The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has released a study showing that Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS) safeguards are lacking across brands, with most of the 14 partially automated systems tested receiving “marginal” or “poor” ratings.
In a press release shared on Tuesday, the IIHS released early results from the new ratings system, noting that partial automation systems from Tesla, Ford, Nissan, and most other automakers that were tested were lacking in multiple categories. The study offered ratings of good, acceptable, marginal or poor, both overall and in specific categories.
Level 2 systems like Tesla Autopilot can improve drivers’ attentiveness: IIHS study
“We evaluated partial automation systems from BMW, Ford, General Motors, Genesis, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Tesla and Volvo,” said David Harkey, IIHS President. “Most of them don’t include adequate measures to prevent misuse and keep drivers from losing focus on what’s happening on the road.”
Of the 14 partially automated systems tested thus far, only one system from any automaker was deemed acceptable, while two were rated marginal, 11 were rated poor, and none were rated good. The categories that were individually rated for each system included driver monitoring, attention reminders, emergency procedures, lane change, adaptive cruise control (ACC) resume, cooperative steering, and safety features.
The IIHS gave both Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) beta systems poor ratings overall, while Volvo Pilot Assist, Nissan ProPilot, Mercedes Active Distance Assist Distronic, Ford BlueCruise and several others were rated poor. Driver monitoring and attention reminders were some of the lower-rated categories across most brands, highlighting the ability for drivers to trick systems into thinking they’re being fully aware.
The research non-profit also noted that there was “little” evidence to support that partially automated systems like these are actually at the point that they currently make driving safer—though most companies target safety as a number one goal with ADAS programs.
“Some drivers may feel that partial automation makes long drives easier, but there is little evidence it makes driving safer,” Harkey said. “As many high-profile crashes have illustrated, it can introduce new risks when systems lack the appropriate safeguards.”
The top-rated systems in the index included Lexus Teammate with Advanced Drive with an acceptable rating, along with the GM Super Cruise and Nissan ProPilot Assist with Navi-Link. Every other system was rated poor overall.
You can see the full category breakdowns from tests of Tesla’s Autopilot and FSD beta systems from the IIHS below, along with those of a few others.
Credit: IIHS Credit: IIHS Credit: IIHS Credit: IIHS Credit: IIHS
“These results are worrying, considering how quickly vehicles with these partial automation systems are hitting our roadways,” Harkey added.
“But there’s a silver lining if you look at the performance of the group as a whole. No single system did well across the board, but in each category at least one system performed well. That means the fixes are readily available and, in some cases, may be accomplished with nothing more than a simple software update.”
Below you can see overall ratings for each system tested.
| System Tested | Vehicle | Overall Rating |
|---|---|---|
|
Lexus Teammate with Advanced Drive |
2022-2024 Lexus LS |
Acceptable |
|
GM Super Cruise |
2023-2024 GMC Sierra |
Marginal |
|
Nissan ProPILOT Assist with Navi-Link |
2023-2024 Nissan Ariya |
Marginal |
|
BMW Active Driving Assistant Pro |
2023-2024 BMW X1 |
Poor |
|
Ford BlueCruise |
2021-2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E |
Poor |
|
Ford Adaptive Cruise Control with Stop & Go and Lane Centering Assist |
2021-2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E |
Poor |
|
Genesis Highway Driving Assist 2 |
2023-2024 Genesis G90 |
Poor |
|
Genesis Smart Cruise Control/Lane Following Assist |
2023-2024 Genesis G90 |
Poor |
|
Lexus Dynamic Radar Cruise Control with Lane Tracing Assist |
2022-2024 Lexus LS |
Poor |
|
Mercedes-Benz Active Distance Assist DISTRONIC with Active Steering Assist |
2022-2023 Mercedes-Benz C-Class |
Poor |
|
Nissan ProPILOT Assist 2.0 |
2023-2024 Nissan Ariya |
Poor |
|
Tesla Autopilot version 2023.7.10 |
2021-2023 Tesla Model 3 |
Poor |
|
Tesla Full Self-Driving beta version 2023.7.10 |
2021-2023 Tesla Model 3 |
Poor |
|
Volvo Pilot Assist |
2022-2024 Volvo S90 |
Poor |
You can view the full list of rankings with individual category rankings from the IIHS here, or view the institute’s test protocol and rating guidelines here. Additionally, see the institute’s press release detailing the rating system’s early results here.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.
News
IM Motors co-CEO apologizes to Tesla China over FUD comments
Liu said later investigations showed the accident was not caused by a brake failure on the Tesla’s part, contrary to his initial comments.
Liu Tao, co-CEO of IM Motors, has publicly apologized to Tesla China for comments he made in 2022 suggesting a Tesla vehicle was defective following a fatal traffic accident in Chaozhou, China.
Liu said later investigations showed the accident was not caused by a brake failure on the Tesla’s part, contrary to his initial comments.
IM Motors co-CEO issues apology
Liu Tao posted a statement addressing remarks he made following a serious traffic accident in Chaozhou, Guangdong province, in November 2022, as noted in a Sina News report. Liu stated that based on limited public information at the time, he published a Weibo post suggesting a safety issue with the Tesla involved in the crash. The executive clarified that his initial comments were incorrect.
“On November 17, 2022, based on limited publicly available information, I posted a Weibo post regarding a major traffic accident that occurred in Chaozhou, suggesting that the Tesla product involved in the accident posed a safety hazard. Four hours later, I deleted the post. In May 2023, according to the traffic police’s accident liability determination and relevant forensic opinions, the Chaozhou accident was not caused by Tesla brake failure.
“The aforementioned findings and opinions regarding the investigation conclusions of the Chaozhou accident corrected the erroneous statements I made in my previous Weibo post, and I hereby clarify and correct them. I apologize for the negative impact my inappropriate remarks made before the facts were ascertained, which caused Tesla,” Liu said.
Investigation and court findings
The Chaozhou accident occurred in Raoping County in November 2022 and resulted in two deaths and three injuries. Video footage circulated online at the time showed a Tesla vehicle accelerating at high speed and colliding with multiple motorcycles and bicycles. Reports indicated the vehicle reached a speed of 198 kilometers per hour.
The incident drew widespread attention as the parties involved provided conflicting accounts and investigation details were released gradually. Media reports in early 2023 said investigation results had been completed, though the vehicle owner requested a re-investigation, delaying the issuance of a final liability determination.
The case resurfaced later in 2023 following a defamation lawsuit filed by Tesla China against a media outlet. According to a court judgment cited by Shanghai Securities News, forensic analysis determined that the fatal accident was unrelated to any malfunction on the Tesla’s braking or steering systems. The court also ruled that the media outlet must publish an apology, address the negative impact on Tesla China’s reputation, and pay a penalty of 30,000 yuan.
Elon Musk
SpaceX is exploring a “Starlink Phone” for direct-to-device internet services: report
The update was reportedly shared to Reuters by people familiar with the matter.
SpaceX is reportedly exploring new products tied to Starlink, including a potential Starlink-branded phone.
The update was reportedly shared to Reuters by people familiar with the matter.
A possible Starlink Phone
As per Reuters’ sources, SpaceX has reportedly discussed building a mobile device designed to connect directly to the Starlink satellite constellation. Details about the potential device and its possible release are still unclear, however.
SpaceX has dabbled with mobile solutions in the past. The company has partnered with T-Mobile to provide Starlink connectivity to existing smartphones. And last year, SpaceX initiated a $19.6 billion purchase of satellite spectrum from EchoStar.
Elon Musk did acknowledge the idea of a potential mobile device recently on X, writing that a Starlink phone is “not out of the question at some point.” Unlike conventional smartphones, however, Musk described a device that is “optimized purely for running max performance/watt neural nets.”
Starlink and SpaceX’s revenue
Starlink has become SpaceX’s dominant commercial business. Reuters’ sources claimed that the private space company generated roughly $15–$16 billion in revenue last year, with about $8 billion in profit. Starlink is estimated to have accounted for 50% to 80% of SpaceX’s total revenue last year.
SpaceX now operates more than 9,500 Starlink satellites and serves over 9 million users worldwide. About 650 satellites are already dedicated to SpaceX’s direct-to-device initiative, which aims to eventually provide full cellular coverage globally.
Future expansion of Starlink’s mobile capabilities depends heavily on Starship, which is designed to launch larger batches of upgraded Starlink satellites. Musk has stated that each Starship launch carrying Starlink satellites could increase network capacity by “more than 20 times.”
Elon Musk
FCC accepts SpaceX filing for 1 million orbital data center plan
The move formally places SpaceX’s “Orbital Data Center” concept into the FCC’s review process.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has accepted SpaceX’s filing for a new non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellite system of up to one million spacecraft and has opened the proposal for public comment.
The move formally places SpaceX’s “Orbital Data Center” concept into the FCC’s review process, marking the first regulatory step for the ambitious space-based computing network.
FCC opens SpaceX’s proposal for comment
In a public notice, the FCC’s Space Bureau stated that it is accepting SpaceX’s application to deploy a new non-geostationary satellite system known as the “SpaceX Orbital Data Center system.” As per the filing, the system would consist of “up to one million satellites” operating at altitudes between 500 and 2,000 kilometers, using optical inter-satellite links for data transmission.
The FCC notice described the proposal as a long-term effort. SpaceX wrote that the system would represent the “first step towards becoming a Kardashev II-level civilization – one that can harness the Sun’s full power.” The satellites would rely heavily on high-bandwidth optical links and conduct telemetry, tracking, and command operations, with traffic routed through space-based laser networks before being sent to authorized ground stations.
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr highlighted the filing in a post on X, noting that the Commission is now seeking public comment on SpaceX’s proposal. Interested parties have until early March to submit comments.
What SpaceX is proposing to build
As per the FCC’s release, SpaceX’s orbital data center system would operate alongside its existing and planned Starlink constellations. The FCC notice noted that the proposed satellites may connect not only with others in the new system, but also with satellites in SpaceX’s first- and second-generation Starlink networks.
The filing also outlined several waiver requests, including exemptions from certain NGSO milestone and surety bond requirements, as well as flexibility in how orbital planes and communication beams are disclosed, as noted in a Benzinga report. SpaceX noted that these waivers are necessary to support the scale and architecture of the proposed system.
As noted in coverage of the filing, the proposal does not represent an immediate deployment plan, but rather a framework for future space-based computing infrastructure. SpaceX has discussed the idea of moving energy-intensive computing, such as AI workloads, into orbit, where continuous solar power and large physical scale could reduce constraints faced on Earth.
IM Motors co-CEO apologizes to Tesla China over FUD comments
SpaceX is exploring a “Starlink Phone” for direct-to-device internet services: report
