Tesla FSD Safety Stats Misleading

[whitex]

I have another family friend who has a degenerative disease that makes it unsafe for her to drive. So she bought a Cybertruck and literally lets it drive her everywhere.

Hopefully this was not her
https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/cybertruck-fire-sr-167

Sponsored

 

[AutoX]

I agree. The capabilities are impressive.

And what it can do for safety is impressive as well.

Unfortunately I’ve been disappointed for a long time with how Tesla markets the safety aspects which actually makes them “less safe than they could be.”

It starts with inflating statistics and even the marketing names “autopilot” and “full self drive” give people a false sense of security and they end up ABUSING the systems.

Countless stories of people using counterweights to trick the cars. Why would they do it if they didn’t think it was safe? You don’t see this widespread with other manufacturers.

I’ve had multiple arguments with a co-worker who spends his time on his laptop typing emails in his older model S on FSD on the highway daily (before the eye nanny). He believes it’s perfectly safe.

I have another family friend who has a degenerative disease that makes it unsafe for her to drive. So she bought a Cybertruck and literally lets it drive her everywhere. I’m terrified of what may happen in the instances that she or my other co-worker need to have been paying attention and take over.

100% Tesla is to blame for their beliefs.

These systems are (currently) designed to be used with a driver paying attention. They are drivers aids and do not replace the drivers.

Despite many competitors having similar level 2 systems, you don’t see the drivers abusing them in the same way.

These are examples of irresponsible drivers. Like people that drink and drive. Or people that use their cell phone while driving. Ultimately, it comes down to the driver being responsible. I don't think the naming convention fooled people into believing that they shouldn't be paying attention, or doing things like hanging weights to by pass the safety checks. Even if they believed 100% that Tesla was capable of driving 100% of the time without them paying attention, one incident where the car ask you to take over would invalidate that assumption, that is if they had any sense of self-preservation. Having had the autopilot system since 2020, and extensive experience with FSD since last year, I can say first hand that you need to pay attention and be able to take over when needed, but at the same time, it offloads a significant amount of cognitive load while driving.

 

[AutoX]

Hopefully this was not her
https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/cybertruck-fire-sr-167

If you're not capable of taking over when needed, then you shouldn't be driving. Kind of like the elderly that eventually will need to give up their license.

Having said that, there is a gray area why FSD is extremely helpful. It's that age group when they can still drive, but the reflex is not where it used to be. In these cases, FSD would be safer than then driving without FSD.

 

[69Mach390]

These are examples of irresponsible drivers. Like people that drink and drive. Or people that use their cell phone while driving. Ultimately, it comes down to the driver being responsible. I don't think the naming convention fooled people into believing that they shouldn't be paying attention, or doing things like hanging weights to by pass the safety checks. Even if they believed 100% that Tesla was capable of driving 100% of the time without them paying attention, one incident where the car ask you to take over would invalidate that assumption, that is if they had any sense of self-preservation. Having had the autopilot system since 2020, and extensive experience with FSD since last year, I can say first hand that you need to pay attention and be able to take over when needed, but at the same time, it offloads a significant amount of cognitive load while driving.

Absolutely these are irresponsible drivers.

But their ignorance is fed directly by Tesla marketing.

Where do you think they got the idea this was safe? Why aren’t drivers of other manufacturers doing the same irresponsible things?

It’s not a coincidence.

It’s also perfect that you brought up drinking and driving. Also heard PLENTY of first hand stories of people who think it’s safe to drive a Tesla using FSD while drunk.

Again….. never heard stories of people doing that with other manufacturers.

Why? Because of “full self drive” and “autopilot.” People honestly think the car “drives itself.” Also a phrase I hear repeated often.

 

[whitex]

Having said that, there is a gray area why FSD is extremely helpful. It's that age group when they can still drive, but the reflex is not where it used to be. In these cases, FSD would be safer than then driving without FSD.

Google/Waymo research found that it’s not true. Paradoxically, the better the FSD gets, the more dangerous it becomes to the supervising human.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/07/technology/google-self-driving-cars-handoff-problem.html

Think about it, how ready to take over would you be if your car drove itself every day, every trip perfectly, except once a year it tries to kill you.

 

[FlyingPoint]

Absolutely these are irresponsible drivers.

But their ignorance is fed directly by Tesla marketing.

Where do you think they got the idea this was safe? Why aren’t drivers of other manufacturers doing the same irresponsible things?

It’s not a coincidence.

It’s also perfect that you brought up drinking and driving. Also heard PLENTY of first hand stories of people who think it’s safe to drive a Tesla using FSD while drunk.

Again….. never heard stories of people doing that with other manufacturers.

Why? Because of “full self drive” and “autopilot.” People honestly think the car “drives itself.” Also a phrase I hear repeated often.

Your kidding right? What about all the "boy racers" in their M3 Comp's? I have read most if not all of your posts, this is way out of character for a thoughtful individual that you have aways demontstrate to be. I give you a pass on this one.

 

[69Mach390]

Your kidding right? What about all the "boy racers" in their M3 Comp's? I have read most if not all of your posts, this is way out of character for a thoughtful individual that you have aways demontstrate to be. I give you a pass on this one.

Not kidding at all.

People have been abusing Tesla’s FSD and autopilot for years. There was an entire industry for aftermarket counterweights to trick the system to be hands free. I don’t see that with other manufacturers.

Not sure what people driving BMW’s like idiots has to do with people driving drunk in a Tesla other than “both are bad.” Plenty of blame to go around for the drivers and how Tesla marketed things. If they cared about safety, they wouldn’t have had to been forced to add more restrictions on later models after deaths, NHTSA investigations and lawsuits.

 

[whitex]

It’s also perfect that you brought up drinking and driving. Also heard PLENTY of first hand stories of people who think it’s safe to drive a Tesla using FSD while drunk.

To be honest, I think it's just an excuse. The same type of people who claimed in the past they are just fine driving after a few drinks, simply use FSD as a justification, but had there not been FSD, they'd still drive intoxicated (and plenty do). Way back around 2017 I met a drunk guy at a casino, who was telling people Tesla FSD drives him, so he doesn't need to be sober to drive home. At that time, FSD enabled car didn't even turn their headlights on automatically (the AP2 computer code was not ready), but the Tesla website claimed full self driving, so the guy just used it as an excuse. I don't even know whether he even owned a Tesla.

 

[69Mach390]

To be honest, I think it's just an excuse. The same type of people who claimed in the past they are just fine driving after a few drinks, simply use FSD as a justification, but had there not been FSD, they'd still drive intoxicated (and plenty do). Way back around 2017 I met a drunk guy at a casino, who was telling people Tesla FSD drives him, so he doesn't need to be sober to drive home. At that time, FSD enabled car didn't even turn their headlights on automatically (the AP2 computer code was not ready), but the Tesla website claimed full self driving, so the guy just used it as an excuse. I don't even know whether he even owned a Tesla.

Maybe?

Or maybe it’s just another example of how people put way too much faith in Tesla’s FSD capabilities.

They think it’s infallible. Kinda like how whenever Tesla comes up on forums people always rush to their defense and Tesla “can do no wrong.”

I think the people abusing the FSD and especially those driving drunk are absolute morons and putting themselves and the people around them in extreme danger.

But I also give some of that blame to Tesla for their marketing practices that make people think it’s safer than it actually is. The article at the beginning of this thread is just one of many examples.

 

[AutoX]

Google/Waymo research found that it’s not true. Paradoxically, the better the FSD gets, the more dangerous it becomes to the supervising human.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/07/technology/google-self-driving-cars-handoff-problem.html

Think about it, how ready to take over would you be if your car drove itself every day, every trip perfectly, except once a year it tries to kill you.

No Autonomy system will be perfect, but it's already better than the avg human driver. So if you're looking at the macro picture, FSD will try to kill you less than you trying to kill yourself.

Insurance companies are starting to back FSD with lower rates confirming that they believe that FSD is safer and less accident prone:

https://insideevs.com/news/785085/test-fsd-lemonade-cost-reduce/

 

[AutoX]

Absolutely these are irresponsible drivers.

But their ignorance is fed directly by Tesla marketing.

Where do you think they got the idea this was safe? Why aren’t drivers of other manufacturers doing the same irresponsible things?

It’s not a coincidence.

It’s also perfect that you brought up drinking and driving. Also heard PLENTY of first hand stories of people who think it’s safe to drive a Tesla using FSD while drunk.

Again….. never heard stories of people doing that with other manufacturers.

Why? Because of “full self drive” and “autopilot.” People honestly think the car “drives itself.” Also a phrase I hear repeated often.

Let's say that they believed the FSD hype 100%. Any rational person with any sense of self-preservation would realize after the first incident where FSD ask you to take over or performed a dangerous maneuver that they would been to be more attentive. If the driver continues to work on their laptop/watch movies despite that then they would of done so with or without FSD hype.

I can tell you from all my family members/friends that have tried FSD that not a single person trust FSD 100% on the first drive. In fact they are very tentative, hyperfocus, and ready to take over. It's only after a few drives do they become more comfortable. I would find it hard to believe that despite the marketing that there are many drivers that would jump in a Tesla with FSD for the first time and set it and just not pay attention. That's just not how most people operate.

 

[AutoX]

Maybe?

Or maybe it’s just another example of how people put way too much faith in Tesla’s FSD capabilities.

They think it’s infallible. Kinda like how whenever Tesla comes up on forums people always rush to their defense and Tesla “can do no wrong.”

I think the people abusing the FSD and especially those driving drunk are absolute morons and putting themselves and the people around them in extreme danger.

But I also give some of that blame to Tesla for their marketing practices that make people think it’s safer than it actually is. The article at the beginning of this thread is just one of many examples.

It's not that we think that Tesla can do no wrong. But rather that people that are bashing Tesla because they hate Elon due to his political leanings (DEI/Trans issue in particular) and not because Tesla is particularly bad. It's hard to argue about the virtue of FSD with someone that has never experienced it and is only regurgitating talking points. I feel the same way talking about EVs with anti EV/petroheads. If they're not open to change, no amount of data will change their minds, until they try the tech themselves.

People have no problem getting into an Uber with an unknown driver. They don't know the driver ability, how long they been driving, whether they're on medications/alcohol or even their mood that day. Yet they won't trust a system that has been proven to be safer than the avg driver by a factor of 3 and improving with every update.

 

[whitex]

No Autonomy system will be perfect, but it's already better than the avg human driver. So if you're looking at the macro picture, FSD will try to kill you less than you trying to kill yourself.

There is a lot more nuance to this. FSD is better that the average human driver in specific conditions. It simply won't engage in other conditions. Notice that no autonomous taxis deploy in any area that hasn't been carefully mapped out by the cars themselves, and they will not operate in certain conditions withing well defined GPS fencing. Furthermore, they require a remote operator to contact in situations where it doesn't know what to do. Last but not least, if I make a mistake, I am fully engaged in driving and have situational awareness, while FSD is expecting the driver to take over with zero notice (Level 2) so there is a good chance the driver will be able to take over unless they were in fact fully engaged already. I also have a sense of self-preservation, and can improvise if needed, not something FSD will do.

Insurance companies are starting to back FSD with lower rates confirming that they believe that FSD is safer and less accident prone:
https://insideevs.com/news/785085/test-fsd-lemonade-cost-reduce/

Again, there is much more nuance to this. Lemonade insurance insures you per mile. Sure, they can give you up to 50% discount for the miles on FSD - they can count on the fact that FSD will not engage in more risky situations, switching to human driven miles at full price. Insurance companies already reprice the insurance based on collected driving data, because yes you can find statistical trends there.

Imagine a hypothetical adaptive cruise control which only engages in sunny, full visibility weather, with very light traffic around, and disengages when visibility gets worse, traffic gets heavier, or you change lanes. Sure, if you are an insurance company charging per-mile, it would make sense to insure every mile completed with this cruise control engages at a lower price.

My point is that Lemonade insurance doing this cannot be generalized to say FSD drives safer than humans, any more than you could say that with my hypothetical adaptive cruise control. What is unique about FSD is that it allows the insurance company detailed tracking on when FSD was engaged. It also provides detailed driving data when FSD is not engaged - my insurance company will give me a discount for my Taycan, which doesn't have FSD, if I allow them to collect detailed driving information via an OBDII connected tracker, or nowadays even an app IIRC. That doesn't mean the tracking app makes me a safer driver, it just means insurance companies are willing to give a discount in exchange for tracking data, like what they get from FSD. That data allows them to more precisely calculate the risk of a claim - even simple GPS data like where and when you drive and park can change the calculations.

 

[AutoX]

There is a lot more nuance to this. FSD is better that the average human driver in specific conditions. It simply won't engage in other conditions. Notice that no autonomous taxis deploy in any area that hasn't been carefully mapped out by the cars themselves, and they will not operate in certain conditions withing well defined GPS fencing. Furthermore, they require a remote operator to contact in situations where it doesn't know what to do. Last but not least, if I make a mistake, I am fully engaged in driving and have situational awareness, while FSD is expecting the driver to take over with zero notice (Level 2) so there is a good chance the driver will be able to take over unless they were in fact fully engaged already. I also have a sense of self-preservation, and can improvise if needed, not something FSD will do.


Again, there is much more nuance to this. Lemonade insurance insures you per mile. Sure, they can give you up to 50% discount for the miles on FSD - they can count on the fact that FSD will not engage in more risky situations, switching to human driven miles at full price. Insurance companies already reprice the insurance based on collected driving data, because yes you can find statistical trends there.

Imagine a hypothetical adaptive cruise control which only engages in sunny, full visibility weather, with very light traffic around, and disengages when visibility gets worse, traffic gets heavier, or you change lanes. Sure, if you are an insurance company charging per-mile, it would make sense to insure every mile completed with this cruise control engages at a lower price.

My point is that Lemonade insurance doing this cannot be generalized to say FSD drives safer than humans, any more than you could say that with my hypothetical adaptive cruise control. What is unique about FSD is that it allows the insurance company detailed tracking on when FSD was engaged. It also provides detailed driving data when FSD is not engaged - my insurance company will give me a discount for my Taycan, which doesn't have FSD, if I allow them to collect detailed driving information via an OBDII connected tracker, or nowadays even an app IIRC. That doesn't mean the tracking app makes me a safer driver, it just means insurance companies are willing to give a discount in exchange for tracking data, like what they get from FSD. That data allows them to more precisely calculate the risk of a claim - even simple GPS data like where and when you drive and park can change the calculations.

There are plenty of videos where FSD have prevented an accident through quick maneuvers where the driver wasn't even aware that there was danger.

here's one:





I'm not sure if you have any first hand experience with FSD, but it will engage in almost all conditions short of the camera being blocked. It will engage in heavy rain, although like humans, the performance will be degraded compare to sunny weather. It doesn't need clear lane markings like other systems (mercedes, Ford, GM super cruise.)

Regarding the OBD tracker discount, the discount is usually based on your driving score (how fast you accelerate, brake, etc). They do not just give you a discount for having the OBD data. Lemonade will give you a discount for having FSD engage. This is presumably because they feel that you are less likely to get into an accident with FSD than without.

40% of accidents are rear enders, usually due to the driver being distracted. This is one area where autonomous system have an edge as they don't get distracted. Do they still happen? Sure, but it's going to be much lower than the general driving public.

 

[69Mach390]

Let's say that they believed the FSD hype 100%. Any rational person with any sense of self-preservation would realize after the first incident where FSD ask you to take over or performed a dangerous maneuver that they would been to be more attentive. If the driver continues to work on their laptop/watch movies despite that then they would of done so with or without FSD hype.

I can tell you from all my family members/friends that have tried FSD that not a single person trust FSD 100% on the first drive. In fact they are very tentative, hyperfocus, and ready to take over. It's only after a few drives do they become more comfortable. I would find it hard to believe that despite the marketing that there are many drivers that would jump in a Tesla with FSD for the first time and set it and just not pay attention. That's just not how most people operate.

The problem is that the world is filled with gullible and irrational people.

To be clear this is a shared blame situation. By far it’s mostly the drivers, but I think Tesla can and should do better than they have with how they’ve marketed lvl 2 autonomous driving as well as what they did to prevent abuse.

There should never be a situation where someone could take a nap, read their emails etc while a lvl 2 is active.

That was impossible in my last car (Ford Mach E) because Bluecruise has safety measures to prevent it. Tesla does better with it now but there is definitely room for improvement.

Again, you don’t see this with other brands. And it’s not a coincidence:
https://www.mysuncoast.com/2026/04/...h-autopilot-arrested-dui-i-75/?outputType=amp

Sponsored