After all, having more technology in a car isn’t necessarily what customers want, nor does it actually improve the driving experience. I know what I think on the subject, but I’m going to do my best to remain unbiased, as a recent JD Power survey found that most customers don’t value technology in their cars unless it provides a clear benefit.
Disney's search to replace Bob Iger: Morgan Stanley executive leads search
J.D. Power's 2024 U.S. Tech Experience Index study rated the “advanced vehicle technology” experiences of more than 81,000 drivers 90 days after purchasing a 2024 model year vehicle. There was quite a bit of variety when it came to the tech features people like to use. The study found that there are many tech features that customers like and feel meet their needs, but at the same time, there are many that are used infrequently or are constantly annoying.
According to Kathleen Rizk, senior director of user experience benchmarking and technology at JD Power, here's a summary of the company's findings:
While new artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies such as smart climate control have rapidly gained popularity among owners who have used them, recognition technologies such as facial recognition, fingerprint readers, and in-car gesture controls have fallen out of favor as they have failed to solve problems owners were not aware of. For example, a new diagnostic question added to this year's survey not only shows that owners say they have problems with in-car gesture controls (43.4 problems per 100 vehicles), but 21% of these owners also say the technology is under-functional. These performance metrics, including a lack of perceived usefulness, make the technology deemed worthless for any automaker that has invested millions of dollars to bring it to market.
(…)
Despite advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) becoming increasingly prevalent, many owners remain indifferent to their value. Most owners appreciate features that directly address their specific concerns, such as visual blind spots when backing up. However, other ADAS features often fall short, with owners feeling they can handle tasks without them. This is especially evident with active driver assistance, with the behind-the-wheel version ranking as one of the lowest-rated ADAS technologies with a low perceived usefulness score (7.61 out of 10). The hands-free, more advanced version of this technology does not significantly change the user experience, as indicated by a usefulness score of 7.98. This may be due to the feature not solving a known problem.
Something I was pretty shocked to learn was that drivers don't really like really good hands-free driving systems like GM's Super Cruise or Ford's Blue Cruise. Both systems work very well, but JD Power says people may not think they need them because they don't solve known problems. People seem to be perfectly happy just driving themselves on the highway.
They also aren't very keen on passenger screens, which I can totally understand.
Automakers are increasingly offering cars with passenger-seat display screens, despite the feature being classified as “unnecessary” by car owners. The technology has received negative reviews from many owners who point out usability issues. While the technology may be more favorably received if the passenger seat is used frequently, only 10% of cars have a passenger in the passenger seat every day. Additionally, the addition of a second screen adds complexity to the vehicle delivery process, as it is difficult for dealers to train new owners how to use the main infotainment screen.
The study also looked at which brands offer the best technology experiences, according to drivers. Genesis took the top spot for the fourth consecutive year with a score of 584 out of 1,000. Lexus, BMW, Hyundai and Kia rounded out the top five. Mazda, Nissan, Ford, Mini and Dodge came in last. EV-only manufacturers like Tesla, Rivian and Polestar received scores of 786, 666 and 578, respectively, but J.D. Power excluded them because their buyers are generally more receptive to technology.
A version of this article originally appeared on Jalopnik.
