DOW JONES, A NEWS CORP COMPANY
Sections
Aim higher, reach further.
Get the Wall Street Journal $12 for 12 weeks. Subscribe Now

A $20,000 Self-Driving Vehicle Hits the Road

As auto makers offer these option packages for as low as $1,800, they are being snapped up faster than electrified vehicles

For $20,440, you can get a Honda today capable of driving itself in highway conditions. The WSJ's Lee Hawkins takes a look at how Honda and companies like Chevrolet with its Cruze are innovating to improve driver safety. Photo: AP

The Obama administration has proposed spending $4 billion to accelerate autonomous-car technology during the next decade. For $20,440, you can get a Honda capable of driving itself pretty well on a highway today.

Honda Motor Co. HMC -1.03 % is releasing automated safety features on its entry-level vehicle Civic LX sedan, a step that takes some of the most sophisticated technology on the market available and makes it accessible to significantly more buyers, including younger ones. General Motors Co. GM -0.26 % set to launch a new version of its small Chevrolet Cruze this year that makes it the next compact car in line to add advanced-safety bells and whistles.

This reflects a growing availability of advanced-driver assistance systems, or ADAS, such as lane-keeping assist, automatic braking or adaptive cruise control in the market. As auto makers offer the components needed to power these functions in option packages as low as $1,800, they are being snapped up at a far higher rate than electrified vehicles.

After a decade of spending much of its time and billions focused on boosting fuel-efficiency, Washington is increasing its focus on technology that could save lives.

Related Video

Google’s plan for an autonomous vehicle cleared a major hurdle on Tuesday when federal regulators ruled that the computer that operates the car may qualify as the “driver.” Photo: AP

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is considering ways to make ADAS features more ubiquitous, and Congress will hold a hearing Tuesday from Alphabet Inc. GOOGL 0.72 % ’s Google X team and General Motors.

While federal officials and lawmakers ask questions, however, many safety advocates want Washington to immediately make these features standard on the millions of light vehicles sold in the U.S. each year.

This is a lot to ask of auto makers that still don’t make air bags standard in some emerging markets, and a lot to expect of rule makers with limited resources and tens of millions in annual vehicle recalls on their plate. But urgency is swelling.

Traffic fatalities jumped unexpectedly in 2015, up 9% during the first nine months of the year compared with the same period a year earlier.

Yes, Americans are driving more, registering a record 3.15 trillion miles on U.S. roads last year, but that is only a 4% increase. Distraction—drivers increasingly using smartphones as they motor along at high speeds, drunken driving and drowsiness—no doubt is contributing to the trend.

Auto makers are scrambling to accelerate autonomous technology. Tesla Motors Inc. TSLA 3.69 % has led the way with self-piloted features; Daimler AG DDAIY 0.85 % ’s Mercedes-Benz is proliferating ADAS across its lineup; and General Motors, planning to introduce a “Super Cruise” semiautonomous system on pricey Cadillacs next year, is sinking $1.5 billion into two Silicon Valley startups that could help its cause.

Still, a test drive in Honda’s relatively cheap new Civic shows how today’s technology convincingly and economically attacks a growing problem.

On a 25-mile commute in Metro Detroit in Honda’s new Civic, much of the drive can be completed with hands off the wheel and foot off the accelerator as long as lane markings remain visible and another vehicle is in front of the car. A camera mounted at the rearview mirror watches the road, and the car’s central nervous system tells components when to slow down, swerve or slam the brakes.

Auto makers advise against treating ADAS-equipped cars as self-drivers. Questions about liability and a thicket of regulatory ambiguities lead to a cautious approach by marketers afraid of lawsuits or embarrassing situations. For instance, some owners have posted videos of hands- and foot-free driving on YouTube and the car inevitably makes a mistake.

Even so, reckless behavior is standard on America’s highways as people spend more time with their thumbs and eyes on a smartphone rather than on the road. Data indicates drivers are aware of their need for help.

WardsAuto.com estimates installation of adaptive cruise-control vehicles built in North America for the U.S. market, for instance, more than doubled in the 2015 model year compared with just two years ago, now representing 7.4% of vehicles rolling off assembly lines. Adaptive cruise is a critical building block for ADAS.

People will pay more than the $20,440 that Honda is asking. Executives at Nissan Motor Co. NSANY 0.39 % ’s Infiniti brand estimate 15% of buyers for the Q50’s $3,200 “technology package”—a suite of features that lets the $55,000 car drive on its own. That’s three times as many people who pay extra to buy a hybrid-electric version.

Putting the technology to compact cars is arguably the most-effective step toward mitigating the pain caused by distraction.

NHTSA estimates 10% of all drivers 15 to 19 years old involved in fatal crashes were reported as distracted—the largest proportion of drivers who were distracted at the time of the accidents.

Drivers in their 20s are 23% of drivers in all fatal crashes, but are 27% of the distracted drivers and 38% of the distracted drivers who were using cellphones in fatal crashes.

These are the buyers of Honda Civics and the Chevy Cruze, which—even when equipped with ADAS—have sticker prices 41% lower than the average new car sold, according to Kelley Blue Book.

J.D. Power & Associates estimates 20% of compact cars are purchased by millennials, or people born after 1976, and that means those drivers are more apt to buy entry-level automobiles than they are inclined to select any other segment.

John D. Stoll is The Wall Street Journal’s bureau chief in Detroit with responsibility for editing global automotive coverage.

Write to John D. Stoll at john.stoll@wsj.com

Corrections & Amplifications:
The name of the Chevy Cruze was incorrectly spelled as Chevy Cruise in an earlier version of this article. (March 13, 2016)

195 comments
edward gagnon
edward gagnon subscriber

Why don't we tell GM to build the cars on their "our old dime" and then pay the taxpayers back the other $6 billion that the government gave GM?  Plus stopping texting and phone use is easy, install cell single blockers in the cars that are active when a car is moving.  We have the technology.  President Obysmal can just make an executive order and it is done.

JOHN CASSIDY
JOHN CASSIDY subscriber

You know you are a bad driver when  you see more middle fingers than a manicurist.

Jamie Haney
Jamie Haney subscriber

I love self driving cars! I can't wait till I can sit in the car, program it to take me to Florida, go to sleep and wake up there! What a gift to the elderly,the disabled and the harried mom! It will be like a chauffeur for the middle class! We will save so much time and money-- these cars will safely travel very high speeds in close contact and safely-- just like the high speed trains.

This technology is truly revolutionary-- a giant leap just like from horse and buggy to the car.  

James Stephens
James Stephens subscriber

The title of this article was really misleading. Should it have been something like "Obama to give more taxpayer money to the Auto companies"  or "Obama wants to fund Self Driving Cars" or "Another waste of taxpayer money like paying for Solar Panels"?     Self driving cars may someday work in the Southwest, but here in Snow country they will be a long time coming.   I would sure like to see one try to drive on "black Ice", and not go off the road.   That's of course if it can "see" the road in ice and snow...        

John Cole
John Cole subscriber

@James Stephens The technology will probably handle black ice, snow, and all the other miserable conditions just fine.  I know how this stuff works.  That said, I see nothing in the Constitution that says the federal government should fund any of it.

Craig Sawyer
Craig Sawyer subscriber

"much of the drive can be completed with hands off the wheel and foot off the accelerator as long as lane markings remain visible and another vehicle is in front of the car"


Last night I white knuckled it over Snoqualmie Pass here in Washington.  It was dark, windy, snowing heavily, and the interstate was under construction with lane markings all but visible in some spots.  In these areas there were potholes and maybe 18" shoulders.  When a driverless car makes it through this while the drive mindlessly texts away I will be impressed: but not before.

Frank Dickof
Frank Dickof subscriber

@Craig Sawyer 


Craig, the driverless car will most likely never be allowed to travel in those conditions; too dangerous, you see.  You will be told BEFORE you even get in the car that conditions are too dangerous and since Safety! is the primary goal you will have to postpone your trip to some other time, like spring.  Have a nice day.

Ed Bukszar
Ed Bukszar subscriber

Reduce the need to pay attention to your driving, and drivers will pay even less attention than they do now. Is this really a good thing?  

John Terpening
John Terpening subscriber

Another waste of tax payer money. Just pile it on to the national debt. More corrupt government payouts funded by the tax payer. 

Obama, the Demarcates and the Republicans all know this game. Maybe the voters are starting to figure it out. 


Technology will move at the pace of innovation which will continue to accelerate. 

It is a matter of time, not money. More money will not speed this up.


There is plenty of private investments and acquisitions going into key underpinning technologies that are already driving many other applications. 




Nate Smith
Nate Smith subscriber

Now you do know that unless we subsidize this thing for $30,000 each its never gonna happen right ?

Terry Traub
Terry Traub subscriber

Obama wants to spend $4 billion to accelerate the development of autonomous cars.  Yet, it would seem that such development is already taking place, with no particular push from the government.  This smells like another Solyndra fiasco in the making.


Why not take the free market supply side approach and just offer a tax break for such vehicles, the way they did for electric cars?  Or maybe just butt out and let the private sector do its thing?

WILLIAM A TAYLOR
WILLIAM A TAYLOR subscriber

@Terry Traub Democrats want to steal our money and give it to their friends.  To name another example, Hillary has demonstrated repeatedly that she believes that government should offer top-level politicians a chance to become seriously rich.  Her economic ideas are opportunities to solicit contributions in return for favors.  What did she do for Goldman Sachs in return for $600,000?  What did she do for Wal-Mart?  The $3 billion in bribes the Washington Post said had been paid into her foundation isn't enough for her.  All this boosts the cost of government because WE pay for it.


The book at http://amzn.to/1KQXwhN points out that society collapses when government costs more than taxpayers can afford and gives some solutions.


We have far more obligations than we can pay.  Spending will be cut, either the hard way through politics or the very hard way through collapse.   Must we crash when the Chinese won't lend any more?


Domingo Trassens
Domingo Trassens subscriber

Important question: Who will be the responsible of the accidents of the self-driving vehicles: the car maker or the driver?

edward gagnon
edward gagnon subscriber

@Domingo Trassens We must assume that the CEO of the car company will be responsible, much like the CEO's of the gun manufacturers if somebody gets shot.  It must be so because Hillary said so!!

Perry Jennings
Perry Jennings subscriber

"A m$20,000 Self-Driving Vehicle Hits the Road"

I predict self-driving vehicles will hit a lot of other things.

William DeVille
William DeVille subscriber

I enjoy driving. I also enjoy the safety and convenience features of my 2016 Subaru Outback Limited, which has options such as adaptive cruise control, lane wandering warnings, lane keeping assistance, blind spot warnings, cross-traffic warning when backing up, and front collision prevention by braking. A survey of Japanese traffic accidents indicates that cars with these features reduced the accident rate by 50%, compared to cars without them.


While these technologies are used in self-driving cars that are currently in development, that doesn't mean that my Subaru is an "autonomous" vehicle. Although the lane keep assistance does give steering assistance to staying between line markers on a road, Subaru wisely warns that this assistance will turn off if the driver doesn't maintain steering control -- no "hands off" driving.

William DeVille
William DeVille subscriber

These safety features are a technological marvel. They involve optical and radar cameras and sensors that send data to computers in the car and this data is used to control vehicle actions, often with much quicker reaction times than human reaction times.


But they are contextual. Lane marker sensors don't work on a road that doesn't have distinctive lane markers -- which is the case on some of the roads that I travel. Adaptive cruise control works wonderfully on straight roads, but can be confused by curves or turns. And of course the laws of physics are still valid. If I am driving too fast, the ability of the vehicle to slow or stop when a slow-moving vehicle or other obstacle is encountered will be reduced and an accident may happen. If I don't react properly to a blind spot warning, an accident may happen. In other words, the Subaru's safety technologies are intended to assist rather than replace the driver. The driver remains responsible for control of the vehicle.



Tony Pondel
Tony Pondel subscriber

@William DeVille "The driver remains responsible for control of the vehicle"

.

.

 

How 'silly'.  Now the Govt will be in control of your vehicle.  Doesn't that give you a tingle up the ole' leg?

William DeVille
William DeVille subscriber

@Tony Pondel @William DeVille No, I don't think I'd drive or ride in any vehicle that the government is in control of.


The article above confuses important safety technology, which has been in development in the auto industry for years and is now reaching maturity, with autonomous or self-driving cars. I noted a study of Japanese auto accidents in 2014, which concluded that safety technologies of the kind I discussed resulted in a 50% reduction in accidents by vehicles so equipped..


Such driver assistance is a far cry from truly autonomous or self-driving vehicles, and did NOT require government intervention in its development.


The small Chevy discussed in the article is NOT an autonomous vehicle, and any idiot who attempts to drive it in that sense will have a high incidence of accidents. But ordinary drivers will appreciate the technology and have fewer and less serious accidents. Worthy of note: my auto insurance rate got a good discount for this technology.

Bruce Ryman
Bruce Ryman subscriber

Of course the unintended consequences of it all will be a trend to even more distractive actions by drivers, and ultimately more accidents as a result.


Then of course there will be the blatantly obvious failure of one of the systems and the resultant attempt by lawyers to "class action" the thing to death.  Remember, the very fact of the recalls we see today indicate a problem with quality manufacturing by all makers.


Also, those that understand statistics will see how even a 1% failure rate can result in thousands of problems as the number of vehicles continue to be pushed out into circulation.


And even SixSigma Quality Programs cannot delivery 100%

Andrew T
Andrew T subscriber

Why isn't that money going into new forms of energy? At least that would be good for America: self-driving cars are too dangerous. He's just pandering for more donations to the Democrats from Silicon Valley.

David Henry
David Henry subscriber

Regardless of government lobbying efforts, I'm still going to be a skeptical old coot until I see these cars in action.  So will Amazon's drones® deliver to Google's® autonomous cars while we are Twittering® from Facebook's Oculus VR®?  IMO, these are just elaborate marketing stunts.

Christopher Holden
Christopher Holden subscriber

This will ignite the torch and pitchfork movement as jobs for cabbies, Uber drivers, and truck drivers all disappear.

Tony Pondel
Tony Pondel subscriber

Wait another year.  Bernie will give you one for "free."

David Mcmahon
David Mcmahon subscriber

@Tony Pondel


Bernies will only drive in one direction - toward the agricultural fields for your job working for THE PEOPLE!!!

John Pound
John Pound subscriber

Barry - venture capital investing sure is a breeze when you get to use other people's money, am I right?

David Mcmahon
David Mcmahon subscriber

"The Obama administration has proposed spending $4 billion to accelerate autonomous-car technology during the next decade. "


If that's the case, it shows the self-driving car movement must be resisted!

Robert Seeman
Robert Seeman subscriber

@David Mcmahon


Yeah, that's the ticket -- add this one to your heading of Everything Obama is Bad.  No reason to think it through, just resist.  You could be in the House of Representatives.


SIDNEY STIEBEL
SIDNEY STIEBEL subscriber

Will all these aids make drivers more attentive or less? Hands free or foot free driving is mind free driving , time for makeup or eating, and increase significantly reaction time. Will this add more lazy drivers onthe road?

John Pound
John Pound subscriber

@SIDNEY STIEBEL That's why I always used to drive a stick. Besides being more fun, it made me pay more attention to what I was doing...

Kurt Polier
Kurt Polier subscriber

What is the extreme limit of this evolution? Is it smart electronic brain implants? Speaking for myself: The human being must be able to control and monitor intelligent systems, not the other way around. Modern airplanes are equipped to fly and even land automatically. However, there are pilots on board who are trained to fly without all these gadgets. Nobody could convince me to board a flight without them!

Tom Corry
Tom Corry subscriber

@Kurt Polier phones that text each other without any human intervention. skynet love. 

Kurt Polier
Kurt Polier subscriber

@Tom Corry @Kurt Polier Excellent! That should also work for the mobile phones. This morning there was a young woman at the cashier's desk of the supermarket talking at length to someone over her smart phone with a hand free set. You should have seen the grimaces of the other customers overhearing that nonsense. Fortunately, stupidity does not hurt...

Edward Berry
Edward Berry subscriber

Fixed Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo, ISIS, Ukraine, National Debt, Healthcare system, eliminated financial risk.


Next up? Traffic congestion.



David Mcmahon
David Mcmahon subscriber

@Edward Berry  A self-driving car can be controlled. Governments could restrict where cars go and how much you can travel in a given time period. A lot of interesting possibilities here. Wildlife areas could be made completely off limits. 

douglas watts
douglas watts subscriber

A self drive electric car would be as much fun as toasting bread.

David Mcmahon
David Mcmahon subscriber

@douglas watts An amazing transformation from the self-reliant to people who couldn't even drive their own car. 


Michael Broder
Michael Broder subscriber

No good reason for Feds to spend $4 billiion for this stuff. If customers demand it, private manufacturers will build it.And if it cuts injury and death, insurance will compete on rates.

Need real infrastructure action not another program to waste tax money

GORDON HALE
GORDON HALE subscriber

More unconstitutional government spending.

David Halpert
David Halpert subscriber

Terrific! I had felt that would take two generations. Great to see it now. The traffic in every major city in this country is awful. I would much rather sit in the back seat of a car on the way to work or weekend house reading a book, doing business and not caring about traffic.


This is as big as 120 years ago when we went from stagewagons and horse-run carriages.to gasoline-driven cars. 

edward gagnon
edward gagnon subscriber

@David Halpert Hey David, everything your desire is happening already.  I see it everyday on my drive to work, all the while they are driving.


phil sanders
phil sanders subscriber

A lot of anti-Obama comments here, for obvious reasons, but "self-driving cars" is essentially an infrastructure issue, in that it will revamp the whole transportation system in the US, and make roads and bridges more efficient. (less accidents, smoother traffic flow, resulting in higher capacities on existing roads and bridges, etc). $4 Billion on infrastructure  in this country is a rounding error. Yes, private enterprise could do this, but with 30k-40k traffic fatalities a year, an acceleration of this tech could save tens of thousands of lives. Health and safety is a govt. issue, so it isn't unreasonable to spend this. Heck, will probably save Americans billions in car repairs in next decade, more than offsetting our higher taxes due to this 4 Bil. Not to mention savings on police services, emergency helicopter ambulance flights, follow up medical due to accidents, and BILLIONS on car insurance, which will drop quickly in price due to market forces.

Alexis Hatch
Alexis Hatch subscriber

I think it should be immediate suspension of license for 90 days if you are caught using an electronic device of any kind while the vehicle is moving.  At a stop sign, fine.


If we want to allow conversations without actually touching a device (siri or the car handling dialing) that's fine.


In the meantime, for the sake of everyone, I think mandating these kinds of features should be done.  The sooner we move to entirely self driven cars (say 20 years from now), the better.



Tom Corry
Tom Corry subscriber

@Alexis Hatch what about those of us who love to drive (and who have never caused an accident)?

Tom Corry
Tom Corry subscriber

@David Mcmahon @Tom Corry @Alexis Hatch


I'm anti-gun and anti-big gulp. So, I shouldn't complain against the nanny state. I just LOVE to drive manual sports cars. I cannot, however, in good conscience, justify stick shift when dual clutch is more fuel efficient. I love stick, but I can't justify it. 

Alexis Hatch
Alexis Hatch subscriber

@Tom Corry @Alexis Hatch


Realistically, even if someday 95% of the cars on the road are self driving, there will remain 5% that are not.  But there are decades to figure it out as we go along. 



Show More Archives
Advertisement

Popular on WSJ

Editors’ Picks