Moose Test

[Insight75]

Sorry if this has already been posted. Thought this was interesting.....

Watch a Tesla Model X pass the infamous ‘moose test’

 

[EV-lutioin]

Used to live in Jackson, WY and avoiding moose was a real thing! I wonder how much the results of this test is affected by the driver? It sure seems like the driver hit the pylon due to his/her turn angle rather than any failure of the MX to navigate the course at 74 kph.

 

[Insight75]

I mostly enjoyed watching the second video with all the failures!

 

[EV-lutioin]

I mostly enjoyed watching the second video with all the failures!

Can you believe those drivers were not wearing helmets or harnesses!

 

[Skotty]

Can you believe those drivers were not wearing helmets or harnesses!

All you need is one story about a guy whose life was saved by being thrown from a car and then you never have to wear seat belts.

I can't believe how many times I have heard such story in my life. Does this happen everywhere else too, or is this just a Missouri phenomenon where so many lives have been saved by people being thrown from their vehicles in accidents?

 

[jerry33]

All you need is one story about a guy whose life was saved by being thrown from a car and then you never have to wear seat belts.

I can't believe how many times I have heard such story in my life. Does this happen everywhere else too, or is this just a Missouri phenomenon where so many lives have been saved by people being thrown from their vehicles in accidents?

No. I've heard that too--from the same folks who don't accept science on other matters.

 

[animorph]

That's what we said before seatbelts became standard, "I'd rather be thrown from the car before it explodes!" Unfortunately the probabilities of that being beneficial in an accident are very low.

 

[Daniel 74]

Used to live in Jackson, WY and avoiding moose was a real thing! I wonder how much the results of this test is affected by the driver? It sure seems like the driver hit the pylon due to his/her turn angle rather than any failure of the MX to navigate the course at 74 kph.

The tests are done multiple times, each time increasing the speed. If the driver fails, he tries again. During these tests with the model X, 70 km/h - a relatively low speed - was the highest speed the test could be performed within the pylons.

The Audi Q5 has performed the test succesfully at a higher speed, 81 km/h. I guess the additional weight of the X plays a substantial role.

 

[animorph]

And whatever OEM tires they used can make a big difference.

 

[vgrinshpun]

Why would anybody compare Q5, a much smaller crossover results to Model X? What is next? Mazda Miata vs. Mazda 6?

The Moose Test specifications are the same regardless the cars tested, shown in the screen shot from the both videos below.

Model X is 14.7 inches longer, 14.9 inches wider, and 1241 lbs heavier. Comparing the two does not make sense imo.

 

[Daniel 74]

Why would anybody compare Q5, a much smaller crossover results to Model X? What is next? Mazda Miata vs. Mazda 6?

The Moose Test specifications are the same regardless the cars tested, shown in the screen shot from the both videos below.

Model X is 14.7 inches longer, 14.9 inches wider, and 1241 lbs heavier. Comparing the two does not make sense imo.

View attachment 232665


View attachment 232666

Why would comparing the two make no sense? Certainly, an Audi Q5 is smaller than a model X. Unfortunately, the road driven won't make itself wider if it sees an X approaching ;-).

Km77 has done a lot of standardized moose test, the test are all on YouTube (search "maniobra de esquiva (moose test)"). 70 km/h just isn't an impressive result. Even the Mitsubishi l200 got a slightly better result.

Just to make things clear: as a model X owner I'm not to happy with the results, but I can't dismiss them.

 

[Kristoffer Helle]

Probably the retarded traction control system that's stops model x from doing it better.
Edit: it's a good system for everyday use. But it makes the car much slower..

 

[vgrinshpun]

Why would comparing the two make no sense? Certainly, an Audi Q5 is smaller than a model X. Unfortunately, the road driven won't make itself wider if it sees an X approaching ;-).

Km77 has done a lot of standardized moose test, the test are all on YouTube (search "maniobra de esquiva (moose test)"). 70 km/h just isn't an impressive result. Even the Mitsubishi l200 got a slightly better result.
.

For the same reason it does not make sense to compare fuel efficiency of cars of different classes/sizes, the crash data is obtained by crashing cars into the barrier, not the largest SUV that can be encountered on the road, etc, etc. Smaller lighter cars are always going to be nimbler than larger heavier ones.

This is without even mentioning the subjective nature of this "test".

 

[Daniel 74]

For the same reason it does not make sense to compare fuel efficiency of cars of different classes/sizes, the crash data is obtained by crashing cars into the barrier, not the largest SUV that can be encountered on the road, etc, etc. Smaller lighter cars are always going to be nimbler than larger heavier ones.

This is without even mentioning the subjective nature of this "test".

As you said, crash tests are done by crashing a car at a standardised speed against a standardised wall, poll, etc.

The moose test is not different: standardised conditions are used to test how well a car can dodge an imaginary object (a moose, an animal one may encounter in Scandinavian countries) on its road and is able to regain its previous path.

As I said before, a road with a moose on it does not take into consideration whether a large or a small car drives on it, just like a tree you crash into does not care whether you car is small or big.

Of course, smaller cars on the average will perform the moose test better, allthough this certainly is not an golden rule (we all remember the poor performance of the Mercedes A class).

 

[wycolo]

Why the need to turn back into the (right) lane? All you need to do is avoid the moose; moose do not hang out in traffic.
--

 

[EV-lutioin]

How does the Model S perform in this test?

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Why the need to turn back into the (right) lane? All you need to do is avoid the moose; moose do not hang out in traffic.
--

I have found that cars coming in the opposite direction prefer to drive in the leftmost lanes, so I try to keep right.

PS I have never had to dodge a moose, I'm glad to say. Just the usual roadkill and occasional living creature. I have failed to miss 1 baby deer and a chipmunk. (It's OK. The baby deer had its mother with it and limped away.)

 

[JimVandegriff]

I performed this maneuver in real life about three weeks ago with a large deer and the model X (traveling at 60 mph). It was dark, the deer was sauntering slowly across hwy 101 in northern California, and I did a hard swerve to the left, and couldn't have missed that deer by more than 3 inches. Phew. The X performed flawlessly on the swerve. Glad I didn't test that "safest SUV on the planet" thing.

 

[vandacca]

I performed this maneuver in real life about three weeks ago with a large deer and the model X (traveling at 60 mph). It was dark, the deer was sauntering slowly across hwy 101 in northern California, and I did a hard swerve to the left, and couldn't have missed that deer by more than 3 inches. Phew. The X performed flawlessly on the swerve. Glad I didn't test that "safest SUV on the planet" thing.

Hopefully, you weren't hauling your Airstream at the time! X hauling an airstream would be the craziest moose test to visualize.

 

[JimVandegriff]

Hopefully, you weren't hauling your Airstream at the time! X hauling an airstream would be the craziest moose test to visualize.

Just the X at the time. I think the deer would be no more with the Airstream attached! (We do have a lot of Roosevelt elk in our area who can occasionally halt traffic on hwy 101).