Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    New Survey Reveals There's More Apprehension To Autonomous Tech

      Blame the number of recent crashes involving self-driving cars

    Most people aren't so keen on letting an autonomous system take control of their vehicle according to a new survey done by Cox Automotive.

    Nearly 85 percent of the 1,250 people surveyed said they should have the option to drive themselves even in a self-driving vehicle. Only 16 percent said they would feel comfortable allowing a autonomous driving system take over. When asked if they would be a fully-autonomous vehicle (Level 5 under SAE's vehicle autonomy guidelines), almost half said no. Automotive News notes that is up from the 30 percent of people surveyed in 2016.

    Why the increases in overall apprehension? It mostly comes down to number of crashes that autonomous vehicles have been involve in, such as the Uber crash that killed a pedestrian.

    “People now have a deeper understanding of the complexities involved when creating a self-driving car, and that has them reconsidering their comfort level when it comes to handing over control,” said Karl Brauer, executive publisher of Autotrader and Kelley Blue Book.

    In the past two years, awareness into self-driving tech increased 24 percent. But the perception of the safety of self-driving vehicles dropped 20 percent.

    Despite the trepidation, Cox believes the adoption of self-driving vehicles will gain traction - bringing big implications for automakers and dealers.

    “Miles traveled will shift toward fleet-owned vehicles, causing what we believe to be a potential 40 percent reduction in consumer vehicle sales,” said Isabelle Helms, vice president of research and market intelligence at Cox Automotive.

    We should note that Cox Automotive does an interest in the self-driving marketplace. Automotive News says the company has created a new unit that will sell software and services for car-sharing, ride-hailing, subscription programs, and, eventually, self-driving taxi fleets.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Technology is cool, but we are not there yet and I think it will take a generation, aka 10 years to get there.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 hours ago, dfelt said:

    Technology is cool, but we are not there yet and I think it will take a generation, aka 10 years to get there.

    I am not sure it will take 10 years.  I would give it 20-25 years so that all the bugs are out and the AI won't try to kill us.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    One of the main demographics for AD vehicles is supposedly the elderly, but they are going to be the LEAST likely to accept such a scenario.

    AD is going to have a WORSE take rate than EVs over the same time period. OEMs should focus on the EV obstacle first, THEN turn to AD... but always with the reality that it'll never become mainstream.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 8/18/2018 at 6:30 AM, balthazar said:

    One of the main demographics for AD vehicles is supposedly the elderly, but they are going to be the LEAST likely to accept such a scenario.

    AD is going to have a WORSE take rate than EVs over the same time period. OEMs should focus on the EV obstacle first, THEN turn to AD... but always with the reality that it'll never become mainstream.

    True, things for the bulk of those 50 plus never become mainstream to them.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      There has been a prevailing thought about the likes of Uber and Lyft that once they switch from human drivers to self-driving vehicles, they would stand to see a significant reduction in overall operating costs. This possibly means consumers could see these services as an alternative to owning a vehicle. But a new study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) disputes that claim.
      Researchers Ashley Nunes and Kristen D. Hernandez examined the San Francisco market on the per-mile cost of an automated taxi service to owning a vehicle. They found an automated taxi would range between $1.58 and $6.01 per mile, while the conventional vehicle would be at $0.72 per mile.
      "When we started going into this work, we found there's a lot of hand-waving. There was a notion that 'All we have to do is remove the driver, assume a reduction in insurance, and there's our great number.' We said, 'Let's hold it up to scrutiny.' It didn't hold up," explained Nunes to Automotive News.
      The massive disparity gap isn't due to ownership or maintenance, rather a fundamental issue about the taxi market in general. Nunes said taxi operators drive too many miles without a paying customer - hence their higher costs. In San Francisco, the MIT researchers found a 52 percent utilization rate for ride-hailing. Even if they were able to reach 100 percent utilization, Nunes said they would still be "unable to provide a fare that's comparable to car ownership."
      "Their approach with the investment folks has been, 'Trust us, we'll figure this out and it'll be this great utopia where everyone is jumping from an Uber to a scooter to an air taxi.The future may well be all those things. But you need to demonstrate you can offer the service at a price point that consumers are willing and able to pay. Thus far, they are unable to do so," said Nunes.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      There has been a prevailing thought about the likes of Uber and Lyft that once they switch from human drivers to self-driving vehicles, they would stand to see a significant reduction in overall operating costs. This possibly means consumers could see these services as an alternative to owning a vehicle. But a new study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) disputes that claim.
      Researchers Ashley Nunes and Kristen D. Hernandez examined the San Francisco market on the per-mile cost of an automated taxi service to owning a vehicle. They found an automated taxi would range between $1.58 and $6.01 per mile, while the conventional vehicle would be at $0.72 per mile.
      "When we started going into this work, we found there's a lot of hand-waving. There was a notion that 'All we have to do is remove the driver, assume a reduction in insurance, and there's our great number.' We said, 'Let's hold it up to scrutiny.' It didn't hold up," explained Nunes to Automotive News.
      The massive disparity gap isn't due to ownership or maintenance, rather a fundamental issue about the taxi market in general. Nunes said taxi operators drive too many miles without a paying customer - hence their higher costs. In San Francisco, the MIT researchers found a 52 percent utilization rate for ride-hailing. Even if they were able to reach 100 percent utilization, Nunes said they would still be "unable to provide a fare that's comparable to car ownership."
      "Their approach with the investment folks has been, 'Trust us, we'll figure this out and it'll be this great utopia where everyone is jumping from an Uber to a scooter to an air taxi.The future may well be all those things. But you need to demonstrate you can offer the service at a price point that consumers are willing and able to pay. Thus far, they are unable to do so," said Nunes.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    • By William Maley
      When one automaker comes up with an interesting idea, usually others will follow. See German crossover 'coupes' as an example. With Ford working on a hybrid version of the Mustang, it doesn't come as a surprise that Chevrolet is looking into this as well.
      Back in August, a poster on the Camaro6 forum got a screenshot with a survey asking Camaro owners which powertrain they would consider if they bought a new sports car. Respondents were given the four choices listed below, or None of the Above:
      4 Cylinder, 2.7L, Turbo engine, 310 HP, 25 mpg combined, 0-60 mph in 5.2 seconds - $0 4 Cylinder, 2.0L, Hybrid Turbo engine, 365 HP (total system power), 30 mpg combined, 0-60 mph in 4.4 seconds - $4,000 8 Cylinder, 6.2L, 455 HP, 20 mpg combined, 0-60 mph in 4.0 seconds - $4,000 8 Cylinder, 6.2L, Hybrid engine, 545 HP (total system power), 24 mpg combined, 0-60 mph in 3.7 seconds - $8,000 There are few things to take note of,
      No V6 option is listed among the choices The turbo 2.7L is likely the same found in the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra. Also, the 310 horsepower output is the same as Ford's 2.3L EcoBoost. The turbocharged 2.0L hybrid sees a one second drop in 0-60 mph time when compared to the standard 2.0L. Plus, the combined figure rises 5 to 7 mpg - depending on the transmission. The V8 hybrid setup only sees a 0.3-second decrease in the 0-60 mph run, but an increase of 4 mpgs. We need to note that the results of this survey might not result in a hybrid Camaro.
      "We routinely survey our customers across all of our vehicles on potential future technologies or features, but that doesn’t mean we are going to institute them,” a GM spokesman told Motor Authority.
      But it is clear that GM is watching Ford closely with the hybrid Mustang. Who knows, maybe the next-generation Camaro will offer some sort of hybrid power?
      Source: Camaro6, Motor Authority
    • By William Maley
      When one automaker comes up with an interesting idea, usually others will follow. See German crossover 'coupes' as an example. With Ford working on a hybrid version of the Mustang, it doesn't come as a surprise that Chevrolet is looking into this as well.
      Back in August, a poster on the Camaro6 forum got a screenshot with a survey asking Camaro owners which powertrain they would consider if they bought a new sports car. Respondents were given the four choices listed below, or None of the Above:
      4 Cylinder, 2.7L, Turbo engine, 310 HP, 25 mpg combined, 0-60 mph in 5.2 seconds - $0 4 Cylinder, 2.0L, Hybrid Turbo engine, 365 HP (total system power), 30 mpg combined, 0-60 mph in 4.4 seconds - $4,000 8 Cylinder, 6.2L, 455 HP, 20 mpg combined, 0-60 mph in 4.0 seconds - $4,000 8 Cylinder, 6.2L, Hybrid engine, 545 HP (total system power), 24 mpg combined, 0-60 mph in 3.7 seconds - $8,000 There are few things to take note of,
      No V6 option is listed among the choices The turbo 2.7L is likely the same found in the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra. Also, the 310 horsepower output is the same as Ford's 2.3L EcoBoost. The turbocharged 2.0L hybrid sees a one second drop in 0-60 mph time when compared to the standard 2.0L. Plus, the combined figure rises 5 to 7 mpg - depending on the transmission. The V8 hybrid setup only sees a 0.3-second decrease in the 0-60 mph run, but an increase of 4 mpgs. We need to note that the results of this survey might not result in a hybrid Camaro.
      "We routinely survey our customers across all of our vehicles on potential future technologies or features, but that doesn’t mean we are going to institute them,” a GM spokesman told Motor Authority.
      But it is clear that GM is watching Ford closely with the hybrid Mustang. Who knows, maybe the next-generation Camaro will offer some sort of hybrid power?
      Source: Camaro6, Motor Authority

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Consumer Reports' has unveiled the results of their 2018 Auto Reliability Survey and it was not a good showing for the domestics. Only two domestic brands finished in the top 20 - Ford which came in 18th and Buick who placed 19th. The latter dropping 11 spots in this year's survey. The rest of the domestic brands finished in the bottom half with Ram, Tesla, and Cadillac finishing 26th to 28th. Finishing last was Volvo with CR saying the brand's Sensus Connect infotainment system being the reason for the drop.
      What finished towards the top? For 2018, Lexus and Toyota take the top two spots. Mazda saw the biggest improvement, jumping nine spots to third place. Completing the top ten are Subaru, Kia, Infiniti, Audi, BMW, MINI, and Hyundai.
      CR's predicted new-vehicle reliability ratings are derived from an annual questionnaire sent to their subscribers asking about the vehicles they own. The group reports that it had gotten responses for over "500,000 vehicles in its latest survey."
      A key reason why a number of brands saw a drop in the rankings is due to implementing new and complex technologies. A key example is vehicles equipped with 9 and 10-speed transmissions.
      Source: Consumer Reports


      Consumer Reports Annual Reliability Survey: Tesla and Other Domestic Brands Take Big Steps Backwards in Rankings
      Asian automakers again top the list for most reliable; Volvo drops to last amid shift to new designs YONKERS, NY — It was a rough year for domestic brands, according to Consumer Reports’ (CR) latest Annual Auto Reliability Survey, which collected data from its members about their experiences with more than half a million vehicles. Buick, Chevrolet, Chrysler, and Tesla are among the brands that tumbled in the organization’s predicted new-car reliability rankings announced at a news conference before the Automotive Press Association in Detroit today.
      Every domestic automaker landed in the bottom-half of CR’s latest reliability rankings, which covers 29 brands this year - two more than 2017. Ford ranks the highest at 18, down three spots from the previous year. Right below Ford on the list is Buick, which had performed well in recent years and was in the top 10 last year. Cadillac is the worst-rated domestic manufacturer and ranks near the very bottom at 28.
      Asian brands, led by Lexus, Toyota, and Mazda, in that order, continue to be the best for new car reliability in CR’s survey, which is the largest of its kind. Seven of the top 10 brands in this year’s reliability rankings are from Japan and South Korea, including Subaru, Kia, Infiniti, and Hyundai.
      Three European brands, Audi, BMW, and Mini, round out the top 10. Audi and BMW both declined from last year. Three other brands, Porsche, Volkswagen, and Mercedes-Benz, finished midpack. Volvo finished last overall.
      Tesla fell six spots from last year and now ranks third-worst (27 out of 29). The Model S dropped to “Below Average” this year, and its Overall Score is no longer high enough to be “Recommended” by CR. Owners reported suspension problems and other issues that included the extending door handle.  (Please see chart below.) The Model X SUV remained “Much-Worse-Than-Average” for reliability, with ongoing problems including the falcon-wing doors and center display screen. On the flip side, the Model 3 sedan has “Average” predicted reliability based on owner feedback.
      “While the Tesla Model S appears very similar physically to the car that launched six years ago, Tesla has made many significant mechanical and software changes over the past few years. Just as we’ve seen with many other manufacturers, major changes and updates can cause reliability to slide. It can take a year or two for carmakers to work out the kinks with new technology,” said Jake Fisher, Director of Auto Testing at CR. “Making air suspension and AWD standard in the 2017 model has added more complexity and more things that could potentially falter.” 
      “Time and again, consumers tell us that reliability is what matters most when it comes to choosing a vehicle that will meet their families’ needs,” said Marta L. Tellado, President and CEO of Consumer Reports. “That’s why we conduct this exhaustive survey each year—to equip people with the trustworthy information they need to make confident choices, which in turn helps drive the market toward even greater reliability.”
      Consumer Reports’ survey also reveals that some automakers--striving for improved fuel economy--are clearly making more reliable turbocharged engines than others. When compared to the average non-turbo engine among 2016-2018 models, overall, Lexus makes the most reliable turbo powertrain, followed by Honda and Porsche. On the other end of the spectrum, Hyundai and Mini have the most problematic turbos. There hasn’t been a common thread to explain the problems, but new powertrains have the propensity to be problematic in their first few years.
      “Not only are auto manufacturers adding more and more turbocharged engines, but they’re increasingly pairing them to high-tech transmissions with eight, nine, even 10 gears,” Fisher added. “With this added complexity, it’s not surprising to see some brands struggling to get them right, particularly the ones that don’t have a long history of producing turbos.” 
      Newly “Recommended” models show some bright spots for Detroit:  Dodge, GMC edge up; Other domestics slide down
      Consumer Reports’ prediction of new-car reliability is a key element of CR’s Overall Score. The score also includes road-test performance, owner satisfaction survey results, whether a vehicle comes with key safety systems, and results from crash tests, if applicable. This year there are more than a dozen vehicles with reliability ratings that improved enough to lift their Overall Scores to enable them to be “CR Recommended.”
      Overall, there is a lot of reshuffling among the brands in CR’s latest predicted new-car reliability rankings, with most domestic brands moving down the list. But reliability for some key models from Detroit has risen over the past year, allowing CR to “Recommend” them. Those vehicles include the Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Cruze, Chevrolet Suburban, Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger, and Lincoln Continental.
      Brands from Fiat Chrysler Automotive (FCA) continue to occupy the bottom third of CR’s rankings. Dodge edges up three spots to number 21 out of 29 brands thanks partly to the “Better-Than-Average” reliability rating of the Dodge Charger, which has steadily improved over the past few years. The Dodge Grand Caravan continues to have “Average” reliability, while the Challenger, Durango, and Journey all stay “Below-Average.” Jeep has mixed results, falling two spots to 22. The Grand Cherokee and Renegade improve to “Average,” while the Cherokee and Compass SUVs have “Below-Average” reliability. Chrysler drops seven spots to number 24. While the Chrysler 300 improves to “Average,” the Pacifica minivan falls to “Below-Average.” Ram was the worst-charting FCA brand at 26.
      GMC inches up one spot to number 25 due to average or above reliability for the Terrain, Yukon, and Yukon XL. The Acadia and all the pickup trucks rate “Below-Average.”
      Other GM brands saw their place in the rankings fall from last year. Buick, which had recently been a bright spot for reliability among all domestics, falls 11 spots to 19 – this year’s biggest decline. The redesigned Enclave SUV had a “Much-Worse-Than-Average” rating, with owners reporting problems related to the new nine-speed automatic transmission. Chevrolet is down five places to number 23, in part because the redesigned Traverse had “Much-Worse-Than-Average” reliability. Cadillac is again the worst-performing of the GM brands, dropping one spot to 28. Only the XTS sedan rates “Better-Than-Average” for reliability.
      Ford ranks number 18, down three spots from last year. The Taurus, the oldest model in Ford’s fleet, has “Much-Better-Than-Average” reliability. But the usually reliable Fusion drops to “Below-Average”, mainly because of problems with the Sync 3 infotainment system screen. The Mustang and Explorer are “Worse-Than- Average.” As for 20th ranked Lincoln, its bright spot is the Continental’s "Much-Better-Than-Average” reliability rating. The MKC, MKX, and the MKZ are “Below Average.”

      Volvo sinks to last in down year overall for Europe
      Volvo drops six spots from last year as it rapidly brings a number of new models to market. It’s now in last-place among the 29 brands in the survey due in large part to an infotainment system that’s common to a number of different models including the XC60 and XC90 and the S 90. For the XC60, owners also reported problems with the climate system and interior cabin rattles.
      Other European automakers also lost ground. Audi tumbles three spots to seven on the list. BMW falls three spots to eight, followed by Mini at number nine. Mercedes-Benz declines three spots to number 17. The C-Class coupe and sedan improves to “Average,” but the GLC and E-Class are “Below-Average.” Porsche bucks the trend in this group, rising two places to number 11.
      Lexus, Toyota trade places at the top as Asia dominance persists
      Lexus and Toyota take the top two spots, respectively, in CR’s predicted new-car reliability rankings, as they have for six years in a row. Mazda jumps nine spots in the rankings to third overall, making it the year’s biggest gainer, as the automaker worked out the problems that plagued the CX-9 and MX-5 Miata roadster. Subaru continues its recent march up the chart, rising two places to fourth overall.
      The Infiniti brand also rebounds slightly, with the Q50 getting an “Average” score and the QX60 improving to “Above Average.” Nissan similarly tumbles a few slots, even with both the Maxima and the redesigned Leaf rating above average.
      Honda turns in mixed results, landing at 15, which is six spots lower from the year prior. The brand’s reliability is bogged down by some of its new and redesigned models. The Odyssey and the Clarity have “Much-Worse-Than-Average” reliability, and the CR-V and new Accord drops to “Average.” However, Acura seems to have worked out recent trouble spots with its new transmissions and infotainment systems. Honda’s luxury brand gains six spots in this year’s rankings to number 13.
      Kia drops two spots but remained in the top-ten as its all-new Stinger hatchback rates “Average” for reliability, as was the Sportage. Hyundai comes in at number 10, and its luxury Genesis brand is close behind. The G80 has “Above Average” reliability, and the G90 is below average, with reported problems in the area of body hardware and power equipment.
  • Posts

    • Tesla Model Y appears to be plagued with poor sales, despite the company slapping 3 grand on the hoods a few months after their debut. GLOBAL sales thru June stand at 13,415, barely surpassing the Model X (12,461). Meanwhile, the Model 3 stands at 142,346. Chevy Bolt, globally, is at 11,496 thru June.
    • Final Story is an interesting read on the Ban of new gasoline auto sales starting in 2035 and how California Power Companies are seaking a streamlined approach to permitting by the Government if they are to build and install what is needed in power generation and grid distribution of created power to support the demands of the EV auto's by 2035. Power companies are wanting approval to build Vehicle-to-Grid or V2G technology to allow the cars that have full batteries to discharge back to the grid during high demand times. This would be a battery buffer on wheels approach to optimizing power distribution. Power Companies of California are expecting a jump of 25% more electricity demand by 2035 when this ice ban goes in effect. Having auto's charge up during the day when there is a surplus of solar generated electricity is a need as is having battery banks so that in the evening when solar drops off but AC and other needs are needed it can offset the demand. Also changing to LED to reduce power consumption by all light sources needs to happen sooner than later so reduce electricity waste. Smart Charging, Smart Storage and changes in how we do things such as excessive lights on at night. A change that will change how we see and do things. https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1129747_report-california-will-need-massive-grid-upgrades-for-2035-electric-car-push
    • FORD Anouncement - Today Ford announced their deal with Unifor in Canada of their new national labour agreement. Ford will be investing $1.8 Billion CAD to rebuild the Oakville Assembly Complex from an ICE production facility to a full time BEV manufacturing facility. https://electrek.co/2020/09/28/ford-investment-produce-battery-electric-vehicles-canada/ To Quote the deal from the story above: The deal includes several new benefits for Ford employees in Canada: Competitive alternative work schedules to maximize production flexibility Enhanced temporary employee program 2.5% wage increase twice over the life of the agreement C$7,250 ratification bonus for full-time permanent employees and $500 for temporary employees Reduced grow-in period for new hires from 11 years to eight years Interesting Read on the VW ID.4 and the Nissan Ariya EV's. Chasing the Tesla Model Y is a review of the industry and the slew of compact sized EV CUVs that are coming to market over the next 2 years. Interesting take on this is as follows: More than 200 miles of range is the price of entry, and a 300-mile version is probably needed to reassure nervous shoppers and attract attention; Fast charging at 125 kw is the minimum for the next few years, and 350-kw charging is coming on fast; $40,000 is the entry price point for an EV crossover, but it still takes convoluted math to produce an “effective price” that’s as low as the highest-selling entries; and Electric pickup trucks may get the buzz, but compact crossovers are where automakers see EV volume coming. A true generic look when you see these two side by side. https://chargedevs.com/features/volkswagen-id-4-nissan-ariya-bring-ev-drive-to-compact-crossovers-chasing-tesla-model-y/
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. TaurusSHO
      TaurusSHO
      (25 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...