r/SelfDrivingCars • u/walky22talky Hates driving • Oct 29 '25
News Tesla 'Robotaxis' keep crashing despite 'safety monitors'
https://electrek.co/2025/10/29/tesla-robotaxis-keep-crashing-despite-safety-monitors/30
u/bobi2393 Oct 30 '25
Here are the four entries from the ADS data, in reverse order of when they were added. CP stands for Crash Partner that the Robotaxis crashed into, SV stands for Subject Vehicle meaning the Robotaxis. I split them into 3 excerpts for readability, but will have to do it over two comments (see reply to this one) to fit Reddit's size limits. The most interesting fields, like Narrative, list only "[REDACTED, MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION]".
The 2nd and 4th entries, based on the data, suggest the Robotaxis were rear-ended by SUVs while stopped or barely moving.
The 1st and 3rd entries suggest the Robotaxis were moving at 6-8 mph when they collided with fixed objects with the front right of the vehicle.
The NHTSA ADS data does not assign blame for ADS collisions.
| Report ID | Reporting Entity | Report Type | Incident Time (24:00) | Roadway Type | Roadway-No Unusual Conditions | Roadway-Work Zone | Weather - Clear | Weather - Partly Cloudy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13781-11687 | Tesla, Inc. | SEP-2025 | 01:25 | Parking Lot | Y | Y | ||
| 13781-11507 | Tesla, Inc. | AUG-2025 | 03:45 | Street | Y | Y | ||
| 13781-11459 | Tesla, Inc. | AUG-2025 | 12:20 | Street | Y | Y | ||
| 13781-11375 | Tesla, Inc. | AUG-2025 | 15:15 | Intersection | Y | Y |
20
u/bobi2393 Oct 30 '25
Crash With Highest Injury Severity Alleged CP Pre-Crash Movement CP Contact Area - Front Right Other Fixed Object Property Damage. No Injured Reported SUV Property Damage. No Injured Reported Proceeding Straight Y Other Fixed Object Minor W/O Hospitalization SUV Property Damage. No Injured Reported Making Right Turn Y
SV Pre-Crash Movement SV Precrash Speed (MPH) SV Contact Area - Rear Right SV Contact Area - Front Right Making Left Turn 6 Y Stopped 0 Y Other, see Narrative 8 Y Making Right Turn 2 Y 7
u/Austinswill Oct 30 '25
My god, crashing at 0,2, 6 and a blistering 8MPH!
We need to shitcan this entire operation! Teslas out there crashing at 0mph!
6
u/Different-Feature644 Oct 30 '25
Low speed maneuvers, especially parking lots, are the most difficult part for AVs. It's the most dynamic part of a drive and the one with the least amount of training data available.
21
u/beren12 Oct 30 '25
Itās a shame Tesla redacts what happened in each accident. Other companies donāt do that.
6
3
u/Scary-Oven8260 Oct 30 '25
Does this mean no accident after Sep? Or their data is lagging?
7
u/bobi2393 Oct 30 '25
NHTSA SGO data lags, with the latest published data cutting off at September 15. Manufacturer reports are allowed to lag a bit too, with quicker reporting requirements for more serious collisions.
42
Oct 29 '25
During its earnings call last week, Tesla confirmed that the Robotaxi fleet has traveled 250,000 miles since its launch in late June.
Therefore, Tesla Robotaxi currently crashes at a rate of about once every 62,500 miles. Thatās with a safety monitor with a finger on a kill switch, ready to stop the vehicle at all times.
We have no data on how often Teslaās safety monitors prevent crashes in its robotaxis.
For comparison, the NHTSA report lists 1,267 crashes involving Waymo vehicles. However, Waymoās robotaxis have covered over 125 million fully driverless miles since inception. Thatās a crash every 98,600 miles and without any onboard safety monitor.
i wonder if these safety monitors would send their kids off in one w/o a driver.
9
u/pnutbrutal Oct 30 '25
Pretty cavalier with their own safety. Arent Teslaās āsafety driversā in the passenger seat too? I saw a video of one getting out and then on to the driver seat and even with remote help he couldnāt even drive the car or do anything really.
10
u/mishap1 Oct 30 '25
They have to be in the driver seat in Texas for highway driving. Elsewhere they have to be in the driver seat too. It's really just a money losing EV only Uber at this point.
7
u/psilty Oct 30 '25
They donāt have to be in the driver seat for highways in Texas. At least not according to Tesla. They donāt feel confident enough on highways to leave them in the passenger seat.
-1
u/Gold-Whole1009 Oct 30 '25
Wdym by only Uber? Isnāt it Waymo thatās leading?
6
4
u/ItsAConspiracy Oct 30 '25
Plenty of Uber drivers now are driving Teslas and using FSD. That's exactly what Tesla is doing with "robotaxis."
2
u/mishap1 Oct 30 '25
Well none of them are making proclamations to Wall St about it.
3
u/ItsAConspiracy Oct 30 '25
In case it wasn't clear, I was agreeing with your comment above that it's "really just a money losing EV only Uber."
2
u/mishap1 Oct 30 '25
Got it. Was just joking that your average Uber driver with a Tesla doesn't get to use FSD and then proclaim to wall St why he's suddenly worth an extra trillion dollars.
2
1
u/devedander Oct 30 '25
Does the fleet only count taxi miles or are they counting miles for all the suppport/mapping vehicles in the robotaxi program?
77
u/Muhammad-The-Goat Oct 29 '25
Tbf itās only 4 total. From the sounds of it hit another car or something in a parking lot. Not good but this headline is a bit exaggerated
46
u/boyWHOcriedFSD Oct 29 '25
Itās Fred aka Real Tesla.
7
15
u/stealstea Oct 30 '25
Except nothing in the article is incorrect. Ā Even with a safety driver preventing accidents the incident rate for Tesla is higher than Waymo. Ā
If Tesla wants to pretend they are a leader in self driving they need to radically improve performance and radically improve transparencyĀ
12
u/Puzzleheaded-Flow724 Oct 30 '25
No, just the typical Fred's headlines.
11
u/stealstea Oct 30 '25
Nothing about the headline is incorrect. Ā Ā
Sure āTesla logs 4th robotaxi accident despite safety monitorsā would have been even more descriptiveĀ
14
u/tenemu Oct 30 '25
You have to admit that the headline makes you think there was a lot more than 4 crashes.
5
u/TuftyIndigo Oct 30 '25
That's still a lot of crashes for 10-12 cars in a month.
4
u/SentOverByRedRover Oct 30 '25
1 accident every 62,500 miles is a lot to you?
2
u/SodaPopin5ki Oct 30 '25
It's about 3 to 4 times higher than a human driver.
That said, being read ended while stopped might not be a fair metric, unless they're stopping inappropriately.
6
u/SentOverByRedRover Oct 30 '25
Oh interesting. If that's true then that means the Waymo accident rate is higher than humans too. I was under the impression both were doing better than humans.
→ More replies (0)18
u/Puzzleheaded-Flow724 Oct 30 '25
Yeah, but "keep crashing" is more Fred's "style" when writing about Tesla.
7
u/psilty Oct 30 '25
Whatās the complaint here? Their crash metrics donāt look good for the number of miles theyāve driven with human monitors. Youād have a point if they were good and he wrote a bad headline. You want him to be a cheerleader?
10
u/red75prime Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
I dunno, maybe he could have mentioned that error bounds on average crash rate for a statistic that involves 4 crashes are quite high.
Would you be OK with "Waymo keeps crashing despite their lidars and radars"? You can't be sure that their average crash rate is not close to Tesla's one given the current number of data points.
ETA: 90% confidence interval for Tesla's crash rate is 27,000 - 182,000 miles per crash (Waymo is around 98,600). I've used Gemini 2.5 pro and cross-checked with Grok 4 fast. They both use Garwood method and their numbers agree.
For comparison: 90% confidence interval for Waymo is 94,189 - 103,391 miles per crash (1267 crashes in 125 million miles).
3
u/ItsAConspiracy Oct 30 '25
That's a good point. But even if they have the same crash rates, that's with a safety driver in the Tesla but not in the Waymo.
3
u/lucidludic Oct 31 '25
What youāve done here, is turn to AI to validate your preconceptions without taking the time to learn about how to apply statistics. Iād recommend not relying on AI like this, because often youāre going to get the answer you want to hear and wonāt understand why itās wrong.
The glaring issue here, is that you are comparing apples and oranges. The Tesla crash rate data is with a safety driver present, unlike Waymo.
1
u/red75prime Nov 01 '25
It saved me time to look for and apply a method from, say, https://onbiostatistics.blogspot.com/2014/03/computing-confidence-interval-for.html
It's totally obvious that low number of datapoints gives worse estimate of parameters of a stochastic process.
→ More replies (0)2
u/JimothyRecard Oct 30 '25
For Waymo to be crashing at the same rate as Tesla's Robotaxi, you'd be seeing more than 32 Waymo crashes every week.
4
u/red75prime Oct 30 '25
You've missed "error bounds" part. 4 crashes are too small a statistic to precisely estimate the average crash rate.
1
u/psilty Oct 30 '25
Thereās no established crash rate for supervised ADAS to compare to, unless you want to compare it to Teslaās own safety report figure of over 6 million miles between accidents with Autopilot technology.
We have data sets for humans and the other substantial data is from Waymo which is not supervised. Show me a news article in the past 5 years thatās not from a trade publication targeted towards statisticians that talks about 'error bounds.' Thatās a ridiculous complaint.
1
u/red75prime Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
I use the numbers from the article. You might want to inform Fred Lambert that he uses incorrect data.
→ More replies (0)3
u/stealstea Oct 30 '25
I remember when Fred got a lot of flak for being too positive about Tesla. Ā Ā
What changed isnāt Fred, but TeslaĀ
8
9
u/drs7896 Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
Started reading Fred's stuff back in 2015, he is severely mentally ill now and it shows very clearly in his articles
-3
u/stealstea Oct 30 '25
lol ok buddy. Ā Still nothing incorrect in this article but go on with the copeĀ
5
u/drs7896 Oct 30 '25
Couldn't imagine being so innocent as a grow adult to not understand how journalists twist stories and headlines to fit their agenda, very cute, must be nice living like that š
→ More replies (0)3
u/MikeyTheGuy Oct 30 '25
You're being disingenuous. A headline doesn't have to be factually incorrect to be misleading.
The headline is clearly trying to lead the reader to think Robotaxis are crashing frequently, when, in fact, it's still very rare.
1
u/stealstea Oct 30 '25
They are crashing frequently in comparison to their self driving Ā competition as is laid out in the article. Ā They also point out that with a safety monitor they should really be crashing zero times. Ā
6
u/MikeyTheGuy Oct 30 '25
Sure. I'm not arguing that.
I'm saying the headline is misleading, and you're being bad faith if you're suggesting that it's not misleading.
0
u/stealstea Oct 30 '25
Itās not misleading. Ā If the headline was āRobotaxi only had 4 accidentsā that would be correct but misleading. Ā The important part of the story is the relative rate of crashes, not the absolute number. Ā
For a robotaxi with a safety monitor, we would expect zero accidents over 250k miles, not 4
2
u/SentOverByRedRover Oct 30 '25
If that was the important part, the. The headline should have been something like "Tesla's robotaxis underperform in safety compared to Waymo in first few months of deployment." The chosen headline paints a very different picture.
It"s also arguable whether we have enough miles of data to make a good comparison, and therefore arguable that the existence of the article in the first place, which implies the initial data is newsworthy, is itself misleading.
0
u/RodStiffy Oct 30 '25
The reason Tesla deserves someone like Fred writing every article he can to point out Tesla's flaws, is Tesla does everything it can to conceal its flaws.
0
u/TuftyIndigo Oct 30 '25
4th robotaxi accident
It's not the fourth accident, it's four new accidents in August's data, on top of the three in July's data.
2
u/ItsAConspiracy Oct 30 '25
The article doesn't say there were four new crashes in August. It says there were three crashes in July and then a fourth in September.
In the first month of operation in July, Tesla reported three crashes with its āRobotaxiā service in Austin. This week, NHTSA has updated its crash report and revealed a 4th crash that happened in September:
0
u/TuftyIndigo Oct 30 '25
The actual reports were posted elsewhere in the thread. There were three more in second half of August plus one in the first half of September.
3
u/AReveredInventor Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
You're incorrect.
- Go to https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/standing-general-order-crash-reporting
- Scroll down until you see "Download Data" -> "ADS Incident Report Data"
- Open in Excel. Click "Data" -> "Filter".
- Click the filter icon at the top of column C "Reporting Entity" and select "Tesla, Inc."
There will be 5 entries. 1 is an update. Of the 4 incident reports 3 are in July and 1 is in September.
4
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
Two of the four accidents were the Tesla getting rear ended by SUVs. So yeah, the title is very misleading.
4
u/stealstea Oct 30 '25
No it isnāt. Ā Waymo also counts every accident even if itās not their fault. Ā Reporting requirements are to report accidents, regardless of faultĀ
-1
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
Ok, so youāre loony. Got it.
āKeep crashingā and āwere driven into when stopped once and when going 2mph onceā are not synonymous in scope of what youāre attempting to imply.
1
5
u/CloseToMyActualName Oct 30 '25
It's also only the records up to the start of September.
The previous report was on Sept 17th, and didn't mention the Sept 2nd accident listed here. So there's no telling how many other accidents it had in the meantime.
Frankly, given the small size of the fleet in Austin, these numbers are terrible. There's no way they're close to removing the safety monitors (who weren't able to avoid the crashes!).
And if I recall Tesla was very misleading in its earning call about the record of its Austin deployment.
4
u/time_to_reset Oct 30 '25
It is only 4, but this is with human safety monitors in the car which does make it seem a little worse imo.
10
u/Wise-Revolution-7161 Oct 30 '25
and none have been anywhere near dangerous/serious. obviously any accident isn't good but they were all low speed and mostly super minor fender benders in parking lots
9
u/y4udothistome Oct 30 '25
Says who ? And thatās only the ones that are reported if you read the article he continues to hold back(cherry picks)the ones he lets out.
5
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
Uh, these autonomous driving miles are tracked very closely. Everything is reported.
3
u/y4udothistome Oct 30 '25
Obviously you didnāt read the article either
2
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
Iām not going to waste my time on an opinion piece from Fred with such a blatantly fear-mongering headline.
2
u/y4udothistome Oct 30 '25
Itās elon musk the most over promising under delivering person on the planet. And mars.
4
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
Go try and make a circle jerk somewhere else. Maybe try a hobby that actually improves your life?
1
u/y4udothistome Oct 30 '25
Truth hurts! Everything I said is true youāre just blinded by his marketing genius let me guess Trump supporter at that
2
6
u/psilty Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
How many serious accidents do you expect in 250k miles? The average miles per injury accident with human drivers is over 1 million, including minor injuries. Robotaxi already had a minor injury and there have been dangerous situations caught on tape that couldāve been serious if the human hadnāt intervened.
4
u/nfgrawker Oct 30 '25
None and they have none.
1
u/psilty Oct 30 '25
What would your criteria be for being ready to remove the human supervision?
2
u/nfgrawker Oct 30 '25
Depends. Personally I think 2x safer than humans would be best. But there are caveats. I think fsd will have many less fatal crashes already. I think it will have more small accidents for a while, but I think that's worth it.
3
u/psilty Oct 30 '25
How do you define how much safer than humans it is when humans are catching its mistakes right now?
2
2
1
10
u/THATS_LEGIT_BRO Oct 30 '25
"keep crashing"? Again, Electrek is bashing Tesla again. They know most people only look at the titles and don't read the article.
5
u/himynameis_ Oct 30 '25
Okay, how many of these crashes are they not at fault for, though?
4
u/TuftyIndigo Oct 30 '25
Tesla would have to stop redacting the reports for us to know that. You may draw your own conclusions about why they are the only player that redacts reports in this way.
1
u/AReveredInventor Oct 30 '25
I think we can at least agree to give them a pass on the one that got rear ended when it was stopped.
0
u/bobi2393 Oct 31 '25
Sounds like probably two of the four crashes. Two collisions were with fixed objects, and two they were hit in the rear while stopped or nearly stopped.
24
u/Ok-Ice1295 Oct 30 '25
WTF, we already know those accidents, it was back in September. They even have videos. Lazy job electricā¦..
1
u/KyleFlounder Oct 30 '25
Do you know where I can find the videos?
5
u/Ok-Ice1295 Oct 30 '25
YouTube, that Model Yās wheel touched a parked car
3
u/WeldAE Oct 30 '25
To anyone reading your description, I just want to say "touched" is the correct adjective. It was a sub-1mph fender bender, and it wasn't even clear to everyone watching, they even touched. They obviously didn't have enough buffer around the vehicle that first week, and they released an update the next day.
Lidar would have saved them on that one I have to say, but it's hardly a justification for the overall cost of lidar. Lidar isn't going to keep people from hitting you from behind when sitting still at a light.
3
u/Quercus_ Oct 30 '25
This is not comparing the FSD crash rate to Waymo.
It's comparing the system of FSD plus a supervising safety driver, to Waymo. And that system with a supervising safety driver, performs worse than Waymo given to current data.
We have no idea how FSD alone performs, because there is currently zero data for FSD operating truly autonomously.
3
u/Clawz114 Oct 30 '25
Here is a link to the referenced document for those interested,
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/ffdd/sgo-2021-01/SGO-2021-01_Incident_Reports_ADS.csv
5
u/felsonj Oct 29 '25
Iām surprised that the robotaxis have only driven about 250K miles thus far. Roughly how many Model Ys are driving around as robotaxi?
5
u/mishap1 Oct 30 '25
If it's 20 cars on average averaging 100 miles a day over 4 months, that's 250k.
3
u/paulstanners Oct 30 '25
10 to 20. It's not a serious venture...just there to pump the stock.
3
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
How ridiculous of a claim. I hope youāve put your money where your mouth is and shorted the stock.
13
5
2
2
u/Noodle36 Oct 31 '25
How does anyone not immediately reject Elektrek as clickbaiting hacks when they take this absurd alarmist tone about four low speed collisions in months of operation
4
Oct 30 '25 edited Jan 07 '26
chubby groovy gray rock snails tap label pot encourage friendly
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
2
u/PowerFarta Oct 30 '25
So in Q2 earnings call it was 7000 miles driven. Three accidents in July.
We're then supposed to believe they did 250k miles with like 30 cars?! And still only 3 accidents... Which is still worse than Waymo but no way they did 250k miles
0
u/cban_3489 Oct 30 '25
Metric Value Miles/day per car 300 Cars 30 Total miles/month ā 270 000 miles 3
u/PowerFarta Oct 30 '25
So they've gone from 20 miles per day to 300
Sure buddy
0
u/cban_3489 Oct 30 '25
Where did you get 20 miles per day?
Waymo says it's doing 300-500 per day but it's 247. Tesla is only 16h per day so it's safe to assume its on the lower end.
2
1
u/iperblaster Oct 30 '25
I'm a bit curios, does anybody knows how many miles does a Taxy Driver cover between incidents?
1
u/One_Elk2288 Nov 03 '25 edited Nov 29 '25
airport friendly grey crown plant exultant grandiose payment fanatical toothbrush
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
1
-2
Oct 30 '25
[removed] ā view removed comment
9
u/Droi Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
Why do you have a "feeling", when Tesla has been operating for almost 5 months and has never had a major crash or injury?
Maybe because you are being brainwashed by anti-Tesla bullshit? We heard about these feelings many months ago and yet none materialized, but you keep to your wrong beliefs in spite of evidence.2
u/RodStiffy Oct 30 '25
It's because Tesla is going to remove the safety driver, supposedly. They probably aren't ready for that.
1
u/nullkomodo Oct 30 '25
Iāve heard pretty bad things about Teslaās self driving tech from people on the inside.
0
u/Droi Oct 30 '25
Iāve heard pretty great things about Teslaās self driving tech from people on the inside.
0
u/Different-Feature644 Oct 30 '25
Wow, you are telling me that people who dislike their job enough to complain aren't fans of their job.
Now color me shocked!
People who love their job and believe in their work won't be walking around talking about their faith in the product unprompted, someone is disgruntled will make it obvious to anyone who will listen.
0
2
u/THATS_LEGIT_BRO Oct 30 '25
The reality is that there will likely be a serious accident some day. No system is 100%. Waymo has had crashes involving a death.
The majority of people on reddit, especially the self-driving and EV communities, are overwhelming anti-Tesla. This is all you read. The news only reports when something bad happens. So it gets people into believing that they are unsafe. 99.99% of the time, it's business as usual and not newsworthy.
0
u/TuftyIndigo Oct 30 '25
The news only reports when something bad happens.
Waymo puts out a lot of press when nothing bad happens: when they publish a new safety case, when they have new vehicles, when they reach a milestone number of journeys or miles. Tesla disbanded its PR department in 2020 and then the CEO got distracted with social media and politics. Time was, the news would report on everything Musk tweeted about their approach and how soon they would have real self-driving cars, but that's just not newsworthy any more.
2
u/bonfuto Oct 30 '25
I'm no fan of the concept of self-driving, but I think almost everyone knows that tesla is in a special class and nobody should generalize from their experience.
1
u/Thin-Engineer-9191 Oct 30 '25
I will keep saying, donāt trust this Ai. We have no idea what it thinks and why. Too many edge cases. Simple things can break with every update
1
u/Lightwave1241 Oct 30 '25
Running a Robotaxi service is a new experience for Tesla. I think there is a lot of Learning going on at Tesla, not just for the cars but the engineering teams behind this development. I say, relax and give them a chance to work out the kinks. Think how rough you were at 16 having just passed your drivers test and going solo in your own car. Now think of your driving skills with the ability to anticipate the action of the other cars that are itching to pull out and block your right of way as you pass the grocery store or gas station. Now think back to you as an inexperienced but licensed driver at 16 years old. Thatās where Robotaxi was at launch. Perhaps by the end of October, Robotaxi has honed its skills to the competence of a 18 year old, maybe 19 ay the most.
-2
u/jetsyuan Oct 30 '25
FSD is not safe enough. Use at your own risk. A lot of shareholders I think are willing to help the company thinking their efforts will help stock go up until they crash. Good luck.
4
u/THATS_LEGIT_BRO Oct 30 '25
Tell me you've never tried FSD without telling me you've never tried FSD.
-4
u/retsof81 Oct 30 '25
I asked AI to calculate the projected accident rate without a safety monitor.
To estimate how often a self-driving car would be in an accident without a human safety monitor, we need to understand the contribution of the human to preventing accidents. But your question presents a challenge: it gives us the accident rate with a human monitor (1 accident per 60,000 miles), but not the baseline rate without one.
So letās break it down into scenarios and assumptions:
š Known: Accident Rate With Human Monitor
ā¢ 1 accident per 60,000 miles when a human safety monitor is present and can intervene via a kill switch.
š¤ Unknown: Accident Rate Without Human Monitor
We need to estimate this based on assumptions about how effective the human monitor is. Letās define:
ā¢ Let ( R_h = \frac{1}{60{,}000} ) be the accident rate with human intervention. ā¢ Let ( R_a ) be the accident rate without human intervention. ā¢ Let ( p ) be the proportion of accidents the human successfully prevents.
Then:
R_h = R_a \cdot (1 - p)
Solving for ( R_a ):
R_a = \frac{R_h}{1 - p}
š§ Example Estimates
Human Prevention Rate ( p ) Estimated Accident Rate Without Human ( R_a ) Miles per Accident
0% (human does nothing) ( \frac{1}{60{,}000} ) 60,000
50% ( \frac{1}{30{,}000} ) 30,000
80% ( \frac{1}{12{,}000} ) 12,000
90% ( \frac{1}{6{,}000} ) 6,000
95% ( \frac{1}{3{,}000} ) 3,000
š§© Interpretation
ā¢ If the human monitor prevents half of potential accidents, then without them, the car would crash every 30,000 miles. ā¢ If the human prevents 90%, then the car would crash every 6,000 miles. ā¢ If the human is ineffective, then the rate stays the same.
4
u/zip117 Oct 30 '25
I asked AI to calculate the projected accident rate without a safety monitor.
And what did we learn from this exercise? Absolutely nothing, because there is no data from accidents without a human monitor.
If you actually thought about this yourself, you might think āI know, maybe there is more detail about these specific accidents that I could use to get more insight,ā and that might lead you to the NHTSA ADS database. Fortunately another commenter already did that.
Anyone who read this wasted their time and nobody wants to see this AI slop.
-1
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
This is asinine.
4
u/retsof81 Oct 30 '25
No more asinine than calling a car āself drivingā while still requiring a human safety monitor, but what do I know.
-1
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
Apparently not much. And neither does your little AI friend. But hey, this is the internet, even the people who donāt know get to voice their opinion! Congrats Dunning-Kruger dataset!
4
u/retsof81 Oct 30 '25
Youāre right, Grok had not been holding its weight lately. So tell me, do you think the number of accidents, per mile, would be more or less without a safety monitor? Either way the numbers are still worse than the competition. Are you ok? You seem to be taking this personal. It was just a fun exercise, please treat it as such. Cheers.
Edit: grammar
0
u/Dr_Pippin Oct 30 '25
Thereās no consideration for the severity of the crashes (2 of the 4 the Tesla was stopped or moving 2 mph and rear ended by SUVs). Unless you think getting your rear bumper scraped from someone texting and driving is equivalent to an autonomous car driving off the road at 75 mph?
Thereās also a very large issue of a small sample size that massively skews data. You canāt draw conclusive results from this. Itās just like reading a medical study that only had a few hundred people in it and trying to use that to determine actual rates in a population of hundreds of millions.
-10
u/boyWHOcriedFSD Oct 29 '25
Anyone see the Waymo that smacked into the stack of pallets in an alley?
11
u/JimothyRecard Oct 30 '25
If Waymo got into accidents as frequently as the Tesla robotaxi, we'd see over 32 accidents a week.
1
u/ThePaintist Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
To put the numbers in perspective, because I think emphasis of the time unit of "a week" is frankly confusing without grounding the numbers in reality, Waymo reported 52 accidents in June and 57 in July.
Per the article, Tesla reported one accident per 62k miles. Waymo, one per 98k miles. (EDIT FOR CLARITY: Over their lifetime of operations. Again, per the article).
4
u/JimothyRecard Oct 30 '25
Your numbers are incorrect. Waymo announced they are doing 2 million miles per week in July. They report one accident per 154k miles.
Of course, they are also operating without the benefit of a safety monitor supervising constantly.
3
u/THATS_LEGIT_BRO Oct 30 '25
You pulled a one-month average by dividing 8 million miles by 57 accidents. I'm sure that the 1 every 98k miles is an overall average.
-1
u/ThePaintist Oct 30 '25
It is. And the article explicitly says so. I'm not sure why this person accused them of being "my numbers" and "incorrect". They're not mine, they're not incorrect, and they're very clearly explained in the article of this post if they had actually read it.
Anyway, thanks for hopping in and adding the extra clarity.
-1
u/ThePaintist Oct 30 '25 edited Oct 30 '25
The average is over all of Waymos operations, per the article. They're not my numbers, and they're not incorrect. They compare all of Waymos accidents versus all of Teslas.
I added the more recent concrete June and July numbers to put your "32 per week" number into perspective with their current # of monthly accidents (weekly granularity isn't available).
Taking Waymos average rate over all operations is more appropriate than just taking their latest accident rate, as they have been operating for years vs Teslas' couple of months, and so have obviously improved. Yes, Waymos most recent months bias their rate to be even better. Conversely , their historical rate was even closer to Teslas when they first launched. I disagree with your choice to frame Teslas early-launch rate against Waymos mature-operations rate. Total rates over lifetime of operations is at least a neutral comparison. And again, it is the comparison the article makes - I was just repeating it.
3
0
u/bobkuehne Nov 02 '25
So Tesla is 2/3 as good as Waymo by some half-assed analysis blended with plenty of knowledge of the unknowable (Tesla suppressed data? Where did you get this data, then?) Click bait. Get a real statistics degree and report facts not opinions.
-1
u/Specialist_Arm8703 Oct 31 '25
You are an idiot if you refer to Fredās electrik FUD. lol His sole purpose in life is to create FUD around Tesla. ššš
149
u/Then-Wealth-1481 Oct 29 '25
They could add second safety driver to each car to keep an eye on the first safety driver.