-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Adaptive Cruise Control (experience post FW v6.1)
- Thread starter wk057
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model S User Interface
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
I just had my first real drive using the TACC. This is definitely some powerful stuff! It really changes the driving experience.
I don't think I've seen the following discussed yet. There's no question that using the TACC I lost efficiency as opposed to how I would have been controlling the go pedal. The TACC would try to close gaps faster than I would and would maintain speed longer and then have to brake harder, etc. (I'm not complaining--just pointing this out.) So assuming everyone can agree that the TACC, as programmed now, is going to behave less efficiently than a driver attempting to drive efficiently, there are several questions.
One would be how using the TACC impacts the range estimation now available in the NAV system. Perhaps the differences are not significant enough to make much of a difference there, but it is a question. A more important question, I think, is will there wind up being modes at some point, perhaps user-configurable, between "range-priority" or "proximity-priority" when using TACC. The former would allow the car you're following to remain further ahead of you at times, to save some energy, and accelerate at a more reasonable pace when you need to catch up to it. The latter would try to stay closer to the car in front of you, accelerating faster if needed, and would not be concerned with the energy expenditure.
My sense is that for the most part, the current TACC is basically in 100% "proximity-priority" mode. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. But as the technology matures, it would be great to be able to use TACC, but also maximize range, knowing that doing so will mean TACC is somewhat less effective, but still useful.
Does that make sense?
I don't think I've seen the following discussed yet. There's no question that using the TACC I lost efficiency as opposed to how I would have been controlling the go pedal. The TACC would try to close gaps faster than I would and would maintain speed longer and then have to brake harder, etc. (I'm not complaining--just pointing this out.) So assuming everyone can agree that the TACC, as programmed now, is going to behave less efficiently than a driver attempting to drive efficiently, there are several questions.
One would be how using the TACC impacts the range estimation now available in the NAV system. Perhaps the differences are not significant enough to make much of a difference there, but it is a question. A more important question, I think, is will there wind up being modes at some point, perhaps user-configurable, between "range-priority" or "proximity-priority" when using TACC. The former would allow the car you're following to remain further ahead of you at times, to save some energy, and accelerate at a more reasonable pace when you need to catch up to it. The latter would try to stay closer to the car in front of you, accelerating faster if needed, and would not be concerned with the energy expenditure.
My sense is that for the most part, the current TACC is basically in 100% "proximity-priority" mode. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. But as the technology matures, it would be great to be able to use TACC, but also maximize range, knowing that doing so will mean TACC is somewhat less effective, but still useful.
Does that make sense?
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
I was using 7 pretty much exclusively. I played around with 5 and 6 some of the time, but for the most part it was 7.
Just picked up my D from the detailer and had a chance to try out the new features during a stop-and-go commute on surface streets where the speed limit varied between 35 and 55 mph.
Executive summary: I'm sold! It's a very solid first release.
I verified tacc functioning at various distance settings, all the way to a dead stop behind traffic at stop lights. When the light turns green, all you have to do is tap on the accelerator and tacc re-engages with the previous settings. I also verified lane-change acceleration up to the speed-limit-plus-offset. I paid particular attention to the regen and friction braking behavior when traffic slowed in front of me; as others have noted, the software waits longer to begin slowing that you or I would (after our experience with one-pedal driving). Regen engages first, then the friction brakes come in using a noticeable step-function braking profile. As the car slows to a full stop, you can feel the friction brakes back off the max braking force used (also in stepwise fashion) and then there's a little jolt as the brakes lock fully just before the car reaches a dead stop. It feels like a limo driver's stop as simulated by a robot using an 8-bit brake controller.
At at any rate, I'm about to go back out to the car and dri...er, collect some more data. :wink:
- - - Updated - - -
By the way, my Sig S has always had the ability to set cruise control at any speed down to and including 20mph. Will investigate if the D is different on 6.1.
Executive summary: I'm sold! It's a very solid first release.
I verified tacc functioning at various distance settings, all the way to a dead stop behind traffic at stop lights. When the light turns green, all you have to do is tap on the accelerator and tacc re-engages with the previous settings. I also verified lane-change acceleration up to the speed-limit-plus-offset. I paid particular attention to the regen and friction braking behavior when traffic slowed in front of me; as others have noted, the software waits longer to begin slowing that you or I would (after our experience with one-pedal driving). Regen engages first, then the friction brakes come in using a noticeable step-function braking profile. As the car slows to a full stop, you can feel the friction brakes back off the max braking force used (also in stepwise fashion) and then there's a little jolt as the brakes lock fully just before the car reaches a dead stop. It feels like a limo driver's stop as simulated by a robot using an 8-bit brake controller.
At at any rate, I'm about to go back out to the car and dri...er, collect some more data. :wink:
- - - Updated - - -
By the way, my Sig S has always had the ability to set cruise control at any speed down to and including 20mph. Will investigate if the D is different on 6.1.
sillydriver
Member
Tesla should be glad their customer base of intelligent early adopters is on average capable of handling beta testing and developmental test driving. If their base consisted of typical, lowest common denominator car buyers, the internet would soon be full of stories about the upcoming rash of crashes.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
As much as I enjoyed playing with the TACC, when I do the other end of this trip on Monday I'm not going to use the TACC at all, will set cruise control at 68 or so on the highway, will drive "normally", and will see how things turn out.
Wow. This is all pretty scarey. Probably perfectly fine for the ultra savvy driver, but we've all seen how many ignorant drivers there are on the road. Probably less so with Tesla drivers, but wow, I can see some disasters about to happen
I don't see how this is worse than with normal cruise control and inattentiveness. At least with this you have a chance.
Edit: I see I was replying to sort of the wrong post. But still, I think erring on the side of brakeing is likely where we are at right now and safer than the alternative.
Canuck
Well-Known Member
It will be interesting to see over time how many people turn off tacc after trying it, and how the system improves with software updates rather than requiring updated hardware.
Canuck
Well-Known Member
Maybe then they should have held back tacc until it could work together with autopilot to avoid potentially dangerous situations?
A tip to try: One thing that I've learned to do with adaptive cruise is to actually drive "against" other cars in curves. Make the traffic in front something to "bounce from" (not physically, but let the radar beam be that buffer).
I know it sounds silly, and not having driven Tesla's implementation I don't know how applicable, but instead of hitting the breaks if the ACC is not seeing the car in front for whatever reason (say, a strong curve), I often point the car towards some other car, perhaps on another lane, to do the trick.
This sounds more extreme in writing than it does in reality. I wouldn't do anything dangerous like moving between lanes, it is more a consciousness that develops into pointing the car at the traffic in front, through minor adjustments to the driving line. Eventually it just becomes second nature to react to the nature of the radar.
Of course through developing the ACC and its use of various sensors and navigation data, adaptive cruise can take curves better into count. Things are a lot better today than they were in the first adaptive cruises 10+ years ago.
I know it sounds silly, and not having driven Tesla's implementation I don't know how applicable, but instead of hitting the breaks if the ACC is not seeing the car in front for whatever reason (say, a strong curve), I often point the car towards some other car, perhaps on another lane, to do the trick.
This sounds more extreme in writing than it does in reality. I wouldn't do anything dangerous like moving between lanes, it is more a consciousness that develops into pointing the car at the traffic in front, through minor adjustments to the driving line. Eventually it just becomes second nature to react to the nature of the radar.
Of course through developing the ACC and its use of various sensors and navigation data, adaptive cruise can take curves better into count. Things are a lot better today than they were in the first adaptive cruises 10+ years ago.
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
Regarding TACC:
Let's all remember this is not autopilot...it's just an advanced form of ACC. It's not steering for you, and really seems to be more intended for highway use.
Like others I also intend to try it and most likely use it on surface streets...but it is not appropriate to be used for turning in intersections, IMHO.
Be very careful.
Let's all remember this is not autopilot...it's just an advanced form of ACC. It's not steering for you, and really seems to be more intended for highway use.
Like others I also intend to try it and most likely use it on surface streets...but it is not appropriate to be used for turning in intersections, IMHO.
Be very careful.
In the 3 incidents that you described, were you able to see the lane lines on the ground? Could it have been a situation where the lines were so faded that the autopilot camera couldn't accurately judge what was coming up within the lane versus outside of the lane?
Reading my comment, even basic adaptive cruise control can be useful for turning in intersections, if one is careful at keeping the car pointed towards the car turning in front (if there is such a car).
It is a fine art, that of driving "against" other cars in front to control your own speed without touching pedals.
(Disclaimer: General ACC comment, I haven't driven Tesla's implementation yet.)
tliving
Member
I'd love to hear how someone with this update experiences ACC when regen is limited due to cold. Does it still work?
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
Reading my comment, even basic adaptive cruise control can be useful for turning in intersections, if one is careful at keeping the car pointed towards the car turning in front (if there is such a car).
It is a fine art, that of driving "against" other cars in front to control your own speed without touching pedals.
(Disclaimer: General ACC comment, I haven't driven Tesla's implementation yet.)
I've never driven a car with ACC that is enabled below 20 or 25 MPH, but those that have ACC (like our Toyota Avalon) would certainly apply brakes if used in a shallow curved turn lane.
- - - Updated - - -
Thanks for testing the limits for those of us (im)patiently waiting for the update notification!
Similar threads
