there was a fun editorial in EVO or Car which basically said that we should all drive around with a sharp spike in the middle of our steering wheels.... which would make us think more about not having an accident in the first place..

I am not against safety systems, but we should have a choice, because right now both the mandatory safety systems and new speed limits are here to take cafe of the diminishing standards of driving..
I feel much safer in a car with propper handling and propper steering feel, than in one with no feel whatsoever and ABS+ESP+TC+.... to cover for it..

Well, the 'spike' was first proposed decades ago, I forget by whom.

Perhaps driving standards have deteriorated to such an extent because cars are so much safer and easier to drive now. Compare a recent 'hot hatch' with a Ford Anglia on 3½" cross-plies on the same piece of damp, greasy and twisty road... Earlier cars taught respect and skill, or threw you in the hedge. Also, there used to be a common progression from piss-wheels to more exciting cars - now it is often straight in near the top. I know of mid-twenty-year-olds driving Porsche Boxsters.

No doubt someone will brand me as jealous ...

I'd agree on that one..

I remember in '91 I was in the USA, and togeather with my uncle went to buy an alfa 164 (I know, I know.. )... the salesperson told us that they had a major problem with people wanting to try out the ABS brakes during the testdrive.. resulting in some interesting highway pileups.. .... I read someplace that there is a similar situation now with ESP where people think that the car will do anything..

I wouldn't expect to see any retractions or letters to the editor about actuarial matters. That shit tends to stick regardless of factual accuracy. I love my job, but I'm not delusional enough to think that other people care about such matters. I would also qualify that I've never worked with auto insurance, but the general actuarial concepts should still hold.

The first problem with the theory is that if increasing premiums (for investments) is the goal, then lobbying for a device that reduces injuries doesn't seem like a good idea. Sure, the cars with airbags might cost more, but unfortunately for the evil insurance companies it also has the effect of killing and maiming less people. Loss payouts for that should go down, and so the premiums go back down.

The second problem is that investment income depends on the period of time between premium payment and policy payouts. That time period is generally pretty short for auto insurance, especially for the part that covers damage to the car, so investment income is relatively low. In fact, the reduced number of people maimed is a double whammy, because personal injury cases tend to take longer to settle. If you want to maximize investment income, shifting the losses from personal injuries to physical damage is not a good strategy.

There are more issues with that urban legend, like the assumption that underwriting income and investment income are independent, and that underwriting income is zero, but that's getting even more technical.

The most likely cynical reason why auto insurers like airbags is that losses from physical damage are considerably easier to insure than losses from injuries or deaths. If you crash a car without injuring yourself, the worst case scenario for the insurance company is that it's on the hook for the value of a car, which is not too bad. If you break your neck and are paralyzed, then the losses to the insurance company are much bigger and unpredictable, and figuring them out would probably involve lengthy legal proceedings.

The auto insurance industry is famous for lobbying for safety features (huge bucks to Congress) no matter how much cost they add to the vehicle, notably in repair costs. Then they squeeze the repair industry to recoup the difference. It's the cost they can control. Medical and death claims, not so much. I'm not saying that's evil (though what they have done to body shops is not very nice) as in natural terms, human life and limb are more valuable than a motor vehicle. But they are not doing it for moral reasons, obviously.

And getting back on topic...

Apparently this sign has materialised north of Fairmont, WV:

I've heard a story that illustrates just the opposite; insurers want to keep repair costs down. This was pertaining to some special laminated windshields used in 1st gen Taurus and Sables. As the stroy goes, the insurance companies somehow convinced FoMoCo to revert to regular laminated glass. I bet you've heard of it before so correct me if I'm wrong.

Absolutely. I experienced a decline in my driving ability just a few hours ago for this vey reason.

I just came back from the Toronto auto show where there was a MB driving simulator to 'demonstrate' the active speed control, lane monitoring, blind spot monitoring, and alerting system on the S class and E class models. I suspect this was also used as a test bed to gauge our behaviour when we are first exposed to the technology. At least, I hope it was a test bed, because the driver is an essential lynchpin to the success or failure of these systems.

So, in my simulated test drive I was cruising down the autobahn with the CC set to 150 and with my feet off the pedals I observed the car slow down all by itself as we approached traffic. I was then able to merge safely into the passing lane by watching my mirrors and monitoring the blind spot warning system. I was then instructed to apply the throttle to override the system and close up on the traffic ahead of me, which I did. The warning system alerted me that the system was overridden by the driver and as I approached the virtual vehicle in front of me I drove right through it without even trying to slow down, likely killing a few of it's virtual occupants. My reading of the warning message was that the active cruise control was diabled (I was after all able to exceed 150 km/h), but I failed to understand that there was no emergency collision avoidance system to apply the brakes either. Perhaps because of our discussions here of the MB emergency brake system, I expected it to avoid the collision for me.

Now I understand the scope of the speed control system on these cars, but what if I hadn't been on a simulator? And how many thousands of other misconceptions about the system can possibly be held by the general public? These misconceptions will never be addressed by the manufacturer but are guaranteed to be the cause of accidents. To make matters worse, it is certain that these systems will vary enough from one manufacturer to the next that they will each demand some very slightly different behaviour from their drivers, and at the same time the systems will evolve over time even within a single manufacturer, so drivers will always have to adapt in some subtle way. Who is going to teach us? And even if we are taught, it is unreasonable to expect us to remember the nature of each different operating system and their changes over time? Of course not.

There needs to be a standard, and that standard should be that when it comes to essential control systems such as braking, steering, engaging neutral, and shutting off the engine, control should always be within the hands of the driver via a straightforward input and without any interference from hundreds of programmers and engineers a thousand miles away several years earlier who's decisions occassionaly overrule the driver's inputs. I don't mind computers taking over complete control of a closed system, where all variables are accounted for and plans exist to handle them safely. But this mix 'n match blend of electronic and driver control is just too many chefs in the kitchen and it's a recipe for disaster. Several disasters. Just ask Airbus.

Disagree. If it is reasonably certain lives can be saved overall by using these systems that replace or override the driver's control inputs and assuming they are technically and economically feasible, then it would be morally wrong not to implement them. ASC and ABS already do just that and I don't hear any non-luddites crying for them to be banned.

I'm actually looking forward to being able to peacefully and safely sleep or read and leaving the driving to automated control systems while covering distances on the highway.

We seemed to have gotten on to the wrong track.

I am talking about systems that take total control of your car from you - not assist systems or safety features AFTER the fact such as seat belts and airbags.

My Mazda is great at roundabouts with it's DSC, it really works, not as much fun with it off but for the average person simply brilliant.

But it doesn't take away the persons intended velocity or path of travel, it helps to maintain that velocity and path opposite to a car deciding by itself when to stop which is what we are talking about.

Nice Photoshopping.

Small world. I know exactly where that is, just south of the Pennsylvania line. Not too far from Ganassi's secret underground lair.

Well I hope MB learned from your experience. There is a debate going on in the industry -for instance with blind spot collision avoidance.

Should the car chime if you attempt to steer out into the path of an overtaking car? Should it apply a strongish steering torque back to the centre of the lane, but that could be overidden by moving the wheel to the usual position? Or should it flat out prevent you from doing it?

Similarly with stay-in-lane. If you veer without signalling, should it chime, guide you back, or forcibly lock you towards the centre of the lane you are in?

FWIW I see no particular point in letting people drive as they like in typical crowded freeway conditions, and would gladly toss the whole tedious affair over to the car.

Hehe, you should try the Brazilian "crowded freeway conditions" - no way an automated system can handle our Honda 125 couriers in Sao Paulo. The computer would just park the car and quit playing.

Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJhIoNxnOXY...feature=related

My first car to have ABS anti-lock brakes ( Oops, that's the Blood-boiling thread!) was my Cosworth. I drove it fairly hard, as I drive everything, and the only time I felt the ABS kick in was approaching a narrow-guage level crossing in Belgium, doing about 10 mph on a wet, unmaintained track. In my VW Transporter it has made itself known twice, when other drivers have compromised me at about 30 in town, once again on a damp surface. It is great to know it's there, but so many drivers rely on it nearly all the time, including a close friend who, on getting his first ABS-equiped car said "Look! ABS!" and nearly went through his garage up-and-over door. Basic laws still apply. Safety, like economy, is 90° down to the driver. IMO, obviously.

Just saw an item on the news where Toyota is going to re-jig the Prius brakes so you can't use both brake and accellerator at the same time.

They didn't mention which overides what.

I hear they are recalling Corollas too, now, didn't catch what for, may be UK only.

I think that highway - a general term here - deaths or lack of have to be balanced against road condition, conditions, miles traveled per person and so on. Regarding conditions...in New York - USA - snow accumulation is no where near what it was 30 years ago. Today we see many more four wheel drive cars with four snow tires...how do we determine how a relative lack of snow and better equipment - I'm specifically not writing safety equipment - affect death rates? Pretty hard I imagine.

Re turning some of these safety electronics off. A couple of you know from the technical forum that the Hydro Unit ACS failed in my car. This is a company car and they took their time deciding whether or not to fix it...while I drove for 6 months. Unfortunately I had a panic stop at 70mph and the rear driver's side calipe locked up and spun the car car into a 360 across three lanes of traffic before punting another car off into the woods - when I hit the other car my car did a 360 in the other direction.

My point? I can only guess that our cars are designed as wholes, not parts; my car was able to stop quite well from say 60mph for ordinary street fare...110'-115' depending upon temps. I know the car's rear brkae bias was pretty good for a front driver. But this bias was augmented by ABS and as such was controllable in track environments. But without ABS, there was no way I could catch the back end.

We can complain about all the electronic hooligans in our cars, but they do attempt to work as a system and as such, in my case, worked very well as a system...poorly otherwise.

There's another recall in Australia, can't get details on it at the moment...

I don't think it's the Prius recall, which is mentioned above.

This morning's report is that if you apply the brakes and accellerator at the same time, the engine will cut out. Bang goes blipping the throttle heel-and-toe.

And some hill-starts.

Some of the driving that I have to do in the concrete truck involves some tricky use of multiple pedals at the same time.
On one particular job (feeding kerb machines) I need to use the accelerator and the brake at the same time. If I was driving a truck with a manual gearbox I would need to use three pedals at once! It is not as hard as it sounds, you just cut a length of broom handle and use the accelerator with the right hand! (while controlling the mixer with the left hand and steering with...)

So cutting the power when the brakes are applied just would not work for me.

Quote: This morning's report is that if you apply the brakes and accellerator at the same time, the engine will cut out. Bang goes blipping the throttle heel-and-toe.

Quote: And some hill-starts.


Guys, my current company car is a Hyundai Santa Fe with the new 2.2 R diesel engine (437 Nm ) and 6 speed Auto

It has the feature the Koreans intriguingly call 'Redundant brake'. This means the RPM goes to idle when the brake pedal is depressed whilst the throttle is depressed.
However, this does not happen unless a signal is seen by the ECU from a wheel speed sensor. In other words, not when stationary.

My wife Sally's current car is a Hyundai i30 with the 1.6 diesel engine and 5 speed manual. It too has 'redundant brake' but I can regularly heel and toe down through the gearbox. It seems like there is a short delay..1/2 a second or so, before the power goes to idle.

All that works fine when you understand it, but I loathe that you cannot left foot brake to tighten up turn in on the dirt (lots of dirt roads where I live)

Pat

Quote Ray: There's another recall in Australia, can't get details on it at the moment...

I understand the new Toyota recall is for Corollas with power steering issues. It applies to cars with electric power steering and I think Aussie Corollas all use hydraulic power steer.

Pat

So you can't roll a cigarette, open a can of Red Bull and send a text message while you're doing all that? All the old skills are being lost...

I did drop my pie and spill my beer once.

Fixed.

She must have been a real looker!

Yes

Yes

No, I will accept the lowered risk of death, injury rather than no risk of death, injury etc. to enjoy my reasonable control of my veeheekal thanks but I may be open to accept a better option for Freeways only.

Good to see you butting in here, old mate...

Yes, the Corolla that tried to kill or maim my sister has electric power steering. That was a 2007 model, so there must be a few around... the Yaris has it too.

It seems that Toymotor Australia are determined to ride this out fixing the individual cars that show the faults and pretending they never happened. Not good!

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/prius-bra...apan-and-u-s-a/

Most of that rubbish may be ok for poor drivers but for an experienced alert driver it gets in the way.
ABS brakes can be good but 90% of the time a good driver can stop faster.
EST is causing more than a few scares, very often when towing.

Aparently hedgehogs are evolving - they tend to run now, rather than roll into a ball. Perhaps pedestrians will evolve so that they stop stepping into traffic looking the wrong way, texting, deafend by their iPod or drunk. Or, something I am seeing more nowadays, deliberately challenging motorists to run them over.

Advances in automotive technology and trauma treatment are inhibiting pedestrian evolution.

I am also 'anti systems' Lee and I would like to agree but thats simply not true and has been proven over and over.

note - other than for loose dirt roads where locking the wheels digs through to a more solid base.

- you forgot to add mobile phones.

Not much chance of being run over by a mobile phone - mind you, if my original Motorola fell on you you'd need help to escape.

"ABS brakes can be good but 90% of the time a good driver can stop faster."

90% of the time if the driver is aware of an impending stop he may well beat ABS. BUT, firstly ABS is/was supposed to allow you to steer under braking, and secondly, frankly, being able to mash the pedal and perhaps steer is a far better approach in real life accidents than using our driving skilz. Even then its a bit dodgy, steering around a freeway stack is great way of driving into someone else in the adjacent lane.

There was a number of tests in Oz magazines when ABS was creeping in mainstream and none of the testers could beat ABS in controlled panic stop tests - only in gravel as I mentioned. I remember Bob Watson was one of the drivers in one of those articles so it wasn't without talent.

As for steering with or without ABS sorry to say that 99% just slam them on and do nothing else.

This is why you can't beat training. After I passed my Driving Test my father said "Right, now you can learn to drive!" Most people venture out onto the road ill-equiped for anything other than just getting from A to, er, somewhere near B.

You just made me think of another safety device to be fitted to cars - a mobile phone jammer.
Once ensconced in your car, you can travel far more safely, knowing that your phone simply won't work.

In a straight line with high grip levels then possibly. But if you have to steer around an obstacle or have to brake whilst cornering and you have lower friction levels, no way. Not even Michael Schumacher can out perform a 4-channel ABS system in such circumstances. Its been tried many times by many magazines and ABS always comes out as best.

Oh, please, yes, please!

I was under the impression that ABS is there to allow the driver to steer under heavy braking when normally the front wheels would be locked and therefore useless.

WTF is this about ABS helping to "stop faster?" BS.

Hell, I thought you were talking about Ron Jeremy.

I am an innocent - well, sort of - so I had to Google Ron Jeremy. Did you think I meant 'challenging motorists to run it over'?

I'd bet that in the real world* it does.




* TRW being the 'average' driver, not a performance driver, and the type of road surface you typically get. The most important real world factor being the requirement for a maximum braking effort stop is it being a total surprise; even a good racing driver can get caught out if surprised.
The latest ABS gear is pretty good from what I've read and works as advertised - stomp on the pedal as hard as you can and the car just stops. Very hard to beat unless you're alert and in practice with such things.

I thought Mecedes introduced brake assist or whatever they call it simply because, even in panic mode, some people either don't or can't press on the brake pedal hard enough. ABS and brake assist must be a good system, although you stand a good chance of being rear-ended, but experience/practice counts. I know I keep on saying it, I'll shut up.

I've only every had ABS activate once, when I braked fairly heavily from 40 mph at a red light on a deserted intersection. It had a red light camera which had bitten me once before. The juddering ABS frightened the hell out of me, I thought something had broken (1990 Camry). But the car stopped quickly enough. I expect I might have smoked the tyres and stopped ten feet later without it. Maybe half a car over the white line. On reflection, braking was dumb, because I would have gone through on the amber, perfectly legal, but the previous red light ticket had spooked me.

A completely worthless anecdote.

More to the point, the only recent problems I have had with up-do-date (-ish) cars has been with sensors. Temperature sensor in one car, nearly cost me an engine as the gauge read normal even when steam came out under the lid; and a crankshaft position sensor (or was it camshaft)? used in timing the ignition/injection. Sensors are no more reliable than any other car component; the more there are, and the more mission ciritical they are, the greater the potential for disaster. Unlike airliners, cars don't go in much for multiple redundancy on these gadgets.

His nickname was "The Hedgehog," thus the joke.

I heard from a friend that raced track days at Buttonwillow in his VW that the ABS made braking worse, e.g. take longer to brake.

That was in 1995 ... ...