Tesla AP already 10x safer & Tesla already self insuring- game over for FUD

Discussion in 'Tesla' started by 101101, Jan 1, 2020.

To remove this ad click here.

  1. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    Tesla has the best safety record there is period. That is fact!!! People can get pissed off about it but they can't change it with for-profit FUD. It also makes the cleanest vehicles.

    You have Markey who for instance took a bunch of fossil fuel and insurance money (insurance jacks up rate massively so it can socialize endless fossil fuel losses- driven by frauds like interlocking boards) and then signed off on the GND so he could build pseudo credibility to help save the insurance industry and its unnecessary investments that socialize fossil fuel loses and prop up their loser stocks. Now you have the NHTSA foolish 'automation complacency" claim. Its foolish because its a moving target and foolish because it attempts to target the one company actually moving the needle and making progress on safety and with by far- far, far, far the best record on safety. It would be like saying until air bags and seat belts are perfect we can't use them. Well the stuff is saving lives and Telsa is already self insuring.

    But there is the bigger picture to consider. They may think they are going to FUD and lie their way into slowing or stopping progress on AP and automated driving (manufacturing/engineering crashes in Florida and following up with FUD and lying to the public about the public interest for profit) but its not going to work. Are they going to be arguing behind the scenes with China not only that it needs to buy more useless and unnecessary American fossil fuels- stuff China sure as hell doesn't need because it would only be acquired at serious economic losses (its not competitive and never will be again) or even buy more stuff unnecessarily based on that garbage while also saying: you need to slow down self driving car tech? Never going to fly. Is the US going to be able to FUD away claims from people who visit China that it has self driving cars that work perfectly and try to claim the US doesn't want it? No, there are too many compelling policy reasons like massive reductions in traffic and accidents -even if that reduces useless fossil fuel consumption. Will they try to weaken AP so some non US based company or one of the sell out friendly to fossil fuels companies take the ring? They are surely trying to slow it.

    But all their stupid claims and trying to sour the public on the life saving tech (like all their BS about electric car fires when it was Fords and BMWs that were actually catching on fire in record numbers while off and parked to the point of injunction in states around the world- note the stupid new Car & Driver head line about a parked Tesla failing) won't make it fail because it is a tech that is improving at an exponential rate. Maybe they prefer Google, Google seems stupidly more willing to make the delusional move of putting self driving tech on ICE machines or hybrids. Maybe they like Google because its geo-fenced and they think that would slow the roll out. What ever their reasons they would only be making the US fall farther and farther behind and make it look increasingly 3rd world by comparison with Asia.

    When a Tesla is in a wreck it carries a ton of data with it that will show exactly what happened. If that data is missing mysteriously (through rigging etc.) then no conclusion can be drawn. But look at the stupid media for instance having nothing but headlines about a Model S they acknowledge was speeding, that they acknowledge ran a red light and then there was a crash. They can't even say if he AP was on. Not even worth covering just right up front. Oh but no, there is a NHSTA probe- how stupid and then he media misquotes prior NHSTA results. And even edge cases prove almost nothing because the tech is constantly improving. Its like all the dumb 'coverage' of people falling asleep in a Tesla. In a normal car they hit a telephone pole minutes ago, long before any video could be taken- while the AP tech is trying to wake them before slowing to a safe stop. We need a change in the law that is speech enhancing not quelling, that is vital for the speech that says mislead the public about public interest for profit or money and go to jail. Nothing stops volunteer media. Its the lie and censorship and discrimination industry that must be stopped and the money is a murderous aggravating factor not an exonerating or mitigating factor. We should do that and then just confiscate and burn the stuff in the tax haven banks- that is called justice and its something that is missing since the early 70s but must be making a come back.

    Tesla is coming up on a million people with exposure to this stuff which makes them and their families safer. What a moron admin is going to say its bad for the 'economy' what about suits from all the deaths that would result that would have been prevented with trying to slow down or take away this tech.

    Lets really break this down into the simplest terms possible. Tesla is making tech that actively works to reduce the likelihood of an injurious impact. It is super aggressively using the best technology and the best approaches to do this. The stuff about lidar is totally idiotic because that is a tiny bit of active EM frequency and the car takes in a full band of active and passive overlapping EM frequency and processes it for avoidance. And the rest of the car is the proven very best there is in an actual impact. The company also invests massively in this and gets the best people. Its also moving faster than anyone else with the biggest data set work with. If you do a fair comparison with Google it is destroying Google in this race. And we know it won't stop there this tech will be applied to robots and factory floors and freight loading and unloading. But again this is about avoiding collisions and the tech that does watches things move on a frame rate bases at the pace of glaciers and then response like a computer winning winning a chess game to avoid collisions. Also screwing with this would be harming the bleeding edge of American tech- this is the bleeding real world edge. So no it doesn't seem like the parasite idiots with money crowd prevails here. But you can see the desperation, just saw a NBC article with something like 200 goal post moving intentional errors in it. They shouldn't waste the money, its over.
  2. To remove this ad click here.

  3. DaleL

    DaleL Active Member

    I think it is pretty safe to say that the Tesla model 3 is the safest EV on the road. However, In IIHS testing, six non-Tesla 2019 vehicles achieved better crash test results than the Tesla Model 3.

    Tesla cars are quite safe, but some of the "safety" is the result of other factors. Teslas are more expensive than the average car and tend to be driven by middle-age affluent people who are less likely to get in a crash than younger people. Most Teslas on the road are six years old or less. The average vehicle in the U.S. is 11.6 years old. Safety features are constantly evolving and tend to be introduced on the more expensive models first. Also, Tesla drivers tend to live in urban areas and travel on roads with lower speeds, where fatality rates are lower.
  4. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    Perhaps you might cite the source:
    All I could find: https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/four-automakers-meet-automatic-emergency-braking-commitments-ahead-of-2022-target

    Four carmakers equipped virtually all the light vehicles they produced for the U.S. market between Sept. 1, 2018, and Aug. 31, 2019, with automatic emergency braking (AEB), three years ahead of a 2022 target.

    Audi and Volvo joined Mercedes-Benz and Tesla, which hit the target last year, in outfitting all their light passenger vehicles with the crash avoidance technology, according to manufacturer reports. In total, several million more vehicles were produced with AEB, compared with the previous year.
    . . .

    Another source: https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/tesla-earns-its-first-ever-safety-award-from-iihs-for-model-3

    ARLINGTON, Va. — Tesla has picked up its first award from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, as the 2019 Model 3, its less expensive sedan, qualifies for TOP SAFETY PICK+.

    The Model 3 joins one other all-electric plug-in vehicle, the Audi e-tron, in the IIHS winner's circle. A hydrogen fuel cell vehicle, the Hyundai Nexo, also recently qualified for an award.

    The Chevrolet Bolt, an all-electric small car, misses out because its headlights cause too much glare, earning a poor rating.

    "Vehicles with alternative powertrains have come into their own," IIHS Chief Research Officer David Zuby says. "There's no need to trade away safety for a lower carbon footprint when choosing a vehicle.

    We really need to see the source. My experience is IIHS releases: https://www.iihs.org/ratings/top-safety-picks
    • TOP SAFETY PICK+ :: Their highest group but lacks a numerical score. You're either in or out.
    • TOP SAFETY PICK :: The next group down also lacking a numerical score.
    • everyone else
    My caution is sometimes people with an 'agenda' will cherry pick data for an article to claim something that is less accurate. That is why the source is important to see how they came up with their metrics when IIHS does not list a numerical score that I've found.

    Bob Wilson
  5. Your memory is failing, Bob, or else you are selectively choosing to ignore data that does not support your narrative. As per the quote, I pointed this out to you in another thread not that long ago. And here are the sources.
    2020 M3, showing only an Acceptable rating for the Small Overlap FrontDriver-side crash test. And only an Advanced rating (not Superior) on Pedestrian crash prevention.

    My Kona has a Superior rating on the Pedestrian crash prevention, which is better than the Teslas.

    And my other car (Crosstrek) aces all the crash test ratings, incl the Overlap tests.

    And Subaru was one of the earliest adopters of pedestrian detection, way back in 2016.
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2020
  6. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    Well good to know you’re the unbiased source of the now 2-3? IIHS rating. Not quiet 10, nes pas?

    Bob Wilson
  7. To remove this ad click here.

  8. Well, like them or not, but IIHS is used by insurance companies to set their rates, and Tesla insurance is more expensive. That's why Musk is getting into the insurance business, to try and lower those costs for their customers... Don't know of any other car company that is doing that...
    bwilson4web likes this.
  9. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    Tesla parts are pricey leading to higher repair costs. IMHO, Tesla should reach out to traditional auto parts stores to carry or overnight Tesla mechanical parts.

    Bob Wilson
  10. OK, Bob, tell me this. Why can't Tesla get a Superior rating for their Pedestrian crash prevention test? I would expect with all its sensors and software, this would be one of Tesla's strongest safety points. Yet many other cars costing half as much achieve the highest Superior rating for this test.
  11. Yes, but if the accidents are so low, those costs for the insurance companies should also be less. Accident rate has a bigger effect on insurance rates than parts cost. Just look at sport cars, which have the highest rates. Or young drivers, which also have a high accident rate. That's what drives insurance rates.
  12. To remove this ad click here.

  13. DaleL

    DaleL Active Member

    While the Model 3 received top marks from IIHS and other safety organizations, it's one of many vehicles with excellent safety ratings. The Mercedes-Benz C-Class and Lexus ES 350 scored top marks in every category, while the Audi e-tron, another electric plug-in vehicle, also received IIHS's highest safety award. A hydrogen car, the Hyundai Nexo SUV, received results comparable to the Model 3. https://www.businessinsider.com/why-tesla-model-3-received-5-star-crash-test-rating-2019-10

    Feds Say Tesla Exaggerating Model 3 Crash-Test Results
    In an October letter, newly released to the public, NHTSA tells Tesla that it’s misleading to compare overall safety scores of vehicles with different weights because of the physics of car crashes—it’s possible that occupants of a larger, heavier SUV would fare better in a crash than an occupant of a Model 3, contradicting the claims Tesla made in its blog. https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/feds-say-tesla-exaggerating-model-3-crash-test-results/

    FACT CHECK: Tesla safety claims aren't quite right
    For years, Tesla has boasted that its cars and SUVs are safer than other vehicles on the roads,...
    While Teslas could have a lower death rate, it may speak more about the demographics of Tesla drivers than it does about safety of the vehicles, says Ken Kolosh, manager of statistics for the National Safety Council.

    Expensive Teslas tend to be driven by middle-age affluent people who are less likely to get in a crash than younger people, Kolosh said. Also, Tesla drivers tend to live in urban areas and travel on roads with lower speeds, where fatality rates are lower, he said. https://phys.org/news/2018-05-fact-tesla-safety.html

    As to pedestrian detection and auto braking, AAA ran a test of 4 cars which included the Tesla Model 3. The results are at: https://www.aaa.com/AAA/common/aar/files/Research-Report-Pedestrian-Detection.pdf

    My point is not to claim that the Tesla Model 3 is unsafe, instead by any measure it is a very safe vehicle. However, the Model 3 is one of several extremely safe vehicles.
  14. marshall

    marshall Active Member

    If the accident rate is very, very low for all cars, which I believe it is, then the cost of repairs has a bigger effect then what you are thinking.
  15. marshall

    marshall Active Member

    I far as I can tell, the accident rate for all cars is very, very, very low. So this discussion seems a bit silly.

    However, if you are looking for safety, then buy a car that has a top safety rating and lot of mass.
  16. It's not just the repairs, but the medical and other liability costs. Where I live, in BC, Canada, our govt insurance agency keeps blaming liability and fraud claims for increasing our insurance rates.
  17. Here is a technology website that rated the best cars of 2020 for driver assist and safety features. You would think a tech review site would be more inclined to drink the Tesla Koolaid. But no Tesla model even made their top 10, and only the Model 3 got an honorable mention at the back of the article (along with 15 other cars incl my Kona). And it wasn't for its driver assist and safety features, but because it is the highest selling EV at this point in time.

    The surprising thing (at least to most people) is that the lowly Hyundai Sonata came out on top, and was named their ExtremeTech Car of the Year for 2020.
    DaleL likes this.
  18. Just can be killed only once in an accident... I was in a very serious accident when I was a kid (I was not driving), and spent 3 months in hospitals over the next couple of years with operations to get fixed. I never did regain full function and strength in my right shoulder and arm. Have had pain and problems all my life with that. Just a few years agp had to have a full reverse (socket and ball reversed) shoulder replacement. Will never be totally fixed though, and can't lift my right arm over my head. But at least I can sleep better.

    If I had been in a modern car with today's safety and crash protection features, most likely would have walked away from the accident, and it may not even have occurred (although it was t-boner in an intersection).

    So, yes, driver assist and safety tech in cars is very important to me, and a must have with any car that I buy. Both of my current cars are Top Safety Pick Plus, and loaded with the most current driver and safety tech features.
    DaleL likes this.
  19. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    No idea but it joined the ‘+’ group. Perhaps IIHS doesn’t care either?

    Bob Wilson
  20. interestedinEV

    interestedinEV Well-Known Member

    There are few things that Insurance companies consider in rating a car. They look at past history over several years, look at similar or older models of the same car, they look at demographics, technology, actuarial calculations, estimated repair costs, IHS ratings etc.

    Tesla does not have mass volumes of data as it has gone into high volume manufacturing (previous models were S/X which are higher priced to begin with). Insurance companies tend to be conservative in this regard and will price it higher in the beginning and then adjust based on actual claims history and other factors. And yes, they are concerned about the number of accidents, but they are equally concerned on the cost to repair based on the accident. If the average cost of a repair for a similar accident is my higher for Tesla, then Tesla will be rated costlier. So if there are no aftermarket parts and everything has to be obtained from Tesla, it will be a lot more costlier.

    Similarly, Insurance companies look at the network of people who can repair Teslas. You have dent in your Ford Explorer and you can go to a hundred body shops. Not so with Tesla.

    Then there is the unknown of the Autopilot. I would guess (my guess) is they are concerned about Autopilot and Insurance companies may change rating as they want to be cautious. Again, I am not getting into a discussion if Autopilot is safer or not. All I am saying is Insurance companies may begin with higher rate and take a wait and see attitude to determine if they should reduce due to autopilot. The other question here is, if there is a death due to an error in the Autopilot (no fault of the driver), who is responsible, Tesla or the Insurance company. It may be very difficult to prove it was an Auto Pilot defect without getting into the source code, which Tesla will not give easily. (Boeing is having the same problem with 737 MAX. Nobody in FAA has the knowledge to be able evaluate the system and determine the responsibility between Boeing and pilot).

    This is hypothetical but till that is resolved, Insurance companies may want to play it safe.

    So we can argue all we want on relative safety of cars, but each company makes a business decision based on what they know. Where there are lots of Tesla's on the road (may be a year or two from now) a company or two may decide, the risk is actually lower and they want to attract Tesla owners and start competing for the business. That will drive price down.

    Insurance rates vary so much from company to company for the same car, as each company has different objective. So they rate risk differently. Again, does not matter what we think, Insurance companies still consider Tesla risky.
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2020
  21. 101101

    101101 Well-Known Member

    How much BS can there be in one thread? NHTSA got mad because Tesla was using its findings for its normal unpaid marketing- because the showed Tesla was the unrivaled best by far- presume some briber or indirect briber raised hell- probably a certain German make that Tesla has been destroying- just saw a new article trying to imply Mercedes was the primary reason for its downfall, nope its Tesla. There was "vehicles" safer than Model 3- NONE, the Teslas were the safest cars ever. Its like quoting Navigant- biggest pile of BS in history. The BS above about pedestrian avoidance is because ICE cars are noisy and ICE industry wants to straddle the Tesla with silly sounding noise makers to mask comparative ICE noise in purchase decisions. AAA did a bunch on incredibly stupid fraudulent type claims and supposed investigations, so quoting those clowns? IIHS ratings- well would those be part of what resulted in ridiculous higher costs for Tesla owners based on much better actual safety ratings? Could that have something to do with all the FUD like the fake fires and covering every accident on more than 700k Teslas around the world to make that BS seem somehow less suspect? These firms don't like Tesla because Telsa with AP and self insurance aims to kill their model of over charging so they can play casino games and pocket unnecessary gambling wins and socialize losses especially the endless useless socializing of fossil fuel company losses and propping up their turd stocks as a result of interlocking boards.

    They hate Tesla because it represents the end of their rip off games. And citing Extremetech- come on might as well cite Arstechnica you can't get more shill than these two. Arstechnica is always on the lying rip off side of everything for money. Prior to Sony's own customers and employers hacking them to pieces so bad Sony went down for the count (PSN down for 3 months, Sony Pictures 2 terabytes internal data dumped- 200 million customers data leak- so bad Sony tried to get the Obama admin to laughably blame their total crash and burn at the hands of the public on North Korea- prior to that and after that Arstechnica was all pro Sony without limit. Who cites rabid paid to lie organizations like that unless they are part of that nonsense? Its as bad as every time the Tesla stock rises or falls some so called stock analysts or firm pay some shill site to say it was because that shill analyst made some bought and paid for comment, when it almost never is- its very rare or almost never that the bear side of Tesla analysts has anything intelligent or insightful to say. Last thing I remember a bear saying that was intelligent had to do with early Tesa Semi sightings and the space behind the cab- he turned out to be wrong- he was always wrong with the things he was saying but it was eagle eyed- very rare to never have honest or useful things to say.
  22. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web Well-Known Member Subscriber

    It was originally passed in 2010 to "Bell the Hybrid", the Prius:

    It makes more sense to observe noise makers make an EV just as deadly as any pickup or SUV. Pedestrian accident avoidance demands better sensors and software to cover the built-in blind spots.

    Bob Wilson
  23. Pushmi-Pullyu

    Pushmi-Pullyu Well-Known Member

    Say what? Insurance rates in urban areas are much higher than in rural areas, I would guess because traffic accidents are so much more common where traffic is dense than where it's sparse.

    Now, some of the other factors you mention probably do contribute to a lower accident rate for Tesla cars, but certainly "living in an urban area" isn't one of them!

    However, this doesn't mean I agree with any of the nonsense in the OP. The claim in the thread title that "Tesla AP [is] already 10x safer" certainly isn't borne out by the evidence. Somewhat safer, definitely, despite an intense smear campaign by hardcore Tesla bashers to convince people that's not true. Tesla cars under control of Autopilot have a significantly lower accident rate than those not using Autopilot, and that's a Truth which can't be denied, despite all their EV-bashing efforts.

    But the improvement is nowhere near 10x. I'm not even sure it's as much as 2x, altho it's certainly substantially safer to use Autopilot than not to use it. Statistics show quite clearly a reduction in the accident rate under most driving conditions with Autopilot engaged. (Please note I did not say all driving conditions!)

    Autopilot is saving lives and avoiding serious accidents every single day. And it's getting better over time!

    Keep going Tesla!

Share This Page