Joe White Global Autos Correspondent
Greetings from the Motor City!
Tesla Autopilot. Nissan ProPILOT. Volvo Pilot Assist. Lexus Teammate. What are they?
They are all combinations of sensors, hardware and software that enable a vehicle to do some – crucially not all – of the routine tasks of driving. Which tasks and when? That depends. Should drivers let the cars take control while they send texts, read email or take a nap? No. But it happens.
Does this technology make us safer? That depends on who you ask. Elon Musk says yes, insurance data says no.
Who’s to blame when a vehicle operating with the help of a digital driving assistant is involved in a crash? In the United States, judges and juries are getting handed that task.
Never mind self-driving cars for a minute. Today, let’s look at the challenges created by the rush to deploy technology known in the auto industry as ADAS – for “advanced driver assistance systems” – and marketed under a variety of names of which most people only know one: “Autopilot.”
We’ve got more. There’s a new, high-performance Porsche 911 hybrid on the way! Save your pennies. Here we go -
Today –
* Trying times for Autopilot and ADAS
* Porsche gears up for a year of big launches
* Ford gets a $365 million spanking
* The problems with “Autopilot” and its rivals Barring a last-minute settlement, a jury in San Jose, Calif. will start hearing evidence in the latest lawsuit to challenge Tesla’s deployment of “Autopilot,” the name Elon Musk chose for technology that allows a car to handle routine braking, steering and turning – but falls short of fully automated driving.
The litigation centers on a fatal crash in 2018 the plaintiffs charge was caused by Tesla engineering that failed to properly account for the challenges of getting a human driver to retake control of a car after delegating driving tasks to software and sensors. Tesla has won such cases in the past by blaming drivers for not heeding instructions to pay attention, no matter what.
Earlier Tuesday, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety weighed into the debate over the proper design for so-called “advanced driver assistance systems” like Autopilot. The IIHS tested 14 ADAS systems and gave 11 of them – including Autopilot – “poor” overall safety ratings. Only one system, the Lexus Teammate deployed at very low volume on the Lexus LS hybrid, earned an “acceptable” score.
The IIHS study, which is summarized here, concludes that there is no evidence that ADAS systems improve safety. Crash data shows no difference in accidents between vehicles with ADAS systems and those without, the IIHS said.
The IIHS report, the ongoing federal investigations of Autopilot and the civil litigation attacking Tesla’s deployment of the technology underscore the problems with the way ADAS systems are being rolled out to consumers.
The IIHS evaluated ADAS systems using safety metrics. But some automakers, such as General Motors, said they consider their ADAS systems to be convenience features, not safety features.
Then there are the names. Autopilot. Super Cruise. ProPILOT Assist. Active Driving Assistant Pro. Blue Cruise. Distronic with Active Steering Assist.
These disparate marketing labels all describe technology that falls short of fully automated driving. Drivers cannot safely engage any of them and check out by taking a nap or playing a video game. But each has different levels of driver monitoring, different behavior when disengaging and different types of warnings to drivers who aren’t paying attention.
The Society of Automotive Engineers pleaded four years ago for standard naming conventions. No such luck.
It’s been 20 years this month since the U.S. Defense Department launched its DARPA Grand Challenge to inspire American engineers to develop self-driving vehicles.
That military science project gave birth to an industry gold rush. It started with visions of widespread deployment of driverless cars by early in this decade. That didn’t happen. Instead, Tesla began charging thousands extra for partial automation technology and rival automakers followed suit. The IIHS and the Tesla trials signal a new phase of tough questions about the way autopilots-for-cars are being sold to the public.
What’s next? Look for calls on U.S. regulators to impose order. European regulators are already steps ahead.
* Essential Reading
* Uh-oh. Interest rates may not be coming down soon.
* Automakers are sharing your data with insurance companies
* Why warped nickel markets are a problem for EVs
* Porsche’s big launch year Porsche has big plans for 2024, including launching a high-performance hybrid version of its iconic 911 sports car by mid-year. Hang on to your tax refund! (See page 33 of this deck.)
Porsche also plans to launch new versions of the electric Taycan, hybrid versions of the Panamera sedan and the first electric Macan compact SUVs.
That’s the good news. The not-so-good news is that launch costs will suppress Porsche’s revenue growth and margins. Porsche shares are up 0.5% for the year. Rival Ferrari’s shares are up nearly 12%.
* Ford draws a penalty flag
Ford agreed to pay $365 million to settle a long-running dispute with U.S. authorities over its strategy for avoiding tariffs on Turkish-built Transit Connect vans.
The Justice Department’s beef was that Ford shipped Transit Connects to the United States with “sham rear seats”, installed and characterized these as “passenger vehicles” subject to a 2.5% tariff instead of the 25% tariff levied on imported trucks. (That 25% duty on trucks shields the outsized profits Ford, General Motors and Stellantis earn on their U.S. truck franchises.)
Once the Transit Connects cleared customs, the government charged, the back seats were taken out to prepare the Transit Connects for sale as commercial vans.
Ford denied wrongdoing and admitted no liability. The settlement is a bargain compared with the $1.3 billion potential liability Ford disclosed three years ago.
Keep the context in mind: Tough tariff enforcement is in demand during this election year. The Biden Administration, GOP lawmakers and industry trade groups are sounding alarms that Chinese rivals will start trying to import vehicles into the United States via Mexico, or use other means to duck tariffs currently set at 27.5%.
* Fast laps Chinese smartphone maker Xiaomi said it will deliver its first electric vehicles this month. The company’s shares jumped 11% on the news.
Tesla’s Berlin factory got its power back, but it will take time to resume full production, the plant’s manager said. Elon Musk will visit the plant on Wednesday, Table Media reported.
Chevrolet relaunched its electric Blazer SUV – one of a growing crop of Tesla Model Y rivals - with a lower price and revised software. General Motors sidelined the Blazer in December because of glitchy software. In a concession to the price war Tesla has prosecuted in the electric SUV market, GM dropped the price on the vehicle by $5,500 to $6,500 and said it now qualifies for a $7,500 U.S. tax credit.
Volvo Cars will invest in UK startup Breathe Battery in hopes that Breathe can deliver a battery with 30% faster charging time.
Volkswagen quit Australia's auto industry lobbying group, joining Tesla in showing disapproval with the group’s stance against tougher emissions policies. Separately, VW said it will boost investment in its majority-owned Chinese venture with domestic automaker JAC.
The truck-making Volvo said it will furlough 250 workers and slow production in Sweden. Auto File is published on Tuesdays and Fridays. Think your friend or colleague should know about us? Forward this newsletter to them. They can also subscribe here.
Comments