Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Stability Control, are you ready for it?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I can't wait til the first icy morning.
Ron
I also saw the recent test on TV of ESC and hope many others did as well. For inexperienced drivers the system is a real life saver. Seems Ford will be first domestic co. to have it standard in 2009 with GM to follow in 2010.
Darwinism is great but this past weekend some econobox took on a Range Rover head on about 10 ft in front of me when the RR tried to make a left on a green arrow. Luckily the three folks in the RR were ok and I think the lady in the teal car was ok too, probably had at least a broken leg. Since they seem to want to take others with them I'll vote for safety systems that in some cases might keep others out of it, like my ability to avoid the accident and get out of the way so I could direct some traffic.
The question is not whether ESC is a good safety feature to have, but whether presenting it to an often ignorant public in the manner Hyundai did is irresponsible. I haven't been on a giant slip and slide lately, but I sure wouldn't be crazy enough to drive down a mountain on one... even with the miracle of ESC on my vehicle. :sick:
HOW IRRESPONSIBLE! I'm surprised they haven't had somebody killed trying to jump their Civic across buildings.....
.
.
.
.
c'mon jipster - it's a commercial. The POINT was to say that in slippery conditions, the sytem on the new Hyundai can help the diver maintain control - THAT'S IT. If they did a commercial with a typical road in a typical rainshower and then the Hyundai driving down the road in a completely normal manner, everybody watching the commercial would be like "Huh? What was the point of that? yawn....."
If a commerical comes out touting airbags, would you say they are promoting unsafe driving behaviour because the drivers might feel invincible? If they tout a new structural design leading to much better crashworthiness, does that make viewers feel invincible?
kirstie_h, "Car Commercials: The good, the bad, and the annoying!" #2956, 15 Sep 2006 6:14 am
to continue the conversation in the commercial discussion.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
According to todays newspaper ESC will become standard on all vehicles by the 2012 model year, and will be required by the government. GM says it will have ESC standard on all of its vehicles by 2010... Ford and Toyota by 2009. Hyundai will have ESC as standard equipment on 70% of it's 2007 vehicles.
Darwinism at its best..
Except it ends up harming people who are doing the right thing. Manufacturers should be required to show responsible driving, not slaloming down a mountain in an SUV, because it's equipped with stability control.
Why not pass the following laws first?
1. Mandate that all vehicles pass a certain minimum handling safety test. The handling capability of a Chevy Suburban and a Subaru WRX STi are vastly different. Don't allow poor handling tanks on the road. Better handling vehicles would save lives.
2. Mandate vehicle ride heights. A head-on collision between a Hummer II and a Honda Insight would likely not be pretty for the Insight driver. Responsible bumper placement would save lives. Mandate that tractor trailers use ONLY the right lane on state and interstate highways.
3. Electronically govern the top speed of all road registered vehicles to 85 mph (or some reasonable value close to the current speed limit). This would absolutely prevent all high speed crashes involving cars going over 85 mph and would save lives.
4. Disallow vehicles with too many blind-spots. Vehicles with poor visibility have no place on the road.
I see this moronic logic (ie ESC) all the time in engineering research. Instead of addressing the root cause, band-aids are placed on the effect to reduce disaster potential.
Because it is difficult to get things passed that are targeted to specific makes or models.
1. They do pass minimum standards currently. In fact in fatalities per million miles, the Suburban is one of the safest vehicles on the road. The Evo and WRX on the other hand are the cars I see most often in rollovers at the track since they are more ralley cars and not exactly suited to very high speed track handling.
2. Ride heights are already set by rule in, I expect, all states.
3. Good luck and how is a goverened limit not "another half-assed government solution"? It seems you buy one form of intervention but don't much care for passive technology that might just save people from dying.
4. And just what would those be?
You may feel that it is moronic but as published, studies have shown that 7-10k lives could be saved annually if the system was on the whole fleet. Sounds like if the root cause can't be addressed, making people smarter so they don't kill themselves and others, that addressing how they do it is pretty direct. Especially when it is intervention that never takes place except when needed, sort of like air bags.
Randy
Can you be more specific?
Even today, however, many of the ESC "off" buttons don't turn the system off. Most merely raise the thresholds at which the system cuts in. Each manufacturer has their only policy on this matter, no doubt fueled by their respective legal departments. Every one I've tested has always reset to "on/more aggressive cut-in" when the car is re-started.
I suspect that if ESC is made mandatory, then the legal implications of providing an "off" switch will be more burdensome. True off mode may disappear.
On the other hand, I've talked to many sales and marketing types at automakers, and they usually INSIST on such switches for options that cost a lot of money. They want 'em because then a salesman can point out the switch in a showroom to emphasize that the car does, in fact, give you something you can see for your $700 or whatever it is. They really get worked up over it too!
Twitter: @Edmunds_Test
I know what you are saying, but c'mon. If reality were the true test, no commercials would ever be made.
I think the slip 'n' slide angle is humorous. Do I think they really mean it? Of course not!
Do I think a Toyota Tacoma is meteor-proof? No. Funny? yes.
Should I drop an s-load of heavy metal objects on my Tundra and expect to drive away with no damage? No. Funny? Yes.
Is it irresponsible for VW to imply, in one of their FAST commercials, that you SHOULD drive in the rain rather than ordering take-out and burdening some other person with a wet weather drive? I don't think so.
They're all trying to make a point about some feature of their car that you wouldn't notice on a showroom floor, and probably won't notice in a test drive.
Because we all know what a slide 'n' slide is, and what it feels like to be on one, we can all imagine what ESC does and understand why we might want it. And anything that can make the public WANT ESC is all right with me, because I've done the tests and I think, as the title of this thread asks, that its worth it.
Twitter: @Edmunds_Test
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Traction control needs an off mode for another reason: dynamometer testing, as is necessary for many annual smog tests. TRC won't let the front wheels be stationary while the rears are doing 60! Many cars that don't have a switch usually have a back door way for smog mechanics to do this.
Twitter: @Edmunds_Test
ESC is all about Yaw, or rotating the car, not just the wheels. In a spin usually the rear tries to pass the front of the car and as this starts the car is 'yawing' and a gyro measures this beginning of rotation of the whole car and the system then decides what to do. Most systems also address understeer which is not technically yaw but since most cars are set to understeer instead of oversteer (yaw) it doesn't get much comment.
randy
Interesting that in the Corvette the system in the C5 98-04 and the C6 since '05 and the new C6 Z06 since '06 there are differences. In the C5 the system is truly off when you switch it that way and in Comp Mode it is less intrusive. There are reports that in the C6 the off mode isn't truly off but I don't have any details.
Also, you are so correct that each mfgr sets the limits of the system based on their own engineering and presumably legal input. The original Sequoia was so intrusive that it got really bad writeups in some car mags. The interesting thing about sensor input is that peak and steady state readings can mean very different things and getting computer code to recognize subtle things isn't easy, I expect. Then you have the reliability of the sensors themselves to consider and the safe modes they revert to when they don't pass their own internal safety checks. I understand that Honda replaced some code a couple years ago but didn't do a recall. It is complicated stuff.
Randy
Precisely my point. You have absolutely no control while on a slip n slide. If it's not in a perfectly straight alignment you would slide right off at the first bend. Now transfer those conditions to a steep and twisty mountain road covered with sleet and ice. Could a vehicle with traction control handle it? No one has yet answered that question.
Again, manufacturers can exaggerate the meteorite proof ability and toughness of trucks etc. But, to exaggerate the performance capability of a safety feature is irresponsible.
Do I think they really mean it? Of course not!
Again you are making my point. You may not think they really mean it... and most half way intelligent people will realize it is just a humorous commercial for ESC. But, there are some "less intelligent" people out there in the world who may think it is perfectly safe to take a steep hill with limited to almost no traction... and do it safely as long as their vehicle is equipped with ESC.
I wish it was as easy to get people to mean what they say. I presume you mean with Stability Control, and yes the question has been answered in Europe when the system was introduced in the mid 90's. MB took the press out to an ice covered lake and set out a course, like auto cross with cones and had the press and professional drivers try to navigate it. Nobody, even the professional drivers could get around without hitting some cones. Then they turned on the ESC system and everyone was able to get around without hitting cones, the pro's just did it a little faster. Amazing video and one of the reasons that most all cars in the EU already have the system. When MB put it on the A Class (that's another story) then all the rest of the small car builders started to follow suit.
Randy
"As easy" as what??? How ironic. :P
Sorry to have confused you, but of course I meant stability control... not traction control.
It would seem Europeans can have intelligent commercials about the real life capabilities of "stability control". But, here in the U.S we are presented with idiotic slip n slide commercials that exaggerate stability control capabilities. Driving on a flat service on dry ice is much different than driving down a steep mountain on wet ice. So I still contend my original question hasn't been answered.
I do agree that a commercial you described would be much more informative and effective in conveying the capabilities of stability control. I have yet to see anything close to what you have described.
i could see where the technology would provide a false sense of security for low-skill or otherwise distracted drivers and the results could be disasterous.
i think used by skilled, knowlegeable, aware drivers, its all good. in use by others, not a differentiator, perhaps the opposite.
my concern about adopting the technology on a personal level is worry about yaw sensor validation and false activation, but also, i'd like a way to disable (and know it's disabled) so i could compare what the vehicle / road conditions are really presenting.
i want good situational awareness myself. i don't want that (my sensing) usurped by technology.
I didn't say it was a commercial, it was an introduction to the press and the video was for internal use. They were still trying to figure out how it would be perceived by the media and by extension by consumers. In the EU it was accepted, and then basically demanded.
Interesting that the tests and studies done show that the technology has such a low level of impact and happens so early that even some experienced drivers don't even know it has intervened. It is truly in the background until the situation is so beyond reason that it has to do something that you will really notice. Like when it saved me in a 100+mph drop of a wheel off the end of a berm on corner exit at Sears Point Raceway. In the first time I ever had it engage, it was in a hard rain on the freeway and all it did was chime and show a light on the dash with a very slight bobble of the steering wheel (that could have been road bumps) that I hardly noticed, probably saved a hydroplane spin, I'll never know, thankfully.
I don't get why some people that accept technology, be it cell phones or message boards will reject something that they haven't tested to find out if it works.
As for the sensor safe modes I can only speak for the gyro in the Corvette but if it gets any data that is not correct in sequence it gives you a warning that it is shutting itself off.
If you wouldn't mind handing over your corvette to me for the weekend, I would be more than happy to get squirreley in some tight turns with it. But, I don't think any of my friends, dealerships or rental companies would be to happy if I asked to borrow their vehicle for me to see how well stability control worked.
When airbags first came out it was advertised in a way that demonstrated it's actually performance in head on collisions. The same thing when the side curtain airbags came out. But, with stability control what do we get? Some stupid Hyundai Santa Fe at the top of a mountain high tailing it down on a jumbo sized slip n slide.
Why can't advertisers do a side by side comparison on a test track to show the actual performance capabilities of stability control? Stability control vehicle versus one without. They could show the non stability control vehicle flying off the track into a rock wall and bursting into flames. Then have the camera cut back to the driver with stability control giving a slight smile and a knowing wink of the eye. This type of commercial would be both informative, as well as entertaining for those with short attention spans who prefer the slip n slide type of ads.
I don't doubt stability control works, but it is difficult for me to believe it works as advertised when all we get are case studies and silly commercials that exaggerate instead of being informative.
I see more women in SUV's (now that is a JOKE (SUV) just to add $$$ to the window sticker), that will never see off road, or need it for any reason at all, just to look good going down the road, but they have no idea how to handle this vehicle, none at all! They think that they are in a car, even with all the signs plastered all over the inside of the truck! Toyota's first SUV wasn't EVEN a 4 wheel drive, it was just a front wheel drive, that rode very high, to make it look like an SUV!!! I doubt that most women will ever see the sign over their heads, they usually have the visor down and mirror open to put on Makeup!
In a quick maneuver this vehicle WILL roll over, just as the sign over their head says! Most of the SUV's on the road today, which I would say atleast 95% will NEVER be in any situation to need, or pay the price of high fuel cost and maintenance, to say you own a 4 wheel drive vehicle! How many Lexus's will EVER see off road? How about BMW's? Maybe the Supercharged ($95,000.--+) Porsche SUV? Well how about a Hyundai? NONE, I'm willing to bet! But this in Only My Opinion, you can disagree with me if you like, but just look at the stats on these vehicles, and look at WHY they are in more highway accidents, and then tell me they DON'T NEED "Active Handling" or Stability Control"!
It's mostly a joke whether the driver is male or female. The vast majority will never go off-road, whatever the sex of the driver. Male drivers seem to me to be the ones more likely to be driving like jerks in them...tailgating and flipping from lane to lane.
Probably women are driving them because the husband is too insecure to get a minivan or wagon.
I also note that many cars are now listed as having ESC
as switchable or nonswitchable.
Randy
This Detroit Free Press article implies that mandatory ESC by Sept 1, 2011 is a done deal. Politics do indicate that this is likely to be the case, but a Final Rule has not been issued. Here is where things really stand.
NHTSA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on September 18, 2006. This NPRM details NHTSA's scentific justification for the rule, the proposed performance requirements, disposition of any on/off switches, and the phase-in schedule that builds to 100% by Sept. 1, 20011 (MY 2012 vehicles)
The comment period extends until November 17, 2006. Many manufacturers have issued comments, including a request by SEMA (Specialty Equipment Manufacturers Association) to extend the comment period a further 31 days.
If you want to follow what is going on and see what manufacturers are saying about the proposed rule, go to the government's docket management system website, select the simple search tab and enter Docket Number 25801. I'm not certain, but I think anyone can comment.
A Final Rule cannot be issued until after a certain period of time after the comment period closes, even if the comments result in no changes to the NPRM. If memory of my past dealings with NHTSA rulemaking procedures are correct, a Final Rule cannot go into effect for 180 days after it's issuance.
Dan
Twitter: @Edmunds_Test
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061121/BUSINESS01/611210393/10- 14/BUSINESS01
Rocky
And then a view of the above at:
http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/53298.html
I just wish everyone in the automotive media would quit
calling it 'electronic nannies'.
Randy
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070127/AUTO01/701270352/- 1148/AUTO01
Rocky
smaller than the rear and this offset is programmed into the
active handling (ESC) system. People who put on custom
or track wheels have found that the AH light will go on
with these setups. It will be an issue.
As I understand it the yaw sensor, gyro, measures rotation
or about to spin for the whole chassis, but the system also
gets input from the steering angle sensor and from wheel
speed sensors that measure differential speed. The data
from a different mix of wheels can mess up the system. Got
that input at the Caddy dealer the other day when doing an
oil change for the wife's Vette. An Esclade was in and the
service tech said, 'yea, another owner who wants warranty
service since their custom wheels don't work with ESC'.
Randy
Not sure what they could do under warranty if the aftermarket setup messed up the ESC--replacing all the sensors and brains still wouldn't change the programming of the thing.