At first I was thinking I can do without this package but for some reason I keep going back to it. I don't see myself relying on it vs good common sense and looking BUT an extra set of eyes just in case is what brings me back. I've read where the auto dimming head lights don't work that great, turn off too late. I'm also wondering if I'll get sick of the beeping or whatever the notification is because I'm doing 50mph but not 5 full car length behind. Guess that's a good thing BUT is it going to get annoying. I've never driven a car with these options so I asked the dealer to let me know when one comes in so I can experience it. Would like to make a decision so I can have him look out for the car I want in the color I want with the options I want.. Just not 100% sold on the iActiveSense yet. Thoughts? Is the general consensus that it's worth while or just bells and whistles. Thanks
iActivesense Thoughts
- Thread starter Koz60
- Start date
Never had anything even close to this type of technology on a car but.. The only negative things that I think about regarding these types of features is a few things:
1) It could create a false sense of security when driving that may not be as accurate as you think.
2) It could malfunction and I'm sure a light will come on the dash if it detects any issues but how much would it cost to fix, if out of warranty?
3) IMO the more wires and electronics you pack into a car, the bigger the chance for any type of issues to pop up. This is my opinion and correct me if it is completely wrong but I feel like wires could become crossed at some point or some weird electrical issues could become more prevalent whether from the dealer or during any type of work.
So far, I've only experimented with the lane departure warning system (LDWS) and turned it off after less than 10 minutes. I was getting annoyed with the high number of false positives.
I can see myself using the radar cruise control and high beam control, if they work any better than LDWS.
I can see myself using the radar cruise control and high beam control, if they work any better than LDWS.
- :
- San Antonio, Texas
- :
- '15 CX-5 Miata AWD
Similar LDWS experiences reported by Mitsubishi Outlander owners too (I wouldn't be surprised if they use the same units).
Yeah.. the 5 car length notification might get old.
Side note...I have radar cruise on another car and granted it is on '07 car but don't use it as much as I thought I would. It is adjustable but seems to keep the longest gap between other cars (three distance settings) and slows down an uncomfortable distance when someone fills in the gap. It also slows down the car more than comfortable in the curves. Maybe just old tech and the new stuff works better.
Side note...I have radar cruise on another car and granted it is on '07 car but don't use it as much as I thought I would. It is adjustable but seems to keep the longest gap between other cars (three distance settings) and slows down an uncomfortable distance when someone fills in the gap. It also slows down the car more than comfortable in the curves. Maybe just old tech and the new stuff works better.
If these things are true about that technology then I feel better about not going above and beyond and getting the tech/safety package. The features do sound nice at first but in theory how often will you use radar cruise? I drive 100miles round trip to work, I don't use cruise control ever. I like to control my speed all the time. Just curious.. Do any of these safety items count for deductions on your insurance premium?
In my opinion the main benefit of the i-ActiveSense package is Smart Braking Support (SBS), which helps avoid frontal collisions or minimize damage when travelling mid- to high-speed by automatically braking when the vehicle senses an emergency ahead. This is different than the Smart City Braking System (SCBS), which is part of the technology package. It works similarly but at speed below 18 MPH.
Maybe mine has preferences different, but mine doesn't make any noise when I'm too close to another vehicle - it just blinks an image of a car when you have that particular screen selected where the MPG data goes. If I have it set to current MPG or something else it doesn't do anything.
Lane departure was annoying when I first got it, but you can adjust the sensitivty with the nav screen. There is "high" and "low". You can also set it to warn "at" or "before" crossing the line.
I found setting it to "high" and "at" was good for me. "Low" and "at" didn't go off until the lane was almost center to the dash.
Lane departure was annoying when I first got it, but you can adjust the sensitivty with the nav screen. There is "high" and "low". You can also set it to warn "at" or "before" crossing the line.
I found setting it to "high" and "at" was good for me. "Low" and "at" didn't go off until the lane was almost center to the dash.
Attachments
The proximity stuff won't kick in until there's an imminent collision, not just when you're following closely. If it warned you every time you were "too close," people would probably just turn it off.
I'm curious though - what does that rumble setting do? Does it play a rumble-strip sound through the stereo, or is it shaking the wheel slightly?
I'm curious though - what does that rumble setting do? Does it play a rumble-strip sound through the stereo, or is it shaking the wheel slightly?
I think the technology hasn't matured or been standardized in a uniform manner. One manufacturer does one thing another something else, but they both call it forward collision warning. Generally I'm under the belief that these technologies are marketing terms meant to prop up the cost of the vehicle, therefore the bottom line. When stability control systems were the rage, back when Firestone tires exploded randomly, it was revealed that the sensor cost on average $150 to install, but manufacturers would up charge In hundreds or even a thousand dollars for the added feature. Now it's standard equipment and doesn't get much attention.
The IIHS tests this, actually. They have standardized tests for forward collision warning, low speed automatic braking, and high speed automatic braking.
Here's the rankings for small SUVs: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/class-summary/small-suvs
Note the "Front Crash Prevention" column on the right. IIHS hasn't reviewed the 2016 CX-5 yet, so the score there is for the SCBS option on the 2015.
The insurance companies are also noticing that current collision warning tech does reduce accidents: https://www.aaafoundation.org/forward-collision-warning-systems
and again for collision mitigation: https://www.aaafoundation.org/forward-collision-mitigation-auto-braking-systems
It's not standardized because there are a lot of ways to achieve the same thing. Mazda is using cameras and multiple radar and basically building each feature separately. In contrast, Subaru's EyeSight system is fairly cheap because they only need two cameras and the appropriate computers to implement everything in i-ActivSense, but EyeSight also can't operate reliably in fog or strange lighting.
I suspect better comparisons will become available in the future, but the baseline "does it work" tests are already here. Even without that, the insurance data speaks for itself.
It takes a little getting used to, but I switched it because the beeping sound from LDWS was the same as the blind spot monitoring when you blinker and someone is next to you. I was afraid if they were the same sound we would eventually get numb to it and I didn't want that to happen - especially with with BSM.
Basically the stereo makes low "rumble strip" sound when you go off course. One thing I do like is if you are on the left it uses the left speaker and likewise for the right. I don't have to look at the dash to figure which side went off.
I read this too on IIHS - I found it interesting that it worked perfect at 12mph but it didn't slow down at all when going 25mph - it showed 0 mph speed reduction like the system shut down or something. I know the system is only rated for 18mph, but shouldn't it at least attempt to slow down a little?
I also saw they only tested the SCBS and not the regular SBS found in the iActive package. I would be curious how the iActive SBS does in comparison?
Last edited:
Thanks wiley264, looks like I have some reading to do.
Edit, skimming the ratings, it amazes me in this day and age any mass market vehicle would score anything below acceptable. But the usual suspects make the list, jeep, hyundai/Kia. Nice to see the cx5 rank so high!
Edit, skimming the ratings, it amazes me in this day and age any mass market vehicle would score anything below acceptable. But the usual suspects make the list, jeep, hyundai/Kia. Nice to see the cx5 rank so high!
Last edited:
That test is for the 2015 model, which only had SCBS. It doesn't look like IIHS has tested any of the updated US models that include SBS yet.
I suspect SCBS shuts off when the vehicle is travelling above 18MPH because it doesn't have a long enough radar range to anticipate objects above that speed. If it stayed on, it would likely detect false collisions because it probably needs the object to show up on radar for some time before it becomes a hazard so the system can classify it.
I guess before I start trumpeting the wonders of modern safety tech, I should probably acknowledge that you're right when you say it's not standardized. The context that makes it make sense, though, is that this sort of radar-based collision tech has been available on more expensive cars for years. What we're seeing now isn't really a wave of new technology; it's just that the features are being brought down to lower end models than before.
- :
- 2014 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech
As noted above, the test was on a 2015 model, so iActive was not tested since it didn't happen until the 2016 model.
While I agree all vehicles should rate at least "Acceptable". The IIHS keeps moving the goal post to nudge manufacturers toward safer vehicles.
We have crash mitigation on a different vehicle. Saved the wife from an accident. She now considers that a standard feature on future vehicles.
Sorry for the necropost, but I noticed something interesting.
It looks like for the AU (and possibly other) versions of the car, the lane departure warning can actually shake or bump the steering wheel instead of dinging or playing a rumble strip. Is that available in the US version? It sounds like it would be a bit more disconcerting the first few times, but would have the long term benefit of not bothering the passengers.
It looks like for the AU (and possibly other) versions of the car, the lane departure warning can actually shake or bump the steering wheel instead of dinging or playing a rumble strip. Is that available in the US version? It sounds like it would be a bit more disconcerting the first few times, but would have the long term benefit of not bothering the passengers.
I plan on getting the Touring. The BSM and RCTA are the only tech that I think will be useful to me on a regular basis. And luckily those both come standard on the T. The GT with the iactivesense just seems like a lot of expensive bells and whistles that Mazda is required to offer now to keep up with the competition and earn high safety marks. Also the tech parts of any car are always the first things to fail. The Touring is the sweet spot in the lineup. It has the right engine and only the necessary tech I need.
Last edited:
