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

Phantom Braking

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I would agree to @Dewg's description of PB being the unexpected rapid drop in speed by at least a third. Certainly, I've experienced it and certainly, the moment it happened I got a surge of adrenalin, even though I was well aware of PB and expected it would happen eventually. So, it's frightening, I think, by definition.

I have no idea how prevalent this is, but I've read enough accounts to believe it isn't a rare experience only a few nervous nellies have exaggerated. Dangerous? When it happens, you can only imagine it would be bad if it happened when the road was black ice.

Yes, so far nobody seems to have reported an accident. I think that's marvelous. Still don't like that it happens, and I wouldn't call it a "feature not a problem".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dewg
Yes, so far nobody seems to have reported an accident. I think that's marvelous. Still don't like that it happens, and I wouldn't call it a "feature not a problem".


If the accident rate is lower in Teslas as a result of a hypervigilant system then how's it NOT a feature even if it's occasionally discomforting?

That said, while we do have some evidence that's the case (Teslas quarterly safety report on accident rates) I'd agree it's not perfect evidence, and it's certainly possible there's some level of less vigilant that is just as safe, while it's certain there's eventually some level of less vigilant that is less safe.
 
If the accident rate is lower in Teslas as a result of a hypervigilant system then how's it NOT a feature even if it's occasionally discomforting?

That said, while we do have some evidence that's the case (Teslas quarterly safety report on accident rates) I'd agree it's not perfect evidence, and it's certainly possible there's some level of less vigilant that is just as safe, while it's certain there's eventually some level of less vigilant that is less safe.
I think it's splitting hairs a little, but I am confident that PB is an unwanted glitch in the safety software feature, and it is something that can ultimately be eliminated, or nearly so. PB is not the feature. The safety software is.

And I believe Tesla considers it the same way I do, and they are working to reduce such events. In my car, it's much much better than 6 months ago.

And absolutely I'll happily take it and live with it. I understand how others, however, who seem to be experiencing it more often, would not find it tolerable.
 
I think it's splitting hairs a little, but I am confident that PB is an unwanted glitch in the safety software feature, and it is something that can ultimately be eliminated, or nearly so. PB is not the feature. The safety software is.

And I believe Tesla considers it the same way I do, and they are working to reduce such events. In my car, it's much much better than 6 months ago.

And absolutely I'll happily take it and live with it. I understand how others, however, who seem to be experiencing it more often, would not find it tolerable.
Agreed.

I'm really trying to understand the differences between cars with respect to FSD/PBs/etc. I can watch a DirtyTesla video and see nearly the same experience I have with my car, and then see another video or read a description from someone where the car totally fails spectacularly. Why do those other cars have AEB PBs so frequently? Why are they getting red wheel of deaths so often? It's like they are running 1-year old code.

Is it a hardware failure? Cameras failing or not installed properly? Calibration problem? Wheel configuration errors (car thinks you have 19in wheels when you really have 21in wheels)? Software corruption? MCU problems (overheating, stress fractures in components that manifest with heat)? Outdated or corrupted maps? Bad GPS?

It must be terribly frustrating for people with horrible PBs or AP/NoA/FSD problems to watch videos where the car works well. I know I'd be skeptical that those videos are fake in some way, or highly edited. I know that when my car does something odd, like my recent experience with the left turn, one of the first things that comes to my mind is "oh, that must be what they're talking about".
 
Agreed.

I'm really trying to understand the differences between cars with respect to FSD/PBs/etc. I can watch a DirtyTesla video and see nearly the same experience I have with my car, and then see another video or read a description from someone where the car totally fails spectacularly. Why do those other cars have AEB PBs so frequently? Why are they getting red wheel of deaths so often? It's like they are running 1-year old code.

Is it a hardware failure? Cameras failing or not installed properly? Calibration problem? Wheel configuration errors (car thinks you have 19in wheels when you really have 21in wheels)? Software corruption? MCU problems (overheating, stress fractures in components that manifest with heat)? Outdated or corrupted maps? Bad GPS?

It must be terribly frustrating for people with horrible PBs or AP/NoA/FSD problems to watch videos where the car works well. I know I'd be skeptical that those videos are fake in some way, or highly edited. I know that when my car does something odd, like my recent experience with the left turn, one of the first things that comes to my mind is "oh, that must be what they're talking about".
This. And, maybe software variants. I think many of us in the back of our minds worry that there'll be an update and it will get worse for us, as it has for others.
 
You are certainly free to argue that PB may be a significant issue, or perhaps even a serious one, based on anecdotal evidence alone. But "majority" is a very different claim. What you are literally saying is that at least 50% of all Tesla drivers have significant serious PB events. And to Knightshades point, if that IS the case, do you not think there would be rampant well documented issues of crashes? We're talking several hundred thousand drivers now, if this is truly a "majority" problem.

A week or so ago I asked in this thread for someone to point to some video evidence on YouTube. Apart from the usual "there is LOTS of it, just go search for yourself" deflection, all we have so far is (a) a car spinning out of lane on a very wet highway, with no audio or screen views to even indicate it was a PB event at all, and (b) a car on the freeway with AP engaged slowing from 65 to 61mph. To me, that's not exactly convincing evidence for a "majority" of people having "dangerous" PB events.

As I have said before, I'm not saying PB isnt a thing, but so far I dont see any actual statistically significant evidence that it aligns with some of the more dramatic claims of "deadly", "frequently" and "frightening" that have been made here and in other related threads.

I believe you mentioned you are in the medical field, and we have both recently seen what can happen when hysteria and bias (and worse) take the place of unbiased evidence-based rational thinking. Covid caused by cell-phone towers! Worming medicine for horses a miracle cure! Masks? Fake News!!! Let's not go down THAT path again.
Ok, since people apparently can’t use a search engine - it took me 3 minutes to find this video (that includes a minute and a half to watch it.) Shows a guy driving his brand new Tesla and it slowing 20 MPH in about 1-2 seconds:

Here's one from Tesla Björn (a Tesla fan) describing issues with PB and posting an example where it comes to almost a complete stop:

Here are a couple of other reports of accidents reportedly caused by phantom braking:


At this point given the number of reports and how wide spread they are, the onus is on you to prove that it’s not a problem for the majority. When you ask for 'proof' that greater than 50% of owners have experienced, you're asking for a study that doesn't exist. By demanding proof in the form that doesn't exist you are creating an artificial bar in order to allow you to deny the problems.

We also have some accidents. So can we stop with the straw man 'no accidents means not a safety problem' arguments?

I've hardly been hysterical about phantom braking but when people insist on creating excuses for why it's not a problem they need to be called out.
 
Here are a couple of other reports of accidents reportedly caused by phantom braking:



We also have some accidents. So can we stop with the straw man 'no accidents means not a safety problem' arguments?

I've hardly been hysterical about phantom braking but when people insist on creating excuses for why it's not a problem they need to be called out.


Neither of those was actually caused by PB though.


The first was the reporter randomly guessing that PB -could- be a cause with 0 evidence supporting the guess.

But here's another story on the same accident, over a week more recent and after further investigation:

They have a quote direct from NHTSA, guess what it says?
NHTSA said:
at this time, there are no indications that phantom braking was a factor.

The second story you provided was... again... someone guessing... hell the headline ends in a question mark and was updated later to point out that folks showed the speed limit dropped at the spot the car was braking. So the Tesla slowed- exactly as expected when the speed limit drops and the idiots tailgating the Tesla didn't. There ain't nothing "phantom" about that at all.

The fact the best you could find was this nonsense ought make you consider you're wrong on this-- but I'm sure it won't.



We also have some accidents. So can we stop with the straw man 'no accidents means not a safety problem' arguments?

Except we do not have any such accidents, and you continue to incorrectly use the phrase "straw man"


I've hardly been hysterical about phantom braking

I'd say posting stories claiming they "prove" some accidents due to PB-- when it's actually only 2 stories, and neither does that- is pretty hysterical about phantom braking.
 
Last edited:
At this point given the number of reports and how wide spread they are, the onus is on you to prove that it’s not a problem for the majority. When you ask for 'proof' that greater than 50% of owners have experienced, you're asking for a study that doesn't exist. By demanding proof in the form that doesn't exist you are creating an artificial bar in order to allow you to deny the problems.

We also have some accidents. So can we stop with the straw man 'no accidents means not a safety problem' arguments?

I've hardly been hysterical about phantom braking but when people insist on creating excuses for why it's not a problem they need to be called out.

No, you made the clear claim that PB was a problem for "the majority" of owners. It's for you to prove that, not for me to disprove it, any more than I need to disprove the claim that Covid is caused by 5G cell towers. There is no "artificial bar" here, because you yourself set that bar. I simply asked for you to provide substantiating evidence for "the majority" claim, which by definition is 50% or more of owners. If there is no such study, that does not impact my request for proof, it impacts the validity of your claim.

And where have I denied that PB is (or may be) a problem? I've gone out of my way to repeatedly state in this and other threads that PB may need attention. My point was not to disprove that PB exists but to question your argument that it does exist, and those are two very different things.
 
No, you made the clear claim that PB was a problem for "the majority" of owners. It's for you to prove that, not for me to disprove it, any more than I need to disprove the claim that Covid is caused by 5G cell towers. There is no "artificial bar" here, because you yourself set that bar. I simply asked for you to provide substantiating evidence for "the majority" claim, which by definition is 50% or more of owners. If there is no such study, that does not impact my request for proof, it impacts the validity of your claim.

And where have I denied that PB is (or may be) a problem? I've gone out of my way to repeatedly state in this and other threads that PB may need attention. My point was not to disprove that PB exists but to question your argument that it does exist, and those are two very different things.
I and others have presented plenty of evidence and no one has given anything to refute it other than saying ‘there’s no absolute proof.’ Unlike the covid-5G example you give, there is evidence and logical plausibility for my position. The presence of a study would impact the validity of my claim. In the absence of a study one needs to take the preponderance of the other available evidence which I have done.

Regardless of whether you accept that more than 50.0000001% of people have experienced phantom braking, why does it matter? If 49.999999% of people experience it is it less of a problem? You state that you don’t deny the problem yet you continually focus on the semantics which tends to belie your words. Just like you don’t need an actual accident (which we appear to have) to say something is unsafe, you don’t need more than 50% for something to be a problem. Recalls are routinely initiated for far lower rates of defects.
 
I and others have presented plenty of evidence

thatword.jpg



Just like you don’t need an actual accident (which we appear to have)

Except, we don't.

You gave 2 links--- One of which a week later the NHTSA said did NOT appear to have anything to do with PB at all.... and a second which was updated later to admit there was a speed limit drop that appeared to be the reason the car slowed down and the illegal tailgater didn't slow and hit them so again no PB.


Why keep repeating debunked stuff?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CyberGus
I and others have presented plenty of evidence and no one has given anything to refute it other than saying ‘there’s no absolute proof.’ Unlike the covid-5G example you give, there is evidence and logical plausibility for my position. The presence of a study would impact the validity of my claim. In the absence of a study one needs to take the preponderance of the other available evidence which I have done.

Regardless of whether you accept that more than 50.0000001% of people have experienced phantom braking, why does it matter? If 49.999999% of people experience it is it less of a problem? You state that you don’t deny the problem yet you continually focus on the semantics which tends to belie your words. Just like you don’t need an actual accident (which we appear to have) to say something is unsafe, you don’t need more than 50% for something to be a problem. Recalls are routinely initiated for far lower rates of defects.
I said nothing about it not being a problem just because it was under 50%. I simply took you to task for claiming "the majority" of Tesla owners have a problem with PB. You could have said "ok, yeah, maybe I got a bit carried away" which would have been fine, but instead you oscillate between claiming I have to prove that your claim is inaccurate (I dont) and "I have provided plenty of evidence" or "the preponderance of evidence", which, basically, is trying to sneak out the back door since these are very different claims. You can't shift the goal posts back and forth like that and expect anyone to take you seriously.

The point is that by making what is really a wild assertion about the "majority" with nothing to back it up, you have undermined your credibility. You berate others here for claiming that there is NO evidence yet apparently see nothing wrong in making equally unsupported claims yourself. A double standard like that is a red flag for anyone judging credibility and plausibility.

It's quite possible PB is a significant problem. It is, in fact, quite likely that people are seeing some examples of alarming incidents. It's also equally possible that PB has been exaggerated (humans do that, you know). By making a claim that is itself an exaggeration you have, ironically, undermined your own position that PB exists and is a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CyberGus
...

It's quite possible PB is a significant problem...It's also equally possible that PB has been exaggerated.
I feel there's no basis to say that it's "equally" possible that PB is "significant" vs "exaggerated." I don't know how we can determine that without more information.

For myself, I don't feel I am in any position to say that someone is exaggerating their experience until I've fully checked them out. Assuming like that is how you send someone home from the ER with a heart attack.

I guess if we were to quit quibbling over percentages and degrees the discussion would be over until we got an official report.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sleepydoc
I feel there's no basis to say that it's "equally" possible that PB is "significant" vs "exaggerated." I don't know how we can determine that without more information.

For myself, I don't feel I am in any position to say that someone is exaggerating their experience until I've fully checked them out. Assuming like that is how you send someone home from the ER with a heart attack.

I guess if we were to quit quibbling over percentages and degrees the discussion would be over until we got an official report.
Completely agreed. Many (especially on this forum) feel the need to add specific data 23% or 5 seconds is bad but 4.1 is correct or the Over commitment of “the majority“ to validate their argument to feel like they know something or are smarter on the subject which in most cases they are Not. Like saying “two weeks”. Fact is most on a forum are simply expressing opinions or theory.
 
Completely agreed. Many (especially on this forum) feel the need to add specific data 23% or 5 seconds is bad but 4.1 is correct or the Over commitment of “the majority“ to validate their argument to feel like they know something or are smarter on the subject which in most cases they are Not. Like saying “two weeks”. Fact is most on a forum are simply expressing opinions or theory.
A lot of armchair quarterbacks in here. Experts in their field are idiots with no credibility. 🤔
 
A lot of armchair quarterbacks in here. Experts in their field are idiots with no credibility. 🤔
@Dewg: Call me overly paranoid, but there are very definitely trolls on this forum.

Sometimes trolls are trolls because they enjoy yanking peoples' chains. Sometimes trolls are trolls because they really are curmudgeons and really do think that the glasses are half empty.

TMC does have moderators that kick out the truly obvious. But the line between someone simply claiming that they've got an opinion and someone trying hard to do their worst without getting booted can be a fine one, indeed.

And.. Before I came to inhabit the TMC, I used to hang out on Tesla's forums, before they were closed down. Tesla didn't really moderate their forums. No question: There were short-sellers showing up there posting fake threads about how Tesla was going Bankwrupt on a regular basis. There were anti-EV specialists who, after a bit of research, were found to be posting diatribes against Ford EVs as well as Tesla EVs. Worse, these types would run in packs, posting back and forth to each other.

The absolute worst, in my opinion, were ones who would respond to newbie questions with actual good advice; then, once having got their feet in the door, so to speak, would commence to put out bad advice meant to malign the newbie's choice, cause trouble with unnecessary service calls to Tesla, and so on. And this wasn't a one-time only good deal; they did this over and over and over..

From a thousand-foot view, what these types appeared to be up to was pretty clear. Tesla doesn't advertise, but there's a ton of social media engagement between real users on forums like the TMC forum and, at the time, Tesla's forums which serves much the same purpose for the curious. It was thought at the time, without much in the way of proof, mind you, that many of these trollish entities were paid for their disruption efforts. The triumvirate purported to pay for this activity would be other, traditional auto companies; Big Oil; and short-sellers. And it was thought at the time that short sellers were being funded by Big Oil, seeing as the shorties were losing billions of dollars a year trying to claim that Tesla was going under Any Minute Now.

It wasn't just denizens of random internet forums that thought this was happening. Another example would be Sandy Munroe who called out this activity as a real possibility, although he was pointing at Big Oil as the cause. You guys do know that Big Oil was, and has been, funding climate deniers since the mid 1950's, right?

There's not much one can do about this; in a way, that's the moderators' jobs. But, partly because of that Tesla Forums crash and burn, I'm sensitive to forum participants who seem to be 95% negative at All Times on Things Tesla. Or whose reports clash badly with personal experience. Or (and this does happen) with members who claim that they've got Car A on one day, then Car B on a third day, and so on. Or somebody who shows up on the Beta forums.. but then, after a lot of negativity and what seems to be personal experience, admits that they're not actually driving the Beta.

Like I said: trolls. Or worse. Be cautious.
 
@Dewg: Call me overly paranoid, but there are very definitely trolls on this forum.

Sometimes trolls are trolls because they enjoy yanking peoples' chains. Sometimes trolls are trolls because they really are curmudgeons and really do think that the glasses are half empty.

TMC does have moderators that kick out the truly obvious. But the line between someone simply claiming that they've got an opinion and someone trying hard to do their worst without getting booted can be a fine one, indeed.

And.. Before I came to inhabit the TMC, I used to hang out on Tesla's forums, before they were closed down. Tesla didn't really moderate their forums. No question: There were short-sellers showing up there posting fake threads about how Tesla was going Bankwrupt on a regular basis. There were anti-EV specialists who, after a bit of research, were found to be posting diatribes against Ford EVs as well as Tesla EVs. Worse, these types would run in packs, posting back and forth to each other.

The absolute worst, in my opinion, were ones who would respond to newbie questions with actual good advice; then, once having got their feet in the door, so to speak, would commence to put out bad advice meant to malign the newbie's choice, cause trouble with unnecessary service calls to Tesla, and so on. And this wasn't a one-time only good deal; they did this over and over and over..

From a thousand-foot view, what these types appeared to be up to was pretty clear. Tesla doesn't advertise, but there's a ton of social media engagement between real users on forums like the TMC forum and, at the time, Tesla's forums which serves much the same purpose for the curious. It was thought at the time, without much in the way of proof, mind you, that many of these trollish entities were paid for their disruption efforts. The triumvirate purported to pay for this activity would be other, traditional auto companies; Big Oil; and short-sellers. And it was thought at the time that short sellers were being funded by Big Oil, seeing as the shorties were losing billions of dollars a year trying to claim that Tesla was going under Any Minute Now.

It wasn't just denizens of random internet forums that thought this was happening. Another example would be Sandy Munroe who called out this activity as a real possibility, although he was pointing at Big Oil as the cause. You guys do know that Big Oil was, and has been, funding climate deniers since the mid 1950's, right?

There's not much one can do about this; in a way, that's the moderators' jobs. But, partly because of that Tesla Forums crash and burn, I'm sensitive to forum participants who seem to be 95% negative at All Times on Things Tesla. Or whose reports clash badly with personal experience. Or (and this does happen) with members who claim that they've got Car A on one day, then Car B on a third day, and so on. Or somebody who shows up on the Beta forums.. but then, after a lot of negativity and what seems to be personal experience, admits that they're not actually driving the Beta.

Like I said: trolls. Or worse. Be cautious.
Hear hear!
 
I feel there's no basis to say that it's "equally" possible that PB is "significant" vs "exaggerated." I don't know how we can determine that without more information.

For myself, I don't feel I am in any position to say that someone is exaggerating their experience until I've fully checked them out. Assuming like that is how you send someone home from the ER with a heart attack.

I guess if we were to quit quibbling over percentages and degrees the discussion would be over until we got an official report.
My point was not to mathematically equate them but to point out that neither is known with any significant degree of certainly. I have absolutely no idea how probable either are, and I doubt anyone else does either, except perhaps someone in Tesla.
 
My point was not to mathematically equate them but to point out that neither is known with any significant degree of certainly. I have absolutely no idea how probable either are, and I doubt anyone else does either, except perhaps someone in Tesla.
I rather thought that was what you meant, so I didn't make it a response (even though it followed) but intended for the general discussion. I think most of us here are well meaning. 🍻
 
The point is that by making what is really a wild assertion about the "majority" with nothing to back it up
I have absolutely no idea how probable either are
That’s just it - for evidence of the problem we have large numbers of reports, the fact that I haven’t seen anyone, even ardent Tesla supporters state that they never have a problem, and the fact that every Tesla owner I’ve spoken to in person has said they have issues with PB. All the evidence points to it being the majority of owners. I’m not saying this is conclusive scientific evidence but when you say you have no contrary evidence at all and all the evidence I do have suggests the majority do have issues then my conclusion is hardly a ‘wild assertion.’

You’re free to say ‘I disagree because…’ or even to say ‘I don’t think it’s a majority but I don’t have any evidence to back it up,’ but to say I have no credibility but then say you have no evidence is bewildering.