Thought This Was Interesting - Mandatory Stability Control

[DodgeViper01]

Came across this in Car & Driver today while at work:

"The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration intends to make stability control standard on future vehicles. Various studies show stability control reduces auto fatalities by 56%. The regulations are set to take effect in 2009 and will be phased in over a three year period."

 

[twinturbo3150]

that *****

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

"Various studies" funded by STAB supplier Continental Teves?

What does the NHTSA say about extensive defensive driver's training for young drivers rather than the one week in a parking lot our public education provides for teens? Nah, I suppose diversity classes are more important.

 

[Bonkers]

While my opinions of NHTSA polices are lukewarm at best
the simple reality is that automakers were already going
this route anyway. It's like airbags - without getting
the gov involved I guarantee all cars would have them
today anyway. Why? Because 85% of buyers are willing to
pay more for safety and 99% of insurance companies would
have doubled rates for cars without them. Look at ABS and
Automatics - neither have particullarly made the highways
safer yet try buying a daily driver without them.

Course, on the other hand you can look at "mandatory daytime
running lights." The NHTSA tried VERY hard to enforce that
law, but the automakers and general public backlashed so it
was dropped. When automakers realize that people won't pay
$31,000 for a Kia I have a feeling the TC laws will suddenly
bend.

 

[AviP]

I could have sworn that stability control was responsible for my Supra Turbo spinning out more than once in wintry conditions. I hate it and that was one of the reasons I purchased my "dumb" Viper. If they are all going to have it by 2009, then I'll just have to find a permanent way to defeat it.

 

[DrDJ]

Stability control should reduce the chance of vehicle rollover, but the 56% fatality reduction quoted cannot possibly be correct. The only way to do that would be to eliminate alcohol.

If this doesn't become law, it will be a huge marketing mistake for the manufacturer that does not to have it.

A car with state-of-the-art ABS, TC, and SC would be as fast or (more likely) faster in every situation than the same car without.

A defeat feature would be great for drifting, however.

DrDJ

 

[Early93Viper]

We need more government telling us what to do, what to buy, etc., etc.

 

[Bonkers]

A car with state-of-the-art ABS, TC, and SC would be as
fast or (more likely) faster in every situation than the same
car without.

If that were true Aston and Volvo would have won SpeedGT last
year. ABS does help braking - no arguement there, but TC and
SC slow the car down to improve grip. In racing situations
there are plenty of times where the fastest line through a
corner requires the car to be insanely unstable - Seca's
Corkscrew is a good example.

The only good SC and TC do are in terms of soccermom saftey.
People buy cars that are well beyond their level of driving
ability and expect the computers to "fix" it for them. I agree
with TVC - the government should spend way more effort making
people better drivers instead of making cars better at surviving
crashes.

Perfect example of cart -> horse.

 

[AviP]

A car with state-of-the-art ABS, TC, and SC would be as
fast or (more likely) faster in every situation than the same
car without.

If that were true Aston and Volvo would have won SpeedGT last
year. ABS does help braking - no arguement there, but TC and
SC slow the car down to improve grip. In racing situations
there are plenty of times where the fastest line through a
corner requires the car to be insanely unstable - Seca's
Corkscrew is a good example.

The only good SC and TC do are in terms of soccermom saftey.
People buy cars that are well beyond their level of driving
ability and expect the computers to "fix" it for them. I agree
with TVC - the government should spend way more effort making
people better drivers instead of making cars better at surviving
crashes.

Perfect example of cart -> horse.

While I hate the mind-fuggling electronics, racing seems to be heading in a different direction.

While a Gen II GTS was born without ABS, the LeMans GTS-R had ABS. Formula 1 has traction control with variable settings.

It seems that even though a race driver can be faster than electronics on a 1-lap basis, it's the consistency of a race that matters. That is where the electronic win out. This is not just MHO. Much to my surprise, I got that straight from the winning Viper GTS #53 drivers at LeMans. Click the link for Formula 1 TC. http://www.formula1.com/insight/technicalinfo/11/462.html

 

[DrDJ]

A car with state-of-the-art ABS, TC, and SC would be as
fast or (more likely) faster in every situation than the same
car without.

If that were true Aston and Volvo would have won SpeedGT last
year. ABS does help braking - no arguement there, but TC and
SC slow the car down to improve grip. In racing situations
there are plenty of times where the fastest line through a
corner requires the car to be insanely unstable - Seca's
Corkscrew is a good example.

The only good SC and TC do are in terms of soccermom saftey.
People buy cars that are well beyond their level of driving
ability and expect the computers to "fix" it for them. I agree
with TVC - the government should spend way more effort making
people better drivers instead of making cars better at surviving
crashes.

Perfect example of cart -> horse.

I seriously doubt that both TC/SC and non TC/SC Aston Martins and Cadillacs ran the in the series together. Let's compare apples with apples.

I looked at one Speed GT race result and counted 11 Dodge SRT/GTS/Comp Coupe cars, 10 Corvettes, 6 911s, 2 Cadillacs, 2 Aston Martins, and 1 Volvo. Since the lone Volvo and Aston Martins were painfully outnumbered, the chances of them winning the series, even with the slightly faster cars than the rest of the field (figuring in drivers, accidents, strategy, reliability and countless other variables) is still slim.

You are at least a decade behind in electronics if you think that a state-of-the-art TC/SC system makes a car slower around a track. Examples - the Ferrari Enzo or any F1 car. Something else to consider that many might not like - a steering wheel paddle shifter without a clutch pedal makes for a faster car as well.

To date, the most effective way to reduce auto fatalities is to engineer the car to be safer. At some point, at least in theory, the return on engineering changes will be less than the return on increasing driver education requirements.

DrDJ

 

[Early93Viper]

I seriously doubt that both TC/SC and non TC/SC Aston Martins and Cadillacs ran the in the series together. Let's compare apples with apples.

I looked at one Speed GT race result and counted 11 Dodge SRT/GTS/Comp Coupe cars, 10 Corvettes, 6 911s, 2 Cadillacs, 2 Aston Martins, and 1 Volvo. Since the lone Volvo and Aston Martins were painfully outnumbered, the chances of them winning the series, even with the slightly faster cars than the rest of the field (figuring in drivers, accidents, strategy, reliability and countless other variables) is still slim.

You are at least a decade behind in electronics if you think that a state-of-the-art TC/SC system makes a car slower around a track. Examples - the Ferrari Enzo or any F1 car. Something else to consider that many might not like - a steering wheel paddle shifter without a clutch pedal makes for a faster car as well.

To date, the most effective way to reduce auto fatalities is to engineer the car to be safer. At some point, at least in theory, the return on engineering changes will be less than the return on increasing driver education requirements.

DrDJ

The Ferrari Enzo isn't faster with TC on (like most cars mags turn it off to get the fastest time around a track). The latest generation of Ferrari electronic aids (like the active E-Diff differential) found in the F430 is only faster for non-racecar driver. Racecar drivers tend to be faster with no electronic aids (especially in street cars) due to the fact they can completely control the car.

While less experienced drivers tend to be faster with the electronic aids turned on.

The only exception to this rule (that I can think of) is in F1 where the Electronic aids are very different then the one's found in most cars. Also when driving something that has 800hp and weighs 1300 pds you probably would want electronic aids.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Driving a car (race or street) isn't only about going faster. The fun is in controling the car and the competition.

If all you wanna do is go faster build yourself a high speed roller coaster and have at it. But it won't thrill me in the least.

 

[ruckdr]

Speaking of Mandatory, Just thought I would throw this out - long -
I remember it all!!

*********************************************

TO ALL WHO SURVIVED

CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THE KIDS WHO WERE BORN IN THE
1930's 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's !!

First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they carried us.

They took aspirin, ate spinach, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes.

Then after that trauma, our baby cribs were covered with bright colored lead-based paints.

We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.
As children, we would ride in cars with no seat belts or air bags.

Riding in the back of a pick up on a warm day was always a special treat.

We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle.

We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and NO ONE actually died from this.

We ate cupcakes, white bread and real butter and drank soda pop with sugar in it, but we weren't overweight because......

WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!!

We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.

No one was able to reach us all day. And we were O.K.

We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.

We did not have Playstations, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 99 channels on cable, no video tape movies, no I-Pods, no cell phones , no personal computers, no Internet or Internet chat rooms..........WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!

We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no
lawsuits from these accidents.

We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.

We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays,

made up games with sticks and tennis balls and although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.

We rode bikes WITHOUT HELMETS,or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just yelled for them!

Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team.

The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. The cops came to the house and talked to our parents.

This generation has produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever!

The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.

We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned

HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL!

And IF YOU are one of them!

CONGRATULATIONS!

and while you are at it, forward it to your kids so they will know how brave their parents were.

Kind of makes you want to run through the house with scissors, doesn't it?


************************

Later,

 

[Tom F&L GoR]

To protect lives, our best armed services fighter planes are inherent unstable and use "stability control" to simply keep them flying straight.
To protect lives, our top sports cars use "stability controls" to keep them heading straight when flying into instability.

Hmmm...

The long discussion to have is the amount of training each vehicle operator receives relative to which stability control algorithm they would get. OEMs seem to provide us litigous, drunken, cell phone users with idiot-proof systems. The sure sign that well trained "pilots" are in the minority is when the SRT engineer explained last night that opposite lock causes ESP to engage hard.

Perhaps the next generation of "tuners" will have an anti-Nanny plug-in that keeps ABS active, disables ESP, provides traction control only below 40 MPH, and any other feature that the owner/operator would like to dial in or out.

 

[Vic]

Stability control spells the end of "drifting". You should be happy, Chuck!

 

[slaughterj]

The Ferrari Enzo isn't faster with TC on (like most cars mags turn it off to get the fastest time around a track). The latest generation of Ferrari electronic aids (like the active E-Diff differential) found in the F430 is only faster for non-racecar driver. Racecar drivers tend to be faster with no electronic aids (especially in street cars) due to the fact they can completely control the car.

While less experienced drivers tend to be faster with the electronic aids turned on.

But one has to face facts, even most Viper owners are not racecar drivers, so electronic aids likely would help most Viper owners, whether they want to admit it or not. That doesn't mean we have to like the idea of having them, or even use them if they can be turned off, but that doesn't change the reality of the situation.

 

[ruckdr]

Take a look - ELECTRONIC Traction Control - aftermarket by Davis Technologies. There is a LOT of info in this site, including some demo videos. I actually called them a year or so ago, and they did not have a unit to adapt to the Viper as yet, but were working on some solutions. Again there is a lot of information on this site, Click on 'Traction Control', then 'How it works' view some videos.
A Quote: "Davis Technologies utilizes a very advanced, Patented method to detect wheel slip. These systems monitor the rate of acceleration of the engine (typical), and if the rate exceeds a pre-determined threshold, the system retards engine timing to reduce the power delivered to the rear wheels. These systems monitor the acceleration of the engine as many as 100 times a second. One advantage of this type of system is the lack of external sensors, such as wheel speed or ground speed sensors."

Most of their writings talk about 'distributors' (remember those things), but they do have computer controlled units also.

http://www.moretraction.com/indevelopment.htm
http://www.moretraction.com/traction.htm
http://www.moretraction.com/howdoesitwork.htm

Enjoy!

Later,

 

[DodgeViper01]

Wow, I never knew this thread would spark so much debate. Interesting view points though.

 

[Tusc]

Anything that can be installed can be uninstalled.

Although now if you unplug it and get in an accident it's just one more way for someone to find an excuse to sue you. Got to love America.

Edit - and I ought to point out that back when I had my C5 I had an experience where the SC/TC system caused MORE of a problem for me. I was just heading over to my girlfriend's on a cloudy afternoon and there was some mist and light rain which usually makes the road slick. I came from a stoplight in Middletown to the bridge going over Rt 9 where the road curves sharply right and angles up... imagine roughly a 90 degree sloping turn to get onto the bridge. I anticipated the traction issue and while traveling at 25mph or so left the car in 2nd or 3rd gear keeping rpm just off idle around 1200 thinking least power and weakest gearing for the speed would equate to least likelihood of slipping. The back end slipped and I auto-corrected the wheel left while lifting off the gas. This is all slow and controlled, but happened in a split-second. I 'know' the car is moving slightly perpendicular, but now SC/TC kicked in and traction came back abruptly - which was not great since the nose is angled slightly towards the jersey barrier. All said and done it wasn't a big deal, I didn't slide out hard, nor did I contact anyone, but the lane spacing was TIGHT on both sides and no room for error. It was NOT fun to have two drivers behind the wheel doing two different things and I consider the system to be more of a hinderance than an assistance. Likewise, for anyone in the Northeast, these systems are useless in winter ice driving. My take on it is that SC/TC works to the advantage of drivers who don't know what they're doing, but it seems to work against those who DO. I'm just picturing a minivan traversing an icy patch and the driver corrects for the slide, but the SC/TC does it's own braking corrections and offsets the purposefully intended yaw... sending the family over the embankment. How do you prove THAT in court?

 

[Bonkers]

I 'know' the car is moving slightly perpendicular, but
now SC/TC kicked in and traction came back abruptly - which was
not great since the nose is angled slightly towards the jersey
barrier.

I was working for Chevy when then first C5s came out with thier
"advanced" TC and this happened to one of our customers. He was
doing.... a reasonable and prudent speed when he lost it on a
sharp corner - he went to correct and the computer decided to
beat him to it. The end result was the car plowing head-first
into the inside barrier. Luckly he was fine, but the car was a
loss with less than 2000 miles on it.

Not saying that's common occurance, but it's one of the mnay
reasons I do not allow my car to drive for me. If I screw up I'll
deal, if the car screws up how can you possibly deal with it?

 

[V10 ICBM]

TC - floor it and forget it;
ABS - brake and forget it.
StabMgt - nice - get a playstationIII