Collision avoidance system and Euro Ncap

When will it be avilable in the S?

All premium sedans on the market has something similar as standard or an optiion (Adaptive Cruise Control etc.)

Soon to be an standard in all cars sold in Europe .

I have been told that the S will have wiring prepared for this (?)

And when When the S be tested by Euro Ncap?

I didn't get the chance to ask Elon personaly when he came to Norway. (But he really answered a lot of questions from the invited audience - impressing)

Nothing is more important then Safety
That's for sure, as soon as I purchased My Tesla Model S
I started looking online for the best solution, I found a collision avoidance system by "Mobileye" to have the most options, it also was installed in my Tesla without the need for any screws or medaling with the dashboard. I have had it for a few months now, very reliable and all I can say is it already paid off for me, I wont say I am a bad driver cause I'm not, but on a few occasions I came too close for comfort....


Thanks for the Mobileye heads up (Pun intended). I didn't know it existed. Can I ask what you paid for it and about the installation process? Do you have a dashboard warning system as shown on their website?


Mobileeye told me they make the system for ford, Volvo and gm but they do not integrate aftermarket systems with breaks. To much liability. So the manufacturer needs to do this.

Their system looks very interesting but I have yet to take a test drive with one. My concern is that it might get annoying at some point like radar detector before GPS integration.

I love the option of Google Driverless Car as it can avoid accidents in any conditions day, night, rain, snow, fog, pedestrian, animals...

There are a few constraints: I can't afford the cost of about $300,000 to equip my Model S for Driverless Car feature. Those equipments look montrously big and occupy too much space. How can Model S supply enough energy for driverless feature?

This is for Lush1:

If a tree falls in a forest and you don't see it, are you still dead?

This ad is for brake assist and not an anti collision system, but they often go hand in hand.

I don't want an anti-collision system in my vehicle. I like having control of my car. If they put a system like this in I hope they have a way to turn it off.

I have been reading about the defects Nissan's anti-collision systems. From my understanding there is no way to turn the anti-collision systems off in their cars. I will be staying away from any manufacturer that does this.


It's an option.

1) You need to pay extra for it. If you don't want it, don't pay for it.

2) If you accidentally paid dearly for it, you can turn it off.

"A 2012 Institute survey of owners of Volvo vehicles with crash avoidance technologies found that, despite some annoyance, the majority of drivers left the systems turned on most of the time, felt the systems made them safer drivers and would want them in their next vehicle."

Cruise control should never be engaged in heavy traffic. Period stop.

Are tesla owners happy with mobileye?
Cost to install?

@DTsea why not?

Have you used a car with a good adaptive cruise control? The system in my Infiniti works very well, slowing the car as traffic slows, speeding up when needed. I can adjust the gap between cars. Works well in heavy freeway traffic when speeds are varying

I remember when I fall asleep in my car. It was horrible. I had finished a survival military training week. I was exhausted. I was home relaxing and my girlfriend asked me to drive to her to hangout… well I was tired but people that have been in the military will agree, you don’t turn down such a request heheh.
Anyway, coming back I just couldn’t keep my eyes open, I tried everything: music, open windows, drinking water… I was fighting to stay awake… and then I saw my town exit board saying “1500m to exit” and I relaxed a bit…. Boom!! Let’s say I’m happy to be able to tell the story.
Now, if I’m tired or someone of my family is tired the car stays parked… No driving when tired period!
I hope those systems don’t “relax” the driver too much, or you’ll end up with a tons of cars driving themselves until stopping on the side of the road…

I woke up in the passenger seat to a field of green before me in the early mist of sunrise. My Brother was slumbering peacefully in the driver's seat, as my car was passing over the median toward oncoming traffic. I yelled his name, he awoke, quickly assessed the situation, and corrected the course of the vehicle into our own lanes.

Naturally, he said he was 'fine' and could go on. I insisted that he pull over at the next exit. I drove the rest of the way to my Grandparents farm, well rested, and very alert.

I'm glad to be able to tell that story.

On my epic youthful cross-country trip on a Kawasaki 175 two-cycle back in the late '60s, I was taking the bypass around Regina -- about 45 miles per side of a square, ruler-straight on dead-flat prairie. Other traffic at about 1 car per 5 minutes.

I can attest that road hypnosis is possible on a 'cycle. As my speed crept up into the 80s and location on the road began to vary, I managed with intense effort to release the accelerator grip, and coasted to the shoulder. I felt as though I had cheated death!

Any updates on driverless functionality?

All it takes is one person who was driving and paying full attention, who has excellent reflexes, and had a car that put on the brakes for him faster than was humanly possible and avoided a collision, to refute the claim that it's not a safety feature or that it's only for bad drivers. I'm one of those people. No matter how good your driving is, you can't stop somebody from swerving unexpectedly within a few feet of your front bumper and slamming on his brakes at 70 mph. You would have to start moving your foot toward the brake pedal before it even happened if you wanted to avoid an accident in that circumstance.

You shouldn't use passive forms of cruise control in moderate to heavy traffic, but ACC can increase your safety in those circumstances by keeping your following distance at a certain number of seconds, adjusting it when speeds change, keeping you from inadvertently speeding up way past the speed limits when drivers in front of you do, adjusting for you when somebody changes lanes in front of you, and reacting instantly to an unexpected hazard. Nobody is advocating that people use this instead of paying attention. Even with ACC, the assumption is that your eyes are on the road, and that your foot is either right behind the accelerator pedal or hovering over the brake pedal as appropriate. Use of either pedal overrides the ACC or disables it as appropriate.

I bought the Tesla anyway only because my previous car was totaled and I couldn't wait for a design change. And my car wouldn't have been totaled had the driver who totaled it been driving my wife's car, which would have prevented the accident or at least minimized the damage. Then I could have kept my old car until Tesla did something about this issue. Some leading car magazines topped their list of negatives with this issue, since the car has so few flaws that go beyond the scope of convenience issues. Lacking something that all cars in its class have is a good reason to knock them for it.

ACC can increase your safety in those circumstances by keeping your following distance at a certain number of seconds, adjusting it when speeds change, keeping you from inadvertently speeding up way past the speed limits when drivers in front of you do, adjusting for you when somebody changes lanes in front of you, and reacting instantly to an unexpected hazard.

I have no issues with Tesla adding active safety features, but the fact remains that the above is going to breed lazy drivers as a byproduct. Relying on ACC to maintain a safe driving distance from the car in front of you means that you are not making that a conscious effort. You are also relying on ACC to not pay attention to what's happening around you because the car can adjust. Reacting instantly to an unexpected hazard is where the feature is useful, not in substituting for basic driving skills.

Also, which car has an active safety system that would apply hard braking at freeway speeds to avoid a collision? It seems to me that doing so would create a tremendous hazard for rear collision, no? Sometimes the best way to avoid colliding with the car in front of you isn't to hit the brakes, but simply changing lanes. Which active safety feature would do that for me, and if so, would I trust the car to change lanes for me? How can the car tell the difference between a lane, a median, and the river gorge below?

Active safety features have their place, but not at the expense of the driver paying attention.

Driver aids should be added but driver education should also be increased. We should consider both aspects important.

Changing lanes assumes you have time to decide, which is not the case in an emergency. The one time I needed it the most, changing lanes wasn't an option, and not slamming on the brakes wasn't an option. If a driver doesn't have enough time to move the foot from the accelerator to the brake before there would be an accident, it would be impossible to change lanes. Not slamming on the brakes would have meant a severe accident. It had nothing to do with not paying attention, and if you can find statistics that show that owners of cars with these features pay less attention, then show them to me. The problem is that if it's true, and the cars stop the accidents from happening, there will be no reports. On the other hand, if the people wouldn't have been paying attention anyway, then I'd want them to have the feature before they smash into me. All I know is that my insurance is much lower on a car that has such features.

I also find the assertion absurd that a person is going to turn on ACC and decide that it's fine not to pay attention because of it. The manuals for most cars warn you that it's not designed to stop the car completely but could minimize the damage when you do get into an accident, if you don't take heed when it starts flashing BRAKE at you. But if you think that way, then don't turn it on. As long as others are having fewer accidents because of it, that's fine with me. If you hit me, we'll deal with it at the time.

The advantage of ACC is that I can use cruise control and not have to turn it off when a car moves in front of me, or turn it back on when the car leaves, and keep switching it off and on. If it could turn itself on automatically when the road ahead is clear, that would be fine. It's an alternative to standard cruise control, and I could make the same argument for standard CC and say that it encourages people not to pay attention, as long as I don't need to back my argument up. But in the case of standard cruise control, which the MS has, it's a certainty that if you aren't paying attention and a car moves in front of you with CC on, you will hit it if it's slower than you.

We already know that there are plenty of accidents where drivers aren't paying attention and that many of them would have been avoided with active safety features. We also know that none of them were avoided without them.

"And when will the S be tested by Euro Ncap?"

Hopefully never for Tesla, Euro Ncap has the highest standards in the world.

It's a 5 star rating, no seatbelt warning, will get you a star deduction, no autobreaking, star reduction, etc. Pretty gruesome test.

Tesla CAN test their car in Euro NCAP btw.

Euro NCAP will test high volume cars.

BUT any car manufacturer can let their car get tested, and many do, the car company pays for the testing in that scenario, but it's not a high price for a car company.

@amped "Also, which car has an active safety system that would apply hard braking at freeway speeds to avoid a collision?"

Virtually all of the newest collision avoidance systems (new for 2013/14) have this functionality and can stop the car all the way down to zero. These systems, installed in the latest Toyota Prius, Mercedes, Lexus, Acura, Volvo, etc., have already saved a lot of lives. A rear end collision between two cars that are both moving forward is a lot less impact full than a moving car striking a stationary object. Further, no car should be following so close that it would strike a forward car that undertakes emergency braking.

From a recent NYT article about the new IIHS testing on avoidance systems:

"The decision to do the testing and ratings grew out of insurance claims data suggesting that forward-collision warning systems alone reduced collisions with other vehicles by about 7 percent and by 14 percent when automatic braking was added... The insurance institute estimates that more than 20 percent of 2014 models offer a front-crash-prevention system with automatic braking; forward collision warning is an option on nearly 40 percent of 2014 models."

@PD, I am not opposed time Crash Avoidance systems but find them immature and marginally useful except in low speed crashes (25MPH or less). If Tesla included a currently acceptable system I would take it but not stand up and cheer about it! Below is some research similar to my previous post but extra copied text. Looks like no one bothered to actually read the links I posted so here is the goods condensed.

Collision avoidance test ratings
Sep. 2013 seems to be the largest test criteria I can find.

The Institute rates models with optional or standard front crash prevention systems as superior, advanced or basic depending on whether they offer autonomous braking, or autobrake, and, if so, how effective it is in tests at 12 and 25 mph. Vehicles rated superior have autobrake and can avoid a crash or substantially reduce speeds in both tests. For an advanced rating a vehicle must have autobrake and avoid a crash or reduce speeds by at least 5 mph in 1 of 2 tests.

Wiki list of many automobile makes and their system actions but no top speed mentioned! See my condensed list below.

In an important 2012 study[5] by the nonprofit research organization Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, researchers examined how particular features of crash-avoidance systems affected the number of claims under various forms of insurance coverage. They found that two crash-avoidance features provide the biggest benefits: (a) autonomous braking that would brake on its own, if the driver does not, to avoid a forward collision, and (b) adaptive headlights that would shift the headlights in the direction the driver steers. Unexpectedly, they found lane departure systems to be not helpful, and perhaps harmful, at the circa 2012 stage of development.

Cars with the CAS: mention of operating speed
Fiat...low-speed crash avoidance system that works between 5 and 30 km/h. mention of operating speed
General Motors... Mentions low speed braking
Honda...although first adopter no mention of operating speed
8 more brands are listed and none mention operating speed

It seems to me the testing awards superior ratings for appropriate action only up to speeds of 25 MPH and no one claims to work at higher speeds. At this point the majority of the benefit is to the insurers and driver premiums. At that speed not many serious injuries would avoided.

I will cheer and demand a system when they are tested at typical highway speeds (not just speed limit) so look forward to seeing anything that exists or is even being developed. For now no CAS on my car is not much to worry to talk about.

X Deutschland Site Besuchen