-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Self /Auto Park sucks!!!
- Thread starter mahroni
- Start date
RogerHScott
Active Member
I don't think the bar for "success" is quite as low as "no accident". Based on my experience using auto-park I'd be extremely surprised
if the overall failure rate (where "failure" is defined as not succeeding under circumstances where a reasonable owner would expect it
to) is less than 1:100, and I would not be terribly surprised if it were closer to 1:10. Fortunately, the overwhelming majority of these
failures are completely harmless "giving up", but you can hardly count those as "working" for the purposes of judging whether the feature
is usable. Let's turn this around and frame the question in the positive: what success rate (defined as I have here) would you require in
order to consider this (or any similar) feature to be "usable"?
Seriously? You think autopark fails once out of every 10 times?
Like I said above, I don't use it, it's slow. But the few times I did play with it, as long as the spot was big, it did a good job. I can't imagine it's 1 out of 10.
I'd say 90% is usable for autopark. At 95% I would call it good. At 99.9% I'd call it non-beta.
But that's my interpretation. I'm sure there are regulations and industry standard acceptable failure rates.
its missing the camera under the side view mirror that would be able to detect the curb. The reason that other cars with this feature accomplish it so well, is because that birds eye camera view is standard issue for this feature. Tesla seems to get a lot of things right, but that oversight, given all of the examples in the market just seems plain arrogant.
RogerHScott
Active Member
Yes, I'd say easily 1/10 it fails to identify a perfectly well-formed and proper parking space. I'd love to hear from any frequent user
who's experienced greater than 90% reliability in this regard. Otoh, I wouldn't be at all surprised if no one claimed to have actually
observed 90% reliability.
Fair enough, but what other products do you own for which you consider a 10% failure rate to still be "usable"?
Touché.
I can't think of anything major off the top of my head, but most of the products that I own that full under a category of necessity, work closer to the 99.9% point.
Some of my gadgets and apps could easily fall under the 90% point.
f-stop
Active Member
I'll chime in here as one who has never had my car fail to successfully recognize what I'd consider to be a proper parallel parking space (i.e. one I could fit the car into manually, and with a well-defined curb), nor has it ever failed to park perfectly in such a space once identified. I use auto parallel park at every opportunity, unless traffic behind me is very heavy or already waiting too close behind for comfort. (OTOH I don't use auto perpendicular park at all).
I don't doubt that some other owners are having a different experience with auto-park in even perfect conditions, perhaps I'm just lucky. There's other features and software in the car that drive me nuts with inconsistent behaviour (e.g. auto-Homelink, I'lm looking at you...) But I for one so far have >>90% success rate with auto parallel park over ~14months of ownership, though I always monitor its progress carefully via the rear camera and side view mirror and am always ready to manually brake if something looks wrong.
BTW I have no idea if this might be a factor in my own positive experience with auto park, but I'll just toss it out there...
Right after I took delivery of my Model S, I noticed it was giving me intermittent phantom proximity warnings at the front left of the car. The service centre said there was some known problem with paint thickness on some of the ultrasonic parking sensors. They measured all my sensors and found the two front-left ones had excess paint, by only about 15-20µm (maybe 10-15% over spec). Those 2 sensors were replaced and the phantom proximity warnings immediately went away. I was surprised such a small difference in paint thickness caused the problem. As I say, no idea if this is any factor here, but just wondering if there could be some kind of ultrasonic sensor calibration or out-of-spec issue for those of you having auto-park problems??
Sir Guacamolaf
The good kind of fat
..
I'd like to modify my original statement to .. self-parking is basically unusable because it's both unusably slow and unreliably dangerous. In fact it is so bad that even @Max* doesn't use it.
green1
Active Member
except for checking your calendar and meeting you at your front door on private property, except for coming to you wherever you are on private property, except for identifying stop signs and traffic lights, except for hands-free on-ramp to off-ramp, except for bringing the vehicle to a complete stop in an emergency.... so basically, none of the features they promised. I can't actually come up with any of the original promises that they DID deliver on.
And why wouldn't they lie about it's capabilities? they got away with it last time and sold record numbers. If nobody cares to call them out on their lies they'll continue to do it.
But don't worry, in a couple of years people like you will say that AP2 has "mostly been delivered on (with a few exceptions" without bothering to even review the original promises to see that what was delivered doesn't even touch the most basic parts of what was promised.
Sir Guacamolaf
The good kind of fat
I think they did deliver on quite a bit. Autosteer on freeways works quite well. So does auto-braking when I'm not paying attention. So it's not all that negative as you say - although I do agree that they didn't deliver on some of the things they bragged about.
green1
Active Member
Except the stated and demonstrated feature was hands free driving. Not whatever it is that you think they delivered on. They never advertised "stays in lane while you actively apply torque to the steering wheel" as a feature.
Except the advertised feature wasn't "reduces speed by a bit while beeping at you" the advertised feature was "brings the vehicle to a complete stop". So again, they delivered something, but nothing like what they advertised.
They didn't deliver on ANYTHING that they bragged about. I'm glad you're happy with the features you got, but some people bought based on what was being advertised, not on reading their mind and guessing at what they might actually give us instead of the advertised features.
Sure, they've given some neat things, but none of it is what they advertised that they would deliver.
3 second Google search:
Volvo just made a big move that could push forward self-driving cars
There were other manufacturers, can't remember off the top of my head, maybe Mercedes?
ETA: Found it. Volvo, Mercedes and Google: Should Carmakers Be Liable When A Self-Driving Car Crashes?
So you can disagree with my posts all you want, doesn't make you right
none of
not quite correct, none of those cars are on the market, and if you read my simply worded question and grasped the question your reply would not be so snarky. As it stand TODAY, there is NO FULLY autonomous vehicle on the roads and lacking any car there is no insurance company that could or would make the comment you claimed.3 second Google search:
Volvo just made a big move that could push forward self-driving cars
There were other manufacturers, can't remember off the top of my head, maybe Mercedes?
ETA: Found it. Volvo, Mercedes and Google: Should Carmakers Be Liable When A Self-Driving Car Crashes?
So you can disagree with my posts all you want, doesn't make you right
If you read my original post carefully and followed the conversation, you wouldn't have responded the way you did. But it's OK, sometimes it's hard to follow along.
"I think some of the big name manufacturers have stated that if their autonomous cars get into an accident, they'll cover the costs. I would think that involved parking." <--- I never claimed there are autonomous cars on the roads now. I never claimed anything about insurance companies except that i'm curious what the future holds --> "But I agree, I'm also curious what the long term vision is for insurance companies."
The insurance company never made the claim, the manufacturers did (which they'll probably be using an insurance company to cover their asses, but then again, maybe not. it wasn't stated).
Feel free to click the above links, because you obviously didn't read the articles and are continuing to make assumptions. My previous point is and was fully valid. Three manufacturers are claiming they'll cover costs if their autonomous vehicles are in accidents.
Enjoy your day.
Last edited:
jeffro01
Active Member
That's been my experience as well. I have yet to have any issues whatsoever with the auto-parallel parking despite using it well over 100 times now... I have only used the perpendicular parking option once and it was so slow, and I'm pretty fast with it as that's how I usually park, that I haven't tried it sense...
Oh and yes, since the last SW update, my auto-homelink has been quite unreliable when it used to work 99%+ of the time...
Jeff
jeffro01
Active Member
At some point, at some time, you're going to have to stop whining about this in thread, after thread, after thread, after thread, and so on and so forth... It's so freaking annoying to have to constantly sift through especially when you consider you're accusations rarely hold any basis in reality. Tesla delivered A LOT with AP1/HW1 and just because you're particularly hung up on the nagging functionality, doesn't mean Tesla didn't deliver.
As I've said it before, and it's a good thing I'm not in charge of Tesla for a number of reasons, I'd lock you out of your own car and refund your money on condition that you can never order another one of my products again. Customers like you make doing business a lot harder than it needs to be...
Everyone feel free to pile on me and dislike my post until your hearts content, I'm just sick of this constant whining...
Jeff
Interesting on both points.
Personally, I've tried autopark about 5 times and it's only done an acceptable job once. Mostly it gives up or parks so far from the curb it's not legal.
The homelink thing seems real to me. Ours fails about 10% of the time whereas previously it always worked, I didn't even think about it. BTW, it still works perfectly on our other cars.
BigMskiman
Active Member
Parallel auto-park working well for me in current HW2 car, as it was in prior HW1 car.
I've challenged some tight spaces for fun, and it has nailed it. I'll make a video next time.
|v8.1(17.11.10)| AP2 |
I've challenged some tight spaces for fun, and it has nailed it. I'll make a video next time.
|v8.1(17.11.10)| AP2 |
Similar threads
