Click here to view the Swedish version of this article.
Note: The images in this article are free to use for media, as long as you credit ”Niklas Carle/Vi Bilägare”.
- Driver distraction has increased: In the 2026 test, drivers needed 813 metres on average to complete the tasks, compared with 756 metres in 2022.
- Touchscreens are not always the problem: Volvo XC60 shows that a well-designed screen interface can work well, while some button-heavy systems are slow and complex.
- Execution matters most: Larger, better-placed screens help, but buried menus, slow systems and unclear layouts still make everyday controls harder to use while driving.
Touchscreens have transformed the modern car interior. But have they made driving easier or more distracting?
A new consumer-focused test of ten recent car models suggests the trend is moving the wrong direction. Compared with a similar test in 2022, drivers now need to spend even more time interacting with screens and controls to perform basic tasks.
The test repeated the same method used four years earlier. Drivers were asked to carry out a set of everyday tasks while driving at motorway speed on a closed airfield. These included adjusting climate settings, changing radio stations and altering display brightness, and the drivers had time to learn the systems prior to the test.
The result was measured in both time and distance travelled while the driver’s attention was partly taken away from the road.
Longer distance
In the 2022 test, the average distance travelled while completing the tasks was 756 metres. In the 2026 test, that figure rose to 813 metres.
In practical terms, drivers needed around two extra seconds to finish the same type of operations. That may not sound dramatic, but at motorway speed it means a significant stretch of road covered while the driver is focused on menus, icons and settings rather than traffic.
The comparison with 2022 is important because carmakers have had several years to improve digital interfaces. Screens have become larger, sharper and often better positioned.
In theory, that should make them easier to use. Yet the overall result has got worse, not better.
Volvo performs best
Tesla helped start the trend toward screen-dominated interiors with the Model S in 2012, and the 2026 Tesla Model Y remains one of the most extreme examples. It has very few physical buttons, with everything from climate settings to mirror adjustment and gear selection handled through the screen.
Even so, it performed better than the Tesla Model 3 did in the 2022 test, cutting the distance by more than 100 metres.
The best result in the 2026 test came from the Volvo XC60. Its screen-based interface allowed the tasks to be completed in 485 metres, showing that a touchscreen-heavy setup can work well if the layout is clear and frequently used functions are easy to reach.
However, even here there was a negative comparison: the XC60 still required 68 metres more than the Volvo C40 did in the previous test.
Mercedes falls through
The test also challenges the simple idea that physical buttons are always better. In 2022, an old Volvo V70 from 2005 performed extremely well because its large, clearly shaped buttons could be used by feel. The tasks were completed in just 306 metres.
But now, a 2016 Volvo V60 represented a more complex button-based interior. With many more functions squeezed into smaller controls and menu systems, it took 863 metres to complete the same type of tasks. That was far worse than the newer touchscreen-based XC60.
Mercedes also struggled. The new CLA, equipped with the brand’s latest MBUX interface, needed 35 seconds to complete the tasks. That was 15 seconds slower than the Mercedes GLB tested in 2022. The screen also took 19 seconds after unlocking before it responded to touch.
”Touchscreens are here to stay”
There are some positive developments. Screens are generally larger and placed higher than before, closer to the driver’s line of sight.
Still, the central conclusion is clear: bigger and better-positioned screens have not automatically made car interiors easier or safer to use. What matters most is execution.
The 2026 test shows that the touchscreen is here to stay, but carmakers still have a lot of work to do.
What: A test of the driver interface in ten new cars and one car from 2016.
How: We timed how long it took to complete four tasks while driving in a straight line at 110 km/h (68 mph):
- Turn on the seat heating, raise the temperature by two degrees and start the defroster.
- Turn on the radio and switch from Swedish Radio channel P4 to P1.
- Reset the trip meter.
- Dim the instrument lighting to its lowest level and turn off the centre screen.
Using the total time, we calculated how far the car travelled during the test. If the driver wandered from the lane or failed to maintain a steady speed, the test was repeated.
We also measured screen distance and viewing angles, tested whether the screen could be used with gloves made from different materials, and evaluated each car’s phone function. A test panel rated the driver environment in each car. We also measured the time from starting the car until the electronic interface woke up and responded to commands.
Where: Lunda airfield, north-east of Uppsala, Sweden.
Conditions: 12°C, variable cloud cover.
- Vi Bilägare is Sweden's biggest car magazine, launched in 1930.
- We review new and used cars and are also performing world-exclusive tests of headlights and rust proofing.
- Vi Bilägare also offers readers unique insights into car ownership with our long-term tests, where we each year purchase five new cars.
- We are completely independent and not associated with any carmaker.
