No Collision warning system?

[SS_Syndicate]

Other vehicles that have this have had some trouble when trail riding. We have a KL Cherokee and while we don't have it, a few that we trail ride with do. I have seen more than one occasion where the vehicle perceived a collision and slammed on the brakes were what was really needed was acceleration.

1- dropping into a muddy narrow gully.... When the nose of the Jeep went into it it saw the opposite side as an object and slammed the brakes. Then, it was time to winch out as the gully required a fair amount of throttle and momentum to get through its soft bottom.

2-trees.... on COUNTLESS instances where the trails get tight older KLs with this would slam on the brakes when trees were too close.

I think I like the idea of this tech, but I'm uncomfortable with "who is piloting"... This is the same, but different... but the same LOL... Hammond says it best here ->
Sorry, I couldn't figure out how to embed it.

Sponsored

 

[Revelation17]

There is already an invention for that. The "off" button.

This is assuming they provide an off button. Not sure that'll always be the case but I've avoided all of this technology by owning older lower end cars that didn't even have it as an option so I haven't had to deal with it.

 

[Bearded_Dragon]

Other vehicles that have this have had some trouble when trail riding. We have a KL Cherokee and while we don't have it, a few that we trail ride with do. I have seen more than one occasion where the vehicle perceived a collision and slammed on the brakes were what was really needed was acceleration.

1- dropping into a muddy narrow gully.... When the nose of the Jeep went into it it saw the opposite side as an object and slammed the brakes. Then, it was time to winch out as the gully required a fair amount of throttle and momentum to get through its soft bottom.

2-trees.... on COUNTLESS instances where the trails get tight older KLs with this would slam on the brakes when trees were too close.
.

I figured anything in 4L, maybe even 4H, would auto disable any car nannies. I can see why it could be a pain off-road if they're always on. Good info, thanks for sharing!

Hammond made me remember another issue my boss said with his CRV. I guess Honda's "pilot software" or whatever it's called, relies on the white and yellow lines. He said when there's construction and the lines are covered up the car doesn't see the road properly. He can still steer it but the steering wheel has some resistance when he starts to turn it as the car sees the road differently, and it tries to keep him going the way it sees.

I'm also interested to see how these autopilot cars react to say, a bad tie rod or tire, that pulls the vehicle to one side. Would the vehicle prevent autopilot, or allow it and have the vehicle drive straight with the steering wheel at 1 o'clock position?

On that note I'm with WaltA as I'd love some adaptive cruise control. Not anything that would auto brake for me as I still want that control.

 

[word302]

I'd rather people actually pay attention to the road than to rely on electronics to brake. I love technology and I'm glad this isn't a feature on JLs (at least currently).

My boss has this on his new CRV and the only time he's had it apply the brakes is when he goes to pass someone, and he admits he gets close to the rear of the car before passing.

Lol, so you'd rather slam into an object even harder? Do you even understand how collision avoidance works? It runs like like +-20 calculations a second to determine the absolute latest you can wait before apply the brakes, before a crash is imminent. It would never apply braking before you already shoulda been doing so.

No. I’d rather pay attention and be in control of my vehicle.

 

[Karl_in_Chicago]

I personally don't want this nor do I want to pay the added expense (acknowledging, though, what a previous poster noted may eventually be a government mandated feature). To me the only thing this does is help the inattentive driver. That said, I would like EVERYONE else to have it so they don't rear-end me.

 

[RussJeep1]

This thread seems to have taken several directions regarding safety features, and their benefit/intrusion.

WaltA's comment about an off button is on point, but may only apply to what you can do after paying for driver warning options you don't want.

Air bags: far an away, these don't negatively affect anyone's normal driving experience, and safe lives when things turn anything but normal. The absence of side rear ones, at least as an option, in the JLU upsets me, as I've stated too many times in posts here. They can deploy from the (un-removable) seats: same as now un-optional ones in the JL's front.

===

As for the other more obtrusive features--I can respect many Wrangler owners disliking such things on numerous fronts. First, the Wrangler had its origins in simplicity, or at least devoting its research dollars into off roading capability, not the antiquing crowd. I don't mean to disparage the latter, but rather say that Wrangler may not be their vehicle, just as Wrangler owners don't complain that a Tesla can drive itself.

And speaking of driving itself, Wrangler owners I suspect would be the last brand to want such features. Sure, even the most diehard off roader still might need to take their kid on the long trip to college in their rig, and appreciate, if not autonomous driving, then at least cruise control (even if not adaptive), but for Wrangler owners, the trip is at least as important, if not more so, than the destination.

That loved trip isn't something they want to hand over to technology, any more than I'd want to hand over mom's freshly baked pie. (Bias: you're talking to a guy that got pissed at his GPS for offering too many directions recently!)

====

But the reality is that such features save lives, and lower the cost of insurance not merely for the collective, but the vehicle owner with such features. Friends on the collision side of the insurance business tell me business is remarkably down. I'm sorry for their livelihoods, but its come at the betterment of drivers, and has become necessary as another (abused) technology challenges it: cell phone operation while driving.

Revelation17 had a point about technology making for worse drivers not skilled in technique and procedures for safe driving. Call me old school. I use and appreciate the back up camera, but rarely is it an option for also turning your head in the direction the vehicle is heading for part of that reverse ride (thumbs up to FCA for not merely the backup camera in the JL--which is US law, but lowering the spare, increasing (rear/all) window size, creating a safety headrest for the rear middle driver, and, if I'm correct, making it lowerable.

Purists: May the air bags I proposed, should you God forbid need them, save your life so that you may be around, in health, to dissent with my views. : - )

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

I’m for adding it, as long as it can be disabled, but I just find it funny that a motorcyclist needs this feature to tune a radio without crashing.

Motorcycle riding made me far more aware of my surroundings than AEB can ever attempt to equal.

I’m surprised a motorcyclist would have it as a feature they are threatenig as having “lost my purchase until an after market option works”.
(BTW, get in line behind the folks complaining about price, colour, no manual diesel/turbo, no glass roof, lack of 10,000lbs towing, or the myriad of other “lost my business” threats...)

Also, a quick search of the forum or Google would’ve answered the question about the Wrangler getting it and when at the latest, but obviously worth losing the purchase, but not researching the question.

The Mfrs have pledges to add AEB standard to all models by 2022.

 

[Amalm]

I can’t believe this discussion is happening in a wrangler forum.

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

This is the same, but different... but the same LOL... Hammond says it best here

Yeah, but what does he know, he can’t drive in a straight line or around a bend either it seems, so maybe AEB might help.

Be sure to catch today’s GT, intersting start to the new season.

 

[SS_Syndicate]

Yeah, but what does he know, he can’t drive in a straight line or around a bend either it seems, so maybe AEB might help.

Be sure to catch today’s GT, intersting start to the new season.

Oh man! I almost forgot season 2 started today! Woot-Woot Thanks for the reminder!

 

[Spank]

I'm against all these silly safety systems for the simple fact they make already inattentive drivers more inattentive. Most people suck at driving. Not some, not half, most.

I mentioned in another thread how ridiculous Subaru's EyeSight technology is. There is no reason to have "an extra set of eyes on the road" in a vehicle you're driving if, you know, you're actually watching the road like you're supposed to. Being aware of your surroundings should be enough, but it's something nobody does anymore.

I have a sick obsession with watching car crashes on YouTube and sure, hindsight is 20/20, but you watch these poor cammers getting sideswiped and t-boned in situations they could've clearly avoided had they been paying attention to not only what's in front of them, but what's around them, too. Most of these people are hit by other drivers you can clearly see coming a mile away. While it's not their fault some idiot blew through a red light or doesn't understand how lanes work, they could've avoided or at least minimized the damage by using the eyesight technology embedded into their skulls.

If you're not competent enough to drive a vehicle without a collision warning/mitigation system, then the Wrangler probably isn't the best vehicle for you.

I'd argue if you aren't competent enough to drive a vehicle without any advanced safety monitoring systems doing most of the work for you, you shouldn't be driving at all.

 

[ThirtyOne]

Y'all are going to love autonomous cars.

 

[MockBarbecue82]

My boss has this on his new CRV and the only time he's had it apply the brakes is when he goes to pass someone, and he admits he gets close to the rear of the car before passing.

Bossman sounds like he drives like a real bunghole.

No. I’d rather pay attention and be in control of my vehicle.

What are you afraid of? What would emergency braking detract from your driving experience? Do you always keep six(+) car lengths between you and then next car when everyone is 60 down the busy hwy/interstate? 60mph isn't even realistic anymore. At 75 mph 7.5 car lengths would be sufficient, but I can tell you that I never see this. Collision avoidance is not just for you. It helps protect everyone around you, even if they DON'T have it. Sure YOU may love to pay attention 100% of the time because you are a perfect driver, but most people are not. And if it makes being on the road safer for everyone, I'm all for it. All it takes is glancing down at the GPS for half a second for something fatal to be in motion already.

I'd also hate for you or anyone to be rear ended at a stoplight and be thrust forward into the next car(s). Because that is a scenario that collision avoidance will definitely detect before you can even register wtf just happened. OR would be completely avoided if the jackass that just hit you had it to begin with.

I'm against all these silly safety systems for the simple fact they make already inattentive drivers more inattentive. Most people suck at driving. Not some, not half, most. There is no reason to have "an extra set of eyes on the road" in a vehicle you're driving if, you know, you're actually watching the road like you're supposed to. Being aware of your surroundings should be enough, but it's something nobody does anymore. I'd argue if you aren't competent enough to drive a vehicle without any advanced safety monitoring systems doing most of the work for you, you shouldn't be driving at all.

What is so silly about something that saves lives? Do you have factual evidence to support your ridiculous claim that it makes drivers MORE inattentive? I have real evidence to support its adoption.

"According to the IIHS research, equipping vehicles with both warning and autobraking systems reduced the rate of rear-end crashes by 39 percent and rear end crashes with injuries by 42 percent. That's an overall reduction in crashes by 12 percent and a reduction in injury crashes by 15 percent."

"NHTSA projected that the ensuing acceleration of the rollout of automatic emergency braking would prevent an estimated 28,000 collisions and 12,000 injuries."

Man.. that is SO SILLY.

Yes, I too would argue if you aren't competent enough to drive a vehicle without any advanced safety monitoring systems doing most of the work for you, you shouldn't be driving at all. But alot of people on the road suck and that is the harsh reality. This seems like a no brainer. I just don't understand all of the hate, with no realistic reasons to oppose it, other than, "ELECTRONIC NANNIES ARE SCARY TO ME".

I do think the U.S. driving requirements for a license are too lax. I'd like to see something more akin to the Fins.

"In Finland, it takes a minimum of two years to obtain a full, unrestricted driving license. Learners are subjected to skid-pan sessions and night-driving courses. Difficult as it is to compare driving tests, Finland is, anecdotally at least, considered to have a world-class standard of driving."

Y'all are going to love autonomous cars.

No.

I can’t believe this discussion is happening in a wrangler forum.

99% of U.S. auto manufactures have agreed to include automatic emergency braking systems as a standard feature on virtually all new cars sold in the U.S. by 2022. Like it or not it is happening.

The Sahara picture on page 1 is very likely a tester. Only other thing it could be is an auto high beam sensor.

In summary, y'all need to be more forward thinking. Resistance to change such as this with no basis or reasoning is worrisome. Again, I'd hate for anyone to be in a position where they'd look back and wish they had such a simple safety device.

 

[word302]

Bossman sounds like he drives like a real bunghole.



What are you afraid of? What would emergency braking detract from your driving experience? Do you always keep six(+) car lengths between you and then next car when everyone is 60 down the busy hwy/interstate? 60mph isn't even realistic anymore. At 75 mph 7.5 car lengths would be sufficient, but I can tell you that I never see this. Collision avoidance is not just for you. It helps protect everyone around you, even if they DON'T have it. Sure YOU may love to pay attention 100% of the time because you are a perfect driver, but most people are not. And if it makes being on the road safer for everyone, I'm all for it. All it takes is glancing down at the GPS for half a second for something fatal to be in motion already.

I'd also hate for you or anyone to be rear ended at a stoplight and be thrust forward into the next car(s). Because that is a scenario that collision avoidance will definitely detect before you can even register wtf just happened. OR would be completely avoided if the jackass that just hit you had it to begin with.



What is so silly about something that saves lives? Do you have factual evidence to support your ridiculous claim that it makes drivers MORE inattentive? I have real evidence to support its adoption.

"According to the IIHS research, equipping vehicles with both warning and autobraking systems reduced the rate of rear-end crashes by 39 percent and rear end crashes with injuries by 42 percent. That's an overall reduction in crashes by 12 percent and a reduction in injury crashes by 15 percent."

"NHTSA projected that the ensuing acceleration of the rollout of automatic emergency braking would prevent an estimated 28,000 collisions and 12,000 injuries."

Man.. that is SO SILLY.

Yes, I too would argue if you aren't competent enough to drive a vehicle without any advanced safety monitoring systems doing most of the work for you, you shouldn't be driving at all. But alot of people on the road suck and that is the harsh reality. This seems like a no brainer. I just don't understand all of the hate, with no realistic reasons to oppose it, other than, "ELECTRONIC NANNIES ARE SCARY TO ME".

I do think the U.S. driving requirements for a license are too lax. I'd like to see something more akin to the Fins.

"In Finland, it takes a minimum of two years to obtain a full, unrestricted driving license. Learners are subjected to skid-pan sessions and night-driving courses. Difficult as it is to compare driving tests, Finland is, anecdotally at least, considered to have a world-class standard of driving."



No.



99% of U.S. auto manufactures have agreed to include automatic emergency braking systems as a standard feature on virtually all new cars sold in the U.S. by 2022. Like it or not it is happening.

The Sahara picture on page 1 is very likely a tester. Only other thing it could be is an auto high beam sensor.

In summary, y'all need to be more forward thinking. Resistance to change such as this with no basis or reasoning is worrisome. Again, I'd hate for anyone to be in a position where they'd look back and wish they had such a simple safety device.

My reasoning is that I don’t want to pay more for MY vehicle because other drivers suck.

 

[MockBarbecue82]

My reasoning is that I don’t want to pay more for MY vehicle because other drivers suck.

That's fair, I don't either. But I do not see it costing more than the small backup cam they just made mandatory.

Sponsored