The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has introduced a new safety rating system for partially automated driving systems, and the initial tests have raised concerns, particularly for Tesla and its competitors.
Under the IIHS system, automated systems are graded as good, acceptable, marginal, or poor based on their safety features. Notably, none of the systems evaluated received an overall rating of “good.”
Out of the 14 systems assessed, a staggering 11 were deemed “poor,” including Tesla’s Autopilot and its beta-tested Full Self-Driving version, along with other notable systems like Nissan’s ProPILOT Assist 2.0, Mercedes-Benz’s Active Distance Assist DISTRONIC with Active Steering Assist, Ford’s BlueCruise, and BMW’s Active Driving Assistant. Volvo’s Pilot Assist also fell short, earning the dubious distinction of performing worse than Tesla’s systems.
Even the top-performing systems failed to impress, with Lexus’ Teammate with Advanced Drive securing an “acceptable” rating, followed by General Motors’ Super Cruise and Nissan’s ProPILOT Assist with Navi-link, both receiving “marginal” ratings.
IIHS President David Harkey cautioned against overreliance on partial automation, citing instances where such systems lacked adequate safeguards, potentially introducing new risks.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has previously asserted the safety benefits of Tesla vehicles equipped with Autopilot, claiming they are significantly safer than the U.S. average and even outperform Tesla vehicles without the technology enabled. However, federal regulators are currently investigating nearly 1,000 accidents involving the use of Tesla’s Autopilot.
IIHS anticipates manufacturers will enhance their systems’ safety features in response to the findings. Notably, the Tesla systems tested by IIHS utilized software predating the company’s December software update.
In response to the IIHS report, automakers emphasized their commitment to safety. Nissan stated it is evaluating the results and will continue collaborating with IIHS on safety matters. Ford expressed disagreement with the findings but pledged to consider IIHS feedback for future updates to its BlueCruise system.
Mercedes-Benz acknowledged the importance of IIHS testing but stressed the focus on preventing system misuse rather than evaluating performance. Volvo echoed similar sentiments, expressing a commitment to minimizing reliance on driving assistance systems.
BMW emphasized the need for philosophical alignment on how driver assistance systems monitor attention, while Lexus parent Toyota highlighted efforts to increase vehicle safety beyond federal standards.
General Motors underscored the importance of comprehensive safeguards for advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), clarifying that its Super Cruise system is intended to enhance driving experience rather than serve as a safety feature.
