Stability control in SUV's

Nope

it is an admissi> Stop me if I'm crazy, but isn't the fact that both Ford and GM are rushing

inherently

computer to

you make a good trial lawyer,

by the same logic

Ford adds headlights to their cars, why don't they just make a car that can be driven at night without lights? Aren't they admitting its unsafe to drive at night?

Ford adds brakes to their cars, why don't they just make a car that can be driven without brakes? Aren't they admitting its unsafe to drive without brakes?

Ford suggests snow tires in winter, why don't they just make a car that drives safe in snow? Aren't they admitting its unsafe to drive in the snow?

And it's all market driven.

People want big-ass SUV's else they would buy Subarus. That's said and done. Ford and GM are just trying the mitigate the rollover risk and make the purchase of a big-assed SUV more attractive. It's a win- win for the makers and the customers. The vehicle doesn't roll over and it walks on top of my Subaru in a crash.

Manufacturers are putting stability enhancing systems in all types of cars, not just SUVs. Trucks and SUVs roll over easier than cars because they have a higher center of gravity and people drive them without thinking.

Peter

Isn't the fact that they put seatbelts and crumple zones into the car an admission that they're unsafe?

Because people won't buy a flat wide truck. They're improving safety on a popular item, and you see it as some sort of a conspiracy? That's really strange.

Or.....

it is an admission that people are inherently unWILLING to drive as conditions require.

It really harkens back to the screw -job that 60 minutes did on Jeep about 20 years ago. They proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that if you drive a Jeep like a Porsche it is likely to roll over. Nothing has changed... if you drive a SUV like a Porsche it is likely to roll over.... Duh!

Merely more tangible proof of natural selection.

If their stability control is as good as their antilock brakes, count me out.

Unless your SUV _IS_ a Porsche of course.

I wonder if our old friend Pete Albrecht has given it a try? He did pretty good at rolling over a Jeep SUV, and he really knows his Porsches.

-- Ed Huntress

It's because when you put some soccer-mom, (who can't even drive a car very well), in a truck. she needs all the help she can get or bad things will happen. She was taught to drive a car, doesn't even know that a truck requires different treatment, and hasn't the least conception of the meaning or consequences of a high C.G. The big selling point for S.U.V.s is crash survivability, so the sales pitch selects for insecure drivers to begin with. Is it any wonder that most of the things you see on the road are so poorly handled? Excuse the rant, MadDog

Overgeneralize much?

Hitch, _any_ vehicle is 'inherently unsafe under certain conditions.' Even an M1 Abrams. That's a fact of life.

If you can reduce the conditions under which your vehicles handle badly it's to your advantage commercially.

This is doubly true when you're dealing with people who either don't bother to learn the facts of life or somehow think their immune.

So, no, I don't see it as admission of anything.

--RC

My Blazer could do donuts in a 1.5 lane road. My S10 pickup is lucky to do a donut in 2 lanes. It makes it tough to do a U turn. I first noticed the difference on my road and later in town.

I figured all of the 'stupid' J turn roll overs forced the change.

Perhaps they realize that traffic issues are now the issue - and semi-automatic control will help. The engine is already computer controlled, and so is the transmission. The wheels are simply the next item on the list.

Martin

LOL. How true. Pretty soon there will be a wire embedded in the roadway, and it will uplink to all the cars on that road.

This will allow them to set speed governers, and select options from the traction control menu.

It will be a short step to say that cars without this ability will be illegal to drive on public roads - same as pretty soon cars without airbags or ABS will be illegal.

Anyone caught disabling the nanny-drive feature will be fined and ticketed.

Jim

To take this in a different direction.... I had a 93 Cadillac Eldorado with ABS and traction control. All I can say is that it works well and has kept me out of trouble.

I now have a 03 Seville with the above and Stabiltrack. I have tried to slide it a few times but the software taps whatever brake it wants and keeps you on track. It works. Fortunately I have not needed it yet but with the next snow storm that could all change. Give the engineers a break. They have a good thing. BTW, ABS is on most large aircraft to help keep them on the runway in wet and slippery conditions. If this was bad technology, it would never end up on an airplane.

I am a reasonable driver having logged probably 500,000 miles in my career so far. I am a midwest driver, growing up in NE Ohio and now in Illinois. As I recall I have hit things 2 times. One was a 2 mph bump into a phone pole (ice storm, everything glazed and I chose between a new pickup and a pole. Didn't even spill my coffee) and a tap into someones bumper in rush hour traffic when they slammed on the brakes. Animals not included (1 deer, 1 dog, countless rabbits).

Bob

The trouble with stability enhancers and ABS systems is, that they do NOT create traction where there was none before.

In this regard, they can make things worse - because the user does not feel like anything is getting loose, until there's too little traction to be driving at the speed the car is travelling. Then things come uncorked.

One would think that accident rates for ABS equipped cars would be a lot lower then those without. Apparently, at least in the recent past, this is not true.

Jim

Hoo-boy..... that Cayenne sure is a tough off-road vehicle.... and only about $90K with the turbo! Every time I see somebody driving one I feel like they are at the wheel of a real life parody....

I've seen this come up in the subaru group. No traction control system can overcome the laws of physics.

I can remember the same argument against radial tires when they first came out. I'm not sure if it means anything though.

It would be interesting to know whether or not ABS has reduced the cost of insurance repairs.

Eastburn

I'm looking forward to it. We'll get a lot more reading done, because we won't even have to look up from our books every couple of paragraphs or so.

-- Ed Huntress