PDA

View Full Version : Audi Presense - experience



wolek76
07-06-2016, 09:02 PM
Hello everyone.
Had the car for two months now. Done a bit of driving on motorways but mainly in London (got 2400miles on the clock already!!!)
And today had a bit of a nasty surprise.
As I was going through the Hyde Park, I was doing 20 - 22 MPH and following the road as it was curving to the left. Nobody behind me nor in front of me either.
Then, as I was at the nearing the apex of the bend, a scooter pops out into view. It was going in opposite direction but naturally turning to his right hence being nearer the centre of the road and leaning towards the turn.
It was normal for a second, and then I heard a Beep of Audi Presense (with red triangle/exclamation mark in the HUD) and the car suddenly slammed on the brakes.... :bigeyes::bigeyes::bigeyes: ALL BY ITSELF ....
By the time I realised what happened, everything was back to normal, but believe me that was one scary moment....
I hate to think what would have happened if it was winter and the road was slippery....
Anything I can do/change about this?
I have seen the sensitivity of Presense in MMI, but that's already set to 'Late'...
Not sure I can trust this thing anymore...
Thanks for reading

M1tchy
07-06-2016, 10:20 PM
That's not good. Mine (63 plate A7) doesn't react to stationary objects or things coming towards me. Must be an upgraded system on the newer models.

You could ask Audi if they can change something?

As for Icy roads, I assume the traction control etc would take care of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nemo78
07-06-2016, 10:22 PM
Hi Wolek, scary stuff but it's amazing what Presense picks up and doesn't pick up.

On my initial Q I had no end of issues with it and ended up either putting on 'late' or turning off as there were too many false sensing one of which was on the motorway.

I think I recall someone saying in a thread there was a software update available now or soon to fix the sensitivity of Presense etc

Good luck with it all...

srbsq7
07-06-2016, 11:12 PM
No issues so far myself. It's gone off once when a kid ran across the road about 20 yards ahead of me when doing 20mph through town but didn't hit the brakes, just woke me up! Like Nemo, I do recall a discussion about a software update to fix presense sensitivity issues and I think it may even have been on the A4 forum?

andyhud007
08-06-2016, 09:09 AM
I have had it go off a couple of times and the "worst" one was when I pulled out slightly towards middle of road to pass a parked car.. It thought that was going to be a collision and dabbed the brakes for me. Nothing too serious though, it happens so quick you just keep going

Nemo is right, there is a software update due to sort some "Trigger Happy" Audi Pre-Sense issues. No idea when though

Q7newbie
08-06-2016, 10:00 AM
Yeah, in its current guise, PreSense is guaranteed to have bugs.
But overall, it is safe to assume once it's matured, it will be quite impressive.

As for how it performs I have the wet or on icy roads: I can attest to it working cohesively with the ABS and Traction control. It happened on 3 separate occasions this January when I was up Fort William and Cairngorm mountains. It was still a hair-raising experience, but it does last all of a wink of an eye.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

satyp
08-06-2016, 10:39 AM
woe.. :-0.. Sounds more like Audi #Sixthsense at this rate..

Hopefully updates are rolled out in a periodic fashion if safety itself is at hand.

Does anyone now if we can register for alerts for such software update releases?.. Or is it simply downright old-Skool call up dealer and twiddle the fingers?..

Sent from my LG-H961N using Tapatalk

andyhud007
08-06-2016, 11:09 AM
woe.. :-0.. Sounds more like Audi #Sixthsense at this rate..

Hopefully updates are rolled out in a periodic fashion if safety itself is at hand.

Does anyone now if we can register for alerts for such software update releases?.. Or is it simply downright old-Skool call up dealer and twiddle the fingers?..

Sent from my LG-H961N using Tapatalk

The latter is most cases....

zollaf
08-06-2016, 12:16 PM
i wonder how it would go if this wonderful system did an emergency stop when an emergency stop wasnt required and the car behind doesnt stop in time and his dash cam proves the audi was in the wrong and didnt need to stop, whos insurance would pay out ? sounds positively dangerous to me, being a good driver is far better than some computer that can stop the car if it feels like it. thing is, a computer can only scan and see an object, it doesnt know what that object is or what its doing.

M1tchy
08-06-2016, 01:03 PM
In the small print it says the driver is responsible at all times. I guess it would be the driver behind as if they can't stop they are too close?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

zollaf
08-06-2016, 01:07 PM
not in all cases, if it can be proved the car in front stopped for no reason. i know its normally the car behind at fault, but there are some exeptions, especially with a dash cam as evidence.

srbsq7
08-06-2016, 02:09 PM
i wonder how it would go if this wonderful system did an emergency stop when an emergency stop wasnt required and the car behind doesnt stop in time and his dash cam proves the audi was in the wrong and didnt need to stop, whos insurance would pay out ? sounds positively dangerous to me, being a good driver is far better than some computer that can stop the car if it feels like it. thing is, a computer can only scan and see an object, it doesnt know what that object is or what its doing.

True, but on balance I would put my money on the computer doing a better job than a driver. I think Google has proved this with their autonomous driving tests in the US. Given the examples so far, the car has perhaps been overly cautious but not behaved dangerously for no reason whatsoever. Therefore, I think it would be highly unlikely you would be at fault for the car intervening.

I deliberately added all these safety systems and happy with them so far. I'm not sure if it's pre-sense, but I also get a flashing 'too close to car in front image' in the HUD which is really useful. You can set it to the number of seconds gap between the car in front.

zollaf
08-06-2016, 02:24 PM
but in this case the car 'slammed ' the anchors on for no reason.. thats a computer potentially causing a pile up, not doing a better job than a driver.

t1sh
08-06-2016, 02:43 PM
Thank you for head up, guys.
I guess I should start wearing pre-sense diapers to keep the seat clean if an awkward situation like this occurs.
Still to experience something like this!

zollaf
08-06-2016, 02:50 PM
i think i would find the fuse for it and file it under 'B'...

srbsq7
08-06-2016, 03:02 PM
Couldn't disagree more. I think this technology, whilst it won't always be perfect, will save lives. It will also probably stop you from annoying prangs too.

zollaf
08-06-2016, 03:06 PM
a big spike in the middle of the steering wheel would save lives, all this technology does is mean people dont concentrate enough on ther driving. if drivers just drove instead of being distracted by all this technology then accidents wouldnt happen. and what annoying prangs. the only drivers that have annoying prangs are the ones that shouldnt be on the roads in the first place. i have managed 25 years and never had one.

NickTyler
08-06-2016, 03:19 PM
a big spike in the middle of the steering wheel would save lives, all this technology does is mean people dont concentrate enough on ther driving. if drivers just drove instead of being distracted by all this technology then accidents wouldnt happen. and what annoying prangs. the only drivers that have annoying prangs are the ones that shouldnt be on the roads in the first place. i have managed 25 years and never had one.

Back to horses and carts then?

Thing is that no matter how good a driver you are or whatever you do there will be that time sooner or later that the technology can help you. There will also be times that it won't, especially when it is still new, it is not perfect yet. It's called progress. All the stories (I also have 1) have mentioned 'surprising moments' none say the car caused any danger or a crash.

More to the point being such a good driver it should not worry you as it will never need to step in :p. You may find some comfort in the fact that other road users have it and it might prevent them hitting you due to 'distraction'.

Sorry if this post comes across a bit blunt but it is not meant to be personal, just to the point. ;)

jamief
08-06-2016, 03:45 PM
a big spike in the middle of the steering wheel would save lives, all this technology does is mean people dont concentrate enough on ther driving. if drivers just drove instead of being distracted by all this technology then accidents wouldnt happen. and what annoying prangs. the only drivers that have annoying prangs are the ones that shouldnt be on the roads in the first place. i have managed 25 years and never had one.

Rubbish. Accidents happen, whatever you think about them. Anything that can be done to help avoid them is worthwhile.

zollaf
08-06-2016, 04:36 PM
of course accidents happen, well, they dont according to the police though, do they, thats whay a rta became a rtc.

NickTyler
08-06-2016, 05:21 PM
That's a good point. Someone has to be at fault so the insurance can blame and claim!! I dropped the wife's treasured sugar jar the other day. I certainly didn't mean to do it but it was definitely my fault.

I wonder if the wife will send me through a claim for a new jar, rental jar while the old one was out of action, lost sugar and mental anguish as she can no longer drink tea as it brings back memories of the 'accident'...

Q7newbie
08-06-2016, 09:13 PM
In the small print it says the driver is responsible at all times. I guess it would be the driver behind as if they can't stop they are too close?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yup. The nigh on impossible to counter-argue point will always be: if you couldn't stop safely when the car ahead had to emergency brake, then you were too close.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Q7newbie
08-06-2016, 09:22 PM
a big spike in the middle of the steering wheel would save lives, all this technology does is mean people dont concentrate enough on ther driving. if drivers just drove instead of being distracted by all this technology then accidents wouldnt happen. and what annoying prangs. the only drivers that have annoying prangs are the ones that shouldnt be on the roads in the first place. i have managed 25 years and never had one.
Hmm, yeah, not really. You can't lay all black for recent accidents on technology or drivers.
How about culprit #1:

poor Road and city planning by the state that has lead to an exponential increase in traffic and congestion?

How about the crap UK driving test we get out license to use passing, that fails to properly ingrain foresight, traffic movement and car/automotive understanding. (if more people that drove actually UNDERSTOOD cars and their basic method of function, it would help too). I'm not saying everyone needs to be an Adrian Newey or Gordon Murray, but most don't have a clue at all about torque and low gears etc or the relationship between brakes/tyres and temperature.


And finally, just because you've never been in an accident in 25 years of driving doesn't mean you haven't caused any.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

srbsq7
08-06-2016, 10:53 PM
After nearly being hit twice head on by people driving whilst using their phone earlier this year (not on calls), I asked the local police to provide info on convictions in the town over the previous 12 months. There were 13 in total, made up of 5 fines and 8 attending a training course.

I think we're only going to see more accidents caused by distracted drivers and they're unlikely to be caught and even when they do, they get minimal punishment.

I think safety technology like this should be mandatory.

zollaf
08-06-2016, 10:56 PM
And finally, just because you've never been in an accident in 25 years of driving doesn't mean you haven't caused any.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
was totally agreeing with you until this point , which i think is an unnecessary comment.

zollaf
08-06-2016, 10:59 PM
so why should people who can drive have to have auto everything just because a minority cannot drive or obey the rules. surely better policing and better roads would be far better. i regularly have plenty of near misses on the mainly little country roads i drive on. usually people driving too fast, but i normally manage to get out the way and avoid a collision. but then i suppose if they had these auto brakes then it would be them doing the emergency stop instead of ploughing into me, so maybe they are not such a bad idea. maybe you could do an advanced test to allow you not to have it fitted.

srbsq7
08-06-2016, 11:27 PM
so why should people who can drive have to have auto everything just because a minority cannot drive or obey the rules. surely better policing and better roads would be far better. i regularly have plenty of near misses on the mainly little country roads i drive on. usually people driving too fast, but i normally manage to get out the way and avoid a collision. but then i suppose if they had these auto brakes then it would be them doing the emergency stop instead of ploughing into me, so maybe they are not such a bad idea. maybe you could do an advanced test to allow you not to have it fitted.

Agree, but the only place I've seen this old school policing is on the Isle of Man. Everywhere else seems to be reliant on cameras....

NickTyler
09-06-2016, 03:11 PM
so why should people who can drive have to have auto everything just because a minority cannot drive or obey the rules. surely better policing and better roads would be far better. i regularly have plenty of near misses on the mainly little country roads i drive on. usually people driving too fast, but i normally manage to get out the way and avoid a collision. but then i suppose if they had these auto brakes then it would be them doing the emergency stop instead of ploughing into me, so maybe they are not such a bad idea. maybe you could do an advanced test to allow you not to have it fitted.

I still maintain that those that can drive should not be upset by this technology being active on the car. Like I said if you drive perfect then the system will never have to intervene and as far as the driver is concerned may actually be switched off right?

But why would you not want it there just in case?

zollaf
09-06-2016, 03:21 PM
because if its there then then there is always the risk that you will take advantage and become a bad lazy driver. like people with abs that brake far too late and far too heavy on bends or roundabouts. if i dont want it fitted on my car then thats my choice and not the choice of someone that thinks it should be, so another good reason to leave the eu. i also dont want my car slamming the brakes on when the brakes dont need slamming on, or abs cutting in when it doesnt need to, which is why i fitted a switch on my 80 to turn the abs off, stupid thing keeps cutting in when i dont need it to.

jamief
09-06-2016, 03:23 PM
because if its there then then there is always the risk that you will take advantage and become a bad lazy driver. like people with abs that brake far too late and far too heavy on bends or roundabouts. if i dont want it fitted on my car then thats my choice and not the choice of someone that thinks it should be, so another good reason to leave the eu. i also dont want my car slamming the brakes on when the brakes dont need slamming on, or abs cutting in when it doesnt need to, which is why i fitted a switch on my 80 to turn the abs off, stupid thing keeps cutting in when i dont need it to.

What is your thoughts on an airbag? And a seatbelt?

ABS, and no doubt, Presense-type technologies will save many lives. Here is a quote from a research paper on the longterm use of ABS:


a significant 13-percent reduction in fatal collisions with pedestrians (confidencebounds: 5% to 20%) and a significant 12-percent reduction in collisions with other vehicles on wet roads(confidence bounds: 3% to 20%). ABS is quite effective in nonfatal crashes, reducing the overall crashinvolvementrate by 6 percent in passenger cars (confidence bounds: 4% to 8%) and by 8 percent in LTVs(confidence bounds: 3% to 11%). The combination of electronic stability control (ESC) and ABS willprevent a large proportion of fatal and nonfatal crashes.

zollaf
09-06-2016, 03:31 PM
never had abs on any car actually help me. i did have a mk 3 golf with it on in 1997, company car. i was exiting an industrial estate in milton keynes at about 25 mph, coming upto a main road. the surface was broken tarmac. i braked gently to stop, the abs cut in, i braked again, car did not slow down. all i could do was turn into the busy main road under full power and luckily didnt crash. statistically abs may have saved lives but like all other 'safety' things it does lead to complacency behind the wheel, hence why years ago you always got stuck behind some old fart in the worlds safest car, a volvo, and the driver didnt normally have a clue. nowadays this is not restricted to just volvos but most makes because they all have lots of safety things. seatbelts, i learnt to drive in an old landrover with no seatbelts, dont really bother me but i do wear one when they are fitted. airbags, no, safety belt stops you moving forwards. my 80 has procon 10 which pulls the steering wheel away from you. statistically this is (or was) much safer than an airbag but if activated it writes the car off so isnt as cost affective .

NickTyler
10-06-2016, 10:56 AM
Cutting in when you don't need it is a refinement and development problem or maybe a fault with the car and I totally agree that if it is not fit for purpose you might be better off without it, but if it is working properly then it should make no difference... Until it does!

What if a child ran out in front of you between parked cars? Totally out of your control, but in that case the tech might just save the day. Or at least make it a bit less terrible.

NickTyler
10-06-2016, 11:03 AM
On another note. What do you think about the Google sticky bonnet?

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/google-patents-sticky-bonnet-pedestrian-impacts

Looks like a plausible idea in the lab but imagine getting stuck too low and half of your body being dragged under the car until it stops :yikes:. I guess they think that is a better bet than the chance of a crash landing from many feet.

zollaf
10-06-2016, 11:11 AM
oh my god. where are we going. making cars safer is no substitute for education. children need to learn how to cross the road and drivers simply need to learn how to be safer drivers. sorry to be blunt but no amount of in built safety can ever be a replacement for the green cross code.

NickTyler
10-06-2016, 11:19 AM
I can't and won't argue with the substitute for education but with children you can't take them from walking one day to fully competent green cross coders the next. It is the parents responsibility to keep them safe at that stage but we probably should have an education program, test and license for procreation as well. I may have gone too far then...:Blush2:

And what about that drunk guy who falls out of the pub and into the road?

Why substitute. We should have safer cars and more education!

jamief
10-06-2016, 11:21 AM
oh my god. where are we going. making cars safer is no substitute for education. children need to learn how to cross the road and drivers simply need to learn how to be safer drivers. sorry to be blunt but no amount of in built safety can ever be a replacement for the green cross code.

Humans are imperfect creatures. Children do run on the road, sometimes people cross without looking. Drivers get distracted. I'm not sure why you are so against things which will save lives? If presense can react quicker than a driver to a child running onto the road, why on earth would you be against it?

zollaf
10-06-2016, 11:28 AM
progress will see us driving about in fully automated cars made of cotton wool that can do no harm to anyone or anything.
life is a risk. driving, walking, cycling, everything is a risk. self preservation is the best thing to keep yourself from harm. some people have it, some dont. people get killed, thats just the way it is. if the parents let their child run into a road then thats the parents fault, isnt it. why should we have to drive cars with auto brakes all because some people cant look after their kids. a licence to procreate is a wonderful idea.

jamief
10-06-2016, 11:30 AM
progress will see us driving about in fully automated cars made of cotton wool that can do no harm to anyone or anything.
life is a risk. driving, walking, cycling, everything is a risk. self preservation is the best thing to keep yourself from harm. some people have it, some dont. people get killed, thats just the way it is. if the parents let their child run into a road then thats the parents fault, isnt it. why should we have to drive cars with auto brakes all because some people cant look after their kids. a licence to procreate is a wonderful idea.

I can only assume this is some kind of elaborate troll, so I'm not going to waste my time. Utterly ignorant.

zollaf
10-06-2016, 11:35 AM
its my opinion, one i am entitled to. if you think we should all wrap ourselves up in cotton wool and have pillow fights then fair play. if you allow your kids to run feral and blame everyone else for their shortcomings then thats upto you but not something i agree with. if you think drivers should sit in their cars and play games and not be responsible for their own actions then you are entitled to that opiion, but DO NOT CALL ME A TROLL.

NickTyler
10-06-2016, 11:39 AM
progress will see us driving about in fully automated cars made of cotton wool that can do no harm to anyone or anything.
life is a risk. driving, walking, cycling, everything is a risk. self preservation is the best thing to keep yourself from harm. some people have it, some dont. people get killed, that's just the way it is. if the parents let their child run into a road then that's the parents fault, isnt it. why should we have to drive cars with auto brakes all because some people cant look after their kids. a licence to procreate is a wonderful idea.

And why not drive about in the comfort of a perfectly safe cloud knowing everything is taken care of?

Life is a risk yes but why not let tech take some of the risk out of it? Then your self preservation will be even more effective. Or should we get rid of bike helmets, the police, saftey systems in the nuclear power plant? I know I am being a bit silly now but where do you draw the line?

zollaf
10-06-2016, 11:40 AM
exactly, where do you draw the line.

jamief
10-06-2016, 11:40 AM
its my opinion, one i am entitled to. if you think we should all wrap ourselves up in cotton wool and have pillow fights then fair play. if you allow your kids to run feral and blame everyone else for their shortcomings then thats upto you but not something i agree with. if you think drivers should sit in their cars and play games and not be responsible for their own actions then you are entitled to that opiion, but DO NOT CALL ME A TROLL.

You clearly are a troll - I've not suggested any of the things above. The only thing I've suggested is that technology improvements which can help save lives (ABS, Airbags, seatbelt pre-tensioners, presense etc) are a good thing. You're either deliberately ignoring the statistical significance of modern car safety, or you're a bit thick. I'll leave it to other readers to decide which.

zollaf
10-06-2016, 11:41 AM
ooooof, personal insults now is it. i am offended by that.

NickTyler
10-06-2016, 11:55 AM
Definitely not a troll. Just has a different opinion and not afraid to voice it. Nothing wrong with that.

It was me suggesting some of 'the things' earlier in this thread.

Q7newbie
10-06-2016, 12:36 PM
was totally agreeing with you until this point , which i think is an unnecessary comment.
You're entitled to deem it unnecessary as much as I am entitled to state it. And truth is, it's not untrue. Unless you're not human, you like all the rest of us can be responsible for causing an accident. In some cases without even being aware of it. It's not an attack on you, so there's no o reason for you to he affronted by it. It's just the truth.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

Q7newbie
10-06-2016, 12:41 PM
I can't and won't argue with the substitute for education but with children you can't take them from walking one day to fully competent green cross coders the next. It is the parents responsibility to keep them safe at that stage but we probably should have an education program, test and license for procreation as well. I may have gone too far then...:Blush2:

And what about that drunk guy who falls out of the pub and into the road?

Why substitute. We should have safer cars and more education!
My sentiments exactly. It seems some here feel like Improved education can't coexisting be developed in tandem with improved safety technology.
Good thing he wasn't in charge of safety development for the the British military, otherwise the new body Armour vests me and my colleagues were issued with for Afghan wouldn't have been bought and that shrapnel it absorbed so well (unlike previous iterations) woulda been lodged in my abdomen!

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

srbsq7
10-06-2016, 01:59 PM
You only have to look at the aviation industry where they've extensively looked into the causes of incidents. Many if not most have human error as a factor and rarely is it deliberate. Fatigue, distraction, overload, poor decision making etc, hence why automation has come in to assist with this. It's not perfect, but I don't think anyone would disagree that it's not made flying safer or that pilot training should continue to improve. Like others have said, it's hand in hand.