Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self Driving technology, along with nine other assisted-driving systems from major automakers, received “poor” ratings in a recent study by the U.S. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), a safety research arm of the insurance industry.
Inside of Tesla. Image credit: Bram Van Oost via Unsplash, free license
The IIHS also stated that there is no evidence suggesting real-world safety benefits for Autopilot or other assisted-driving systems based on crash data.
David Harkey, President of IIHS, mentioned that the institute analyzed insurance claims data, comparing vehicles with and without these systems, and found no reduction in claims due to the more advanced systems. In contrast, there is evidence supporting the effectiveness of automatic emergency braking systems, which have been shown to reduce rear-end collisions by 50% and incidents of a vehicle hitting a pedestrian by 30%.
Despite Tesla and Elon Musk’s claims that a Tesla operating with Autopilot is significantly safer than the U.S. average, the IIHS findings challenge the assertion of real-world safety benefits for these advanced driving systems.
Federal regulators are actively investigating nearly 1,000 accidents involving the use of Tesla’s Autopilot. An upcoming civil case in California, set to go to trial soon, will serve as another examination of Tesla’s strategy, which often attributes crashes to drivers who allegedly fail to adhere to warnings instructing them to remain attentive when Autopilot or Full Self Driving technology is engaged.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducted a study, evaluating 14 assisted-driving systems from nine automakers against its developed standards. Notably, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration lacks formal standards for advanced-driver assistance systems (ADAS).
According to David Harkey, President of IIHS, the absence of federal regulations and consistent guidance prompted the institute to establish its safety standards.
Out of the tested systems, only one received an acceptable rating: the Lexus Teammate with Advanced Drive, introduced last year on a limited number of Toyota Motor’s luxury Lexus LS hybrid sedans. Toyota, in response to the findings, emphasized its ongoing commitment to enhancing vehicle safety and its consideration of third-party testing programs, including IIHS’s Top Safety Pick program and NHTSA’s New Car Assessment Program.
GM’s Super Cruise and Nissan’s “ProPILOT Assist with Navi-link,” available on the 2023-2024 Ariya electric vehicle, received “marginal” overall ratings in the first-ever Partial Automation Safeguards test conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Nissan stated that it is assessing the results and will collaborate with IIHS on matters related to customer safety. GM emphasized that Super Cruise is designed to enhance the driving experience and is not positioned as a safety feature.
Various assisted-driving systems from Tesla, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Nissan, Ford, GM, Hyundai’s Genesis brand, and Geely’s Volvo Cars brand all received “poor” overall ratings, despite achieving “good” scores on specific elements of the IIHS tests. The IIHS clarified that its new testing methodology focuses on safeguards to prevent misuse rather than assessing the performance of the driver assistance systems.
Automakers have the opportunity to enhance safety ratings by incorporating existing technology for features like driver-monitoring or attention warnings, which have received “good” scores, according to David Harkey, President of IIHS.
Tesla and other automakers are actively improving the capabilities of their systems, with Tesla updating its Autopilot software following a federal recall agreement. The IIHS plans to evaluate the revised system.
Responding to the findings, Mercedes emphasized taking the IIHS partial driving automation safeguard ratings seriously, while BMW stated its commitment to incorporating the results into the evolution of their cars and systems.
Written by Alius Noreika