This has already started - look up the discount some insurers give to owners of Subarus that are equipped with EyeSight. The numbers show their collision avoidance is making roads safer.
Also, interesting fact: Subaru is achieving these impressive stats using stereo vision, not lidar.
Agreed - my wife just bought a new Subaru with the Eyesight package. I was very dubious at first, but after a few long freeway trips, I'd much rather drive her car than my older vehicle. I believe that Subaru in Japan has published some impressive statistics about accident reduction with the Eyesight package. IMO, these technologies should be mandated on all new cars.
I have a Subaru with EyeSight and it does strange things sometimes. For example, if I happen to be in the left (passing) lane going around a leftward curve and a car in the right lane is stopping or slowing to turn right, the Subaru will hit the brakes because due to the curve of the road, the right lane car is straight ahead. It's scared me a few times.
The other thing about the system that sucks is that it's all optical (AFAIK) so when visibility is poor, it shuts off. They need to add more sensors because those are the conditions I would most like an extra set of eyes.
Subaru's eyesight absolutely will stop you when you think you're about to hit something, regardless of whether or not that something was moving previously.
It's actually really annoying if you live in a rural area without clearly defined lanes, and large, stationary objects (tractors and whatnot) close to the road.
I've also driven a Subaru with EyeSight. I think it's pretty good too, and kinda follows the same philosophy as my Honda, but with different tradeoffs. The Subaru doesn't lane center, so it's less relaxing to drive on the highway because you have to pay more attention to fine tuning your lane position. On the other hand, my Honda deliberately won't automatically come to a stop to avoid a collision (it will only slow down in the last few seconds), so it's more annoying in stop-and-go traffic.
Actually not. Subaru's EyeSight is currently the best system available. Especially in local traffic on detecting bicycles, kids and all those things even at night time.
Agree completely - Eyesight impresses me on a regular basis on the complexity of scenarios it seems to be able to react to, both when it comes to collision alerts / automatic breaking and when used for assisted cruise control.
I haven’t had any experiences with pedestrians at speed in front of the vehicle, but the rear automatic breaking in my Subaru is very aware of / sensitive to people walking behind it.
Care to clarify what you mean here? Had a subaru outback with eyesight a few years ago and I tested it with stationary objects in path multiple times (cardboard boxes and such). The subaru braked and stopped short of the objects 100% of the time.
Luckily most new cars from the last 5-10 years should have blind spot warnings (even as standard on premium cars) so should be a problem that's at least slowly being solved.
A coworker in Austin had a Subaru with the EyeSight system, and it would hard-brake on RM-2222 when it saw the rock walls in a curve. Presumably the "obstacle" took precedence over the fact that the road was curving. She pretty much had to stop using the system on her commute.
GM's Super Cruise system looks impressive (caveat: I haven't tried it out yet). But I'm not sure they have the funds and corporate will to create the LIDAR maps of the US road system that are needed for full coverage.
Definitely. Manufacturers are incentivized (by law and regulation) to optimize for surviving a collision, and less so for avoiding a collision entirely by enhancing visibility. I suppose the amount of attention the average driver pays to the road necessitates the former as a matter of public policy, but...
True, and another facet of the same problem is that blind spots are getting bigger by the model year, as automakers take the cheap way out and raise their belt lines to meet side-impact regulations.
We will all be driving around in tanks before long. I guess that's supposed to be a good thing.
I predict a dramatic increase in car accidents because of the effect this will have on drivers' peripheral vision. Based on the various articles I've read it seems nobody has considered this at all, which is amazing in itself.
This is only one of many things that Volvo does to improve the safety of passengers and those outside of their vehicles. I have a 2010 Volvo that has a feature called City Safety [1], an automatic braking system that prevents low speed collisions in city environments, and BLIS which indicates the presence of a person or vehicle in your blind spot. They also have a new cyclist detection system that engages the brakes [3]. I think if drivers can be more aware of others, pedestrians and cyclists, in combination with smarter vehicles that assist drivers in accident avoidance, it's a win-win.
Does anyone know whether eye safety is de facto maintained when your eye is being continuously bombarded by the 100+ scanning lasers being emitted from each of the 100 cars in the vicinity of an intersection? I'm on board with the case with a handful of lasers scanning by quickly but the energy may really start to add up in certain plausible future scenarios.
Also, interesting fact: Subaru is achieving these impressive stats using stereo vision, not lidar.
reply