That's is a real concern in the abstract, but recent studies indicate
that ESC is just not panning out that way.
There is still a possibility that we will compensate by texting more
or something and wipe out the gains.
That's strawman, nobody said that there were no risks, it just
prevents some wrecks and fatalities on average, lots of them. Try not
to make a fool of yourself.
Oh ESC will, but it does not take away from the fact that some drivers
DO drive right on the limit... USA would be a Minivan overtaking on
the outside around a Cloverleaf... outside the USA there is a large
company car culture does abuse cars in such a manner, it is seen by
some as a "priviledge"... USA does not have that culture (military
humvee drivers and rental drivers excepted of course :-)
ABS "did not work" because 1) people did not know how to use it 2) did
not push the pedal hard enough anyway requiring braking assistance
systems to be added. ABS requires skill on the part of the driver,
arguably skill which if present would negate the need for ABS in most
instances anyway. ABS permits a low skill driver to steer whilst
braking hard, ESC permits a low skill driver to steer abusively AND
retain control. Most drivers are low skilled, ESC can outperform the
most skilled driver as demonstrations have show on "sheet ice".
Fundamentally the laws of physics still apply - braking distance is
not going to magically improve. There are compounds which can be
aerosoled onto tyres during emergency braking (or getting going) which
greatly improve friction between tyre & water and tyre & ice. A few
makers have tried them, obviously they require replacement when used
up - but could be useful combined with ESC+ABS systems.
No it will not because ESC will hide it :-)
ESC works very well, it is the best thing for cars after collapsible
steering columns & safety belts.
I wish the auto makers put more effort into making everything non-
structural lighter. An "eco-car" would be one with HVAC for hot
climates, electric window for driver-only, everything else cut as
light as possible. Not daft hybrids. Every 10kg you save in weight has
a direct chain benefit in tyre/brake/suspension/engine weight.
A car body is only about 280-350kg, the glazing is a fair weight, but
so is all the junk in the car. Ever thinner steel is just creating a
shorter-life car - particularly where it is often used in the most
rust susceptible areas such as wheel arches / fender liners (0.7mm and
I believe one european car is now using 0.6mm, surface rust becomes
Interesting someone said ESC will aid 4x4, indeed, if ESC can prevent
a sideways slide into a road rut, kerb etc it will stop a rollover.
However the laws of physics still apply - a top heavy car impacting
with something will still roll.
ESC is great, some people may use it to drive at the limit knowing the
car will bail them out. Time will tell if people adapt to this new
found skill enhancement, it would be interesting to look for higher
impact speeds on corners - that is to say the small %age of accidents
involving speed and corners may show an increase in speed, but the
large %age of other accidents may show ESC benefits.
Overall ESC is good, just beware the mini-van now with ESC overtaking
on your outside :-)
A long long time ago in a land far far away, I overheard a
conversation that went something like this:
"I'm sorry, there's nothing I can do - we can't meet the target
stopping distances with those tires. I don't think you have any
choice but to spec better tires."
"You mean you can't just fix it with the ABS software?"
In the end I think any Risk Compensation will be mitigated by new
Government are desperate for tax.
- Technology permits taxation per mile.
- Extension of that technology via gyro chip & gps chip will permit
taxation for speeding, driving style, time of driving, exceeding
mandatory speed restriction for fog etc.
Companies pushing such technology will get adoption in whichever Nanny
State they can, politicians front run investments in such companies,
then gain political (revenue) acceptance and investment
internationally, then roll out across Rest of World.
I suspect the UK first - consider 1 Gallon is £6.40 or 10$US re fuel
If you implement electric vehicles you lose a massive tax revenue for
Yes, business is blood sucking from inside the hand of big government.
This is happening, but it is taking the from of insurance companies
a lower premium if you let them monitor your driving with their black
But you have the Big Goverment part backwards. State insurance
many states are *blocking* the Progress Insurance program. Insurance
lots of available insurance discounts.
As of now, Big Government is preventing it from happening in some
It kind of flattering that you think I am a pro pretending to be a
grass rootser, but it ain't so.
And, when you try to use that claim (or anything else) in an ad
homenim argument, it just boltsers my position and undermines yours.
You make everyone think "Jim hates Tom's arguments but he can't refute
them, so he goes ad homenim". Thanks for that.
observe the victim/aggressor switch of the self-delusionist.
if you want it to work buddy. learn to spell first. better yet, use
the freakin' machine you're typing on to do it for you.
"ad hominem", "bolsters" "astroturfer", etc.
I had not banked on Gov't being... so irrational :-)
Black boxes are a good idea particularly in USA because of the type of
- T-Bone risk from large number of traffic light controlled
- T-Bone & rear-ending risk from "stationary waiting to turn"
Roundabouts like UK/Europe are much touted as "more efficient traffic
flow" than traffic light controlled intersections. Yes they are, but
as you increase the number of traffic lanes this efficiency begins to
diminish - you end up having to add traffic lights to roundabouts! The
USA city block layout does not lend itself well to roundabouts, they
are situation specific and require driver education. USA has space at
least, something UK, parts of Europe & Japan in particular lack.
Compensation costs play a big part in insurance premiums, UK has
jumped on the gravy train recently with big (30-60%) hikes in
insurance premiums across the board. We got the "accident-tourists".
Canada uses a different state run system which offers little (might be
cheaper for the young, but government run systems tend to be
unresponsive and sub-optimal).
To who? answer below.
to who? answer below.
, car repair costs,
to who? answer below.
just delayed, no net savings.
Answer................. The insurance companies.
insurance premiums. Quote insurance price for the same car with and
without. No savings to you.
medical costs. Less expense for insurance company.
Car repair costs. Less expense for insurance company. Your deductible
email@example.com (remove brain when replying)
all good points. i think the real winners though are the oilcos and
detroit. the former because heavier more complex cars suck more gas.
the latter because more complex cars get repaired lass and net sales
follow the money and you'll find the motivation. it sure as hell isn't
about driver/passenger safety or we'd have real driving tests that
included skid control, be being encouraged to wear helmets, safety
harnesses and have proper roll cages in our vehicles.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.