I definitely do not get dinged while using AP. Also, can anyone confirm they dropped the radar on radar cars yet? Is there a way to tell, isn’t the top speed on AP limited to 90mph on vision cars?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Safety Score
- Thread starter ScottNY
- Start date
Sadly it seems like hills matter. My driveway is extremely steep and this trip is just going down the street and stopping at my neighbors house (2 min trip). I was creeping down my driveway at 2-3 mph and never accelerated above 10 for the trip. Thankfully this little bit of "hard braking" averages out pretty well over the day. But it makes it near impossible to get a 100 if I make any other mistakes.
Last edited:
I agree it's fine for normal driving, but these are not normal times. I've had lone cars ahead of me brake hard at the last minute for road debris. Why risk it? If some a-hole does cut you off when not on autopilot, then yeah maybe try to dilute that, but not preemptively. Even then, I don't know.
We are only human...
Pavlov = FSD Beta Potential Reward
Safety Score is only raw data. Does not account for the actual factors which created the events in the scores. However just as the dogs salivated, drivers will drive to fix the safety score to get the reward…. We need that hundred so we can get the FSD Beta. Obviously when it becomes generally available, we'll deny doing the above, I’m not a trained dog. For those not familiar google Pavlov Theory of classical conditioning.
This is really weird. Tesla already has all the telemetry data on each vin, they could easily sort it and determine the drivers for the slow rollout to those who indicated they'd like to participate. Why a Safety Score? You have way better telemetry than the Safety Score provides.
Woof Woof, I know have to go fix my hard braking score caused by the technician testing out the brakes when he completed the work. I can almost taste that FSD Beta. Don't lie, you know you're all out doing same, you can deny later that you did. Now let's get back out there and get some 100's again.
Be vigilant out there. Have a Great Safety Score Day.
Pavlov = FSD Beta Potential Reward
Safety Score is only raw data. Does not account for the actual factors which created the events in the scores. However just as the dogs salivated, drivers will drive to fix the safety score to get the reward…. We need that hundred so we can get the FSD Beta. Obviously when it becomes generally available, we'll deny doing the above, I’m not a trained dog. For those not familiar google Pavlov Theory of classical conditioning.
This is really weird. Tesla already has all the telemetry data on each vin, they could easily sort it and determine the drivers for the slow rollout to those who indicated they'd like to participate. Why a Safety Score? You have way better telemetry than the Safety Score provides.
Woof Woof, I know have to go fix my hard braking score caused by the technician testing out the brakes when he completed the work. I can almost taste that FSD Beta. Don't lie, you know you're all out doing same, you can deny later that you did. Now let's get back out there and get some 100's again.
Be vigilant out there. Have a Great Safety Score Day.
Were you using regen to come to a stop, or did you also have to use the brakes? The speed doesn't matter. If you quickly apply the brakes at 3 mph, you can still decelerate at more than 0.3 g. I was creeping past a blind hedge at about that speed when a runner suddenly came into view, and I had to slam on the brakes. Ding.
You were penalized heavily because it was a short trip and you didn't have more normal braking to dilute hard brake. In the future, if you do some repeated slowing with regen afterwards that will mitigate the damage.
The regen is supposed to be limited to 0.2 g, but maybe when on a hill in the transition to hold when brakes are applied it exceeds 0.3g.
The hill is accelerating you so that should not add to your deceleration. If you were regenning up a 30 percent grade, you could hit 0.3 gs of deceleration. Going down at steep incline at speed can actually exceed the 60 kw max regen power, and your speed would continue to increase. That is you would accelerate, not decelerate.
Supposedly, the telemetry they normally collect is anonymized. It isn't associated with a particular vin. The button gives them permission to make the association.
I'm leaning more into the thought that the safety metrics are at least somewhat tied to the capabilities of the system itself in terms of handling g-forces in turns, when braking, accelerating, etc and this definitely all relates to the risks associated with a person's driving environment over the last week
When you see stuff like this and think about what's not being appreciated but could
Tesla Safety Score: Speed, Ignore Red Lights, But Don't Brake!
Musk tweeted it's likely only people with a Tesla Safety Score of 100 will be first to get FSD Beta. It's harder than you think to score well in some cases.
insideevs.com
You can run red lights, not use turn signals, and speed without being dinged. Maybe these are oversights that will be accounted for eventually but they're glaring and make this seem less about your actual driving habits and more about the environment in which your vehicle generally operates.
So, going down my driveway, I put the car in neutral (no regen) and use the brake pedal. It's a dirt/gravel driveway and if I go down it with regen it causes the rear wheels to slip, so I just avoid it entirely.
Yeah, I'm not too worried about the big number in that photo, it seems to average out well into my daily score over 40-60 miles
Sure there are a multitude of parameters that contribute to accidents, but the ones they are currently using are statistically the five most relevant.I'm leaning more into the thought that the safety metrics are at least somewhat tied to the capabilities of the system itself in terms of handling g-forces in turns, when braking, accelerating, etc and this definitely all relates to the risks associated with a person's driving environment over the last week
When you see stuff like this and think about what's not being appreciated but could
Tesla Safety Score: Speed, Ignore Red Lights, But Don't Brake!
Musk tweeted it's likely only people with a Tesla Safety Score of 100 will be first to get FSD Beta. It's harder than you think to score well in some cases.
You can run red lights, not use turn signals, and speed without being dinged. Maybe these are oversights that will be accounted for eventually but they're glaring and make this seem less about your actual driving habits and more about the environment in which your vehicle generally operates.
I see your dilemma, but the hard braking is not the fault of the car. I realize it might be hard to modulate the brakes, but it is possible to descend your driveway without decelerating at greater than 0.3g.
What I find interesting is that after you consent to have your data collected, it didn't seem possible to associate any past telemetry. And yes, while past telemetry sent via the cloud was anonymous, stuff is still logged in the car. Service has pulled logs from my car from 2 years back, sometimes doing so remotely. So I have to conclude that until the button firmware, Tesla was not logging at the car level some or all of the 5 weights. The car logs definitely has accel/decel, as Tesla has had to rely on that data to refute the crazy Chinese woman who protested on the roof of a Model 3 in Shanghai earlier this year. FCW is very likely logged at the car level as well.
IF Tesla, after you consent, could have just pulled your car logs and derived the safety score, why subject us all to a week or two of gaming the score, when unbiased data is readily available? It kinda lends credence to the idea that they are looking for the best gamers.... the people going way out of their way to get FSD might be the ones most desperate not to lose the privilege, and therefore will be safe.
How do you know it's possible? You could have a slope where 0.3g of acceleration would be present along that axis even in a static state.
Think about it, with the car flat on the ground, there is 1g straight down. If the car is fully 90 degrees nose down, the accelerometer can not distinguish this from 1g of deceleration. So there is logically an angle where 0.3g is the static condition, even if the vehicle is not moving. So while I agree this driveway may not be that steep, it is not true that in all possible cases, you could descend your driveway without tipping over 0.3gs.
Keep slowly getting dinged on following too close, when I use 90% of the time AP on a vision only car. Clear the system still can't determine how to slow down, accelerate off the line (roars like a banshee from 0-15mph right on the car's bumper in front of me, disturbing and unnerving. Stupid/dangerous as well. Then lifts off the accelerator and goes at a snails pace up to your set speed).
I don't know how I can follow any further behind people to have it not ding me except hand drive it. Clearly vision only is a disaster for regular FSD/AP on this version still. I can go on and on with the list. But as for rankings right now, babying around everything and relying on AP on 7 still gives this following too close ding. Would like the car to rate itself on it's ability to accelerate like a normal person, slow early and smoothly etc. It would score like a 20 out of 100. Been driving so insanely conservative only thing that is giving me a low follow too close is the AP itself. Hand drive no problems.
With all that said, still have a 100...but have a feeling it's about to drop me down with no way nearly to stop it if they want you to use AP. The vision systems utter inability to discern depth with its pixel calculations.. Radar/Lidar don't have these issues obviously. They need me as a beta tester...haha
If you can get a 100 and use AP in traffic/highway, normal roads like I want to do a very high percentage of the time, you should be given Beta.
I don't know how I can follow any further behind people to have it not ding me except hand drive it. Clearly vision only is a disaster for regular FSD/AP on this version still. I can go on and on with the list. But as for rankings right now, babying around everything and relying on AP on 7 still gives this following too close ding. Would like the car to rate itself on it's ability to accelerate like a normal person, slow early and smoothly etc. It would score like a 20 out of 100. Been driving so insanely conservative only thing that is giving me a low follow too close is the AP itself. Hand drive no problems.
With all that said, still have a 100...but have a feeling it's about to drop me down with no way nearly to stop it if they want you to use AP. The vision systems utter inability to discern depth with its pixel calculations.. Radar/Lidar don't have these issues obviously. They need me as a beta tester...haha
If you can get a 100 and use AP in traffic/highway, normal roads like I want to do a very high percentage of the time, you should be given Beta.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yeah, but I can see any obstacles in front of the lead car at 2.5-3 second following. Of course I’m offset from the vehicle in the lane so I can easily see around it. And I always pick a vehicle which easily allows that. Obviously there is always a chance of random braking but 3 seconds is a long time. Again, I limit it to five minutes or so to mitigate any added risk.
The reason to do it preemptively is if I didn’t, I could have someone cut in at the end of a long day, which would then destroy the score on a potentially heavily weighted day. And then I’d have to drive specifically to get that denominator improved - I might even have to drive extra miles and time above 50mph just to improve the score.
As I said previously, going up a hill with a 30 percent grade will cause a deceleration greater than 0.3 gs. But he is going down hill, so the acceleration due to gravity is try to increase his speed, not decrease it. That is, it is accelerating him. So by properly applying the brakes, he can descend the hill while decelerating less than 0.3 g.
There will be a constant amount of braking to just cancel the gravitational force, and an additional braking force to slow the car down. It is this additional application of brakes that needs to be applied smoothly.
I assume they aren't just using the accelerometers along the long axis of the car. Their dead reckoning algorithms should be taking into account the actual change in velocity along the car, the size of the resultant acceleration vector and the rotational accelerometers.
Last edited:
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yes, you’re getting dinged when not using AP, which is more painful when you use AP nearly all the time. Such is life. It’s not dinging you for AP use no matter how jerky it is, or how poor a job it does at maintaining consistent follow.
Has anyone opted out after opt-in to see if the safety score doesn't track a trip? Or are we all in too deep and can't risk not getting FSD beta by getting out of the queue
I guess I should clarify. If you need to come to rest while descending that slope, you will need to experience more than 0.3 g's of deceleration. And if the slope is greater than 30%, then even a constant (smooth) braking force to maintain a constant speed would result in more than 0.3g. This is an example of where breaking is "smooth" ie. constant, yet would be interpreted as hard braking. My issue was that it is not possible in all cases, not just a specifically a 30% grade. Having lived in Pittsburgh, and having lived on a 27% grade, there are plenty of places where driving legally, that is, not impeding traffic by creeping at 1mph, there is no way to have no point of the deceleration be less than 0.3g.
I think this is the case, I know it's not steep enough to trigger a hard braking event on its own because on Monday and Tuesday I didn't have any issues but it must be close enough to where if I'm not "perfect" it triggers.
I guess you missed my edits. But I don't think they are just looking at the y accelerometer.
Similar threads
