J.D. Power's Inaugural ADAS Study Finds Lane-Keeping and Emergency Braking Are Most Problem-Prone

In October 2022, J.D. Power released the inaugural edition of its ADAS Quality and Satisfaction Study—a milestone that placed data-driven research behind what auto glass technicians had been experiencing qualitatively: ADAS systems are frequently misunderstood by drivers, generate high complaint volumes, and create expectations for repair shops that go well beyond installation.

The study, based on responses from 84,165 purchasers and lessees of new 2022 model-year vehicles surveyed after 90 days of ownership, found that ADAS features accounted for 13% of total industry problems, measured at 23.1 problems per 100 vehicles (PP100). The most problematic individual features were lane departure warning and lane-keeping assistance at 6.3 PP100, followed by forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking at 4.6 PP100.

Ashley Edgar, J.D. Power's senior director of global automotive supplier benchmarking and alternative mobility, framed the finding as a quality-versus-innovation trade-off: "Although innovation is important, it is equally important to ensure current technologies, such as collision intervention features, are functioning to the highest degree."

For auto glass shops, the study data had direct operational implications. When a customer returns after a windshield replacement reporting that their lane-keeping system is not functioning correctly, the shop is inevitably part of the conversation—even if the system's failure predates the glass work. Shops that had performed calibration and documented the pass result had evidence to show that the system was functioning at the time of vehicle return. Shops that had not performed calibration—or had not documented it—had no such evidence.

The J.D. Power data also underlined why insurers were beginning to ask about calibration capability as a condition for direct-repair program inclusion. If ADAS systems are generating 13% of all new-vehicle complaints in normal use, the risk of a calibration-related claim following a windshield replacement was not negligible. Insurer networks that required verified calibration from their glass shop partners were managing a real, documented risk.