Hacker News Reader

Comment by idopmstuff | Hacker News Reader

I find this to be such a weird take - I just drove from San Diego -> LA with my Tesla doing 90+% of the freeway driving (I only have the free autosteer, so I have to handle exits, etc.). I have been in multiple rides through SF in friends' Teslas where they did not have to intervene at any point.

Is Tesla FSD ready to replace human drivers? It is not. Is it smoke and mirrors? No - there is a mountain of evidence that it is a very capable product in many situations.

View on HN

Many cars have autosteer at that level, once my silly minivan is on the freeway it can lane follow and adaptive cruise can go down to zero if necessary, and knows the speed limit and adjusts as necessary.

You have an Odyssey (the best minivan), I take it? I think that's the only one that can properly lane center. Other vans just have lane exit prevention. There are some differences between Honda's and Tesla's implementations that Tesla owners appreciate.

I'm not the GP, but newer Hyundais seem to do a good job at this as well. And by extension this probably applies to Kias too.

Yes, Kia, Hyundai, and Genesis all share a lot of common tech.

This is especially true for their EVs built on the E-GMP platform [1]. You'd never guess it by looking at them, but the Hyundai IONIQ 5, Kia EV6, and Genesis GV60 are all built on that same platform, with different bodies and interiors, along with some different suspension tuning.

The driving assistance features do vary with the trim level. In the EV6, the Wind trim has a more basic system, the Wind with Technology Package has more, and the GT-Line gives you the works.

I think the high-performance GT has the same assistance features as the GT-Line, but the GT-Line has a nicer and more comfortable interior than the GT.

My AWD EV6 GT-Line with the optional fake vegan suede seats (instead of the standard fake vegan leather) is by far the best car I've ever had.

(These trim level names are for the US models; they vary a bit in other markets.)

The only complaint about its driver assistance is that it can be a bit twitchy compared with how smoothly I can drive manually when I'm paying 100% attention. But it is great to have in case I get distracted for a moment!

[1] https://www.hyundai.com/worldwide/en/brand-journal/ioniq/e-g...

Hyundai's has definitely gotten better. It's more an asymptotic approaching of lane centering, but typical drivers aren't going to mind that.

Hyundais are fantastic. Their self-steering and adaptive cruise both work really well in high and low speed situations on highways.

The Kia Carnival - it seems to lane center just fine, but maybe the Odyssey can do better.

When looking, the Odyssey just didn't have the price/value ratio, it really needs an update and refresh. The Sienna just doesn't exist.

Tesla van owners?

Owners of the 3, S, X or Y, I believe.

The Cadillac of minivans, as they say in Get Shorty.

Putting aside the fact that you ignored the second half of what I said, that doesn't really change the point - the post I was responding to said Tesla's tech is smoke and mirrors. Smoke and mirrors means fakery. It means it's a thing that fundamentally does not work, and tricks are used to make it appear as though it does.

My response was simply to point out that it is wrong to say it is smoke and mirrors (or I would be dead in a high speed car crash instead of writing this).

It's smoke and mirrors to call it anything close (or a path to) Full Self Driving. If Tesla called their tech Pretty Decent Autosteer no one would accuse them of lying. But they don't. And I suspect that's why you're getting downvoted as well.

You're moving the goalposts substantially from the original claim, which was "Tesla's tech is all smoke and mirrors for years now."

It is certainly misleading to call it Full Self Driving - no argument there at all. It's also wrong to call all of Tesla's tech for the last however many years fakery.

That’s a fair point. Maybe a more true statement would have been that any perception of Tesla having a technical advantage over other manufacturers towards Level 5 autonomous vehicles is just smoke and mirrors.

My Subaru Outback’s auto steer is frankly more capable than my Dad’s Tesla’s. It’s quieter and, due to having radar, more capable.

If you still have to keep your hands on the wheel, can’t watch movies or read books, etc., what is even the point?

I've made a lot of long freeway drives, and for me, even though I have to keep my eyes on the road, it's much more relaxing when the car does it. I arrive to my destination feeling much less exhausted from the drive.

Anyway, that doesn't really have anything to do with the original post - all I was saying was that it is a functional product and that it's just incorrect to call it smoke and mirrors.

I have several times been a passenger in a car where I wished the human driver would enable autosteer. It is disconcerting to have the lane warning alarm go off five times in a 30 minute span.

I don't think most people realize how erraticly they drive.

But five warnings in 30 minutes could just be 15 or 20 seconds of inattention. So more than 99% full attention. A driver assist that just smooths things out only 0.1% of the time could save the day a lot.

> It is disconcerting to have the lane warning alarm go off five times in a 30 minute span.

These lane departure systems are trash, in my experience. They can’t distinguish between real lane markings, cracks filled with sealant, old lane markings that have been painted over, etc.

The worst thing is when they take over your steering wheel for these phantom departures. I hate it, and always disable these systems in rental cars.

For the same reasons why people use cruise control when driving despite it not fully self driving.

So does my Toyota RAV4.

I agree with this guy. Tesla FSD isn't smoke and mirrors! It's made of sensors and computers n stuff! Making this out of mirrors would be impractical, let alone smoke.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com