Previous research has shown that a device called “motor priming” (MP) was more effective than other lane departure warning systems. MP prompts drivers to take action by means of small asymmetric oscillations of the steering wheel. The first objective of this experiment was to provide a deeper understanding of MP mechanisms through a series of comparisons with other haptic and auditory systems. The results suggest that much of the improvement in recovery manoeuvres observed with MP is due to the motor cue (proprioceptive preactivation of the gesture). Other factors, such as delivering the signal directly to the hands (stimulation of response effectors) or using the tactile modality rather than auditory warning, play a lesser role. This supports the hypothesis that MP devices directly intervene at the motor level, in contrast to more traditional warning systems, which only improve situation diagnosis. The second objective was to assess drivers' acceptance of the assistance devices. A dissociation between efficiency and acceptance of the devices was observed: drivers globally preferred auditory warning to MP. The combination of auditory warning and motor priming appeared to be a good compromise to achieve both effectiveness and acceptance. This experiment illustrates the relevance of simulator studies when dangerous situations are the main targets of the investigation.