MG responses

[ojuk]

Sent MG a list of comments and gripes, but put a separate section together regarding my comments on LKA, EBA, speed sign recognition and phantom braking when using ACC.

They never answered directly regarding the the speed sign and ACC issues (other than it would be passed to their techs), but in regards to LKA and EBA they had this to say:

"With regards to the Lane keep assist and emergency braking system, we are constantly working on improving the system and you should be able to adjust the sensitivity with the latest update. However, there is no way to constantly turn this system off as we consider these to be safety features. We want the driver to constantly be aware that they are driving without the safety features and so they have to consciously turn the system off for every journey."

They didn't answer my query directly that I felt they were dangerous. Neither did they answer my comment that the car should have user profiles which would allow you to set these as disabled automatically if you wanted to. It seems like this is "party line" from MG.

I have booked my car in for a software update in October - along with a review of the wireless charger (doesn't work) and the heater which only seems to blow hot air out when it's set to hot. Anything below hot is cold.

Interestingly, I also asked them about users being able to update software and they said...

"Unfortunately, I would be unable to provide you with a detailed reason why we do not allow OTA updates for vehicles. It borders along the lines of authenticity and security as well as to avoid complications that may arise from software updates."

Thoughts???

 

[NLMGSAN]

At least one: about neccesary improvements of LKA.
In previous communications they argumented that LKA updates would not lead to a recall because it is an assist system.
Your text now suggests it is considered a safety feature important enough to be active permanently.

Thus, if the latter holds, LKA updates should lead to a recall?

 

[tsedge]

I'm not interested in what MG want, I am interested in what I want. And if an MG will not do it, I'll get something else that provides persistent profiles, lets me permanently disable features and has systems that work.

It isn't a safety system, it isn't classified as such by EuroNCAP, and if it was then a lot of lawsuits would be heading MG's way.

This sounds like customer services trying to wriggle out and using an unwise excuse.

 

[NLMGSAN]

EuroNCAP does not classify anything. They are nothing but a testing organisation. What is supposed to be a safety system or assisting system is described in the EU regulations. Accordingly, test criteria are described and NCAP should simply follow these criteria. One of the criteria for the Alert mode is that it should work with any EU lane marker. Yet, they never tested them completely. In the end, NCAP only provides a commercial star rating for companies based on inccomplete tests.

 

[tsedge]

Well, fine, but their whole existence is to classify cars into safety scores. Yes there are EU regulations but there are also things beyond the regulations that are tested and I understand that there's a back and forth dialogue and things they trial before they become required.

Also, in the UK new EU regulations don't automatically apply, but we still follow EuroNCAP, so technically it is the latter that sets our rules.

I agree the testing they do is inadequate.

In general there are very few true safety systems and the way you can tell something is a safety system is that you cannot turn it off (such as anti-lock brakes) or have to have it on (such as seatbelts).

Anything you can turn off is typically classed as driver assistance.