Re: Electronic stability enhancement and maneuverability
Guest 10 April 2007 21:32:07
"John S." <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote in message news:1176215401.316648.95150@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 10, 9:57 am, "Don Stauffer in Minnesota"
<stauf...@usfamily.net> wrote:
Seems to me that the new automatic stability systems may reduce
maneuverability. What do you guys think?
No. They will reduce some of the effects of drivers over-maneuvering
and losing control.
One of the reports I read said these systems are highly advisable. I have no experience with them, but our new car (to be delivered this week) has this feature.
If anyone has any comments, I would like to know how owners like them.
Seems to me that the new automatic stability systems may reduce
maneuverability. What do you guys think? Do they sense angular rate,
or lateral Gs, or both?
Car & Driver just tested some SUV's, the ones with stability control were very much slower in the lane change and much less G-force was allowed on the skidpad. It's in the May issue.
-- Steve Walker Fusion640@verizonwallet.net (remove wallet to reply)
I am not against safety belts, or side guard beams, or safety cage
construction, or crumple zones. On the otherhand I think air bags not
only don't improve safety, they actually decrease it (compared to just
wearing seat belts).
Ed
This is an interesting problem - and I've now read two articles in the last week talking about how improved safety equipment may actually cause more damage because people end up taking bigger risks.
Article #1 - NASCAR and the COT - it's safer, thus the drivers will take more risks and possibly suffer MORE injuries. (somewhere on NASCAR.com)
I don't buy into ESC and I sure don't want it mandatory on my cars, but I have no problem with other people buying it. I don't like air bags either, but I like my ABS in the winter - you don't stop shorter, but you do stop straighter.
I bet ESC will end up with DRLs and Air Bags and ABS in the "nice in theory, but didn't stop people from crashing into each other" file. Maybe if people just learned how to DRIVE we wouldn't need all this mandatory crap.
inspired waste of the publics money. NHTSA and IIHS are infamous for
making exaggerated safety claims for changes and then never going back
and verifying that the claims were true. They got causht big time
after trying to ram ABS down the public's throat. Of course requiring
ESC effectively requires ABS as well - so in the end the burecrats get
a two fer screw job.
It is literally impossible for the human being to pump the brake as
rapidly as an ABS and there are only a few off-road cars that offer
the wheel-selectable braking available on ABS. And there are virtually
no drivers with the skills to use such a braking system. ABS is one
of the biggest improvements in vehicle safety I'm aware of.
Where are the statistics to back up your opinion? While it is true ABS
has been associated with the reduction in some type of accidents, it
has also been associated with an increase in other types of accidents.
If all other factors are held constant, how can cars with ABS that is
properly used be involved in more accidents than cars without ABS.
That's easy man.
ABS allows you to steer out of trouble by increasing the stopping distance by pulsing the brakes off so you can still steer. This is a big 'compromise'.
This is all fine and great until there is no place to steer to, then you just hit whatever it is in the way.
It is deadly off road on dirt roads because it won't allow the wheels to lock so the poor suckers with ABS just keep going and going and bang! that tree wins every freaking time.
They then can pull the fuses or relays on the ABS and attempt the same trail at the same speeds and miss that tree 'every' time.
Been there, done that, watched that, on too many occasions.
Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view! Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2115147590 (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
On 4/11/2007 9:36 AM ... Don Stauffer in Minnesota wrote:
On Apr 10, 5:35 pm, Steve Walker <fusion...@verizon.net> wrote:
Don Stauffer in Minnesota wrote:> Seems to me that the new automatic stability systems may reduce
maneuverability. What do you guys think? Do they sense angular rate,
or lateral Gs, or both?
Car & Driver just tested some SUV's, the ones with stability control
were very much slower in the lane change and much less G-force was
allowed on the skidpad. It's in the May issue.
--
Steve Walker
Fusion...@verizonwallet.net (remove wallet to reply)
Ah, that was what I suspected. I doubt if the system has any idea of
the actual friction coefficient between tires and surface. Therefore
it must be prgrammed to activate at some g level or rate substantially
below the limit on dry pavement. Thus, while it may not reduce
maneuverability on slippery surfaces, I suspected it would reduce it
on dry pavement. Being an old sensor engineer, I doubted they had any
way to actually detect a true skid- tires slipping laterally, or
picking up a very high slip angle. A true slip angle sensor for tires
would be extremely high tech.
Systems I've seen sketched out relied on a gyroscope positioned between the two front seats to sense when the vehicle was getting our of sorts with itself.
On Apr 12, 9:10 am, Ray <r...@nospam.example.com> wrote:
I have cars with ABS, and for winter driving, I consider it a wonderful
device. For summer use, not so important. ABS works for me, but
apparently not for a lot of people, which is why I'm glad it's not
mandatory.
By forcing the installation of ESC, the Feds have also mandated ABS.
They never could prove ABS was worthwhile, so they weren't able to
mandate its installation, but by making ESC mandatory, they are
finally forcing us all to waste money on ABS. And this time they
didn't make the mistake of carefully studying the issue. They just
made some half assed claimed and made it mandatory.
BTW, there are numerous tests that show ABS increasing stopping
distances on snow.
Ed
I live in Canada, where I've been stuck disabling DRLs on my cars for 17 years now.
ABS may increase stopping distances but it also means you can STEER around the other object. It can't change the laws of physics, but I definitely prefer it in Winnipeg in the winter.
Mandatory tire pressure monitoring systems are coming too. Lame. It's no wonder every new car weighs 200 pounds more than last year's model...
Yes, it is just one grand conspiracy after another isn't it. You
don't suppose the head of DOT owns an automotive subcontracting
company do you? If the Feds aren't conspiring with OPEC and oil
companies to keep gasoline prices high they are colluding with car
manufacturers to keep adding pointless safety and emission features to
cars. We started with seat belts and crankcase emission controls and
it's been downhill ever since. There's just no reason for any of that
stuff to be added other than to cause you to pay more for your car,
now is there?
The DOT has blown it before. Look up the Seat Belt interlock system of the early 70's. Good idea in theory, bad idea in practice. If you had a bag of groceries in the front seat, the car wouldn't start unless you had the passenger belt buckled.
(I'm in favor of seatbelts, not stupid mandatory crap.)
All this safety stuff isn't cheap, and it weighs more than nothing. You don't get something for free with ABS, side door beams, safety glass, radial tires, etc. they're all good, but all have downsides.
If you would like to report an abuse of our service, such as a spam message, please . Если Вы хотите пожаловаться на содержимое этой страницы, пожалуйста .
