How well do the safety packages work?

[Stormin’ Moorman]

I'm going to have to agree with many of the posters on this thread, in my experience the forward collision warning gives MANY false positives. I've had it slam on the brakes in parking garages and when going around cars in another lane. It can be quite dangerous. I don't know if maybe it's a calibration thing or that the system is a POS. Next time i go in for service I'll see if they can re-calibrate the sensor. Otherwise I'll switch to "beep only" like @Jennalee

Sponsored

 

[DaltonGang]

I wont buy it, on any of my vehicles. Too many nanny electronics as is.
My wife has this on her Toyota Highlander, and it is too sensitive. I disable it every time I drive it.

 

[Chocolate Thunder]

In just over a year of ownership and 17K mikes I’ve never had a false positive like some have reported. I don’t know what the difference is between those that have and haven’t; but I’d guess theirs isn’t calibrated correctly.

The system works very well exactly as designed. I’ve had it stop me once when I didn’t want it to. Not a false positive, a person abruptly slowed down on the highway to make a right turn ahead of me while I was using advanced cruise control. I had my ACC set at 75 and because the speed differential was so great and I have it set to maximum following distance it did it’s job. I did see the hazard in plenty of time and I was fully prepared to simply change lanes to the left to go around them without breaking speed, but the system didn’t know that and applied brakes hard. Had I not been paying attention I’d possibly have hit them from behind with normal cruise control on.

 

[rallydefault]

But even then, wouldn't you say it would have been more optimal for you to have been able to change lanes as you planned rather than the system braking hard on you on a highway?

I don't know. I get that tech is streamlining our lives in many ways ("Alexa - tell my faucet to dispense 2 cups of water"), but at what point does it start to rob us of having skills for ourselves?

Not for any of us, obviously. We've all grown up driving cars entirely on our own. We know how to check our mirrors on highways. We know how to parallel park. We know what to do if someone in front of us brakes suddenly (as long as we're not staring down at our cell phone). But what about my daughter? By the time she's 16, you won't be able to buy a car without all these systems. There may even be laws about driving older cars that don't have these systems. Self-driving may be the norm for all I know.

What if something goes wrong with the tech? What is something is hacked? Look at how many electronic systems go haywire in any given system on any given day, whether in cars or planes or company computers or service stations at restaurants or whatever. Look at how many companies get hacked every week. What happens when the next generation of drivers don't know how to do things when something goes wrong? There's a difference between accidents happening now because people aren't paying attention and accidents happening in the future because new drivers completely and totally lack the skills necessary to actually drive a vehicle.

I think we would have been better off cracking down on distracted driving rather than building crutches to allow distracted driving.

 

[Chocolate Thunder]

Advanced safety systems are not going away, they will increase tremendously. Distracted driving is not going away, it’s increasing tremendously and will continue to do so. Safety systems shouldn’t be thought of as a “crutch”, they’re a means to avoid disaster when other methods fail for whatever reason.

Like any other mechanical device they can fail. They’re usually designed and implemented so that failure is rare. Obviously we as human operators fail at an exponentially higher rate than advanced automotive safety systems, although many of us don’t think that ever applies to us, only the other terrible drivers on the roads. But what about “Mr. Perfect Driver” who never makes any mistakes? Consider that he shares the road with those other lesser drivers who clearly don’t have his skills or level of attentiveness behind the wheel. Would you rather the lady putting on makeup in the visor mirror while having a phone conversation at 60 mph dangerously close to your rear bumper NOT have advanced safety features on HER car? The old lady who runs a stop sign because she’s driving in an unfamiliar place while looking for an address - she could t-bone your Jeep at 30 mph or hit you at 5 mph because of emergency braking (or possibly miss you altogether).

Every day I see this. I work as a transportation safety specialist and I see the footage from the forward and side facing cameras on our company’s trucks. It’s sobering to see so many near misses that coulda woulda been disastrous if not for the advanced safety systems on our trucks and other passenger vehicles.

 

[aldo98229]

My experience with this type of system was from my 2012 Chrysler 300 SRT and my 2019 Tacoma: I didn’t like either.

1. Like others have said, it gets many false positives. The system will freak out by a concrete barrier or a ramp that is not in the way. If it freaks out; you will freak out.
2. I HATE adaptive cruise controls. It entices other vehicles to constantly sneak in front, pushing you farther and farther down the line. If you don’t want to pass then get off the passing lane! It’s that simple.
3. When I went to sign the papers on my Tacoma, the business manager tries to sell me an extended warranty because, according to her “...it costs $3,000 to replace that windshield.” My response was “if no one thought this was important enough to tell me before, it isn’t important enough to tell me now.” I declined the added warranty —and sold the truck six months later due to other issues.

I don’t think Wrangler is the type of vehicle that should be loaded with electronic gizmos, especially if you take it off-road. It only adds opportunity for things to break that are very expensive to fix. Even without the optional Advanced Safety Group, JL already has a ton of electronics.

My JL has the Safety Group without the advanced features. It gets me the Blind Spot Monitor, backup sensors and rear LEDs. To me, this offers a happy medium: enough safety aids without all the complicated stuff that is only bound to break.

PS - at 3,000 miles, the few issues my JL has encountered have all been electronics: the blind spot monitor will “Temporarily Disable” when I take the Jeep off-road and the shaking starts; the backup camera lines have failed to appear twice. So far these issues have self-corrected. Knock on wood. But only confirms that my Jeep doesn’t need more electronics.

 

[rallydefault]

@Chocolate Thunder
Yea, I see what you're saying, and it's tough.

But I do disagree with you on one main thing: even though we SHOULDN'T (key word) think of the safety features as "crutches," people are and will. And that's the crux of the matter for me. It's human nature, and big mistakes through history always occur when things look awesome on paper but fail to account for human nature. The vast, vast majority of us are lazy in the sense that the moment someone/something will step in and do something for us that we previously had to do ourselves, we will rely on that new thing more and more until we basically never do it for ourselves again.

Example: I'll throw myself under the bus on this one. Since having a backup camera, I find myself looking more and more at the camera and less and less actually out of my back window. I do it so much that, I'll be honest with you, I don't know how well I would manage my driveway if my camera would not be functioning (my driveway is narrow and very curvy, and located at the top of a busy intersection, so I need to back in quickly). For me, someone who doesn't like these systems, that's a sobering thought. Whether anyone else is willing to own up to something akin to this is whatever, but there's my anecdote.

I get that accidents happen nowadays. I get that people have, since the beginning of time, caused crashes by doing stupid things. Putting on makeup, eating a burger, and shaving have now been largely replaced by texting and tweeting. Same level of stupid, same deadly results. I get that, on paper, it would be great to add systems to mitigate these tragedies and one day try to avoid them. My point is that tragedies will continue, just of a different type. Tragedies will occur when a new generation of driver encounters a situation their car's systems can't warn them of/take them through. A new type of tragedy will occur when a forward collision sensor mistakenly goes off on a highway and sends a truck slamming into the back of your family. A new kind of tragedy will occur when your adaptive cruise control craps the bed in the middle of a long road trip and you've been, sympathetically enough, complacent behind the wheel because you've learned to give your trust to the machine.

I support the eventual outcome and spirit of these systems, but I believe, once again, we've jumped the gun. I do not believe these systems should be on consumer vehicles until they are perfect. Perfect. And that is still years away. Test them on corporate truck if you want. Test them in designated zones if you want. But in the mean time, more effort/time/money should have been spent on driver education, license testing/upkeep, features that disable cell phones when in motion, etc. I mean, it's crazy when you think that, for the most part, we receive a license when we're around 16 years old, and then we are practically never tested again. I know we all love visiting our DMVs (ha), but come on.

 

[Chocolate Thunder]

The issue of inadequately trained and inattentive drivers is (in my mind) a wholly separate issue from over reliance on safety tech.

I fully agree with you that our system in the US is laughably horrible for training, licensing, and recertification of drivers. In a number of other developed nations it requires a lot more training and costs much more (Finland for example).

Nothing will ever be perfect. People or machines. That’s an unreasonable standard. But you’re right about human nature. Nothing will ever work for every person every time because some people will abuse/misuse anything good, some are lazy, and some people are just really stupid.

Your example of reverse cameras is a good one. They are able to show you an area behind your vehicle that is physically impossible to see with turning your head and using the mirrors. In some vehicles like trucks and Jeeps that blind area directly behind you down low is huge. Certainly if they save the life of one toddler playing hide and seek behind your car it’s worth the cost IMO.

Until advanced safety technologies are mandated (like reverse cameras already are) I’m OK with some people opting to skip them. I don’t. But some people here are old enough to remember before seatbelts were even required equipment on cars, let alone required to be used by law. Same with baby seats. There were plenty of “reasonable” arguments against them that sound absolutely idiotic in hindsight.

 

[rickinAZ]

Wow, this certainly is a polarizing issue. I'm going to turn 65 this year and, unlike some on this thread, I'll embrace technology to make me safer. It's easy to say "just pay attention" and you won't have a problem; just not realistic.

 

[rickinAZ]

I think we would have been better off cracking down on distracted driving rather than building crutches to allow distracted driving.

I think that we are cracking down on distracted driving, but, it doesn't seem to be working based on my everyday observations. Or do we go full Luddite and eliminate earlier innovations (that weren't perfect at first) like anti-lock brakes and stability control?

I'm embracing the future.

 

[cosine]

i do not have any of the safety options because of the inaccurate, false reading / actions. also it just more electronic crap that is bound to either crap out or causes a big headache and $$$ due to going to the dealership to get it fix. thats one reason i wanted a base sport model jl. plan and simple.

i do find that a large % of drivers solely rely or 'misuse" these options and not physically being aware of your surroundings. thats scary because drivers think they are indestructible. again not all drivers just a large % of them.

as for the consumer report. i will look at the articles. however i do not take in or rely on the information they provide because there are alot of "miss leading" information. i do not like or agree with consumer reports..

dont get me wrong here. i do think that the safety options are nice, but i do not like these sudden reactions that can accure in any situations like some posters have mentioned. i prefer to physically look around and see what is happening.

technologies are great, but too much of them doesnt help as well as anyone care to think. they could cause problems that could of been prevented. the best option is me because safety depends on your actions. thats how i look at it and staying old school (to a certain point) is beginning look good. plan and simple = to less headache and more $$$ to play with.

 

[cosine]

I think that we are cracking down on distracted driving, but, it doesn't seem to be working based on my everyday observations. Or do we go full Luddite and eliminate earlier innovations (that weren't perfect at first) like anti-lock brakes and stability control?

I'm embracing the future.

i agree with you, but i also agree with rallydefault.

 

[rickinAZ]

@Chocolate Thunder
But in the mean time, more effort/time/money should have been spent on driver education, license testing/upkeep, features that disable cell phones when in motion, etc. I mean, it's crazy when you think that, for the most part, we receive a license when we're around 16 years old, and then we are practically never tested again. I know we all love visiting our DMVs (ha), but come on.

I totally agree with this sentiment. In Germany it's tough to get a license and it shows. My personal pet peeve is lane-changing without signaling - especially RIGHT in front of me. Don't see that on the Autobahn (except maybe by American visitors). America is great at many things; just not driving.

My other pet peeve is drivers with the phone to their ear when they're driving a hands-free equipped vehicle.

 

[cosine]

Example: I'll throw myself under the bus on this one. Since having a backup camera, I find myself looking more and more at the camera and less and less actually out of my back window. I do it so much that, I'll be honest with you, I don't know how well I would manage my driveway if my camera would not be functioning (my driveway is narrow and very curvy, and located at the top of a busy intersection, so I need to back in quickly). For me, someone who doesn't like these systems, that's a sobering thought. Whether anyone else is willing to own up to something akin to this is whatever, but there's my anecdote..

same here. i do find the rear camera very useful and caught my self using it more time than looking. now i do both methods when backing up. the camera is great for night time backing.

 

[MJM]

We ordered our JLR with none of the "safety" options. I was so glad we could still opt to NOT have it. In my opinion, the only truly effective safety feature is to tighten the loose but behind the wheel. Like someone else said, I have no issue with other vehicles having it, but I hope it always remains optional. It will break, it will malfunction because it's an electromechanical system. All man made systems are by nature imperfect and ultimately unreliable.

Some mentioned possible future laws requiring self driving cars or outlawing cars without all the new tech. I hope I don't live to see that day. Too much government interference in our lives already. Remember, those willing to trade freedom for safety or security will soon find they have neither.

Sponsored