Traction control/ stability control safer car?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ESC helps more often than it hurts safety. Have not disposed of old cars that do not have ESC because they do not have ESC but would prefer ESC if buying a new or used car today.

" There are significant reductions in fatal crash rates when passenger vehicles are
equipped with ESC. ESC leads to reductions especially
for fatal single-vehicle crashes, but there also are
reductions for fatal multiple-vehicle crashes. As
ESC has expanded from sports and luxury vehicles into
the general fleet, the overall estimate of its effectiv
eness has declined by appr
oximately 10 percentage
points compared with an earlier estimate using identical
statistical procedures. However, it still is one of
the most effective technologies yet developed for preventing serious crashes. "

http://www.iihs.org/frontend/iihs/documents/masterfiledocs.ashx?id=1740
 
Originally Posted By: Corollaman
We have a 2005 Caravan that does not have traction control or stability control, how much safer are newer cars that do have these systems?


Hugely platform dependent. All cars do not use the same software or hardware, and programming varies hugely by mfgr and model. ABS cyclic speeds are also hugely different from car model to model. Some cars have complete control of the engine and transmission. Newer ones can stop you and some can even alter the course of the car to match up with the steering angle. And more and more...

There is no doubt that it makes the average lowest common denominator type of driver a bit safer.

At Skip Barber class we were taught to use the stability control system on my car as a training aid. If you felt intervention it meant you were not smooth enough! But that is a 'performance tuned' system, which is leagues different than an economy commuter car.
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

There is no doubt that it makes the average lowest common denominator type of driver a bit safer.

At Skip Barber class we were taught to use the stability control system on my car as a training aid. If you felt intervention it meant you were not smooth enough! But that is a 'performance tuned' system, which is leagues different than an economy commuter car.


Exactly; the performance oriented systems don't really bother me if they have a very late intervention threshold. The ones I can't stand are the "Stability Controls for Dummies" that kick in before the vehicle is even remotely out of shape. Ditto for the ones that cannot be completely disabled...
 
I keep it on in any car I drive on the street, on the Track yea you have to turn it off.

I have plenty of Auto Cross Experience to correct and I keep the systems on. I understand how it intervenes, I understand when it can intervene and I use it as an extension for car control.


I do not understand people who turn it off every time they drive for no reason other than to turn it off.

Even if you know how to correct overseer...understeer...etc its just easier to leave the system on as it can correct more efficiently(stopping individual wheels) and faster then you can, and most importantly with much less needed space.
 
Last edited:
They do help in emergency situations. I'm not the best driver and know it. I do appreciate having a system that will help me avoid a collision, or even assist in keeping the car out of the ditch when hitting that one patch of black ice on a clear street.
 
Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

There is no doubt that it makes the average lowest common denominator type of driver a bit safer.

At Skip Barber class we were taught to use the stability control system on my car as a training aid. If you felt intervention it meant you were not smooth enough! But that is a 'performance tuned' system, which is leagues different than an economy commuter car.


Exactly; the performance oriented systems don't really bother me if they have a very late intervention threshold. The ones I can't stand are the "Stability Controls for Dummies" that kick in before the vehicle is even remotely out of shape. Ditto for the ones that cannot be completely disabled...


Totally agreed. I actually 'tuned' my car to get the nannies pushed back, the extremely minor performance improvements were definitely not worth it. But the HUGE difference in traction control and yaw reactions was! Now the car does not intervene unless you are pretty far out of shape, it really made it much better IMO...
 
Traction control is stupid. I hate it. The only way to overcome it is to have quality snow tires.

Stability control, on the other hand, can be a life saver. Going around snowy corners it's annoying and makes you lose momentum. But on the road/highway at speed, it can keep you pointing the correct direction during emergency maneuvers. This, I have experienced.
 
Track and street are completely different environments.

Any competent driver at the track does NOT want stability controls going. Sometimes, you want to bring the rear end around a little, and SC can impede that. Five pushes of the button, and DSTC is disabled on mine on track day.

Conversely, I don't want to see tail outs in crowded traffic from the 18 year olds on 476 around Philly. The more SC there, the better.
 
Originally Posted By: Volvohead
Any competent driver at the track does NOT want stability controls going.

If F1 and other racing series didn't ban it, I guarantee every team would use traction and stability control. Are F1 drivers not competent?
 
An F1 car on the track is infinitely different with respect to acceleration, cornering, and braking forces.
 
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Volvohead
Any competent driver at the track does NOT want stability controls going.

If F1 and other racing series didn't ban it, I guarantee every team would use traction and stability control. Are F1 drivers not competent?


Seems they might be better than most, eh?

And imagining that any competent driver doesn't want any help getting a faster lap? When your car has a specific tuned suite of integrated systems that can signal you well before you can FEEL anything that traction loss is imminent you can learn to drive faster and smoother. I repeat that these systems vary wildly from mfgr to mfgr, and even from model to model within lines of cars.

Some of us of course are already professionals, or at least imagine they are...
 
Any vehicle is only as safe as the driver. Some of us have had half a century of safe driving in all types of weather, without the aid of traction and stability controls.

Unfortunately we have a large driver skill disparity on the roads today, and vehicles have been mandated to try to keep the poor drivers safer, and protect the rest of us from both the poor drivers and the race driver wannabe's who think that the roadways are their personal race track.
 
Originally Posted By: thescreensavers
I keep it on in any car I drive on the street, on the Track yea you have to turn it off.

I have plenty of Auto Cross Experience to correct and I keep the systems on. I understand how it intervenes, I understand when it can intervene and I use it as an extension for car control.


I do not understand people who turn it off every time they drive for no reason other than to turn it off.

Even if you know how to correct overseer...understeer...etc its just easier to leave the system on as it can correct more efficiently(stopping individual wheels) and faster then you can, and most importantly with much less needed space.


I have a Hyundai Genesis Coupe with the ESC. The only time I turn it off is when I;m on the track. It really helps in snow when the tail end starts to go out on you. There are many stories of those who turn it off then spin out on went roads because they don't know how to drive or don't know the car's potential.

It does intrude on the impromptu WOT blast though when you shift.
frown.gif
 
I have been pleasantly surprised by how unobtrusive the stability control system is on my Mazdaspeed. It's so good that I usually leave it on when I'm running on a wet track.
 
I read an interesting article about possible future implementations of automotive stability control systems. Supermaneuverable aircraft such as the Eurofighter Typhoon and the F-22 Raptor are inherently unstable; they cannot be flown without assistence from the flight computers. I'm simplfying this a great deal but in essence the instability of the aircraft is what allows them to have supermaneuverable abilities. The article went on to discuss whether similar principles could be applied to cars. One example I could think of would be a car like the original 911 Turbo(930), which was notorious in many quarters for its lift throttle oversteer. Perhaps a sophisticated stability cotrol system would allow the vehicle to rotate faster about its yaw axis wihout loss of control or over-rotation.
Food for thought, anyway...
 
Originally Posted By: MCompact
One example I could think of would be a car like the original 911 Turbo(930), which was notorious in many quarters for its lift throttle oversteer. Perhaps a sophisticated stability cotrol system would allow the vehicle to rotate faster about its yaw axis wihout loss of control or over-rotation.
Food for thought, anyway...

Mitsubishi called their system "AYC" Active Yaw control on some versions of the EVO, and called it "Super AWC" Super All Wheel Control on the Evo X. It is supposed to stop that problem, but because I have never driven an Evo, I'm not sure how well it works. The US Evo 8 and 9 didn't have it, so I am even less likely to drive a car with that system.
 
I like all of the new vehicle technology improvements. My first car was a 1960 Ford Sunliner. Single master cylinder braking system. 352 Marauder V8. 3 speed auto trans.

We have come a long way from those days.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top