US Federal Government to Require Stability Control

[YSSMAN]

...A good idea?

By KEN THOMAS

Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The government, impressed by the promise of anti-rollover technology, is planning to require automakers to include electronic stability control devices on all new vehicles in the coming years.

The technology has been hailed by automakers, suppliers and safety advocates for its potential in reducing traffic deaths and rollovers. The government’s top traffic safety official has said it could have the greatest impact on auto safety since the arrival of seat belts.

About 40% of new vehicles have it as standard equipment and auto industry officials expect it to be available on all vehicles by 2010. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is set to unveil proposed rules for stability control on Thursday that also will include testing standards for auto manufacturers. NHTSA officials have declined to release details.

One study found that stability control could lead to a reduction of 10,000 deaths a year if all vehicles had the technology, a significant chunk of the more than 43,000 people killed on the roads annually.

“These are staggering statistics compared to most safety technologies that are installed on the vehicles today. This technology will save lives,” said William Kozyra, president and CEO of Continental Automotive Systems, North America, a leading supplier of stability control.

Kozyra called it “the most important automotive safety technology of our generation.”
The crash avoidance technology senses when a driver may lose control, automatically applying brakes to individual wheels to help make it stable and avoid a rollover. Many sport utility vehicles, vans and pickups have the equipment.

NHTSA Administrator Nicole Nason has said the agency will mandate the equipment, estimating it would save 10,600 lives when fully implemented into the fleet. During a July hearing before Congress, she said it “could be the greatest
safety innovation since the safety belt.”

Rollovers have had particularly fatal consequences, leading to more than 10,000
deaths a year despite accounting for only about 3 percent of all crashes. SUVs and other vehicles with high centers of gravity have been susceptible to rollovers.

Automakers have been receptive to the technology and have indicated little resistance in the decision to mandate the equipment because they have been implementing it onto their vehicles.

Ford Motor Co. announced Wednesday that it would make it standard equipment in all new vehicles by the end of 2009 while General Motors Corp. has said it will be included in all vehicles by the end of 2010. Virtually all Toyota Motor Corp. vehicles have it as an option and it has been standard on all Toyota SUVs since the 2004 model year.

Joan Claybrook, a former NHTSA administrator and head of Public Citizen, a consumer watchdog, called electronic stability control “breakthrough technology” but said it would be difficult to predict how many lives it could save.

Early in the development of the air bag, she said initial studies predicted it could save about 9,000 people a year, much higher than the 2,300 lives it saves annually.
“Until you get it into production and onto vehicles, you don’t know how large the numbers are going to be,” Claybrook said.

A study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety earlier this year predicted 10,000 deaths could be prevented a year if passenger vehicles had the technology.
The study found stability control reduced the risk of single-vehicle rollovers involving SUVs by 80 percent.

One of the benefits of stability control is that it doesn’t require anything from the driver. While other crash avoidance technologies, such as lane departure warning, require the driver to react, stability control senses the vehicle veering out of control and stabilizes it.

“There really isn’t any downsides that we’re seeing,” said Russ Rader, an IIHS spokesman. “ESC is in a unique club with only seat belts and air bags for it’s lifesaving potential.”

Automakers caution that seat belts will remain the most essential tool in avoiding death or injury in a crash. Seat belts save an estimated 15,000 motorist a year, prompting the government to push primary enforcement laws across the nation.

Robert Yakushi, Nissan North America Inc.’s director of product safety, environmental, said the technology “shouldn’t be characterized as a cure-all for all handling situations” but something that helps drivers maintain control in some
situations.

“If everyone depends on vehicle stability control, I think, to save them in every situation, I think that builds overconfidence in the driver,” Yakushi said, stressing that “the driver is key to vehicle safety.”

I'm going to applaud this action with a slight bit of hesitation. While I certainly want this safety equipment to become standard on almost every "regular" model, I pray that there is some kind of "loophole" for sportier models that are on the market... Or atleast the automakers are smart enough to have an on/off switch...

Good for US, we're geting to that level of thought that seems to prevail thoughout the rest of the world...

 

[Keichi Tsuchiya]

There better be an on/off button in the car for when I'm on the track.

 

[=V8 Power=]

O god....
I only have TCS in my car and thats bad enough. I turn it off most of the time because it just pisses me off. If I give my FF car a little too much gas on a wet or gravel road it immediately reduces the engine RPM. AHHH, I know the tires are spinning and I know how the heck to control them.

While electronic driving aid programs are good for soccor moms, real car people like most people on this forum hate them (am I right?). I think people need to learn how to drive. Once you understand the physics involved in operating a car (something not taught in drivers ed) you don't need any stupid electronics to help you. What happened to the good ol' days of V8 Muscle cars...

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, thats why I'm a bit on both sides here. On the one hand we need systems like these standard on everyday cars to keep dumb-asses like my Stepmom from flipping her Envoy (actually, I wish that WOULD happen) because she thinks she is unstopbable with 4WD and a high-ride suspension.

On the other hand, people like me, or my father, etc would prefer to go without the electronic doo-dads as they only take away from the expirience overall. I belive the whole point of buying a car is the fact that it is YOUR car, better yet when only you know how to drive it "correctly."

I vote the strap it on everyday cars like the Impala, Accord, Rio, Caliber, etc. People who drive the average models are far more likely to kill themselves in a difficult situation as compared to people who are prepared and know how to handle themselves in difficult situations. Granted, an on/off switch should still happen, but I can still see plenty of automakers taking the "Toyota Route" and just strapping it to everything on the lot... If we like it or not...

 

[TS]

O god....
I only have TCS in my car and thats bad enough. I turn it off most of the time because it just pisses me off. If I give my FF car a little too much gas on a wet or gravel road it immediately reduces the engine RPM. AHHH, I know the tires are spinning and I know how the heck to control them.

While electronic driving aid programs are good for soccor moms, real car people like most people on this forum hate them (am I right?). I think people need to learn how to drive. Once you understand the physics involved in operating a car (something not taught in drivers ed) you don't need any stupid electronics to help you. What happened to the good ol' days of V8 Muscle cars...

If I had a trophy, I'd give you one. You hit the nail right in the head with that one. 👍

 

[Slicks]

While I do agree that it will save lives, I am still not favoring it.
Like many other voices in this thread, I do believe it could be appropriate for an everyday driver who doesn't know the meaning of countersteer. While many drivers are not trained enough to know how to handle a car properly, those that do will find the device quite intrusive, be it on a Corvette, an F150, or a Civic. Like all automotive electronic nannies, I believe this one should have an 'off' switch.

And one point concerning the article,

NHTSA Administrator Nicole Nason has said ... it “could be the greatest safety innovation since the safety belt.”

Close, but not quite. I think ABS is utilised far more than this ever will.

Robert Yakushi, Nissan North America Inc.’s director of product safety, environmental, said the technology “shouldn’t be characterized as a cure-all for all handling situations” but something that helps drivers maintain control in some situations.
“If everyone depends on vehicle stability control, I think, to save them in every situation, I think that builds overconfidence in the driver,” Yakushi said, stressing that “the driver is key to vehicle safety.”

I highly agree with that. Instead of making something to control rollovers, why don't we train drivers to prevent them?

 

[Omnis]

I wonder if it's unconstitutional for them to force it. I have the right to no traction control.

 

[iceburns288]

While electronic driving aid programs are good for soccor moms, real car people like most people on this forum hate them (am I right?). I think people need to learn how to drive. Once you understand the physics involved in operating a car (something not taught in drivers ed) you don't need any stupid electronics to help you. What happened to the good ol' days of V8 Muscle cars...

The bigger problem than soccer moms are the guys on internet forums who think they can control a car without VCS when they really can't, and end up crashing at a significant speed...

 

[Wolfe]

The article didn't mention specifics like this, but if the systems aren't allowed to be turned off and stay off until the driver pushes the "on" button again, this mandate will be forcing one of the worst safety features introduced on a car since those blasted automatic-seat-belt things.

I agree with the Nissan guy, Robert Yakushi. Stability control won't solve our problems. The roads would be MUCH safer if driver's ed worked the same way as the MSF's motorcycle course -- teaching not only the rules of the road and how to work the controls (and manual transmissions should no longer be ignored in that regard), but also how to control the vehicle in various situations.

 

[=V8 Power=]

If I had a trophy, I'd give you one. You hit the nail right in the head with that one. 👍

haha, thanks

 

[a6m5]

While I think the technology is great, I also agree completely with Robert Yakushi. 👍

 

[YSSMAN]

I agree with the Nissan guy, Robert Yakushi. Stability control won't solve our problems. The roads would be MUCH safer if driver's ed worked the same way as the MSF's motorcycle course -- teaching not only the rules of the road and how to work the controls (and manual transmissions should no longer be ignored in that regard), but also how to control the vehicle in various situations.

In reguards to that, we may as well have a standard level of learning across the country. To my knowlege, my home state of Michigan has some of the toughest standards for driving, among that, some of the strongest rules that prevent people from getting their licences... I know folks who have moved here from other states (they were younger than 18) and were forced to re-take their drivers education programs, as Virginia'as and Georgia's standards did not meet ours.

...In addition to that, I belive the Michigan drivers licence is one of the few, if not the only, state licence that is fully-transferable to that of the German licence program. Given how few accidents occour in Germany, they must think highly of the Michigan standards...

Either way, people are stupid, particularly female drivers here in the US. When they are busy talking on the NEXTEL while drinking coffee and fixing their makeup, they deserve to be in an accident to learn their lesson. Granted, I wouldn't want physical harm done to anyone, but they are only going to learn what happens once it happens to them...

 

[red70mach1]

They better keep the 'cancel switch' so people like me can drive it to the limit.

 

[Wolfe]

They better keep the 'cancel switch' so people like me can drive it to the limit.

Few manufacturers have a true "cancel switch" as it stands today.

I believe most stability control systems will automatically re-activate as soon as ABS turns on for any reason. The only manufacturer I can think of that allows you to turn stability/traction control off and keep it off is BMW, and that's just because I follow them the closest.

 

[Pupik]

There better be an on/off button in the car for when I'm on the track.

Heck, I'll take an on/off button for when I'm driving to work.

Never mind the sporty stuff, does a Kia Rio or a Toyota Yaris really need stability control? How is someone going to learn the limits of their car if it's hampered by computer telling the owner how to brake, turn, accelerate in a panic situation? If a driver can't handle 100hp with two pedals and a steering wheel, public transportation is the only logical answer.

The lack of any overriding controls on my old '93 Corolla was one of the reasons it was a great learner's car; you could slam on the brakes and lock them up into a turn and read the brake fade just right, if you needed to. You could throw it into a corner and nothing impeded the progress of the car other than the physical limits imposed by the car. You could make it twitchy in the rain if you wanted it to. It could be boring, but the light weight and simple controls allowed you to make the decisions of what the car could do, if you controlled it properly. It's a great way to find the limits of a car, and how it's going to react when you push the envelope, so you can adjust accordingly.

If a computer makes the decisions for me, it's a false security blanket for learning drivers. Granted, stability controls have improved a lot, they aren't as intrusive as before, but they are not a substitute for safe driving, defensive driving, and the expereince of handling an out-of-control car properly. They can also make a car handle unexpectedly for those of us whom have expereince with a car handling just on or outside its limits.

Case in point, a few years ago, I drove an '04 ES 330 on a damp road. I made a diving left turn on a green arrow. I expected the front end to lose a little traction about 2/3 of the way through the turn, so I made a few corrections, as with all my (then) 13 years of experience with front-drive cars in the wet. Instead, the Traction Control siezed up the front end, causing the rear to be twitchy. In the following split second, the front let go, but the computer figured the rear was out of control, and controlled the rear for me. It was a really disconcerting feeling, as the car wobbled back and forth a few times, but finally let me go on my way by the time I was pointed straight. Basically, it didn't let me handle the car the way I wanted to drive it, and also made it even more dangerous to drive.

I wonder if it's unconstitutional for them to force it. I have the right to no traction control.

Unfortunately, we don't live in Liberteria; many laws are usually enforced without the clause of personal responsibility.

 

[TheCracker]

Driver education is a better answer. Saving somebody from the brink of an accident is not as good a solution as teaching them how to not get into that situation in the first place. It's like giving somebody a dangerous dog and telling them to shot it if it attacks somebody rather than teaching them how to train the dog in the first place.

Giving Joe Public more reasons to not think that he/she has to consentrate more on their driving can't be a good thing can it? People are inherently lazy, especially when driving. If you tell them that no matter what you do behind the wheel, your car's electronics will sort you out then their standard of driving is bound to get worse because you are giving them less things to concentrate on.

 

[JCE]

Driver education is a better answer. Saving somebody from the brink of an accident is not as good a solution as teaching them how to not get into that situation in the first place. It's like giving somebody a dangerous dog and telling them to shot it if it attacks somebody rather than teaching them how to train the dog in the first place.

Giving Joe Public more reasons to not think that he/she has to consentrate more on their driving can't be a good thing can it? People are inherently lazy, especially when driving. If you tell them that no matter what you do behind the wheel, your car's electronics will sort you out then their standard of driving is bound to get worse because you are giving them less things to concentrate on.

+rep

Great post, this is exactly how I feel. Driver's education is the number two safety "device" that can save lives...behind the seatbelt anyway. And forcing traction control is more nannyism of this rediculous country. Just like airbags there better be a REAL cutoff swtich/key.

But the possible solution for us car nuts is to remove the traction/stability control relay (if there is one in that particular vehicle) or just get your ECU reflashed or chipped.

 

[skip0110]

Few manufacturers have a true "cancel switch" as it stands today.

I believe most stability control systems will automatically re-activate as soon as ABS turns on for any reason. The only manufacturer I can think of that allows you to turn stability/traction control off and keep it off is BMW, and that's just because I follow them the closest.

OBDII troubleshooting requirements mean that every car has an absolute off sequence for stability/traction systems. Usually this is a sequence of ignition positions interspersed with foot brake or parking brake depressions. Thing is, it will probably also disable ABS and many other safety systems. And you have to do it every time you start the car.

 

[3-Wheel Drive]

Here's an idea for those Feds to chew on:
Instead of making our cars practically drive themselves, why don't they actually teach us to drive?

I don't know about you guys, but my driver's ed didn't seem to teach me anything other than traffic rules I already knew. To me it was a nothing more than a review. Hell, we weren't even taught stick-shift, we just learned automatic on crapbox Ford Tauruses that had numb steering, unrepsonsive acceleration, and almost non-existant brakes.

I'm sorry, but when I finished and got my license, I didn't feel like I took anything useful from the course. To me, that is a sign that the method is flawed. Driver's education needs to be improved IMHO.

 

[weiss_komet]

I'm really getting sick of the government telling the auto companies how to do their jobs. They do not build cars. The government is always trying to save people from themselves, but sometimes the hard way is the BEST lesson.

 

[southern347]

Stability control does nothing if you are drunk and driving the wrong way on the interstate, yet cars are not required to be equipped with breathalyzers. Where is the logic?

 

[=V8 Power=]

Here's an idea for those Feds to chew on:
Instead of making our cars practically drive themselves, why don't they actually teach us to drive?

I don't know about you guys, but my driver's ed didn't seem to teach me anything other than traffic rules I already knew. To me it was a nothing more than a review. Hell, we weren't even taught stick-shift, we just learned automatic on crapbox Ford Tauruses that had numb steering, unrepsonsive acceleration, and almost non-existant brakes.

I'm sorry, but when I finished and got my license, I didn't feel like I took anything useful from the course. To me, that is a sign that the method is flawed. Driver's education needs to be improved IMHO.

SO True!! I agree with you totally.

The only difference is I learned driving with Chevy Cavaliers EWWW!!

 

[weiss_komet]

I learned on a Metallic celery green VW New Beetle.

 

[YSSMAN]

I learned how to drive on a John Deere tractor!

...Seriously though, I took my drivers education classes in a 2002 Pontiac Montana...

Unforgetable... Thats what you are...

Unforgetable!!!

 

[skip0110]

I learned on a 1985 Civic wagon and various GM J-bodies.

 

[Casio]

I don't see what the big deal is. Is it macho to say 'YEAH! Real men don't need Stability Control! My Right foot is all the control you need!'?

If you want it off 'so people like me can drive it to the limit', then maybe you should be wondering why on earth you're driving your car on a public road to the point it needs stability control instead?

So far the only argument against it have been more or less:

river education is a better answer. Saving somebody from the brink of an accident is not as good a solution as teaching them how to not get into that situation in the first place.

Which is good. But why not do both? Teach people how to drive, so they don't get into that situation, but when do they have a back-up chute. People still crash after driver training, I'm sure in some cases driver training even causes over confidence.

 

[Wolfe]

Pupik and 3-Wheel Drive get +rep from me. 👍 TheCracker would get +rep too, but GTP said I need to spread more around first.

Anyway, as I said in my last post, driver's ed should be more like the Motorcycle Safety Foundation's riding course. I was amazed when I took the class, because it was almost exactly like the license tests in Tourist Trophy -- the same lessons in control, with cones and everything. I wouldn't have learned anything if they simply told me the rules of the road and tossed a license at me, like with driver's licenses, and I would have probably ended up killing myself by not knowing what to do in an emergency situation, and not knowing how to properly handle the bike in "spirited" cornering.

Now, imagine if driver's ed was something along the lines of Gran Turismo's license tests, but with an emphasis on learning a car's limits and avoiding obstacles, rather than the racing line. Ordinary people would learn how to properly control a vehicle in an emergency situation and perhaps realize how important it is to maintain concentration....speed-happy teenagers (who will always want to street race, no matter how often you tell them not to) will be a little less likely to kill themselves and/or others out on public streets....people who just don't "get" driving and terrorize our roads today will get frustrated and end up licenseless (think of all of the times you've heard/read someone complaining about how difficult the GT license tests are, and apply that to the general public 💡 )....

 

[TheCracker]

I personally think that learner drivers should have to take a 'goverment sponsored'* skid-pan course in car control as well as a motorway/freeway course. I'm not just talking about the US, i'm talking the world over. Or at least anywhere where i might find myself using their roads

it doesn't really count for us lot here who are mostly, if not entirely, car and driving enthusiasts or would-be car and driving enthusiasts. A majority of road users take driving lessons and tests just to get a driving licence, they're not interested in driving dynamics - how a car handles and what makes it handle that way. They just want to get from A to B and why shouldn't they, the roads are there for everyone to use. Trouble is, getting from A to B and the basic driving standards tought by instructors don't prepare you for when you find yourself at the controls of a vehicle that's 'out of control' - whether its suddenly lost traction, run out of abbility in a corner, having to make a sudden direction change etc etc. These are the situations where many accidents happen and its often because the driver wasn't able to control the situation because of a lack of knowledge or experience. A simple skid-pan course would at least give a driver some insite into how a car reacts to slides and sudden changes of direction if not turning them into Hannu Mikola overnight

In the UK motorway driving isn't required to earn your licence, which means our motorways are clogged by idiots who don't know the correct etiquette.


*I say goverment sponsored since, in the UK at least, driving lessons are expensive and entirely paid for by the learner (or family).

 

[m7ammed]

I haven't the whole thread just the first couple of posts , I've got DSC (BMWs version ynamic Stability Control) , 2 weeks a go a was on a high way exit which connects it to another high above it so its like a big bend going up wards (hope you get the idea) I was doing 60-75 KM/H , and out of no where the cars starts to pull into the inside of the turn I counter steer and DSC and TC kicks in at the same time...... I decide to let the car do the work and I'm just going to hold the steering , and I exited the the bend safely , now the reason that the car pulled was because there was some oil on the bend and beleive me if your the most experienced driver in the world , it will catch you off guard , on oil you can't control the car , I thanked god that I had DSC or I would have gone into a ditch ...... these things also help the most experienced drivers .


The thing with the switch , it has to have one , in some situations you need to turn it off or the car won't move , I went into the sand at the beach , and when getting back on the road I was going up a 1.5 meter slope the car nearly stopped in the sand , I pressed the gas the TC was cutting in and nearly made the car sink into the sand , I turned it off , press the gas lightly and out and into the road I went .

So here I gave to real life experiences with DSC

 

[Jim Prower]

Now, the reply form any congressman:

I am sorry, but to add any money with our already stretched budget for the infrastructure and instruction for proper driver's training would be too much, given the war in Iraq and Katrina, and would not help us get re-elected so we can continue to line our fat wallets with taxpayer dollars and look like we're good people.

Here, have a sucker and a "Vote For Me" pin.