Follow us today…
There’s something captivating about how automakers present advanced driving technology, with smooth shots of cars gliding down pristine roads, drivers relaxed and smiling, and the promise of effortless travel. But the real test comes when everyday owners put these systems to work in the unpredictable rhythm of daily driving. That’s when expectations collide with the actual limits of technology. And while scrolling through the “2025+ Ford Expedition” Facebook group this evening, I came across a post that perfectly illustrated this gap between promise and reality. Justin Holt, a devoted Ford fan, explained why BlueCruise left him frustrated compared to GM’s Super Cruise.
Here’s how Justin put it: “I’m a Ford fan by far. That said, Blue Cruise sucks; do better, Ford! My wife’s 2025 only works on major interstates, while my company truck’s Super Cruise works on just about every highway and back road.”
The Problem With BlueCruise Coverage
BlueCruise is Ford’s hands-free driving technology, designed to work on a network of pre-mapped highways for hands-free driving. When it works, it can be a relaxing way to cover long stretches of road. But the catch, and the root of Justin’s frustration, is that this network isn’t as large or flexible as GM’s Super Cruise system. This means there are plenty of major highways, and almost all secondary routes, where the system won’t engage at all.
GM’s Super Cruise, on the other hand, covers hundreds of thousands of miles of roads, including rural and secondary highways. Adding to the frustration, some owners note that Ford’s marketing emphasizes BlueCruise’s capabilities without making it obvious how restricted the mapped network is. This results in potential buyers often discovering the limitations only after taking delivery.
Other Owners Weigh In
Justin’s post quickly drew agreement from other owners who’ve had similar experiences.
Casey Ragar commented, “Completely agree here. I like BlueCruise but it’s literally miles behind Super Cruise in almost every measurable category. Especially mapped roads. There are portions of major highways that still aren’t mapped.” My take on this is that Casey’s point about mapped roads is the heart of why BlueCruise struggles. Coverage isn’t just a luxury feature; it defines the entire usefulness of a hands-free system.
Peyton Sanders added: “I agree and also can’t stand how it pulls you closer to the dotted lines and other vehicles. I’m very disappointed in this system.” I think Peyton’s comment reflects a big trust factor. Hands-free tech needs to feel natural and reassuring, not like it’s making micro-adjustments that put you closer to danger.
Then there was Leroy Kirkland: “I can’t stand anything assisting me drive, I tried that BlueCruise and it almost drove me into a concrete barrier! Maybe if America actually had good roads then the assistant Cruise would be nice. But here in Texas, the roads are all crap.” Leroy’s experience highlights a reality many overlook. Driver-assist systems are only as good as the roads they’re designed to navigate. Poor infrastructure can turn even the best tech into a liability.
Why Ford Is Behind in the Coverage Race
While Ford and GM both rely on high-definition maps, GM has had a head start. Super Cruise debuted in 2017, four years before Ford launched BlueCruise in 2021. This has given GM a significant advantage and more time to expand its mapped network. Ford’s approach has been more cautious, maybe prioritizing Ford BlueCruise mapping accuracy and safety validation over rapid expansion. Still, in the real world, that means customers are left with fewer opportunities to actually use the system they paid for.
Ford has also been busy tackling other challenges, from Ford Expedition recalls for brake problems to being included in lists of SUVs with the highest depreciation rates. While these things might not directly affect BlueCruise, they do impact overall owner perception.
How Mapping Expansion Works for These Systems
Both companies use high-definition LiDAR and GPS mapping, but in GM Super Cruise preemptive mapping strategies, sending fleets to survey roads ahead of customer demand is the strategy. Ford, by contrast, focuses on refining existing maps before expansion. This yields better accuracy where available but leaves drivers facing large unmapped areas.
Advertising
GM’s inclusion of rural two-lane highways is another differentiator. For example, while BlueCruise might refuse to activate on certain stretches, Super Cruise will often work seamlessly in the same spots.
The User Experience Gap Beyond Coverage
Coverage isn’t the only factor separating the two systems. Owners often note that Super Cruise feels smoother and more confident in lane positioning, especially during long curves or when traffic merges. Lane positioning confidence in GM Super Cruise vs Ford BlueCruise is a recurring discussion point in owner forums.
BlueCruise, by comparison, can make subtle but unsettling steering adjustments that some drivers interpret as a lack of precision. The camera-based driver monitoring in both systems works well, but Ford’s sensitivity can lead to more frequent alerts even when the driver is attentive, creating unnecessary interruptions in the hands-free experience.
Another overlooked aspect is software update frequency. GM has been more aggressive with over-the-air updates for its Super Cruise, often adding new road segments or refining behaviors multiple times a year. These updates not only enhance performance but also expand coverage in noticeable ways, giving owners a sense of ongoing progress.
Ford does update BlueCruise too, but the intervals between major improvements can feel long and they often focus on smaller refinements rather than substantial coverage expansions. This slower stride forward leaves some owners wondering when, and if, the gaps they see every day will be addressed.
Tech Promises vs. Reality
This gap between marketing and reality isn’t unique to Ford. Many buyers of advanced tech features, even with Tesla’s FSD for example, report similar frustrations. Real-world limitations of Ford BlueCruise technology are often a stark contrast to the polished image presented in advertisements.
So from my perspective, this isn’t just a matter of coverage gaps, as it’s about trust in Ford’s driver-assist technology. Buyers investing in a vehicle like the 2025 Ford Expedition are expecting cutting-edge technology to work consistently and intuitively. When a feature is restricted to limited areas, it risks feeling more like a marketing bullet point than a genuinely transformative tool.
If Ford aims for BlueCruise to be more competitive with GM’s system, it may need to focus on expanding its mapped coverage more quickly, enhancing the steering feel, and delivering updates on a steadier cadence to address the usability concerns raised by customers.
Important Takeaways
- Know the limits before you buy: Hands-free driving systems vary widely in where and how they work. Always research coverage maps before relying on them.
- Bigger isn’t always better: A high-tech SUV with limited tech usability can be more frustrating than a simpler vehicle with tech that works everywhere.
- Road quality still matters: Even the best driver-assist systems can be undermined by poor road conditions.
- Loyalty has limits: Brand fans may still look elsewhere if the features they value most are outclassed by the competition.
Share Your Take
Have you ever been surprised by how limited your vehicle’s hands-free system is in real-world use?
And do you think Ford can close the gap with GM’s Super Cruise in the next few years, or will the competition keep pulling ahead?
Let us know in the comments below, especially if you own a vehicle with one of these systems. We would love to know how they’re performing for you.
Aram Krajekian is a young automotive journalist bringing a fresh perspective to his coverage of the evolving automotive landscape. Follow Aram on X and LinkedIn for daily news coverage about cars.
Image Sources: Ford’s gallery and the “2025+ Ford Expedition” public Facebook group, respectively.
Follow us today…
Source: torquenews.com
