Connect with us

News

IIHS to develop nighttime AEB evaluation after study finds emergency braking systems make no difference in the dark

(Credit: IIHS)

Published

on

A study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) found that pedestrian crash rates were lower when vehicles were equipped with pedestrian automatic emergency braking (AEB) systems. However, the agency’s study also revealed that AEB systems practically made no difference in pedestrian crashes that occurred at night. 

“This is the first real-world study of pedestrian AEB to cover a broad range of manufacturers, and it proves the technology is eliminating crashes,” says Jessica Cicchino, IIHS vice president of research. “Unfortunately, it also shows these systems are much less effective in the dark, where three-quarters of fatal pedestrian crashes happen.”

The AEB System Study

Cicchino, the IIHS study’s author, looked at nearly 1,500 police-reported crashes involving 2017-2020 model-year vehicles from different manufacturers to determine the impact AEB systems made in pedestrian crashes. The study accounts for the quality of the vehicle’s headlights, along with the driver’s age, gender, and other demographic factors. 

The study found that pedestrian crash rates of all severities were 27% lower when vehicles were equipped with AEB systems. Injury crash rates were 30% lower. However, the study also found that AEB systems made no difference in tests conducted in “unlighted areas.”

Cicchino made the discovery among a subset of 650 crashes with more detailed information about lighting conditions, speed limit, and crash configuration. The more detailed data revealed that AEB systems reduced the odds of pedestrian crashes by 32% in daylight and 33% in areas with artificial lighting, during dusk or dawn and nighttime. 

Advertisement

Nighttime AEB Evaluation Tests

The manager of active safety testing at IIHS, David Taylor, and his team have already conducted some research tests to design the planned nighttime pedestrian AEB evaluation. Eight small SUVs from eight different manufacturers were put through the standard vehicle-to-pedestrian evaluation in complete darkness. 

IIHS tested a 2019 Subaru Forester, 2019 Volvo XC40, 2020 Honda CR-V, 2020 Hyundai Venue, 2021 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2021 Ford Bronco Sport, 2021 Toyota C-HR, and 2022 Volkswagen Taos. Each vehicle went through the evaluation twice. 

Current Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Evaluation

The IIHS vehicle-to-pedestrian evaluation is a 6-point scale, as seen below. The test consists of several scenarios where adult and child-like dummies “walk” perpendicular or parallel to the vehicle at varying speeds. Total points for perpendicular scenarios are weighted at 70%, while points from the parallel scenario are weighted at 30%. 

During five test runs, vehicles were awarded points based on their average speed reduction. An additional point is awarded in the 37 mph parallel scenario to cars that provide the driver a warning at least 2.1 seconds before impact.

(Credit: IIHS)

Nighttime AEB Evaluation Test Results

The vehicles the IIHS chose for the test included cars that used single cameras, dual cameras, single camera and radar, and radar only configurations. The test also had vehicles that already took the vehicle-to-pedestrian front crash prevention evaluation and earned ratings ranging from superior, advanced, and basic. 

(Credit: IIHS)

Except for the radar-only Taos, all the vehicles’ performances declined in the dark, dropping some of their ratings from superior to advanced when using high beams and superior to basic when using low beams. The Taos received essentially the same nighttime tests scores compared to daytime evaluations. However, the IIHS noted that the Taos was also the worst performer during the daytime tests. 

The best performers in the nighttime tests were the 2021 Ford Bronco Sport and 2021 Toyota C-HR. Both vehicles use a combination of cameras and radar

Advertisement

“The better-performing systems are too new to be included in our study of real-world crashes,” noted Aylor. “This may indicate that some manufacturers are already improving the nighttime performance of their pedestrian AEB systems.”

The Teslarati team would appreciate hearing from you. If you have any tips, reach out to me at maria@teslarati.com or via Twitter @Writer_01001101.

Maria--aka "M"-- is an experienced writer and book editor. She's written about several topics including health, tech, and politics. As a book editor, she's worked with authors who write Sci-Fi, Romance, and Dark Fantasy. M loves hearing from TESLARATI readers. If you have any tips or article ideas, contact her at maria@teslarati.com or via X, @Writer_01001101.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla ‘Mad Max’ gets its first bit of regulatory attention

Published

on

Credit: Teslarati

Tesla “Mad Max” mode has gotten its first bit of regulatory attention, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has asked for additional information on the Speed Profile.

A few weeks ago, Tesla officially launched a new Speed Profile for Full Self-Driving (Supervised) known as “Mad Max,” which overtook the “Hurry” mode for the fastest setting FSD offers.

Tesla launches ‘Mad Max’ Full Self-Driving Speed Profile, its fastest yet

It launched with Full Self-Driving v14.1.2, and it was no secret that the company was looking for a new mode that would cater to more aggressive driving styles.

The release notes showed the description of the Speed Profile as:

“Introduced new speed profile MAD MAX, which comes with higher speeds and more frequent lane changes than Hurry.”

It certainly lived up to its description. In our testing, it was aggressive, fast, and drove similarly to some of the more challenging traffic patterns I’ve come across.

In normal highway driving, it was one of the quicker cars on the road, while other applications saw it be a suitable version for navigating things like rush-hour traffic.

Here’s what my experience with it was:

While Tesla owners have certainly enjoyed the feature and the behaviors of Mad Max, the NHTSA said it is in contact with Tesla about it, looking to gather additional information. Additionally, it said:

“The human behind the wheel is fully responsible for driving the vehicle and complying with all traffic safety laws.”

The important thing to note with Mad Max mode, along with the other Speed Profiles, is that the driver can choose whichever one they’d like, and they all cater to different driving styles.

While Mad Max is more aggressive, modes like “Sloth” and “Standard” are significantly more conservative and can be more suitable for those who are not comfortable with the faster, more spirited versions.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla shares AI5 chip’s ambitious production roadmap details

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has revealed new details about the company’s next-generation AI5 chip, describing it as “an amazing design.”

Published

on

Tesla-Chips-HW3-2
Image used with permission for Teslarati. (Credit: Tom Cross)

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has revealed new details about the company’s next-generation AI5 chip, describing it as “an amazing design” that could outperform its predecessor by a notable margin. Speaking during Tesla’s Q3 2025 earnings call, Musk outlined how the chip will be manufactured in partnership with both Samsung and TSMC, with production based entirely in the United States.

What makes AI5 special

According to Musk, the AI5 represents a complete evolution of Tesla’s in-house AI hardware, building on lessons learned from the AI4 system currently used in its vehicles and data centers. “By some metrics, the AI5 chip will be 40x better than the AI4 chip, not 40%, 40x,” Musk said during the Q3 2025 earnings call. He credited Tesla’s unique vertical integration for the breakthrough, noting that the company designs both the software and hardware stack for its self-driving systems.

To streamline the new chip, Tesla eliminated several traditional components, including the legacy GPU and image signal processor, since the AI5 architecture already incorporates those capabilities. Musk explained that these deletions allow the chip to fit within a half-reticle design, improving efficiency and power management. 

“This is a beautiful chip,” Musk said. “I’ve poured so much life energy into this chip personally, and I’m confident this is going to be a winner.”

Tesla’s dual manufacturing strategy for AI5

Musk confirmed that both Samsung’s Texas facility and TSMC’s Arizona plant will fabricate AI5 chips, with each partner contributing to early production. “It makes sense to have both Samsung and TSMC focus on AI5,” the CEO said, adding that while Samsung has slightly more advanced equipment, both fabs will support Tesla’s U.S.-based production goals.

Advertisement

Tesla’s explicit objective, according to Musk, is to create an oversupply of AI5 chips. The surplus units could be used in Tesla’s vehicles, humanoid robots, or data centers, which already use a mix of AI4 and NVIDIA hardware for training. “We’re not about to replace NVIDIA,” Musk clarified. “But if we have too many AI5 chips, we can always put them in the data center.”

Musk emphasized that Tesla’s focus on designing for a single customer gives it a massive advantage in simplicity and optimization. “NVIDIA… (has to) satisfy a large range of requirements from many customers. Tesla only has to satisfy one customer, Tesla,” he said. This, Musk stressed, allows Tesla to delete unnecessary complexity and deliver what could be the best performance per watt and per dollar in the industry once AI5 production scales.

Continue Reading

Energy

Tesla VP hints at Solar Roof comeback with Giga New York push

The comments hint at possible renewed life for the Solar Roof program, which has seen years of slow growth since its 2016 unveiling.

Published

on

tesla-solar-roof-500k
Image Credit: Tesla/Twitter

Tesla’s long-awaited and way underrated Solar Roof may finally be getting its moment. During the company’s Q3 2025 earnings call, Vice President of Energy Engineering Michael Snyder revealed that production of a new residential solar panel has started at Tesla’s Buffalo, New York facility, with shipments to customers beginning in the first quarter of 2026. 

The comments hint at possible renewed life for the Solar Roof program, which has seen years of slow growth since its 2016 unveiling.

Tesla Energy’s strong demand

Responding to an investor question about Tesla’s energy backlog, Snyder said demand for Megapack and Powerwall continues to be “really strong” into next year. He also noted positive customer feedback for the company’s new Megablock product, which is expected to start shipping from Houston in 2026.

“We’re seeing remarkable growth in the demand for AI and data center applications as hyperscalers and utilities have seen the versatility of the Megapack product. It increases reliability and relieves grid constraints,” he said.

Snyder also highlighted a “surge in residential solar demand in the US,” attributing the spike to recent policy changes that incentivize home installations. Tesla expects this trend to continue into 2026, helped by the rollout of a new solar lease product that makes adoption more affordable for homeowners.

Advertisement

Possible Solar Roof revival?

Perhaps the most intriguing part of Snyder’s remarks, however, was Tesla’s move to begin production of its “residential solar panel” in Buffalo, New York. He described the new panels as having “industry-leading aesthetics” and shape performance, language Tesla has used to market its Solar Roof tiles in the past.

“We also began production of our Tesla residential solar panel in our Buffalo factory, and we will be shipping that to customers starting Q1. The panel has industry-leading aesthetics and shape performance and demonstrates our continued commitment to US manufacturing,” Snyder said during the Q3 2025 earnings call.

Snyder did not explicitly name the product, though his reference to aesthetics has fueled speculation that Tesla may finally be preparing a large-scale and serious rollout of its Solar Roof line.

Originally unveiled in 2016, the Solar Roof was intended to transform rooftops into clean energy generators without compromising on design. However, despite early enthusiasm, production and installation volumes have remained limited for years. In 2023, a report from Wood Mackenzie claimed that there were only 3,000 operational Solar Roof installations across the United States at the time, far below forecasts. In response, the official Tesla Energy account on X stated that the report was “incorrect by a large margin.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending