Absolutely! With the exception of creeping in bumper to bumper traffic and long stretches of Interstate driving, I think AP 1.0 is dangerous and unreliable -- let alone at high speeds on undivided roadways. I know I may be a heretic, but I am not surprised that restrictions on AP 1.0 are coming. It was always beta software and its limitations will become increasingly pronounced as AP 2.0 matures -- the future is that AP 1.0 will become non-supported legacy hardware/software. I would not be surprised that it will be forced into retirement by regulators -- this would probably be good for the safety of the public and for Tesla. I won't miss it much. The best part of owning a Tesla, in my view, is driving one. No revolt here.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
AutoPilot speed restrictions...what do you think
- Thread starter boonedocks
- Start date
Absolutely! With the exception of creeping in bumper to bumper traffic and long stretches of Interstate driving, I think AP 1.0 is dangerous and unreliable -- let alone at high speeds on undivided roadways. I know I may be a heretic, but I am not surprised that restrictions on AP 1.0 are coming. It was always beta software and its limitations will become increasingly pronounced as AP 2.0 matures -- the future is that AP 1.0 will become non-supported legacy hardware/software. I would not be surprised that it will be forced into retirement by regulators -- this would probably be good for the safety of the public and for Tesla. I won't miss it much. The best part of owning a Tesla, in my view, is driving one. No revolt here.
They came for the ludicrous launchers, but I said nothing because I was not a ludicrous owner...
They came for the autopilot users, but I said nothing because I was not a long distance commuter...
They came for the autopilot users, but I said nothing because I was not a long distance commuter...
I get it. My only observation is that these are entirely different issues. . . The limitations and regulatory issues of AP 1.0 were fully disclosed. At best, it was always going to be a work in progress. I think Tesla saw the writing on the wall with the rushed roll-out of AP 2.0 disabled -- one or two more serious crashes, let alone the injury or death of non-Tesla motorists, resulting from inattentive drivers traveling at high speed on AP could kill the whole program in its tracks. They essentially capped the current pool of vehicles running AP while they get this figured out. The restrictions being imposed may be an attempt by Tesla to fend off the demise of AP 1.0 for as long as possible and allow time for 2.0 to be implemented. If 2.0 is not magnitudes better than 1.0, I'd be worried about the future of the program.
I follow the instructions and keep my hands on the wheel and stay alert because I have experienced AP's limitations. So I have a right to complain by your logic.
This software limitation is a hassle and takes away the usefulness of a feature Elon Musk touted as "game changing" for years. It was undocumented which makes it sneaky. I would have declined the update had I known, even though AP is not too frequently activated in my car, when it is the speed limit is dangerous (I get passed and egged on when I do 5 over, even).
Considering the freeways in Arizona are often undivided (drives to both LA and Vegas come to mind), they haven't even fully covered their old "on ramp to off ramp" design.
I thought AP1.0 didn't have staff working it because the teams were focused on 2.0. I wish that had been the case rather than "nerfing" a capability.
scottf200
Well-Known Member
@Alex D , Have you called to complain? I have a couple times. They first time they were supposed to have my service center contact me. I have not heard from the SC. BOTH the people on the phone (and the people around them they asked) did not have ANY idea what I was talking about. They were never told it changed. They thought it was a bug. I called again tonight and they are supposed to be following up on it.
Please call the Tesla number and use the options that is about the functionality of your car.
I've driven a rural 55 MPH road many times since I've owned my X and it has always done 60 MPH on this straight rural road across IL for 100 miles. Now last week it is limited to 55. Had a semi-truck pass me on this two lane road and other cars following closely until they passed.
@kavyboy , Have you called to complain?
I'm on your side here. I think the speed limit is ridiculous. I'm driving, i should be allowed to choose the speed.
scottf200
Well-Known Member
@Steve1081 , what version of software are you on? This started for me as near as I can tell on one of these two.
I got one (.16) when the SC applied it while getting other work done then the other (.82) that night.
Tue Dec 13 2016 11:06am 2.48.16
Tue Dec 13 2016 11:59am 2.48.82
Did that know what you were talking about? ie. did they acknowledge that they change was intentional?
DrivingRockies
Closed
davidc18
Active Member
Expect more restrictions in the future. AP 2.0 will have even more restrictive use cases as it is turned on. You should expect that FSD will not ever exceed the post ed speed limit on any road. Tesla has clearly followed a path that says you will use your ( with autopilot ) car they way they see fit, period.
davidc18
Active Member
I am not a fan of any restrictions. The driver is responsible 100% of the time.
The artificial nags are a dangerous distraction and simply train the users to do the minimum necessary action to remove them. Even a basic review of aircraft safety systems supports this.
The artificial nags are a dangerous distraction and simply train the users to do the minimum necessary action to remove them. Even a basic review of aircraft safety systems supports this.
It's inevitable new regulations will impose restrictions on AP usage, or Tesla will eventually be dragged into a court case on accident liability, which could also result in restrictions being imposed by Tesla (to minimize their exposure to liability claims).
There's an interesting dilemma with speed limits.
Forcing AP/FSD to obey the speed limits and other traffic laws can make cars operate differently than human drivers. And while that may keep the software from violating the laws, is it really safer?
If you set your cruise control to the speed limit, or even 5 miles above the speed limit - is that really safer, when all of the other vehicles are driving faster?
However, if there is any possibility Tesla could have liability for accidents occurring while vehicles are under control of AP/FSD, and there is a liability increase if the vehicles is operating above the posted speed limit, will Tesla decide to impose restrictions on AP/FSD usage to minimize their liability exposure?
For example, other manufacturers have imposed severe restrictions on user interactions with their console displays while cars are in motion. Other than voice commands, other operations (such as entering navigation destinations or even changing the car's settings) may be disabled until the car comes to a complete stop. There aren't any regulations covering this (and Tesla doesn't impose any restrictions), so it must be concerns by the manufacturers that if they allow full use of the user interface while driving, they could be held responsible for any accidents.
Tesla is leading the pack for autonomous driving, and like any new technology, we should expect to see changes as the technology matures, and it becomes clearer how the technology can be operated safely.
If that means following the posted speed limit, that may be a trade-off we'll all have to work through in order to get the benefits of AP/FSD.
There's an interesting dilemma with speed limits.
Forcing AP/FSD to obey the speed limits and other traffic laws can make cars operate differently than human drivers. And while that may keep the software from violating the laws, is it really safer?
If you set your cruise control to the speed limit, or even 5 miles above the speed limit - is that really safer, when all of the other vehicles are driving faster?
However, if there is any possibility Tesla could have liability for accidents occurring while vehicles are under control of AP/FSD, and there is a liability increase if the vehicles is operating above the posted speed limit, will Tesla decide to impose restrictions on AP/FSD usage to minimize their liability exposure?
For example, other manufacturers have imposed severe restrictions on user interactions with their console displays while cars are in motion. Other than voice commands, other operations (such as entering navigation destinations or even changing the car's settings) may be disabled until the car comes to a complete stop. There aren't any regulations covering this (and Tesla doesn't impose any restrictions), so it must be concerns by the manufacturers that if they allow full use of the user interface while driving, they could be held responsible for any accidents.
Tesla is leading the pack for autonomous driving, and like any new technology, we should expect to see changes as the technology matures, and it becomes clearer how the technology can be operated safely.
If that means following the posted speed limit, that may be a trade-off we'll all have to work through in order to get the benefits of AP/FSD.
green1
Active Member
Tesla WAS leading the pack, but the software has gotten worse with every single update. All the comparison reviews I've seen between the Tesla version and the Mercedes system were done on 7.0 and said that the Tesla one was better mostly because it required less driver interaction. I'd love to see some new reviews based on Tesla's latest downgrades, I'm not confident that Tesla is maintaining a lead here. I bet all the other systems are quickly catching up (and not because they've gotten any better!)
Alex D
Member
I did call them just now and was told that it is an added "safety" feature and there's nothing I can do about it. I told her that I don't consider it safe when I (or my car in that case) becomes an obstacle for other vehicles on the road. She promised me to forward my feedback, apologized and that was it. It really p$%^#@ me off.
green1
Active Member
If this sort of behaviour pisses you off, don't let Tesla get away with it.
Request a warranty repair where they fix the functionality back to what you expected. When they refuse, escalate. Take it to arbitration, don't take it lying down.
Tesla keeps repeatedly doing these things because there is ZERO consequence to them for doing so.
Request a warranty repair where they fix the functionality back to what you expected. When they refuse, escalate. Take it to arbitration, don't take it lying down.
Tesla keeps repeatedly doing these things because there is ZERO consequence to them for doing so.
green1
Active Member
They will say "we have forwarded your concern to your local service centre" (or at least that's what they said when I sent a similar one about restrictions added in 7.1) My local service centre then told me that the next firmware update (8.0) would be even better, which of course it was not, and then eventually when I refused to leave them alone told me that they had escalated it to "upper management in California" who never contacted me, nor would the local service centre provide any contacts for them. After several months of being stonewalled at the local level, I reached out to a user on this forum who has been identified as being high up in the service organization at Tesla. They told me to upgrade to 8.0 as I'd love it, then stopped replying to me.
I have now followed the instructions in my warranty documentation and sent a registered letter to Tesla. They have so far ignored that as well, but I gave them a deadline of the end of the year to reply.
My next steps involve government consumer protection agencies, and/or the arbitration process.
My car had several features at delivery that they refuse to support. I have a warranty on those features, and I want them to honour the warranty.
Additionally, if I go to Government consumer protection agencies, I'm going to push on the false advertising front as well due to all the AP1 promises which have not been delivered on. (I wouldn't have gone there had Tesla not pushed me, but if I'm going to take this, I'm taking it all the way.)
Similar threads
