 mph (as opposed to Cadillac's 1.1 seconds for the same speed).
Save the best for last
Motor Trend has kept the most important part of this test for the end: checking how many times the vehicle asks the driver to put his hands on the wheel during two different routes. Here, the difference between the Tesla and the other two cars (the Cadillac did not enter since it doesn't have steering assist) was huge. The journalists described the method as follows: "Whenever the car demanded that we hold the steering wheel—it began to cross the lane markings, or we became nervous." In other words, either the car felt unsure, or it did something stupid.On the first route, the Mercedes needed 140 touches accounting for 10% of the time, the Hyundai 141 and 11% while the Tesla was good with just 22 touches, equalling 2% of the time. The second run gave even more drastic results: 113 and 29% for the S65, 148 and 28% for the Genesis, and 12 and 0.5% for the Model S. These numbers make it sound like the Tesla is the more advanced of the three, and that may very well be the case, but it's also the one that allows its drivers to dose off, taking their eyes and minds off the road. And, as more and more situations begin to demonstrate, that can have very regrettable consequences. Should Tesla hold back progress just because its clients can't use the technology the way it's supposed to? No, but it should try to find more ways of convincing its drivers to keep their hands on the wheel.
Google News