Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Consumer Reports Updates Its Scoring System, Leaves Tesla FSD Out In The Cold

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Some of the systems available right now are so good that they can lull drivers into a false sense of security.
Humans, however, are notoriously bad at passively paying attention to something.

Consumer Reports says that in the future, they’ll actually start detracting points for systems
that fail to adequately keep driver’s attention on the road.


GM-Super-Cruise.jpg
 
The safest driver assist feature set is not having any driver assist features. Can’t be inattentive due to a feature that doesn’t exist, right?

We are going to subtract points for a subjective test about “driver attentiveness” because it may cause crash’s though empirically the evidence is overwhelming that even with this issue cars using driver assist features are safer and Tesla autopilot in particular has a excellent track record.

Seems to me just a way to decide we care going to take points away from Tesla so that the competition can be graded on a curve.
 
The safest driver assist feature set is not having any driver assist features. Can’t be inattentive due to a feature that doesn’t exist, right?

We are going to subtract points for a subjective test about “driver attentiveness” because it may cause crash’s though empirically the evidence is overwhelming that even with this issue cars using driver assist features are safer and Tesla autopilot in particular has a excellent track record.

Seems to me just a way to decide we care going to take points away from Tesla so that the competition can be graded on a curve.
I agree it’s subjective and probably just a jab at Tesla. I feel less attentive because I have to take my eyes off the road to see if that message pops up to pull on the wheel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M109Rider
If Autopilot has such a great record, what's the harm in trying to make it better by supplementing it with even better tools for driver engagement?

This isn't all or nothing, we can have driver-assist systems that complement human drivers fantastically while also reducing the risk of complacency and issues associated with passive monitoring, drifting attention, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ahcpa
If Autopilot has such a great record, what's the harm in trying to make it better by supplementing it with even better tools for driver engagement?

This isn't all or nothing, we can have driver-assist systems that complement human drivers fantastically while also reducing the risk of complacency and issues associated with passive monitoring, drifting attention, etc.
Till when, do you punish a system that is "lvl 3" and doesn't need driver input because the driver isn't paying attention? Who makes these decisions? Just because a company calls something level 3, doesn't mean it truly is safe.
 
Till when, do you punish a system that is "lvl 3" and doesn't need driver input because the driver isn't paying attention? Who makes these decisions? Just because a company calls something level 3, doesn't mean it truly is safe.
I would guess Level 3 systems would be graded on their ability to properly communicate with drivers in terms of warning them to take over etc

Level 3+ are all about liability and who owns the driving task, not necessarily capabilities or safety. Something like Mercedes' Level 3 system right now would really be there to reduce the driving burden in traffic jams, but it means Mercedes owns the driving task while active and that alone is a huge step.