IIHS front collision avoidance testing results posted for 2022 Maverick

[Raderb87]

Looks like good data to my dinosaur brain! I wonder why low beam lights were better for the collision avoidance.

It wasn't. Under low beam, the reduction of speed was less than during day time. This is common.

Sponsored

 

[mrjspence]

The AEB system doesn't work above a set speed, if I recall correctly, so if you are going 60MPH you've got nothing to worry about.

Unless you own a Tesla with phantom braking problems (like we did lol)

 

[Deleted member 14823]

I noticed there is now front collision avoidance testing results via IIHS.

https://www.iihs.org/ratings/vehicle/ford/maverick-crew-cab-pickup/2022

I honestly didn't know AEB included pedestrian detection. I just plain missed that in the manual...kind of embarrassing.

 

[19mustang65]

The headlight thing doesn't make sense, the Mavericks headlights are far better than many vehicles, the nice thing is that the low beams stay on when the high beams are activated, so you can see both near & far. Since vehicles went away from sealed beams to composite, most do not activate both at the same time.

I agree. I came from a 1999 s10 so it's far better than those.

 

[MostlySafeBear]

All of your fears could be alleviated with research.

You could easily google AEB unintended activation, watch YouTube videos that document how the system works, and more. The owner's manual has several things to say about the systems as well, but hardly anyone ever reads it, which blows my mind, since it's usually the second largest purchase most people ever make. I'd want to know everything about it, every way possible.

Other commenters have said that the truck gives you a warning before it hits the brakes, so it's not just random sudden braking, you'll know it's going to slam on the brakes if you don't respond quickly enough.

You have said in other threads over and over that you want a basic basic all manual truck, and yet you complain that the Maverick is not as basic as you want, expressing fear at basic safety technology. Then why buy such a vehicle? No one is forcing you to buy any newer vehicle. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of older vehicles are perfectly usable even today, configured much closer to what you want, and they have no AEB to "worry" about.

 

[MostlySafeBear]

Ford engines and transmissions and what they "could" do that "shouldn't be hard" are an entirely separate discussion. Of course, I'm sure that we have all seen that episode of the Simpsons where Homer designs the car that he wants - which made sense in pieces, like a separated area for the driver and kids - but that turned out to be a complete disaster. There is a reason that automotive engineers have college degrees and are not just random people off the street. It must not be that simple.

As far as what "basic safety technology" is, that is an ever-evolving and improving area. In the beginning it was things like a reinforced brake pedal that wouldn't shear off under emergency braking conditions. It was stuff like laminated windshields that wouldn't shatter into huge jagged pieces and slice the driver/passengers to death. Collapsible steering columns, padded dashboards, crumple zones, and so much more. In regards to AEB, it's been on the market for a long time, since 1997 in Japan. Cadillac even conceived of it in the 1950s, but it was far too expensive at the time. Did you know that airbags have been on US model cars as far back as 1971 in an experimental capacity?

It's a moving target, and what's considered to be "basic safety technology" in 20 more years will undoubtedly be different and more advanced than what we have today.

 

[MostlySafeBear]

I'm not an automotive engineer, so I won't debate why a certain safety system isn't used in a passenger vehicle, but I'm absolutely sure there is a reason they use different systems. I guarantee you that the engineers are not just daft idiots that fell asleep on the day that was being shown in class. If I were to make an educated guess, it would be that rally vehicles and passenger vehicles serve different roles and experience different stresses, in addition to the fact that the vehicles are built to vastly different price points.

As far as Takata airbags, that wasn't a failure of the concept of airbags as a standard safety technology. It was a defective run of parts not produced to the designed specifications.

 

[MostlySafeBear]

All of the transmission and engine comments are completely unrelated to the topic being discussed, so I'll skip those.

Rally cars being based on passenger vehicles do not change the fact that they are built to different price points, even if they're not built so much as modified. It still counts in the price. They also experience different stresses and are used in wildly different environments, so they have different safety systems.

As far as engineers and reliability, service access and similar - automotive design is a massive compromise, not only worked on by multiple engineers, but also subject to cost cutting. They will NEVER be perfect for everyone.

 

[MostlySafeBear]

Thank you for proving my point about different stresses and different environments/use cases.

We cannot reliably expect Grandma Mabel who needs to run to the grocery store to reliably and properly use a complex safety system that a rally car driver would use. Therefore, automotive safety for passenger cars was designed for the maximum benefit for the maximum segment of the population. Ease of use is as much of a concern as cost, and as covered, rally cars cost MUCH more than a standard passenger vehicle.

Rally cars are not the topic though. The topic is your unfounded fear of modern safety systems, and your initial avoidance of the fact that what constitues a modern safety system is an evolving thing/moving target. AEB has been in passenger car use for ~25 years, and for longer in test vehicles.

 

[MostlySafeBear]

Again, thank you for proving my point that the system in a rally car, no matter how much more it takes than a standard passenger car, even just a little, is a significant usability concern from multiple perspectives including ease of use, correct use, user will to follow single step vs. multi-step processes, plus cost concerns and who knows what else I could be missing.

Yes, that is the topic, and your initial replies were specifically about how you didn't trust the AEB feature or see it as a basic safety system.

Sponsored