Feature wish for Traffic-Aware Cruise Control

[Olle K.]

I wish to have more options in TACC to choose larger distances to car in front. The currently largest setting is 7, which gives between 2 and 3 seconds' leeway. While this may well be more than enough for Tesla's reaction time, it's much too close for driver to relax and for front end of Tesla to avoid dirt, sand and rock shots. It is particularly terrible in semi-crowded highway traffic at normal speeds in the spring where there is no point in overtaking, but winter's mud and sand is still on the road.
As it is now, I can't see any reason for using or even having any one of the levels 1-6 at all. I hope that a simple software upgrade will make it possible to set the level in seconds instead of a random number. 1-7 seconds' options would be perfect.
Please vote up if you agree. I suppose Tesla is monitoring these forums.

 

[daniel]

I don't have TACC, but your suggestion sounds reasonable to me. I would not count on Tesla reading every thread on this board, however. I would suggest contacting them directly.

 

[EVCollies]

Wow, the drivers in Sweden must be much more polite that the Front Range, if my TACC is set to > 4 cars pass and cut back into my lane so much I feel like I'm traveling backwards.

 

[iceman747]

Wow, the drivers in Sweden must be much more polite that the Front Range, if my TACC is set to > 4 cars pass and cut back into my lane so much I feel like I'm traveling backwards.

I have my TACC set to 1 and I still get cut off. I'm in CA though.

 

[HankLloydRight]

In the Northeast Corridor, anything greater than 2 results in the same behavior (being passed and cut-off).

And even at 2 sometimes I need to speed up to shorten the gap to prevent someone from jamming themselves in front of me.


I simply can not imagine what a 6 ot 7 setting would be like.

 

[Olle K.]

Thank you for your input. Yes, cutting in is a problem here too, but it is also dependent on the general speed and degree of jamming. At normal highway speeds, if you keep, say, 5-6 secs distance to the next car, the speedsters overtaking and (possibly) cutting in will (1) more often cut in with a better distance in front of you, and (2) soon continue further from you anyway and overtake the next car, so they will likely neither disturb your driving nor upset your mind. Try it! Too short inter-vehicle distance at normal speeds is the root of most problems. In traffic jams with slow traffic I too keep it shorter, because then mud etc. is no big problem.

 

[Snowstorm]

It would be good to know what those numbers actually mean. Are they units of time? Or are they general guidelines that vary based on conditions. I appreciate that we can set it from 1-7, as there are different settings for different situation. I usually set mine to 6, which I find OK (or at times a bit close) on highway speeds but too far when it is stop and go traffic in which I set a 2-3 setting. I loosely timed 6 to be about 2 seconds of time at 110km/h. I think a limitation the system have is a matter of range, can the radar / camera properly identify and track a car that is say more than 2 seconds ahead of you at max TACC speed? 4 seconds at 90mph would require about 160m of room and I am not sure if our cars can "see" and ID cars that far up ahead. If you look at the dash display, I noticed that cars doesn't really show up there till maybe there are 100m ahead of you, which seems to be just over 2 second gap at max TACC speed.

 

[thegruf]

afaik settings are based on time, unless at low speed when they revert to distance.
They are also different for TACC than they are for AP (in the UK at least)
I also have the impression that the settings can be different on normal vs median highways but have never proved this.

I find the range of distances okay to balance cutting in vs relaxed driving, though if using TACC I do have to remember to increase the setting sometimes

My biggest wish is that Tesla would improve the reaction when traffic in front speeds up, this is usually when I find cutting in occurs as the Tesla is slow to respond and close the gap, though I guess excessive speeding up and slowing down could also be annoying.

 

[TacC]

My understanding is that the setting is a floating scale representing following distance. The following distance increases as speed increases so the car can deliver the same safety and driving behavior in various conditions.

You may find an interval of 2.5 seconds at 80mph to be stressful and unsafe, while also finding 2.5 seconds at 18mph to be excessive and frustrating. Likewise, 100ft at 80mph is more dangerous than 100ft at 18mph. You'll notice that you don't need to adjust the following distance as you drive at different speeds - the car does this automatically.

So the setting doesn't represent a firm time or distance scale. You may think of it as a scale representing safety or aggression. When you combine the appropriate max speed setting with a following distance at 3, you should get the same driving style in all traffic conditions.

I think the idea is that you should be able to find one setting that fits your preference for most, if not all speeds. If you don't mind the car jerking around a bit, you're probably at 1 or 2. If you want to have a leisurely drive, you're probably at 6 or 7.

On a somewhat related note, there's a good bit of research suggesting that humans are most comfortable and capable with 7-point scales (as opposed to 5- and 10-point scales).

 

[vandacca]

My understanding is that the setting is a floating scale representing following distance. The following distance increases as speed increases so the car can deliver the same safety and driving behavior in various conditions.

You may find an interval of 2.5 seconds at 80mph to be stressful and unsafe, while also finding 2.5 seconds at 18mph to be excessive and frustrating. Likewise, 100ft at 80mph is more dangerous than 100ft at 18mph. You'll notice that you don't need to adjust the following distance as you drive at different speeds - the car does this automatically.

So the setting doesn't represent a firm time or distance scale. You may think of it as a scale representing safety or aggression. When you combine the appropriate max speed setting with a following distance at 3, you should get the same driving style in all traffic conditions.

I think the idea is that you should be able to find one setting that fits your preference for most, if not all speeds. If you don't mind the car jerking around a bit, you're probably at 1 or 2. If you want to have a leisurely drive, you're probably at 6 or 7.

On a somewhat related note, there's a good bit of research suggesting that humans are most comfortable and capable with 7-point scales (as opposed to 5- and 10-point scales).

I agree with you that Tesla's intention was to provide a setting that worked in all conditions. In reality though, I find myself playing with the settings depending on speed and traffic. However, I do play with it a lot less now since the last update, so maybe they're getting closer to that goal.

 

[Olle K.]

A floating scale with 7 steps is perfectly fine with me. I'd just like to have an option to cruise at quite larger following distances than the current level 7 gives me without having to abandon TACC. I do it now by manually adjusting the max speed lever, so I don't approach the leading car more than is comfortable for me.
(I would also like to have a little exhaust pipe to deliver thick smoke or tear gas against tail gaters... )

 

[ptsagcy]

I find that changing the setting to "1" is helpful for lane changes. I find that settings above 1 wait too long for a car in the lane you are changing to, to clear. I normally keep it at 2 on the highway and drop to 1 in stop and go traffic to avoid "cut-ins". On a long road trip, in light traffic, I might use 3 or 4 for a more relaxing ride. I have never used anything above 4.

 

[vandacca]

Has anyone noticed that in the past few months, "1" setting is further than it used to be? Not sure which update, but I think it was 8.1 17.11.10.

 

[Saghost]

Has anyone noticed that in the past few months, "1" setting is further than it used to be? Not sure which update, but I think it was 8.1 17.11.10.

I think that happened in the later 8.0 releases, shortly after the accident thread here TMC where the driver said he was in AP on distance 2 and ran into someone when everyone slammed on their brakes.

I always assumed the Tesla could stay ahead of a wave like that with the ultrafast brake booster and better tires, but some things I've read seem to suggest that Tesla put a maximum deceleration rate limiter into TACC for some reason.

 

[ecarfan]

I wish to have more options in TACC to choose larger distances to car in front. The currently largest setting is 7

I agree. I never use anything less than 7 and would like to have an 8 and 9 choice.

(My current S does not have AP but I have driven two different AP cars for several hours on So Cal freeways)

 

[TallPaulS]

Wow, the drivers in Sweden must be much more polite that the Front Range, if my TACC is set to > 4 cars pass and cut back into my lane so much I feel like I'm traveling backwards.

I'm in Colorado and I feel comfortable at 80mph with 2-3. The reason being is that idiots will cut in with anything more, making the trip more dangerous. I'd usually feel a lot more comfortable at those speeds with ~5 given my own reaction time preferences, but when it causes people around you to make dangerous maneuvers you have to take that into account. This is true of driving without AP as well of course--it's my hope that AP has significantly better reaction times than a human though.

 

[Olle K.]

Interesting to get the various personal perspectives on this. I agree that at semi-slow speeds and stop-and-go traffic TACC setting 1-3 may be optional. I too use that.
But with smooth traffic flow at normal speeds I feel that anything shorter than 7 makes myself a tail gater. I don't want to be a tail gater, because it will annoy the driver in front of me and -- worse -- ruin the front of my precious car.
TallPaulS, how would you feel about the other option, i.e., having a large 4-6 seconds' gap in front of you allowing the idiots safer cutting in without affecting your own driving the least. You will be delayed to your destination by about 2-4 seconds.

PS: Another trick is to cruise comfortably in the rightmost lane. The idiots seem never to use that lane -- except for passing ...

 

[TallPaulS]

Interesting to get the various personal perspectives on this. I agree that at semi-slow speeds and stop-and-go traffic TACC setting 1-3 may be optional. I too use that.
But with smooth traffic flow at normal speeds I feel that anything shorter than 7 makes myself a tail gater. I don't want to be a tail gater, because it will annoy the driver in front of me and -- worse -- ruin the front of my precious car.
TallPaulS, how would you feel about the other option, i.e., having a large 4-6 seconds' gap in front of you allowing the idiots safer cutting in without affecting your own driving the least. You will be delayed to your destination by about 2-4 seconds.

PS: Another trick is to cruise comfortably in the rightmost lane. The idiots seem never to use that lane -- except for passing ...

It's a bit more complex than that. I25 between Colorado Springs and Denver is 2 lanes (each direction). It's 75mph rated road and you consistently see traffic anywhere from 55mph to 90.

The "good" drivers will usually do ~80 and use the left lane for passing, moving back to the right. Unfortunately there are enough bad drivers consistently driving in the left lane that with only two available lanes it creates the aggressive drivers whom regularly swoop back and fourth at speeds closer to 90. There are, of course, accidents all the time as a result.

The reason I bring all of this up is that even driving in the right lane with a 4-6 gap as you mention is more than enough to encourage the idiots to attempt to use that space to swerve around the person in front of them in the left lane.

Is it your fault if they cause an accident as a result? Of course not. Would the accident have occurred if the gap between you and the car in front of you didn't appear to be enough to attempt the maneuver? These are the questions I have learned to constantly address as a motorcycle rider, where being in the right never trumps not being dead.

 

[TallPaulS]

Having said all that, I support the idea, but from an engineering perspective it becomes much more difficult to safely implement a TACC system the further back you are from the T (traffic) component of that system.

 

[Olle K.]

Weaving/swerving/swooping as well as staying too long in the left lane should be more severely punished.