Ford Co-Pilot 360 ranks 3rd best overall according to Consumer Reports

[FourHorses]

You can dislike Consumer Reports comparisons for many reasons but “best scores to the highest bidder” isn’t one of them. They don’t even accept advertising.

Good to know. Like I said, I had only heard that.

Sponsored

 

[Atomicdog]

Good to know. Like I said, I had only heard that.

Motor Trend Car of the Year? They fully admit it goes to the manufacturer that gives them the largest advertising package for a car. It’s complete shit.

 

[SoccerDude]

I just double checked and it does show Ford CoPilot 360 included with the base model.

 

[Elwood]

https://www.consumerreports.org/car...orms-other-active-driving-assistance-systems/

Thanks to @molson from the bronco sport page for the find!

Would be nice to have a solid video review of the system to actually see it with my own eyes.

Without challenging Consumer Reports' honesty, I do think that they typically grade cars like they would a toaster or a washing machine. Their ratings rarely reflect what real auto journalists think about a vehicle and they seem to unfailingly support the most boring of boring vehicles in most respects. This is data though, and more is definitely better than less.

 

[pony2bronco]

You would prefer the same idiots on the road now driving with a semi-autonomous vehicles that don’t require them to pay attention? Or allows them to engage systems in areas where they should not be used, roundabouts etc? That sounds glorious, how do I sign up for that??

To each their own. On the flip side of that plenty of idiots out there right now that already dont pay attn, why not at least have a system that keeps the car on the road.

 

[cactus_jack]

"Buy Ford! We are ranked 3rd best at useless and annoying features!"

 

[perfectburrito]

To each their own. On the flip side of that plenty of idiots out there right now that already dont pay attn, why not at least have a system that keeps the car on the road.

Agreed. Whether we like it or not, this kind of technology is going to become more and more prolific with some features like pre-collision assist likely becoming mandatory - think seat belts.

I've been working in automation similar to this kind of technology for almost 20 years, and the case studies are fairly definitive that computer-assisted controls have faster reaction times and reduce accident rates, over manual controls. Humans are prone to distractions, make improper corrections under pressure, and can easily become disoriented - not to mention a wide range of external factors that can impair judgment and reaction time like sleep deprivation, drugs (legal and otherwise) hypoglycemia, alcohol, other passengers, etc.

I get the resistance many have to this kind of technology, but it's here whether you like it or not, and will become mandatory in the future. Might as well wrap your head around it. It is already VERY WIDELY used in aviation and has been for years. Most of your time on a commercial plane, it is under the control of flight computers already.

 

[SuckItMcGee]

I'm pretty sure Co-Pilot360 is not part of the standard package, only available in the Mid. On the Black Diamond B&P, you have an option to add this package but this prompts you to add Mid. The package cannot be added to the Base.

I wouldn't mind having this package if it were standard, but I'm not jumping from Base 2 Dr just to be able to add the Mid.

 

[Bronco4lyfe85]

To each their own. On the flip side of that plenty of idiots out there right now that already dont pay attn, why not at least have a system that keeps the car on the road.

That’s exactly what I just said and these are not self driving vehicles. This will encourage people who don’t pay attention to further not pay attention. I see absolutely no issue with the car requiring you be looking at the road for the car to be applying brakes and swerving away from accidents.

 

[XCR440]

LOL, true... but this is also consumer reports who I have always heard gives the best scores to the highest bidder.

Not just highest bidder, but if you stroke their ego your scores go up, look at Ford a few years ago, had CR show them what needed fixed and cozied up to them one year and scores were way up, next year Ford kicked CR to the curb and was suddenly terrible.

As to annual scores, those are proven to be scientifically flawed. By only surveying readers it skews results over time, if you own a Toyota and read that they are great, you'll continue to give them good scores, regardless if they're only average in scientific ratings. On the flip side if you own a Chrysler and are told its terrible, your likely either rate it bad, or get mad and quit subscribing so it won't get a good score from you since you're not eligible.

 

[Economisto]

Agreed. Whether we like it or not, this kind of technology is going to become more and more prolific with some features like pre-collision assist likely becoming mandatory - think seat belts.

I've been working in automation similar to this kind of technology for almost 20 years, and the case studies are fairly definitive that computer-assisted controls have faster reaction times and reduce accident rates, over manual controls. Humans are prone to distractions, make improper corrections under pressure, and can easily become disoriented - not to mention a wide range of external factors that can impair judgment and reaction time like sleep deprivation, drugs (legal and otherwise) hypoglycemia, alcohol, other passengers, etc.

I get the resistance many have to this kind of technology, but it's here whether you like it or not, and will become mandatory in the future. Might as well wrap your head around it. It is already VERY WIDELY used in aviation and has been for years. Most of your time on a commercial plane, it is under the control of flight computers already.

Couldn't have said it better

 

[Bronco4lyfe85]

Agreed. Whether we like it or not, this kind of technology is going to become more and more prolific with some features like pre-collision assist likely becoming mandatory - think seat belts.

I've been working in automation similar to this kind of technology for almost 20 years, and the case studies are fairly definitive that computer-assisted controls have faster reaction times and reduce accident rates, over manual controls. Humans are prone to distractions, make improper corrections under pressure, and can easily become disoriented - not to mention a wide range of external factors that can impair judgment and reaction time like sleep deprivation, drugs (legal and otherwise) hypoglycemia, alcohol, other passengers, etc.

I get the resistance many have to this kind of technology, but it's here whether you like it or not, and will become mandatory in the future. Might as well wrap your head around it. It is already VERY WIDELY used in aviation and has been for years. Most of your time on a commercial plane, it is under the control of flight computers already.

I completely agree with you but that was not his point. He said Fords scores were low due to the fact Fords systems don’t require driver attention whereas Cadillac requires your eyes be looking at the road with the help of a camera. Cadillac also doesn’t allow you to use it in certain scenarios either. Roundabouts, neighborhoods, certain highways etc. But Ford and many other brands don’t stop engagement of the system under any circumstance.

He said he would prefer a car without extra “nannies/engagement.” I myself would not prefer giving distracted drivers a vehicle they think will just drive for them while they play on their phone.

 

[perfectburrito]

He said he would prefer a car without extra “nannies/engagement.” I myself would not prefer giving distracted drivers a vehicle they think will just drive for them while they play on their phone.

I understand perfectly what his point is and the studies have been conducted by the FAA and various military agencies. Computer-assisted controls do not encourage bad behaviors among pilots; they prompt responses, increase alertness and reduce accident rates.

Now that may not be an apples to apples comparison as the threshold to becoming a pilot is significant compared to becoming a driver. That being said, the already-existing problem of distracted drivers will not be resolved with or without this technology. But lives will be saved with it.

 

[Bronco4lyfe85]

I understand perfectly what his point is and the studies have been conducted by the FAA and various military agencies. Computer-assisted controls do not encourage bad behaviors among pilots; they prompt responses, increase alertness and reduce accident rates.

Now that may not be an apples to apples comparison as the threshold to become a pilot are significant compared to becoming a driver. That being said, the already-existing problem of distracted drivers will not be resolved with or without this technology. But lives will be saved with it.

Are we comparing a well compensated pilot responsible for 100’s of lives flying in the sky at 30K at 600+ mph to a teenage girl with an Instagram in her car? Okay than.

That’s fine though. If you guys prefer cars don’t require your attention to have them swerve, brake and change lanes be my guest. I’d much prefer the car that requires your eyes on the road. Will it resolve distracted drivers? Nope. Will it require drivers to pay attention to have a car react for them? Yep. I’ll at least take that.

 

[perfectburrito]

Are we comparing a well compensated pilot responsible for 100’s of lives flying in the sky at 30K at 600+ mph to a teenage girl with an Instagram in her car? Okay than.

That’s fine though. If you guys prefer cars don’t require your attention to have them swerve, brake and change lanes be my guest. I’d much prefer the car that requires your eyes on the road. Will it resolve distracted drivers? Nope. Will it require drivers to pay attention to have a car react for them? Yep. I’ll at least take that.

I recommend reading my whole comment since I addressed that already.

Your concerns are valid and have been consistently voiced by critics of this kind of technology for decades. The performance data does not suggest that those concerns are significant contributors to residual accident/incident rates. Obviously, you are entitled to your opinion and to choose the product you want. I am just providing my experience to those that want some additional background information.

Sponsored