Waymo recalls 1,200 self-driving vehicles for potential collisions with roadway barriers
Self-driving vehicle company Waymo said about 1,200 vehicles are being recalled due to a software issue that could cause collisions with roadway barriers.
However, the recall will not impact the Atlanta area, nor its program with Uber for self-driving cars in the city.
According to Waymo, the recall is voluntary and applies to cars with software released before November 2024.
In a statement shared with Channel 2 Action News, Waymo said the recall does not impact any vehicles currently on the road.
[DOWNLOAD: Free WSB-TV News app for alerts as news breaks]
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced on Monday that certain Waymo vehicles with the company's 5th Generation Automated Driving Systems software from before Nov. 7, 2024 were included in the recall.
'The software may cause the vehicles to collide with certain roadway barriers, such as chains and gates,' NHTSA said.
Additionally, the company said that a software update resolved the issue in November last year, 'significantly decreasing the likelihood' of minor collisions.
RELATED STORIES:
'You're up next:' Uber opens waitlist for autonomous rides with Waymo in Atlanta
Want the Uber, but not the driver? This could be your answer
Waymo driverless cars have hit Atlanta's streets. Here's what we've learned about them
Is Atlanta ready for driverless cars? They're coming, so we put them to the test
More specifically, 'the voluntary recall was issued due to minor collisions involving chains, gates, and other gate-like roadway barriers, none of which caused injury and the vast majority of which were low speed.'
As far as taking action with the recall, a Waymo spokesperson said the company 'provides more than 250,000 paid trips every week in some of the most challenging driving environments in the U.S. We hold ourselves to a high safety standard, and our record of reducing injuries over tens of millions of fully autonomous miles driven shows our technology is making roads safer. NHTSA plays a vital role in road safety, and we will continue to work collaboratively with the agency as part of our mission to be the world's most trusted driver.'
A federal spokesperson told Channel 2 Action News that an NHTSA investigation was opened in 2024 after receiving reports of 22 incidents involving Waymo's vehicles, those running their fifth-generation software.
The safety defect in the previous software version was detected in 1,212 vehicles.
As of Dec. 26, 2024, NHTSA said Waymo had already updated its ADS software free of charge and all affected vehicles had been repaired.
[SIGN UP: WSB-TV Daily Headlines Newsletter]
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Best Stock to Buy Right Now: Uber vs. Carvana
The world's mobility landscape is changing in several different ways. There may be room and reason to own both of these companies right now. One of these stocks, however, is experiencing oversized growth for reasons that aren't apt to persist. 10 stocks we like better than Uber Technologies › Uber Technologies (NYSE: UBER) and Carvana (NYSE: CVNA) aren't just two different companies. They're seemingly polar opposites. Ride-hailing giant Uber is thriving largely because owning and driving a car is an increasingly expensive hassle. Used car dealer Carvana, conversely, makes it easy and affordable to own your own automobile. One could reasonably argue there's solid -- even growing -- demand for both businesses. But it's difficult to deny the contrasted underpinnings of what make these two companies tick. Investors could understandably be confused. The good news is, one of these names is a clearly better bet than the other -- now and for the foreseeable future. You almost certainly know the companies. Uber Technologies isn't just a major personal mobility name, after all. It largely brought the domestic ride-hailing industry into existence, and now controls three-fourths of the U.S. market, according to data from Bloomberg. It's developing an international presence as well, even if it's not quite as dominant overseas. As for its fiscals, the $175 billion company's drivers provided over 11 billion rides last year, up 18% year over year, turning that into nearly $44 billion in revenue and almost $3 billion worth of operating net income. Nearly half of its revenue, however, came from deliveries and freight services rather than passenger trips. Carvana isn't quite as big, although its growth is just as impressive. The used car dealer reported $13.7 billion worth of revenue for 2024, up 27% year over year, generating a record-breaking $404 million in net income. Most of that profit came from sales of used vehicles to retail consumers, although wholesaling accounts for the bulk of its total unit transactions. A rebound from a inflation-crimped slide in demand after the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic helped drive these top and bottom lines higher. Last year's forward progress, however, also extends a choppy trend that's been in place for some time thanks to Carvana's clever marketing, and brilliant use of technology to establish scale. And yet, these two seemingly growing companies' stocks aren't exactly performing in tandem. Carvana shares are up by more than 200% for the past year, and testing their peak reached in 2021. Uber shares haven't made any real net progress since March of last year, upended multiple times by earnings reports marred by one modest shortfall or another. The market has largely lost its bigger-picture perspective on both companies, however. Take Uber Technologies' recent quarterly results as an example. Yes, since early 2024 either sales or earnings or guidance haven't always lived up to expectations. The company's never failed to make actual forward progress at any point during this stretch, however. Again, last year's revenue improved 18%, and is expected to repeat the feat this year. Although its sales growth rate is slowing, that's a purely mathematical matter. On an absolute basis, it's chugging along as well as it ever has. It's apt to continue doing so well into the foreseeable future, too. Uber is plugged into a serious secular trend. That is, although plenty of people still own and drive cars, there's a growing segment of the domestic and foreign population that doesn't want to do either anymore. A recent survey performed by Deloitte indicates that only 11% of people living in the United States over the age of 55 would consider giving up their vehicle, whereas 44% of people living in the U.S. under the age of 35 would consider doing so. And the disinterest is greater the younger the crowd. Thirty years ago roughly two-thirds of eligible teenagers held a driver's license. Today that figure's about one-third. The advent of a viable alternative like Uber is a key reason for this paradigm shift that's likely to remain in motion for years, as younger non-drivers grow up and pass along these new norms to their children. To this end, Straits Research believes the global ride-hailing market is set to grow at an average annual pace of more than 11% through 2033. Uber is well positioned to win more than its fair share of this growth. The food delivery industry is also set to grow at an annualized pace of 17%, by the way, according to an outlook from Precedence Research. This is another big growth opportunity for Uber, which already enjoys a strong presence within the market. But is Carvana just too promising to pass up? The bullish arguments hold water, to be sure. Chief among them is the sheer cost of a new car. Data from Kelley Blue Book indicates that as of April the average new automobile in the United States was being sold for a hefty $48,699. That puts the monthly payment well over $700, and subsequently, out of reach for most would-be buyers. Used cars are considerably more affordable though. Kelley Blue Book reports April's used car sales rolled in at an average price of $25,547 apiece, roughly halving the monthly payment as well. There's an important footnote to add to this dynamic, however. That is, the car business is incredibly cyclical. Once the current wave of updates and replacements has run its course, don't be surprised to start seeing Carvana underperform. Making matters even more challenging is the lack of new cars manufactured and sold in the U.S. between 2020 and 2022. As Edmunds points out, a three-year-old car (plus or minus a year) is Carvana's sweet spot, so to speak, where affordability and value intersect. Available inventory of these vehicles now stands at more than a decade low though, making it difficult for Carvana to offer what most consumers want. Never say never, of course. It's possible Carvana will continue to consolidate the country's highly fragmented and largely inefficient used car business, achieving growth through greater scale. There's certainly plenty of room for it. As it stands right now, Carvana estimates it only accounts for about 1% of the used car business. It's also possible Uber will run into an unexpected headwind sooner rather than later, even if it's not clear what that headwind might be. Be realistic though. Increasingly crowded urban and metropolitan streets and parking lots paired with car prices that aren't apt to abate anytime soon works in Uber Technologies' favor. Meanwhile, Carvana's recent sales strength doesn't reflect a new long-lived norm as much as it reflects the fact that the average vehicle being driven on U.S. roads is now 12.6 years, according to S&P Global Mobility, an age at which replacing it makes more sense than repairing it. The resulting demand for quality used cars isn't apt to last forever though. Now throw in the fact that Carvana's shares are currently trading 14% above analysts' consensus price while Uber's stock is 16% below analysts' (most of whom rate Uber as a strong buy at this time) average price target of $97.39, and there's little doubt that the ride-hailing powerhouse is a better stock to buy right now than the used car dealership chain's. Before you buy stock in Uber Technologies, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Uber Technologies wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $669,517!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $868,615!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 792% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 171% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 James Brumley has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Uber Technologies. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Best Stock to Buy Right Now: Uber vs. Carvana was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
14 hours ago
- Forbes
Tested: Tesla Model Y Juniper As Robotaxi
Here's some breaking news: the 2026 Tesla Model Y 'Juniper' with Full Self Driving is a robotaxi. Maybe Tesla can't call it that but that's what it is. And Waymo may have met its match. I had the 2026 Model Y for the 48-hour test drive (which Tesla just began offering) this past week in Los Angeles. The new Model Y, which hit Tesla stores in February, comes with Full Self-Driving (Supervised) version 13.2.9. But the fact that it's supervised didn't stop me from using it, in practice, unsupervised as a robotaxi, i.e., going door to door without intervention. As background, I've tested the Juniper Model Y FSD now three times: two test drives when it arrived at Tesla stores in March-April and now a 48-hour test drive. On most excursions it has gotten me door to door without intervention (see video below). That is, I just punch in the destination address and let the Model Y drive. I'm a passenger – not unlike Waymo, which I've also used many times in the Beverly Hills-West Hollywood area (more on Waymo comparison in video). Here's the short version. The new Model Y Juniper with version 13 of FSD is pretty damn close to a Tesla robotaxi and Waymo. Yes, I had to occasionally intervene but many trips in the vehicle are intervention-free = robotaxi. And, yes, it makes mistakes but so does Waymo. No FSD errors on the Model Y Juniper with v13.2.9 I've experienced have been dangerous or egregious. Mostly things like driving too slowly or taking a convoluted route to my destination (the latter is a mistake Waymo also makes). The Model Y with FSD version 13 is a vast improvement over the Model 3 I tested about a year ago. As just two examples, the Model Y took me from my home to a Supercharger location about 10 miles away intervention-free. I did nothing but sit there and witness the drive. At the end of the return trip, it took a route that I would not have chosen to take. But human taxi drivers do that too. It also took me to a Starbucks about 8 miles away intervention-free. That trip too was very similar, if not exactly the same as, what I've experienced in a Waymo Jaguar I-PACE in downtown Los Angeles. The only thing that I've found annoying is occasional speed limitations. On some short stretches of road near my home it slows to 25 mph and won't go faster unless I intervene. Tesla FSD is often compared unfavorably to Google's Waymo. That may have been true in the past. But not anymore. I use Waymo a lot in Los Angeles, as I said above. Though Waymo is amazing, it also makes mistakes. But its biggest shortcoming is its range limitations, i.e., geofencing (see this map). Los Angeles is a very big place and most of LA county is off limits to Waymo. Tesla's FSD doesn't have that problem. That is both a boon and a bane for Tesla – the latter because it's a huge challenge. But I see Tesla meeting the challenge in most cases. I will give Waymo this. In the geofenced area I use (Century City / Beverly Hills / West Hollywood) it is more refined and more confident than Tesla FSD. In some cases, more adept at avoiding and getting around obstacles. But Tesla is almost there. And, again, Tesla FSD has a huge advantage in that it is not limited to small restricted areas. I've spent a lot of time testing General Motors Super Cruise. As well as Ford's Bluecruise and Rivian's Highway Assist. Super Cruise does what it says it does. It very competently takes over the driving duties on the highway. But it ain't Tesla FSD. It won't do local roads. It's not a robotaxi. And that's the bottom line. FSD is not foolproof or flawless. And a Bloomberg story this week makes that clear. In that case, an older version of FSD was blinded by the sun, resulting in fatalities. And I've been in a Tesla when FSD missed seeing a community gate, which, without intervention, would have resulted in an accident. That was in a previous version of FSD. But it doesn't mean it can't happen again. That said, GM's SuperCruise, based on my experience, also makes the rare risky mistake. As do other ADAS (Advanced Driver Assist System) from other EV manufacturers that I've tested. Over the past year, I've tested ADAS on EVs from General Motors (Super Cruise), Rivian (Highway Assist), Ford (Bluecruise), and Tesla. My take is that the benefits of an ADAS outweigh the risks. In 2024, there were 39,345 US traffic fatalities. Needless to say, practically all involved human drivers. And that increasingly means distracted drivers using their smart device. Unlike humans, an ADAS does not get distracted. The larger picture is that, on balance, a Tesla with FSD – and any reputable ADAS for that matter – makes the roads safer. As long as the driver is paying attention and can take over when the ADAS fails. The latter unfortunately is a big if because some drivers see it as an invitation to text or nap. So, what about a robotaxi where there is no driver to intervene? As stated above, of course there's risk. But there is a much bigger risk with the average car driven by the average distracted human. With the explosion of personal devices, more and more people are distracted while they drive as they engage in things like texting – and even web browsing – while driving. I see people staring down at their devices while driving every day in Los Angeles. Those people are much more dangerous than any ADAS-controlled car. And those people would benefit greatly from an ADAS. The upshot is, an ADAS, such as Tesla FSD and robotaxi, does not get distracted and is laser-focused on the road. Humans often are not.
Yahoo
14 hours ago
- Yahoo
Waymo is winning in San Francisco
The self-driving car service Waymo has been active in San Francisco for 20 months and has already captured 27% of the city's rideshare market, according to new research compiled by Mary Meeker's Bond venture capital firm. That rapid progress suggests the mainstreaming of self-driving car service could happen faster than once thought. Why you're catching the 'ick' so easily, according to science Waymo is winning in San Francisco Supersonic air travel gets green light in U.S. after 50-year ban lifted 'What we've done in San Francisco is prove to ourselves—and to the world—that not only does autonomy work, but it works at scale in a market and can be a viable commercial product,' Waymo Co-CEO Dmitri Dolgov told Fast Company in March. In my experience as a frequent Waymo user, the service can cost up to a third more than Uber, depending on demand. But in some ways it's worth it. While Uber was originally meant to make ridesharing a friendlier and more social experience than taxi service, being alone can have its perks, too. A Waymo One ride can be a time of quiet contemplation, or even meditation, slotted in between meetings or other tasks. With Uber or a taxi service, you also get a different experience each time. The quality, condition, and odor of the vehicle varies from ride to ride, as does the driver's level of sociability, attitude, behavior, and language. Waymo service, by contrast, is largely the same every time: same Jaguar SUV, same neutral smell, same mellow, ambient music (which you can shut off if you want to). Note that Waymo's Jaguar I-PACE SUVs, after being decked out in computers and sensors, probably cost between $130,000 and $150,000, Motor Trend estimates. So Waymo could adopt less-expensive, and less-posh, vehicles as it scales to drive down costs. Riders may feel more in control in a self-driving car (sounds counterintuitive, I know). In an Uber, 'my car, my rules' governs a number of aspects of the ride. I wouldn't ask an Uber driver to change or turn off the music in his own car, for example. In a Waymo 'you control the music and don't feel judged by being on a call or whatever you do,' Das tells Fast Company. And while Waymo rides may take a little longer than Uber rides to get to their destination, there's evidence that Waymo rides are safer than human-driven cars. Waymo researchers studied more than 56.7 million miles of driving and found that by removing the human driver Waymo achieves a 92% reduction in crashes involving injuries among pedestrians, an 82% reduction in crashes with cyclists, and an 82% reduction in crashes involving motorcyclists. Yes, Waymo might have captured a quarter of the market here because San Francisco is a tech city. 'This may be due to a combination of the region's tech-focused culture, busy workers staying heads-down on work or sensitive calls, or simply a preference for fewer social interactions,' Jeremiah Owyang of Blitzscaling Ventures tells Fast Company. 'Standardized quality in a private setting is outperforming a variable, faster human driver—a physical representation of automation.' And don't get me wrong. I've had my share of problems with Waymo. On at least two occasions, in less-traveled parts of the city, a Waymo car has dropped me off several blocks from my destination. And, at least in San Francisco, you still can't take a Waymo to the airport (the company started servicing its first airport, Phoenix Sky Harbor, in 2022). Still, the differences that matter between the self-driving and human-driven experiences are becoming clearer to more consumers. And some of the ones that really matter seem to favor Waymo. Waymo currently offers rides in the San Francisco Bay Area and down the peninsula and Silicon Valley. The state of California just gave it permission to offer rides in San Jose. The company, which spun off from parent Google 10 years ago, also operates in Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Austin. Across these markets, Waymo says its cars have covered more than 33 million miles. In Austin, Waymo operates through a partnership with Uber. Riders hail a self-driving car through the Uber app. Within its 37-square-mile service area in Austin, Waymo accounts for nearly 20% of Uber rides. Waymo was valued at $45 billion after its most recent funding round of $5.6 billion last October. The company reports its revenue under parent company Alphabet's 'Other Bets' category, which showed $450 million in revenue and an operating loss of $1.2 billion for the first quarter of 2025. This post originally appeared at to get the Fast Company newsletter: Sign in to access your portfolio
