I don't foresee myself ever needing a new car with driver assist features

[kphoger]

If someone in front of me brakes suddenly, it doesn't matter whether it was the computer or the driver braking, it's my responsibility as a driver to maintain a reasonable following distance so that I have time to react to their sudden braking.

But it's not a matter of laying blame.  It's a matter of the accident happening in the first place.

[Scott5114]

Yikes. I had no idea that some of these features (like hill hold assist) are automatic. Even worse, it can't be disabled.

Given my specific situation (manual transmission, very hilly city), I don't see what I would gain by being able to enable/disable hill hold on the fly.

I think the problem is when you have someone from a not very hilly city who drives the car for 10 years, then drives to Seattle and the car starts doing things of its own volition.

I find it remarkable that someone could drive a car for even a year without realizing it can hold itself at a 3% grade.

Being from central Oklahoma, I have no idea what a 3% grade is. Although I probably got one once in the math class where they taught us how to do the rise over run slope equation.

For real, in Norman, I'm struggling to think of any slope more extreme than you might encounter at a freeway interchange.

[Big John]

For a freeway, per AASHTO, max. grades are 3% for flat terrain, 4% for rolling terrain and 5% for mountainous terrain.

[Stormwalker]

If someone in front of me brakes suddenly, it doesn't matter whether it was the computer or the driver braking, it's my responsibility as a driver to maintain a reasonable following distance so that I have time to react to their sudden braking.

But it's not a matter of laying blame.  It's a matter of the accident happening in the first place.

And if I am driving correctly, the accident will not happen regardless of whether their car brakes for no apparent reason, because I won't hit them.

This actually brings me to another reason I wouldn't want my car to brake for me.  I drive a performance car.  It has very good brakes.  If I overreact to something on the road and apply full braking when I shouldn't, there is a very good chance I will be hit from behind, because other cars can't stop as quickly as mine can.  I had this situation just the other day, when someone on the Dallas North Tollway cut off the driver in front of me, who then overreacted and stepped very hard on his brakes.  I had allowed a reasonable following distance, and so I was able to come to a stop safely without needing to apply full brake power.  Even with this, the SUV behind me (who had not allowed enough following distance) got uncomfortably close, and the truck behind him (who was blatantly tailgating) had to swerve onto the shoulder to avoid him.  If I had slammed on my brakes in this situation, there would certainly have been a multi-car pileup as the SUV behind me plowed into me and then the truck plowed into him.

There is a level of nuance and judgement involved in making these decisions.  I don't doubt that computers are capable of making them... and I don't doubt that a computer is capable of doing it better than I can since the computer can calculate rate of closure and rate of deceleration, as well as braking force required, on the fly, much faster than I can.  But these technologies are programmed by humans who make mistakes, and they haven't been around all that long yet.  As such, I don't think they have seen enough iterations in development and improvement for me to trust them quite yet.  Not when I feel very confident in my ability to avoid these situations where I would need the assist to begin with by being a responsible, careful, and defensive driver.

I don't object to the technologies on principle.  In fact, I think they will probably save a lot of lives.  I just want to let the technology season a little longer before I trust it enough to have such a system in the car that I drive.

As it happens, I'm not too worried about it, because when I bought my Camaro, I bought it with the intention of driving it for at least 10 years.  I've had it for almost 7 now, and only have 35,000 miles on it.  I love it as much now as I did the day I bought it.  So... I don't expect to be replacing it anytime soon.

[J N Winkler]

Being from central Oklahoma, I have no idea what a 3% grade is. Although I probably got one once in the math class where they taught us how to do the rise over run slope equation.

For real, in Norman, I'm struggling to think of any slope more extreme than you might encounter at a freeway interchange.

I can promise there are 3% grades not far from you.  The segment of I-35 between SH 33 near Guthrie and SH 51 near Stillwater comes to mind--there is a place in Logan County where it climbs 50 ft in 1905 ft, corresponding to an average grade of 2.6%.  This is without getting into two-lane state highways, which typically have less forgiving geometry, or segments of I-35 further away, such as the long upgrade near Turner Falls for which a climbing lane is provided.

The stylized fact (and part of the motivation for the criteria Big John quotes) is that 3% is the maximum grade at which trucks will perform more or less as if they are on a level roadway.

[jakeroot]

Yikes. I had no idea that some of these features (like hill hold assist) are automatic. Even worse, it can't be disabled.

Given my specific situation (manual transmission, very hilly city), I don't see what I would gain by being able to enable/disable hill hold on the fly.

I think the problem is when you have someone from a not very hilly city who drives the car for 10 years, then drives to Seattle and the car starts doing things of its own volition.

I find it remarkable that someone could drive a car for even a year without realizing it can hold itself at a 3% grade.

Being from central Oklahoma, I have no idea what a 3% grade is. Although I probably got one once in the math class where they taught us how to do the rise over run slope equation.

For real, in Norman, I'm struggling to think of any slope more extreme than you might encounter at a freeway interchange.

For a freeway, per AASHTO, max. grades are 3% for flat terrain, 4% for rolling terrain and 5% for mountainous terrain.

Even in my own research, I found that 3% may be in excess of what actually triggers it. Even at very gentle slopes, it will hold the car.

Looking around the OKC area, some of the loop ramps between freeways are easily steep enough to trigger it. Now I recognize that not everywhere has busy enough freeway ramps for this to ever become a genuine concern (although incidents could certainly cause unexpected slowdowns), but then hill hold really isn't for people in Norman. It's really designed for people who live in areas with a fair amount of traffic and at least rolling hills. So when someone from a flat area tells me this feature is superfluous or whatever, it strikes me as remarkably out of touch. If someone who didn't like it actually lived in a hilly area, even for a couple months, they'd very quickly learn to love it.

I guess it might be like me complaining about open top cars. But then Seattle isn't exactly the target audience for a cabriolet, so...

[webny99]

Being from central Oklahoma, I have no idea what a 3% grade is. Although I probably got one once in the math class where they taught us how to do the rise over run slope equation.

Haha, very well done.

[Stormwalker]

Even in my own research, I found that 3% may be in excess of what actually triggers it. Even at very gentle slopes, it will hold the car.

Looking around the OKC area, some of the loop ramps between freeways are easily steep enough to trigger it. Now I recognize that not everywhere has busy enough freeway ramps for this to ever become a genuine concern (although incidents could certainly cause unexpected slowdowns), but then hill hold really isn't for people in Norman. It's really designed for people who live in areas with a fair amount of traffic and at least rolling hills. So when someone from a flat area tells me this feature is superfluous or whatever, it strikes me as remarkably out of touch. If someone who didn't like it actually lived in a hilly area, even for a couple months, they'd very quickly learn to love it.

I guess it might be like me complaining about open top cars. But then Seattle isn't exactly the target audience for a cabriolet, so...

I mean, I live in Dallas, and mine activates on hills that are, well... they're moderate hills by Dallas standards.  Which means not particularly impressive by the standards of some other places.  Dallas is fairly flat (though not quite as flat as some would claim).  Occasionally it activates on things like the driveway in front of my garage, though, which isn't much of a slope at all. I mean, yes, if I put the car in neutral it would roll... slowly.  Certainly not quickly enough to be an actual problem unless I completely ignored it.  Even if someone was parked right behind me I'd be in no real danger of rolling back into them unless I was REALLY oblivious.

But I've certainly been to other places, and I lived in Yorktown Heights, NY for a couple of years, and while that isn't San Francisco, it certainly isn't flat, either!  So I have some awareness of what driving in a hilly area is like, and I can certainly see how it would be an asset in those places.

Of course, I never actually said I thought the hill-start assist was superfluous.  I said I don't NEED it (which is to say, I am capable of driving the car just fine without it)... but I actually do like the feature, except for the fact that it seems to be fairly inconsistent about the conditions under which it activates.

[vdeane]

I think the problem is when you have someone from a not very hilly city who drives the car for 10 years, then drives to Seattle and the car starts doing things of its own volition.

I don't think hill hold is comparable to things like advance breaking or lane keep assist.  The car isn't really "doing things", it's more about what it's not doing - namely, rolling back when moving your foot from the break to the gas.  And at least on my Civic, if you really want to roll back, it will after a lag of about a second or so.  It doesn't change how I drive at all, it's just a little more convenient, especially as people driving automatics don't expect the car in front of them to roll back.

[Stormwalker]

I think the problem is when you have someone from a not very hilly city who drives the car for 10 years, then drives to Seattle and the car starts doing things of its own volition.

I don't think hill hold is comparable to things like advance breaking or lane keep assist.  The car isn't really "doing things", it's more about what it's not doing - namely, rolling back when moving your foot from the break to the gas.  And at least on my Civic, if you really want to roll back, it will after a lag of about a second or so.  It doesn't change how I drive at all, it's just a little more convenient, especially as people driving automatics don't expect the car in front of them to roll back.

Sounds like the hill hold on your Civic doesn't apply as much brake as the hill assist on my Camaro, then, because it's definitely noticeable in that it slows the transition from being still to forward motion a bit when it's active.

It's not as pronounced as, say, leaving the parking brake on.  But definitely noticeable.

Actually, I wonder if the Camaro's just takes a little longer to release than yours, and maybe that's why I notice it.

[kphoger]

To be fair, I suspect Scott5114 doesn't often come to complete stops on freeway ramps and the I-35 mainline.

[MikeTheActuary]

I know....I'm late to the thread...but I couldn't resist commenting here.  (Hazard of my profession.)

But if that costs me an extra $2000 then I don't want it.

And what if that feature saves you more than that amount in future insurance costs?

Auto insurance rates these days do factor in the experience of various driver-assist technologies....both the reduction in accident frequency, as well as the increased repair costs from the newer, specialized equipment.

[Dirt Roads]

But if that costs me an extra $2000 then I don't want it.

And what if that feature saves you more than that amount in future insurance costs?

Auto insurance rates these days do factor in the experience of various driver-assist technologies....both the reduction in accident frequency, as well as the increased repair costs from the newer, specialized equipment.

One of the unresolved issues in the autonomous vehicle industry is whether personal auto insurance will be able to pass the liability over to the vehicle manufacturer.  For accidents occurring with the autonomous mode activated, there are concerns that insurers will be able to successfully argue that the manufacturers were previously held liable for similar accidents. 

[Scott5114]

My point is not that there aren't 3% grades around here, but that people from around here are not likely to be able to understand a grade quoted as such, and thus knowing that my car is going to do something at x% grade doesn't allow me an appreciable metric to judge when the feature is going to kick in. And if I were used to its behavior on a 0% grade and expected that behavior to be consistent, then drove somewhere with hills, the inconsistency from what I was expecting could cause a problem.

Possibly. It sounds like hill hold isn't as intrusive as the other stuff mentioned in this thread. Definitely seems nice if you live in a hilly city. But if it was an option I would probably forego it because there's just plain not enough hills that I get stopped on for me to find it useful.

[Rothman]

When I worked in San Francisco, a Utahn co-worker didn't curb the company car's wheels or set the hand brake and...we then had to replace a company car.

Another co-worker of mine from Norman, OK thought it was hilarious since he said even in OK, he was taught to curb wheels when parking on the very shallow slope in his neighborhood.

[Scott5114]

Yeah, part of the driver's test when I took it in 2006 was "pull over and park here and pretend you're on a hill". So I'm familiar with the concept of curbing the wheels, but I'm not entirely sure I remember which direction the wheels are supposed to face.

[JayhawkCO]

Yeah, part of the driver's test when I took it in 2006 was "pull over and park here and pretend you're on a hill". So I'm familiar with the concept of curbing the wheels, but I'm not entirely sure I remember which direction the wheels are supposed to face.

Uphill w/ Curb - Away from the curb
Downhill w/ Curb - Towards the curb
No Curb (either direction) - Away from traffic (if you're parked on the right, turn to the right, and v.v.)

Chris

[Rothman]

Yeah, part of the driver's test when I took it in 2006 was "pull over and park here and pretend you're on a hill". So I'm familiar with the concept of curbing the wheels, but I'm not entirely sure I remember which direction the wheels are supposed to face.

Just think about which way the car would go if it started going downhill.

[1995hoo]

Yeah, part of the driver's test when I took it in 2006 was "pull over and park here and pretend you're on a hill". So I'm familiar with the concept of curbing the wheels, but I'm not entirely sure I remember which direction the wheels are supposed to face.

The theory is that if there is a curb, you turn the wheels so that the curb will help stop the car from rolling if the handbrake fails.

If there is no curb, you turn the wheels so that the car would roll in the direction away from passing traffic.

Based on my observations when I'm out walking, I'm the only person in my neighborhood who curbs his wheels. Of course, we don't have any steep hills either. I'm simply in the habit of doing it, in part because at one point DC was ticketing people who didn't and I made myself get into the habit in case I parked on a hill in DC.

[Duke87]

Yeah, part of the driver's test when I took it in 2006 was "pull over and park here and pretend you're on a hill". So I'm familiar with the concept of curbing the wheels, but I'm not entirely sure I remember which direction the wheels are supposed to face.

Just think about which way the car would go if it started going downhill.

This is the reason why the instructions are what they are, though be careful since it's in some ways counterintuitive. Indeed, you will sometimes see people get tripped up and turn their wheels towards the curb on an uphill - which may feel right intuitively but in fact is worse than leaving them straight since this will steer the front of the car into the traffic lane(s).



Regarding the OP topic... I am not going to waste pixels repeating complaints that others have already lodged, however I will add one thing that does not seem to have been mentioned: the overdeployment of warning chimes.

I have rented Toyotas, for example, that will play a warning chime and pop up a message suggesting you take a break simply if you have been operating the vehicle for more than 2 hours continuously. This... no, this is not helpful.

Another common offending item is the thermometer. Outdoor temp drops below 35 or so, the car plays a loud warning chime and pops up a message saying "Caution: icy conditions possible". While the icy conditions popup is arguably helpful (and I have no problem with such a message popping up quietly), the warning chime accompanying it is uncalled for.

As far as I am concerned, if I am driving and my car suddenly makes a loud noise, this should indicate that there is some urgent problem that requires my immediate attention - a door ajar, a seatbelt not fastened, a flat tire, an overheating engine, etc.
When warning chimes are used for non-urgent reasons, this will startle a driver who is not used to it, and once a driver does become used to it it risks losing effectiveness from overuse - such that when something actually is urgent, the driver may not notice quickly since they will have been conditioned to largely ignore the warning chimes.

[interstatefan990]

I have rented Toyotas, for example, that will play a warning chime and pop up a message suggesting you take a break simply if you have been operating the vehicle for more than 2 hours continuously. This... no, this is not helpful.

Another common offending item is the thermometer. Outdoor temp drops below 35 or so, the car plays a loud warning chime and pops up a message saying "Caution: icy conditions possible". While the icy conditions popup is arguably helpful (and I have no problem with such a message popping up quietly), the warning chime accompanying it is uncalled for.

Subarus do this too, but the warning chime for that is more of a friendly, singular chirp. When it actually needs to warn you of something urgent, it'll loudly beep at you rapidly. Maybe Toyota should follow suit.

[J N Winkler]

I try not to park on a grade, period, because curbing the tires flat-spots them.  Thus, if I am obliged to park on a hill, I generally look for a relatively level street perpendicular to the slope.

[US 89]

The loudest sound I've ever heard come from a car was from my mom's Volkswagen Jetta. I was driving it down the interstate and out of nowhere came a very loud BEEEEEEEEP. After a few seconds of wearing off from the initial shock, I was able to find the culprit: the semi-annual TPMS light that always comes on after it gets cold in fall.

I took the next exit and pulled into a gas station to check my tire pressures. All were roughly 1-2 psi too low. I'm glad the warning light came on, but the reality is that you don't need a loud, loud noise to distract you from the interstate for a tire that's just slightly flat. For as much warning as I got, I'd expect my engine to be overheating or something.

[Scott5114]

Another common offending item is the thermometer. Outdoor temp drops below 35 or so, the car plays a loud warning chime and pops up a message saying "Caution: icy conditions possible". While the icy conditions popup is arguably helpful (and I have no problem with such a message popping up quietly), the warning chime accompanying it is uncalled for.

My car silently displays "ICE POSSIBLE" on the radio screen (which is where the thermometer readout is). Even this always strikes me as kind of amusing/pointless, since for ice to be possible, there also has to be some sort of moisture, and the weather patterns around here make it comparatively rare that both exist at the same time. (And if they do, you'll know about it a week before it happens and may have even already partaken in a ritualistic milk/bread run.)

The Chevy Cavalier I learned to drive in didn't even have a thermometer or a compass–you had to check the weather before you left the house! And bring a map, because your Motorola Razr probably wasn't gonna be much help!

[Dirt Roads]

The loudest sound I've ever heard come from a car was from my mom's Volkswagen Jetta. I was driving it down the interstate and out of nowhere came a very loud BEEEEEEEEP. After a few seconds of wearing off from the initial shock, I was able to find the culprit: the semi-annual TPMS light that always comes on after it gets cold in fall.

I took the next exit and pulled into a gas station to check my tire pressures. All were roughly 1-2 psi too low. I'm glad the warning light came on, but the reality is that you don't need a loud, loud noise to distract you from the interstate for a tire that's just slightly flat. For as much warning as I got, I'd expect my engine to be overheating or something.

We've got an old car that started having problems with TP sensors going bad.  The first time it happened, nobody could find the problem.  Turned out, the car has five sensors on its TPMS: the one in the spare tire had died.