Sunroof Heated Leather Seats Suspension Package One Owner Local Trade 4wd on 2040-cars

Auto blog

IIHS: High numbers of drivers treat partially automated cars as fully self-driving

WASHINGTON — Drivers using advanced driver assistance systems like Tesla Autopilot or General Motors Super Cruise often treat their vehicles as fully self-driving despite warnings, a new study has found. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), an industry funded group that prods automakers to make safer vehicles, said on Tuesday a survey found regular users of Super Cruise, Nissan/Infiniti ProPILOT Assist and Tesla Autopilot "said they were more likely to perform non-driving-related activities like eating or texting while using their partial automation systems than while driving unassisted." The IIHS study of 600 active users found 53% of Super Cruise, 42% of Autopilot and 12% of ProPILOT Assist owners "said that they were comfortable treating their vehicles as fully self-driving." About 40% of users of Autopilot and Super Cruise — two systems with lockout features for failing to pay attention — reported systems had at some point switched off while they were driving and would not reactivate. "The big-picture message here is that the early adopters of these systems still have a poor understanding of the technologyÂ’s limits," said IIHS President David Harkey. The study comes as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is scrutinizing Autopilot crashes. Since 2016, the NHTSA has opened 37 special investigations involving 18 deaths in crashes involving Tesla vehicles and where systems like Autopilot were suspected of use. Tesla did not respond to requests for comment. Tesla says Autopilot does not make vehicles autonomous and is intended for use with a fully attentive driver who is prepared to take over. GM, which in August said owners could use Super Cruise on 400,000 miles (643,740 km) of North American roads and plans to offer Super Cruise on 22 models by the end of 2023, did not immediately comment. IIHS said advertisements for Super Cruise focus on hands-free capabilities while Autopilot evokes the name used in passenger airplanes and "implies TeslaÂ’s system is more capable than it really is." IIHS in contrast noted ProPILOT Assist "suggests that itÂ’s an assistance feature, rather than a replacement for the driver." NHTSA and automakers say none of the systems make vehicles autonomous. Nissan said its name "is clearly communicating ProPILOT Assist as a system to aid the driver, and it requires hands-on operation.

How real is the Chevy Bolt EV and will it really cost $30,000?

"This is us bragging that we can do this kind of car." That's how Michael Simcoe, GM's executive director for NA exteriors, described the Chevy Bolt EV concept, which made a surprise appearance at the Detroit Auto Show today. While there was talk of a 2017 production debut, this is for sure a concept vehicle. But that means the ideas behind the vehicle are perhaps more important than the details. For example, no one is talking about what size battery might appear in a production Bolt, but Simcoe would talk about how rapid progress in battery improvements made it possible for GM to make the bold Bolt declaration that promises 200 miles and a price tag of around $30,000 (after incentives). But if the Bolt makes it to market, it won't be until 2017 (as rumored) or later, is it really fair to promote the car as being available with a federal tax credit? For one thing, credits for plug-in vehicles may change in the next few years, but if the laws stay the same, each manufacturer is limited to 200,000 vehicles before the credits start to decline. GM is justifiably proud that it's sold over 70,000 Volts thus far, but with a new model coming out later this year and a few years to go until the Bolt potentially arrives, GM could be pushing right up against that 200,000 limit when the Bolt goes on sale. But Volt executive chief engineer Pam Fletcher told AutoblogGreen that, "We're just trying to take some of the confusion out." "Think about talking to the average consumer," she said. "First, going through the explanation of how the federal tax credit was set up, how it's being used and so on. [In the industry, we] have the luxury of understanding the nuances of that regulation, but right now people who aren't in the marketplace, they don't have the luxury of all that. It's already hard to communicate the details so we gave them data in a way that is what they're used to seeing." There was one question that drove the two-year Bolt gestation and design period, Simcoe said: What does a better battery offer a vehicle designer? "We've got a number of spaces we play in for powertrain technology and obviously electrification is one of them," he said. "With Volt 1 and then the Spark EV, with that development and batteries getting better for us, we started doing some practical packaging to deliver a vehicle which was not the traditional aero form which you see around electric vehicles.

GM under fire from safety advocates over braking problem caused by recall fix

Safety experts are lambasting General Motors over what they say is the automaker’s slow notification of owners of certain 2019 sedans and trucks that a recall fix could cause power braking to fail and increase the risk of a crash, the Detroit Free Press reports.  GMÂ’s original recall in December targeted about 550,000 Cadillac CT6 sedans and Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 pickups, all from the 2019 model year, over potentially defective electronic stability control and antilock brakes. In that case, GM said the errors would not show up as a diagnostic warning on the instrument cluster. But after GM had done recall work on 162,000 vehicles, about 1,700 owner have complained that their power brakes didnÂ’t work after they had the recall done and then used the OnStar app to start their vehicle. GM then issued a supplemental fix for customers whoÂ’d already had their vehicles serviced. In this case, a diagnostic warning should illuminate saying either “Service Brake Assist” or “Service ECS,” which GM says is a signal that a customer should not drive the vehicle and instead call their dealer, which will tow the vehicle and have it repaired. Safety advocates say the automaker hasnÂ’t gone far enough to protect customers. “The fact that you could potentially start a vehicle and not have brakes is a pretty risky proposition,” Sean Kane, president of the Safety Research and Strategies, which works on auto issues for plaintiffs and governmental organizations, told the Freep. “The fact that they wouldnÂ’t notify owners (sooner) is pretty stunning.” GM told the Freep it was required to notify the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and file paperwork before it notified customers about the original recall, which was made Dec. 12. It then had to investigate and resolve the problem created by its original recall fix before alerting customers. GMÂ’s call center and dealers are contacting the remaining 900 customers who havenÂ’t yet had the update made to the original recall repair. GM also hired a vendor to send recall letters to the 550,000 customers affected by the original recall notifying them about the update. There are no known injuries or deaths related to the problem. Read the Freep story here.