I think in some of the promotional material they have basically said that anything less than Top Safety Pick + would be failing to them. They make a point to be very safe cars and it is hard to say that if any of them do not get all "Good" ratings.Also waiting. But unlike Toyota for example ie RAV4. Subaru has for over 20+ yrs taken the crash ratings super seriously as a result they are continually the only Auto Maker with strait 5 star ratings across their entire offering.
I highly doubt the Ascent will be anything less than a top rating. Its possible Subaru may even up the game by having some features that competitors don’t plan on having for a generation or two. Example being Subaru exceeded the roof strength standards years before the standard was even settled. So I don’t see them miffing it like Toyota did on the current RAV4.
You clearly don’t live in Michigan. I swear everyone thinks NASCAR drafting is how you drive on the highway there.Having shared the roads with Subaru drivers, it is imperative that their cars have a 5 star safety rating, because most of them drive like they are on the racetrack or road course.
Since the only way to get Top Safety Pick + is to have an collision avoidance system - and we KNOW that every Subaru with one is a Top Safety Pick + - AND the Ascent will have standard Eyesight - that means it's going to be a Top Safety Pick +.Yep, they've made it quite clear that they expect nothing but a Top Safety Pick+ on the Ascent,
That's just a limitation of the cameras. Typically it only causes a problem for early morning heading east (about the first 20 minutes after sunrise) and late afternoon (about 20 minutes before sunset) heading due west. And it's just as flat here in Oklahoma City, system works fine.The 2015 technology doesn't work around here in Houston w/ flat geography, going to and from work w/ the sun.
Having shared the roads with Subaru drivers, it is imperative that their cars have a 5 star safety rating, because most of them drive like they are on the racetrack or road course.
Carl,That's just a limitation of the cameras. ....
I thought you were commenting about driving into direct sun, so that's what I was answering. I always tell my customers that the Eyesight system is a driver assist system, not a driver replacement system and it does have limitations.Carl,
That's not what I asked. ... lol.
BTW, I'm curious, why did you modify the quote w/o any preservation or place-holder?
And you call yourself a salesman ....They only use radar for the reverse automatic breaking and blind spot monitoring.
Most people do not understand the difference that radar is RF and sonar is sonic.And you call yourself a salesman ....
Radar is used for Blind Spot / Reverse Cross Traffic Alert / Lane Change Assist
Sonar is used for Reverse Automatic Braking
There are systems right now that do use radar. They're having the programming issues you mention because of non-planned radar reflectors. The highway sign that's crooked after an accident, or a metal guardrail on a tighter turn.Then thinking on it a little bit more, there are plenty of things that are very difficult for radar to pick up; non metallic objects and those annoying objects like pedestrians.
But it is a layered approach; it is not as if there would only be one thing that the collision avoidance system would be dependent upon. Forward radar would be a supplemental input, just like the stereo cameras, side rear corner radars and rearward sonar.
You mean like this one?That way we don't have publicity issues like the pedestrian avoidance system running over someone when you're showing it off for the media ...