Think we'll ever get follow distance of "1" again?

[beatle]

HW3 is new to me as of last month, but I understand Tesla eliminated the follow distance of "1" some time ago when they converted our cars' radar units to ballast. Think we'll ever get a follow distance of "1" back? AP is now useless in stop and go traffic around here as many people believe you're dawdling behind the car in front of you and will then attempt to go around you and cut you off. The car also takes forever to climb back to the set speed which exacerbates the problem if traffic speeds are yo-yoing. These were not problems with AP1 which was a godsend for dealing with traffic.

 

[**BatteryLow**]

No, who cares for 1 if you still have 2. Give us follow distance 11!

 

[JulienW]

No, who cares for 1 if you still have 2. Give us follow distance 11!

Actually this is more relevant than you meant since the Distance is only a relative distance anyway. Tesla could just relabel or "adjust" the relative numbers and even make it go to 11.

 

[bo3bdar]

Can I just say that using car lengths as the metric is stupid? Following distance should be based on time not distance.


It should be a measure of your reaction time, and ability to stop before plowing into what is in front of you. See the recent crash in the tunnel, where people behind were choosing a poor follow distance.

If you use time then you don't need to adjust it for different speeds, and you would automatically be able to follow closely at low speeds, because 200ms of time is not very much pavement at 10 mph.


For someone driving aggressively and video game caliber reflexes, 200ms would be OK. If you are driving casual, let's bump that up and give you 500ms of reaction time. If you are on TACC, let's bump it up to 1000ms, because you want some leeway.

Am I asking too much to have sane measurement units?

 

[JulienW]

Can I just say that using car lengths as the metric is stupid? Following distance should be based on time not distance......
Am I asking too much to have sane measurement units?

Did you read my post above about the number being relative and NOT absolute? Tesla DOSEN'T use absolute car lengths. 1 is NOT 1 car length. It is a relative distance that appears to change relatively at different speeds. So it is probably based more on time with speed a consideration.

Even the OP used 1 in quotation marks ("1") to imply it is relative.

 

[JulienW]

Odd thought/rhetorical question:

The follow distance doesn't seem to have any effect in FSD Beta City Street driving. When we get V11 (FSD Beta Highway) could the follow distance be removed completely? If FSD Beta is going to treat them as one stack (no switching) then follow distance days may be numbered.

 

[**BatteryLow**]

Actually this is more relevant than you meant since the Distance is only a relative distance anyway. Tesla could just relabel or "adjust" the relative numbers and even make it go to 11.

 

[beatle]

I used quotes to indicate the setting, not to allude to what it might represent. I don't really care what it is measuring. "1" was for a human-like following distance in heavier traffic. "2" is more of a "I'm just tootling along behind this car, maybe on my phone. Go ahead and cut me off" setting.

I'll use a setting of 3 or 4 when I'm on a two lane road with low traffic.

 

[SalisburySam]

…some time ago when they converted our cars' radar units to ballast.

Love the phrasing, thanks for this morning’s coffee chuckle! And to your point, I’m also awaiting the return of the “1” following distance for exactly the reasons you state. I’ve avoided all software updates (now numbering 10 including v2023.n.n) and have remained on v2022.20.8 to NOT disable my radar with the concomitant changes to following distance and other downgrades.

 

[bo3bdar]

Did you read my post above about the number being relative and NOT absolute? Tesla DOSEN'T use absolute car lengths. 1 is NOT 1 car length. It is a relative distance that appears to change relatively at different speeds. So it is probably based more on time with speed a consideration.

Even the OP used 1 in quotation marks ("1") to imply it is relative.

OK. So... are we saying it just doesn't work very well? If it's relative, then why is it so terrible when driving in stop n' go traffic? We can just call it 'beta'.

This is the sort of stuff with Tesla that drives me crazy. Some totally half-assed solution that never gets any further attention or work to finish it.

 

[aronth5]

OK. So... are we saying it just doesn't work very well? If it's relative, then why is it so terrible when driving in stop n' go traffic? We can just call it 'beta'.

This is the sort of stuff with Tesla that drives me crazy. Some totally half-assed solution that never gets any further attention or work to finish it.

I guess I don't care since for me FSD/NoA handles stop n' go traffic really well. I cannot imagine wanting to use "1" anywhere. So the answer to the OP's question is I hope not. Think of all the rear end crashes you've seen and how many wouldn't have happened if so many people didn't tailgate?

 

[SalisburySam]

I guess I don't care since for me FSD/NoA handles stop n' go traffic really well. I cannot imagine wanting to use "1" anywhere. So the answer to the OP's question is I hope not. Think of all the rear end crashes you've seen and how many wouldn't have happened if so many people didn't tailgate?

My experience with EAP/FSD is that my car handles stop-and-go traffic backups exceedingly well…just may be its core FSD strength. The “1” following distance (time, not distance) is exactly appropriate for that scenario keeping a short distance to the car in front and smoothly keeping up with crawling and stopping traffic. It keeps me close enough to discourage others from cutting in which in turn keeps those behind me from further fits of anger, but far enough to not need panic braking. Again, it just works and works very well for this case. It is the main reason I’ve refused to update my software beyond v2022.20.8, the last to include this (and keep my radar working).

 

[EVRider-FL]

From the manual:

To adjust the following distance you want to maintain between Model S and a vehicle traveling ahead of you, rotate the Autopilot stalk. Each setting corresponds to a time-based distance that represents how long it takes for Model S, from its current location, to reach the location of the rear bumper of the vehicle ahead of you. Your setting is retained until you manually change it.

 

[aronth5]

My experience with EAP/FSD is that my car handles stop-and-go traffic backups exceedingly well…just may be its core FSD strength. The “1” following distance (time, not distance) is exactly appropriate for that scenario keeping a short distance to the car in front and smoothly keeping up with crawling and stopping traffic. It keeps me close enough to discourage others from cutting in which in turn keeps those behind me from further fits of anger, but far enough to not need panic braking. Again, it just works and works very well for this case. It is the main reason I’ve refused to update my software beyond v2022.20.8, the last to include this (and keep my radar working).

I tend to agree but I don't want to have to adjust the setting based on traffic and roads. Since it works very well for me without using '1' I don't care if it ever comes back.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

HW3 is new to me as of last month, but I understand Tesla eliminated the follow distance of "1" some time ago when they converted our cars' radar units to ballast. Think we'll ever get a follow distance of "1" back? AP is now useless in stop and go traffic around here as many people believe you're dawdling behind the car in front of you and will then attempt to go around you and cut you off. The car also takes forever to climb back to the set speed which exacerbates the problem if traffic speeds are yo-yoing. These were not problems with AP1 which was a godsend for dealing with traffic.

You’re mixing “function” with “follow distance (time).”

These are not the same of course.

It definitely does not function well as is. Big problems, as described.

Follow distance is separate, of course.

They broke it because they are off in the weeds desperately trying to solve the jerk problem (and failing of course).

Turns out an attentive human is incredibly good and smooth and can easily maintain a time-based distance. Pretty amazing.

I also want follow time of 11! But I want the car to get up to speed promptly and get to the following distance (time) promptly without tracking the velocity of the car in front mechanically.

 

[Twiglett]

As the current system seems to be arbitrary distance/time/sun elevation it just as likely that Tesla will give us 1-7 just by changing the numbers and nothing else.
I too am interested to see what they do with the unified stack as @JulienW said. Are we getting settable distance in FSD or stuck with chill-assertive in AP?

 

[E90alex]

No. Vision is just not as accurate as radar for monitoring precise distance and speed differential so that’s why they can’t do “1”.

My car without radar behaves very poorly at adjusting to varying speeds of the lead car. And frequently gives false forward collision warnings when the speed differential is not nearly enough to cause a collision.

 

[Supcom]

No. Vision is just not as accurate as radar for monitoring precise distance and speed differential so that’s why they can’t do “1”.

My car without radar behaves very poorly at adjusting to varying speeds of the lead car. And frequently gives false forward collision warnings when the speed differential is not nearly enough to cause a collision.

It's not an accuracy problem. Tesla Vision has a latency on the order of about 0.5 seconds. So, the car has to maintain a follow distance far enough so that it can still react appropriately even though it won't know that the car ahead made a panic stop a half second ago.

Latency is the crux of most issues with vehicle control on AP or FSD and even TACC. It takes away critical evaluation time so the car tends to overreact to avoid getting into a position where it cannot react effectively. As the latency improves, the vehicle control improves. We've seen this with FSD over the past year, but there is still too much latency in the system.

 

[E90alex]

It's not an accuracy problem. Tesla Vision has a latency on the order of about 0.5 seconds. So, the car has to maintain a follow distance far enough so that it can still react appropriately even though it won't know that the car ahead made a panic stop a half second ago.

Latency is the crux of most issues with vehicle control on AP or FSD and even TACC. It takes away critical evaluation time so the car tends to overreact to avoid getting into a position where it cannot react effectively. As the latency improves, the vehicle control improves. We've seen this with FSD over the past year, but there is still too much latency in the system.

Whatever the problem is, whether latency or accuracy or both, is less prominent with radar in my experience.

Tesla essentially admits this themselves by not allowing the “1” follow distance on Vision when cars with radar used to be capable of it.

My 2018 Golf R with a much more “primitive” ADAS system with hardware dating back to at least 2015 behaved *much* better in terms of ACC and FCW and phantom braking.

 

[beatle]

You’re mixing “function” with “follow distance (time).”

These are not the same of course.

It definitely does not function well as is. Big problems, as described.

Follow distance is separate, of course.

They broke it because they are off in the weeds desperately trying to solve the jerk problem (and failing of course).

Turns out an attentive human is incredibly good and smooth and can easily maintain a time-based distance. Pretty amazing.

I also want follow time of 11! But I want the car to get up to speed promptly and get to the following distance (time) promptly without tracking the velocity of the car in front mechanically.

Except I didn't attempt to define either. Tesla refers to the setting as "follow distance."

Humans may be smooth when stopping time and distance are well known, but in a panic stop, they... panic and perform poorly. Or in the worst cases they don't realize the car in front of them has panic stopped and they don't brake appropriately and run into the leading car. I actually felt safer in stop and go traffic while AP1 was in control because I knew it was better equipped to react faster and brake harder, all without me having to be on high alert. I just feel nauseated with HW3.

Elon says you don't need radar or lidar since humans can drive just fine using only vision. But why have humans as a benchmark who rear-end each other in traffic every day? We already have this cool ~100 year old technology that can do better. Radar might add "noise" to the AP algorithm when attempting more complex navigation, but for a simple task of keeping pace and not hitting the car in front of you, it does a pretty good job as @E90alex observed in his caveman car.