Skip to main content

Electronic crash-avoidance systems get thumbs up from consumers in federal testing

By Jonathon Ramsey RSS feed

Posted May 29th 2012 9:30AM

CommentsAdd
accident avoidance

Starting last fall, eight carmakers worked with the Department of Transportation on a study assessing drivers' acceptance of accident-avoidance technologies. The initial six-month program in the Connected Vehicle Safety Pilot Program put people on closed roads in cars that communicated wirelessly to issue warnings about lane changes, blind spots, forward collisions and other cars approaching intersections. Of the 688 participants, more than 90 per cent wanted the tech in their cars, and that response rate covered just about all age ranges.

But perhaps the most remarkable finding about the study was that in spite of massive favour, none of the participants wanted to have to pay "more than US$250" for the technologies. We don't know how the question was phrased, but when an iPod Touch costs US$195, adding Ford Sync to a Fusion SE costs CAD$850 and a trip to Disneyland for a family of four can bankrupt a small nation, we're slightly surprised that a suite of potentially lifesaving features isn't even worth considering for more than $250.

The study isn't over yet – the next phase involves 3,000 test cars trying out the features on open roads in Michigan. It will begin this fall and run into next year.

Hit the jump for more.

BMW Motorrad ConnectedRide: Cross Traffic Assistant

News Source: The New York Times

Category: Ford, Technology, Safety

Tags: accident avoidance, car to car, car to car communications, collision avoidance, collision detection, Connected Vehicle Safety Pilot Program, department of transportation, safety, study

Add a Comment

Sign in »
*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

2 Comments

Filter by:
From The Back Seat

As I said elsewhere, anyone who likes the idea of self-driving cars should be consigned to ride the bus for the rest of their lives. It accomplishes thee same thing by letting them do other things besides drive which they obviously aren't interested in in the first place and is better for the environment by getting all those cars off the roads thus freeing up space and decreasing the commuting times for those of us who actually ENJOY operating our cars. Seriously, there isn't one good argument for this technology that riding the bus/subway/train wouldn't solve. Because if you dread/hate being behind the wheel then you shouldn't be there in the first place because you are a menace that the rest of us has to avoid.

May 29 2012 at 4:34 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
squished18

I believe the reason why the amount we are willing to pay for crash-avoidance is relatively small is because the occurrence of crashes is relatively small. Most drivers will never actually benefit from this technology because they avoid crashes on their own. Therefore the amount they are willing to pay for it is quite small.

Now, self-driving cars is an altogether different question. My guess is people will pay significantly more for self-driving cars. People will use the self-driving "feature" every day. They might never need "crash-avoidance".

May 29 2012 at 10:20 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply