US Manufacturers required to include stability control

[Jaranath]

The proposed requirement is to be in place by 2012.

Although I'm of mixed feelings about this requirement, the safety numbers they present hit pretty hard.

[Janizary]

What I think will be interesting is what will happen on the side of the investigators when accidents occur. For example: Let us assume some driver has manually disabled his VSA/ESA (whatever you wish to call it) then is involved in an accident. Investigators later find this was manually disabled (through ECU logging, or some other method). If the accident was determined to have been 'avoidable' had the VSA been activated, then I could see some very interesting judgements made in any criminal and civil trials as an outcome.

"Willful disregard for public safety, etc.", however your particular jurisdiction defines 'Reckless', 'Careless', or even moving to manslaughter (see the typical definition which includes a 'wreckless disregard' clause) in cases where someone is killed as a result of the accident.

Not saying pro or con, or otherwise, just that this could be a factor in the future.

[Jrfish007]

Originally Posted by Jaranath

The proposed requirement is to be in place by 2012.

Although I'm of mixed feelings about this requirement, the safety numbers they present hit pretty hard.

ahhh.... this is proposed, not mandatory anything yet. and I've seen quite a few of these come thru in recent years, then a few years before they are implemented, manufactures lobby against it and it gets taken down. I’m guessing IF the proposal is adopted, a similar fait would happen.

[ethlar]

Originally Posted by Janizary

...Let us assume some driver has manually disabled his VSA/ESA (whatever you wish to call it) then is involved in an accident. Investigators later find this was manually disabled (through ECU logging, or some other method). If the accident was determined to have been 'avoidable' had the VSA been activated, then I could see some very interesting judgements made in any criminal and civil trials as an outcome.

I can see insurance companies denying payments after finding out about that too.

[Janizary]

Good point, ethlar!

[Jaranath]

Yeah, that's kinda my thinking, Janizary. I have a hard time accepting that TCS/ESC can actually HURT, unless two specific conditions are met:

1. You are driving at the limits of the loss of control, essentially racetrack driving, and

2. You expected to have the extra bit of grip or throttle that the TCS/ESC robs, and have committed yourself to a situation where its absence means an accident will occur.

I've flipped a kart twice. I had no control over the second incident, but the first one involved precisely this sort of situation: I expected to have a very narrow range of track to execute a pass at the limit of my kart's capabilities, and indeed I would have if the other driver's mechanical problems (the unknown-to-me cause of his slow speed) had not abruptly become much worse, putting him where I needed him not to be. I committed myself completely to an action based upon an assumption, and when that assumption proved wrong I got a mild concussion, bruises and one hell of a ride for my punishment.

As the above suggests, I think it's unwise to blame TCS/ESC in situations where the driver chose to put the car in a position with such a small safety margin. On racetracks, that's generally okay, though even then you need to drive intelligently and otherwise take measures to increase safety. There's a reason tracks are rarely built on mountainsides or lined with trees.

My worries about TCS/ESC are about its calibration. I had the opportunity recently (long irrelevant story, a Cadillac "focus group" sort of thing) to drive a Caddy SRX and a Lexus RX 350 hard on a racetrack. Weird to flog an SUV on a track, but anyway: Both had stability control, but the Lexus' was so agressive that it cut in well before the vehicle's limits. It unnecessarily made the Lexus a much less fun vehicle, although I do wonder now if perhaps the Lexus was more rollover prone and they were guarding against that.

The ESC didn't, in my opinion, make the SRX any less fun, and I've read of some modern sports car systems that seem invisible. But if all cars have ESC, how many might have really crappy, poorly calibrated ESC? How does ESC respond to performance-altering modifications? If it becomes illegal or insurance-voiding to disengage ESC, might not such modifications also begin to be frowned upon? I don't want crappy ESC on my Si...I don't usually drive hard, but if the Si had that Lexus' ESC, even cautious 'ol me would find it robbing me on the occasional deserted backroad.

[Gonzo]

Good point on ESC and TCS system calibration. Performance cars will likely have more lenient systems and normal production cars will have their aids kick in sooner. Either way it would be great to have the option of turning them off. Our BMW's TCS kicks in way too soon and way too much.

Again I'm not saying it's bad to have it, but the option to turn if off should be there. Sometimes it is useful, it makes driving in the snow less involving, but it is still a good idea to learn how to control the car with the aids off in a controlled environment.