“Wide differences” in safety of driver assistance systems says Euro NCAP

Euro NCAP has put five new cars with Level 2 assisted driving features to the test against its latest protocols and found wide differences in manufacturers’ implementation of the technology.

Euro NCAP’s assessment of Assisted Driving systems, first introduced in 2020, rests on two pillars: Assistance Competence, the balance between the level of assistance offered by the vehicle and the degree to which the system helps the driver remain engaged in the driving task and of the limitations of the system; and Safety Backup, the measures taken in critical situations to avoid a collision. 

In 2024, Euro NCAP extended its driver monitoring requirements and introduced additional measures to improve speed assistance related to lane relevance, road features, and local hazards. Furthermore, Safety Backup scenarios have been expanded to include motorcyclist avoidance, alongside pedestrians and cyclists.

Tested under these conditions, the Assisted Driving systems of two cars stood out, with “exceptional” levels of Assistance Competence and “excellent” Safety Backup. The BMW i5 and the Mercedes-Benz C-Class were considered “Very Good”, the systems of both providing robust speed and lateral control to take much of the driving load, while keeping the driver ‘in the loop’, to take back control if needed. For Safety Backup, the Mercedes scored particularly highly, the car moving to the hard shoulder and performing a controlled stop if the driver is unresponsive.

The Volkswagen ID.7 and Volvo EC40 (previously the C40 Recharge) were given a “Good” grading. Both cars performed well, although they lacked some of the more sophisticated features and robust performance of the BMW and the Mercedes-Benz.

Bringing up the rear, and “Not Recommended” by Euro NCAP, is the BYD ATTO 3 with its Intelligent Adaptive Cruise Control. The speed assistance system did not interpret road signs correctly and scored only modestly in Assistance Competence. However, it was in Safety Backup where the car did not reach minimum standards, specifically the overall poor performance of ACC against stationary vehicles, and the lack of action taken in case of an unresponsive driver. In this critical scenario, the system effectively switches off steering support after a prolonged period of inactivity whilst maintaining speed control – leaving an unresponsive driver to his or her fate.

All the systems tested by Euro NCAP provide assistance only. More advanced “Level 3” technologies are emerging that will allow drivers to no longer remain focused on the driving task. Euro NCAP says it will continue to monitor the development of these technologies.

In ongoing discussions at the UNECE in Geneva, carmakers are pushing for hands-off driving and system-initiated lane changes (in non-emergency situations) to be made available on Level 2 assisted driving systems in Europe.  ETSC says this risks blurring the line between fully automated and assisted driving and a lack of clarity over whether the human driver or the vehicle system is in control of driving.  

Earlier this month, US federal regulators opened yet another investigation into Tesla’s Level 2 driver assistance system which is wrongly marketed as “Full Self-Driving (FSD)”.  The investigation is into a series of crashes during foggy, dusty or high-glare conditions.  Tesla’s FSD system, which is not available in Europe, relies on cameras with no lidar system (which uses lasers to map the environment) as a backup.