Correct. Their ability to stop you does not degrade as much under heavy use, and therefore, if the brakes had been used extensively just prior to the panic stop, it is possible that better brakes could have stopped the vehicle faster than weaker/OEM brakes. In theory of course because I doubt this situation applies here.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla on Autopilot slams into stationary car (VIDEO)
- Thread starter 2101Guy
- Start date
“The results
The results, after completing the two tests, were clear cut and clearly in favor of the Brembo brakes, perhaps even beyond expectations.
The numbers speak for themselves. The Brembo brake system braked better under all conditions with shorter braking distances than the Golf stock brakes.”
The results, after completing the two tests, were clear cut and clearly in favor of the Brembo brakes, perhaps even beyond expectations.
The numbers speak for themselves. The Brembo brake system braked better under all conditions with shorter braking distances than the Golf stock brakes.”
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Except, they can't REDUCE them.
They can only KEEP THEM THE SAME over more abusive conditions. None of which you would reach in highway driving.
Were you planning to include a link to whatever that quote is from?
Regardless though- Like I said, anybody ignoring how physics works and telling lies like that is trying to sell you an upgrade you don't need.
Seriously dude- read the link I posted. It has math and physics and stuff in it to explain why you're wrong.
Last edited:
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Ah, nevermind, once again I did your job for you.
It's from here:
www.brembo.com
SHOCKER, it's someone trying to sell you a brake upgrade!
But what was actually tested?
IOW- they abused the hell out of the brakes far more than you'd do in highway/street driving.
And what were the results?
So even after 10 highway speed stops over and over, the "upgraded" brakes only stopped on average 1.1 yards shorter.
Note they don't give you breakdown of distance per run. They only give you results after testing 10 stops in a row without cooling, then after a second batch of 10, then after 5 more from even higher speed.
Why?
Because they know it'd show identical distances the first couple times. Only averaged over 10 repeated no cooldowns did they find the stock brakes took LONGER the 10th time than the first.
The upgraded ones never got any shorter than the stock ones did the first time though. They can't, because the brakes don't stop the car- the tires do
I know you're allergic to facts, but this may be the dumbest of the many hills you've picked to die on.
Go look up the physics formula for braking distance.
It asks about the coefficient of friction between the tire and the road.
It does NOT ask about your brakes. At all.
Because the brakes don't stop the car- the tires do.
It's from here:
Stock brakes vs Brembo UPGRADE brakes. What’s the real difference? A test drive with the Golf VII R
The Brembo UPGRADE brake systems offer innovative technology and unique design for whoever wants to get the maximum out of their car. But what is the real difference between a stock brake system and a Brembo one? A comparative test drive by the website Automoto.it clearly shows this difference.
SHOCKER, it's someone trying to sell you a brake upgrade!
But what was actually tested?
IOW- they abused the hell out of the brakes far more than you'd do in highway/street driving.
And what were the results?
So even after 10 highway speed stops over and over, the "upgraded" brakes only stopped on average 1.1 yards shorter.
Note they don't give you breakdown of distance per run. They only give you results after testing 10 stops in a row without cooling, then after a second batch of 10, then after 5 more from even higher speed.
Why?
Because they know it'd show identical distances the first couple times. Only averaged over 10 repeated no cooldowns did they find the stock brakes took LONGER the 10th time than the first.
The upgraded ones never got any shorter than the stock ones did the first time though. They can't, because the brakes don't stop the car- the tires do
I know you're allergic to facts, but this may be the dumbest of the many hills you've picked to die on.
Go look up the physics formula for braking distance.
It asks about the coefficient of friction between the tire and the road.
It does NOT ask about your brakes. At all.
Because the brakes don't stop the car- the tires do.
You are correct. Tesla puts Brembos on their performance models just for decoration. No other reason
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I admire the tenacity with which you completely ignore facts and science and boil everything down to nonsense false binary choice.
But one thing putting them on does NOT do is reduce your emergency braking distance in normal street use. As anybody with a P3D- who swapped to the same PS4s tires, and got the same braking distance as a P3D+ owner, can tell you (and there's been many such). Or anybody who just understands math and physics can.
Or hell, as even car magazines do.
Why Braking Is All About Tires
If you want to upgrade your brakes, start with your tires.
www.roadandtrack.com
As with the first link I provided they give you a few reasons you might want to upgrade brakes anyway (more even wear at the track, better "feel" of the system, etc)-- but "stopping shorter in an emergency on the highway" is not one of them.
BTW- your seatbelts and airbags ALSO don't reduce braking distance. I guess by your "logic" they're also there just for decoration.
Autopilot, the product and term, has been around for decades in airplanes. The pilot in command is still responsible for piloting the aircraft. Must look out for other traffic, obstacles etc. It keeps you at altitude, speed, and/or heading. It can make turns, it can even land some airplanes. At ALL times the pilot in command needs to be paying attention and ready to take over at all times. Quite similar to AP in a Tesla.
Yes this is a really good point. The person sitting in the driver seat IS responsible. And if they hit someone with negligence, the person sitting in the driver seat may be charged with manslaughter. AP & FSDb is a driver *assistance* system at this point in time. Pay attention, be ready to take over at ALL times. It’s not that hard. I find it quite enjoyable (most of the time) as a matter of fact.
Edit: to fix quotes
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
FWIW I've made that exact point about autopilot--- even to the point of citing FCC rules and regulations around it- to prove it's the most accurately named ADAS system on the market multiple times.
Doesn't seem to help though.
Doesn't seem to help though.
I think there are two issues:
1. There's a big difference between what an autopilot actually does and what pilots are required to do when using an autopilot and what a lot of non pilots think an autopilot can do. For some reason there seems to be a widespread belief that pilots can sleep, read the newspaper, browse the internet, etc., when using an autopilot. I'm not sure where this belief comes from but it is rather widespread, and I think Tesla knew exactly what they were going for when they came up with the name.
2. The analogy isn't perfect because when a plane is on Autopilot, the pilot in command must be able to take the controls on a moment's notice, just like a driver should be able to take the controls of a vehicle on a moment's notice. However, the minimum reaction times you have when you're in the air and far away from any other planes are far longer than the reaction times you must have to avoid collisions on the road, where vehicles are much closer together. If you get a TCAS traffic advisory you are about 40 seconds away from a potential collision. If the traffic advisory gets upgraded to a resolution advisory, you're about 20-30 seconds from a potential collision. How many seconds of warning does Tesla Autopilot give you? If a pilot is flying on autopilot, it's not a big deal if he's looking at fuel gauges or adjusting the frequency on the radio, but checking charge level and projections to get to your destination while driving on Autopilot could put you into the bumper of the car ahead of you.
When I use FSD Beta my car can detect stationary cars and starts slowing down well before it gets to them. If this clip was truly from early 2022 then radar could've still been in use and radar is notoriously bad at differentiating a stationary car from a barrier. Tesla vision should've spotted the object and slowed down.
If Tesla vision was activated then perhaps the crumpled up car no longer looked like a "car" to the Tesla. I don't think this is the case though as the rear of the car was relatively intact and its flashers were on. I believe only the FSD stack can actually see the brake lights/blinkers on cars. When I was on regular software, I didn't notice any brake lights on blinkers on other vehicles in the visualization. When I got FSD last week I started noticing the brake lights and blinkers on other vehicles. Maybe the AP stack can't see that? Maybe if the owner of the Tesla had FSD, the car would've noticed the emergency flashers and started slowing down?
If Tesla vision was activated then perhaps the crumpled up car no longer looked like a "car" to the Tesla. I don't think this is the case though as the rear of the car was relatively intact and its flashers were on. I believe only the FSD stack can actually see the brake lights/blinkers on cars. When I was on regular software, I didn't notice any brake lights on blinkers on other vehicles in the visualization. When I got FSD last week I started noticing the brake lights and blinkers on other vehicles. Maybe the AP stack can't see that? Maybe if the owner of the Tesla had FSD, the car would've noticed the emergency flashers and started slowing down?
Last edited:
ArchHamster
Member
Freaking love autopilot as a term for adas and I wish it would catch on as standard jargon for all adas systems to both demystify aviation ap and hopefully encourage similar standards in the future after autopilot has matured.
I think something many people don't appreciate about aviation autopilot is that it's designed to work on the worst day where flying is still possible. This is why, for example, most systems in an airliner have tripple redundancies and autotakeoff isn't a thing while autolanding is (under certain configurations on certain airports). On a good day, we could absolutely design an aviation ap which could follow taxi directions from atc, auto takeoff, auto climb (we haz this), auto cruise (we haz this), auto descend (haz) and auto approach (haz) then auto land (haz*) before taxing back to gate by itself. The issues comes with doing this on the worst day and while some systems are super impressive (like airbus fly by wire, which essentially always has a level of ap activated even during takeoff except for the conditions with the most critical of failures) there is always a chance of the right combinations of failures occurring requiring split second decisions and takeover by a pilot. This is why, for example, when doing autolands or having ap fly a glideslope down to minimums on approach, pilots are trained to have their hands hovering on toga buttons (go around, abort landing button). However, most emergencies in an airplane, especially at cruise, have a significant longer grace period until it becomes necessary for a pilot to intervene. Still, even at cruise, this is not always the case and pilots must be monitoring ap.
Back to adas, I wish some of these design philosophies from aviation could be translated to car ap. Have manufacturers figure out the worst conditions ap can perform in and educate drivers how to spot such conditions. Design ap to perform well in the worst conditions that they can manage. Not just on sunny, clear afternoons. And finally, build redundancy into all systems where it is feasibly possible. For instance, redundant radar for reduced ap modes when cameras are blinded, redundant cameras, he'll I'd even love a redundant GPS, motors, and mini battery although that's getting a bit coo coo.
I hope autopilot stays in use as a synonym for adas. Not because it currently perfectly fits, but because I think it can fit and sets standards and a design philosophy (design ap to work on bad days instead of good days) which car manufacturers can strive to reach. Maybe not this early in development, but going forward.
Last edited:
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
FWIW I think exactly the opposite.
One of Elons "problems" is that he is smart, and assumes everyone else is too.
I've commented on this most in the twitter threads because when applied to engineering he gets pretty great results, but when applied to human behavior his way of thinking becomes a massive dumpster fire because people are stupid and terrible.
So I can absolutely imagine a discussion where he, knowing what AP does in planes, recognizes it's the perfect name for what Teslas ADAS system is intended to do and uses that as the most accurate name possible.
And then is constantly surprised when people misunderstand it.
I don't disagree reaction times needed are different, but I don't think that changes the general intent and operating domains of the system.
To me far worse are names like say Co Pilot, which Ford uses... a Co Pilot can actually fly the plane without the primary pilot actively paying attention.
Similar threads
