Car owners want tech they can ignore
A new JD Power survey of new car owners finds that drivers are happiest with in-car technology they barely have to think about, while resenting features that add screens or complexity without clear benefit. The findings suggest automakers pushing ever more elaborate tech and displays may be misjudging what actually improves the ownership experience, with simplicity and reliability mattering more to customers than flashy additions.
JD Power surveyed 68,084 owners of 2026 model-year vehicles after 90 days of ownership across 40 technologies. Smart ignition, which starts and stops the car automatically based on driver behaviour, topped satisfaction rankings with just 2.4 problems per 100 vehicles, while passenger-seat screens rated worst, with over a third of owners saying they had never used theirs and only 6% using them every drive. Hands-free "Level 2 Plus" systems, such as Tesla's Full Self-Driving and GM's Super Cruise, also underperformed simpler Level 2 driver-assist systems in owner satisfaction, despite offering more automation, indicating that convenience and low friction matter more to drivers than cutting-edge capability.
- Owners prefer unobtrusive tech like smart ignition over flashy features
- Passenger screens rated worst; many owners never use them
- Hands-free driving systems satisfy less than simpler driver-assist tech
New here? Start with this
Cars increasingly offer software and electronic features, from systems that help with driving to screens for passengers. Carmakers add these features to make vehicles more convenient and to distinguish their models.
The key players are carmakers, which choose what technology to install, and drivers, who live with it day to day. Driver-assistance systems can help with tasks such as steering or keeping a safe distance, but they still require the driver’s attention.
How easy and reliable these features are to use can shape owners’ satisfaction as much as how advanced they seem. That matters as carmakers decide which technologies to develop and include in future models.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Automakers should prioritise technology that works reliably and quietly improves everyday driving, because owners’ experience suggests that extra screens and automation can add complexity without enough practical value. Features that are easy to use and need little attention may serve more drivers than elaborate systems that are costly, distracting or rarely used.
The case against
More advanced in-car technology can still be worth developing even when early owner satisfaction is mixed: it may offer convenience, accessibility or safety benefits that take time to understand and improve. A survey after only 90 days may not capture longer-term value, and low use of a feature does not by itself show that it has no value to the drivers who rely on it.