Does this technology actually work (on motor cars)

ThePrettyDamned

digitalscream said:

I'm very glad that this discussion came up...I'm planning to get a Puma as my first car (in keeping with the whole "learning to drive to stave off a mid-life crisis" thing), and it turns out that the 1.4 version didn't come with ABS as standard. Think I might give that a miss, or at least keep a look out for one which does have it.

The 1.7 is awesome, but even though it has abs the brakes are known to be weak (for a car with its power). 

Drive sensibly and you'll be safe. I miss my puma, it was fantastic. 

Newer fiestas are safer in terms of crumple though. 

Foster

WezV said:

I saw this vid the other day 

Awesome Vid. Just goes to show how safe older cars are.

For example, the Honda ruffled up a bit at the front but that was all, hardly absorbed the impact. The good old Rover on the other hand was cleverly designed so that the entire car was a crumple zone!

Foster

And just noticed another safety feature of the rover - in the event of an accident the drivers door automatically opens, preventing the driver from being locked inside the vehicle (a very safe feature if there is a fire you see).

strtdv

It also cleverly ejects the steering wheel down towards the back of the car.

Garthy

Sporky said:

Garthy said:

The tech is great but it should be a safety net, not a crutch and in my opinion it's a race to the bottom as people rely on this stuff to keep them on the straight and narrow.

To be fair, that's what people said about seatbelts and radial tyres and crumple zones and airbags and ABS and ESP and DRLs and all the other things that have contributed to the death rate on the roads dropping and dropping, even as more people drive more miles.

I don't see how you could compare a crumple zone which is passive, to an auto distance control device or auto lane guidance. I don't remember anyone complaining about crumple zones or airbags in that sense either and I'm too young to experience the switch from crossplies to radials but I cannot think of any reason why someone would compare it to an active control.

holnrew

When I had a crash my airbags didn't deploy, but it wasn't exactly head on, must have braked to about 30 and the car was about 12 years old

CabbageCat

holnrew said:

When I had a crash my airbags didn't deploy, but it wasn't exactly head on, must have braked to about 30 and the car was about 12 years old

Me too, I was shunted at speed into the car in front. The airbags didn't deploy but it's OK because the first impact was hard enough to snap the driver seat back flat so I was kinda lying down for the second impact.

ICBM

WezV said:

I saw this vid the other day 

This is is even scarier and shows why the death rate was so high in the 1930s and 40s despite the relatively tiny numbers of cars on the road… a 1929 car being put through a modern crash test.

richardhomer

About 10 years ago, I was following a Honda (at a sensible distance) in an Audi A3 on a winding country road, when a Merc estate coming in the opposite direction (on the wrong side of the road) smashed into the car in front. I stood on the brakes - her car was pushed towards mine by the force - I stopped about a Klon away from her rear bumper....

Miraculously, the lady in front was uninjured (though exceptionally shaken). The Honda was (unsurprisingly) a write-off and the twat driving the Merc (a delivery driver from a local dealership) tried to deny responsibility - claiming the Honda driver had been on the wrong side of the road.

Cannot believe to this day that I managed to stop - I hope that neither the technology - or my reactions - get put to this kind of test again....

robgilmo

Abs won't slow you down faster, it stops the car from skidding so you remain in control and can then steer out of trouble. If you dont have abs and lock the wheels up during an emergency brake you probably need some driving lessons.

robgilmo

speshul91 said:

Out of interest i wonder how many people are driving cars with no driver aids at all these days, my car is a 51 plate with non not even abs. 

1985 land rover, no driving aids at all, I can apply the brakes without locking the wheels up too.

robgilmo

strtdv said:

Sambostar said:

Can you drift something with ESC though?  The newer Transits have it.  Doesn't sound like a lot of fun to be honest.

Yes.

My BMW 125d had ESC, you could put it in "sport+" mode where it would let you get very sideways but stop you completely spinning.

Most cars will let you turn ESC off (although it also turns off various other driver aids in the process such as collision avoidance.



Older ABS systems were terrible in ice and snow though, they used to just freak out and you got no braking at all.
Newer ones are much better.

My Golf has that clever "virtual LSD" where it brakes the inside wheels to drag you round a corner. It really works, I'm very impressed with it.

As well as the independent wheel braking if you're going to spin feature and the collision avoidance/adaptive cruise control, the VW will close all the windows if it detects an unavoidable collision to keep the occupants safer.

Virtual lad? So its ESP with a posh name.

ICBM

robgilmo said:

Abs won't slow you down faster, it stops the car from skidding so you remain in control and can then steer out of trouble. If you dont have abs and lock the wheels up during an emergency brake you probably need some driving lessons.

At least 99% of drivers could not do a proper emergency stop without ABS, and both not lock up the wheels *and* brake in as short a distance as possible. The bottom line is that without training, practice and great skill - or ABS - you can't do both at the same time.

In a sudden unexpected emergency situation anyone who isn't a world-class racing driver will either plant the pedal and lock the wheels, or not press it hard enough and so not stop as quickly as possible - let alone be able to continuously cadence brake as fast as ABS can. And that's even with all-wheel ABS rather than independent. Independent ABS will always win.

The only way a human can beat technology is by the awareness to see the danger develop before it happens and pre-empt having to brake as hard as possible.

stickyfiddle

ICBM said:

robgilmo said:

Abs won't slow you down faster, it stops the car from skidding so you remain in control and can then steer out of trouble. If you dont have abs and lock the wheels up during an emergency brake you probably need some driving lessons.

At least 99% of drivers could not do a proper emergency stop without ABS, and both not lock up the wheels *and* brake in as short a distance as possible. The bottom line is that without training, practice and great skill - or ABS - you can't do both at the same time.

In a sudden unexpected emergency situation anyone who isn't a world-class racing driver will either plant the pedal and lock the wheels, or not press it hard enough and so not stop as quickly as possible - let alone be able to continuously cadence brake as fast as ABS can. And that's even with all-wheel ABS rather than independent. Independent ABS will always win.

The only way a human can beat technology is by the awareness to see the danger develop before it happens and pre-empt having to brake as hard as possible.

All of this in spades. 

In terms of car control I am a good driver(14 years no accidents, a fair bit of rallying and shitloads of karting). I'm absolutely sure I am more capable of controlling a slide or lockup better than 90% of the population but I'd be an idiot to assume I could control a car without ABS as well as one with in an emergency stop scenario. ABS slows you down as fast as your tyres and the road surface will physically allow, AND allows some degree of steering while doing so. Noone on earth has a right foot that can do that.

sweepy

When they trialled ABS in F1, Keke Rosberg lapped a modded Williams at Brands Hatch and was soon 2 secs a lap faster than a standard braking system equipped Williams

Sporky

Garthy said:

I don't see how you could compare a crumple zone which is passive, to an auto distance control device or auto lane guidance. I don't remember anyone complaining about crumple zones or airbags in that sense either and I'm too young to experience the switch from crossplies to radials but I cannot think of any reason why someone would compare it to an active control.

You're the one making the active vs passive comparison, not me.

My point - and I apologise if it wasn't clear - was that people have complained about every safety technology, and yet the death rate has dropped and dropped. The results are clear.

ICBM

Sporky said:

My point - and I apologise if it wasn't clear - was that people have complained about every safety technology, and yet the death rate has dropped and dropped. The results are clear.

To be accurate, a lot of that is due to much better medical care, especially highly trained paramedics with the right equipment who can save lives at the crash scene, rather than the old-fashioned ambulance drivers who basically had to rush the victim to hospital in little more than a van and hope they made it.

I could be wrong, but I don't think the *accident* rate has fallen at anything like the death rate or even the injury rate. It may have fallen as well though. It's all progress in the right direction anyway.

digitalscream

ICBM said:

I could be wrong, but I don't think the *accident* rate has fallen at anything like the death rate or even the injury rate. It may have fallen as well though. It's all progress in the right direction anyway.

Couldn't immediately find any stats on accidents but this has the total of fatalities and injuries, which can be considered a rough proxy since it includes slight injuries too:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reported_Road_Casualties_Great_Britain#Annual_summary

Total injuries and fatalities were 50% lower in 2015 than they were in 1970.

Then, looking at page 10 here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/514912/road-use-statistics.pdf

In the same time, road use has more than doubled.

HAL9000

I drive about 70,000 miles a year for my work and like to think I'm a good driver (I'm convinced though that everyone, including myself, believes they're a better driver than they actually are).

As much as I hate to say it, with that sort of mileage there are bound to be lapses in concentration, moments when I'm looking at one part of the road but the hazard is in a different part, etc. This is where the technology, particularly things like the automatic braking and blind spot assist, at least gives you a fighting chance.

Cirrus

I consider myself a good driver, I do many miles and spend hours a day behind the wheel. Last year I caused an accident, and considered myself a fucking berk. No one was injured. It caused some soul searching, because I did consider myself competent, sensible and in possession of good situational awareness.

However, I am also a human, and hence fallible. No matter how great you are at driving, all it takes is one slip at the wrong time. And even if you are infallible, one slip by one of the thousands of other road users you interact with and you can find yourself in bad situation.

It seems to me that this isn't something you can teach to someone. They either get it or they don't, and the unlucky ones learn it.

So, I'm all for technology that helps cover for these one in a million moments of stupidity on the part of the meat that sits in the driver seat.