Filed under: Government/Legal, Safety, Tech
IIHS pushing for mandatory stability control
.jpg)
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety claims that making electronic stability control (ESC) a standard feature in the US could reduce auto deaths by up to one-third, which would result in a whopping 11,000 fewer fatalities per year.
The institute's numbers show that otherwise identical vehicles have a 43 percent reduction in fatal crashes when equipped with ESC. Not only were single-vehicle crashes (most often occurring when a vehicle loses control and leaves the roadway) reduced, but high-speed multiple-car collisions were also less common. Not surprisingly, the number of low-speed crashes remained the same, as ESC doesn't do much good in a parking lot unless some serious hooliganism is involved.
While some call for specific federal legislation that would mandate the technology on all motor vehicles, an upcoming revision to NHTSA's rollover test that will invoke a dynamic handling maneuver is said to effectively require ESC on most vehicles. Approximately 70 percent of SUVs and 40 percent of passenger cars sold in the US in the current model year have ESC as standard equipment.
We've explored the limits of electronic stability control on several SUVs that have recently rolled through the Autoblog Garage, and we can state that modern electronic babysitters are indeed amazing at arresting our intentional attempts at upsetting the vehicles. As such, we definitely support the idea of ESC as standard equipment, just so long as each vehicle also includes a means to completely deactivate it.
[Source: Money/CNN]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
MattS 8:12AM (6/14/2006)
Absolutley - I'm also fine with this as long as it can be deactivated (at least on cars)
Reply
JZeke 8:36AM (6/14/2006)
This would be great for MOST drivers, but I too want the choice.
Porsche doesnt offer it on the latest GT3, will the law require these uber-sports cars get it? Even if its deactivateable theres something sublime about a true sports car that doesnt have ESP.
However why would you want to shut it off on an SUV? Unlike traction control, which (on older cars anyway) makes travel in snow nearly impossible, ESP seems good in all conditions. Why anyone in an SUV thats barely dirt-road-rated would want to turn it off is beyond me.
Then again, maybe Ferraris should all have it mandatory, seems no one can keep an Enzo on the road...
Reply
Gil 8:45AM (6/14/2006)
ESC? Never heard of it.
Do you mean ESP? (Electronic Stability Program)
Reply
CJ 8:54AM (6/14/2006)
This seems a bit like developing a stove that can turn instantly cold when you touch it -- you might avoid a few burns, but you also never learn not to touch a hot stove. I'm concerned that our reliance on well-trained electrons will make us both dumber and more reckless.
Reply
Chris 9:07AM (6/14/2006)
From experience I can say that this is probably the best idea since seatbelts (when it comes to safety). Call it what you will but, stability control is simply an extension of the ABS system that is standard on almost all vehicles. With this in mind it only takes the addition of a few sensors and a processor and you have yourself a stability control setup.
Reply
Howard Kerr 9:30AM (6/14/2006)
I think the IIHS assertion that 11,000 lives would be saved with ESC/ESP...whatever, are questionable. I mean, with the exception of single vehicle crashes, many people are killed in cars that were being operated "correctly", for example in a rear-ender.
My personal experience? I've had maybe 2 accidents that ESC OR even antilock brakes would have saved me from (both single vehicle accidents) but in EVERY other accident I've had, I was hit by someone else...usually at an intersection or while I was barely moving.
The electronic CONTROLS are nice, but should be made optional and capable of being easily switched off.
Reply
icerabbit 9:30AM (6/14/2006)
Does anybody know about the effectiveness of ESP / ESC / ... when a vehicle swerves off the road?
As, from my perspective, many (most?) of the rollovers happen when top heavy vehicles go off the road and the driver corrects, steering back towards the road ... but the rear part of the vehicle grabs sideways in the dirt.
This was recently highlighted several times with the police footage of an SUV rolling over many times to avoid an accident with a driver wanting to make a lane change without looking ...
Same thing happened to two people I know, one side goes off the road, corrective steering, car spins and sideways motion of the rear end of the car causes it to flip & roll.
I've seen footage of the benefits of ESP on different types of tracks (dry/wet/icy) and frozen lakes. No doubt there that it is a good thing.
I'm really curious if this technology if it is effective in the common highway sceneario I described above.
If it is good. If it is not? Why bother making this mandatory. And even if it helps. What costs will it tackle to the price of every car? Both initial and in maintenance?
I think there are, way cheaper things, the IIHS should push for making mandatory first that would save a lot of lives too and likely avoid many situations where roll-overs might occur:
- no-dead-spot rear view mirrors (curved outer edge)
- rear fog lights which are to be used in severe rain, fog, snow (visibility less than 200m, like in Europe)
- anti-lock brakes
Reply
icerabbit 9:34AM (6/14/2006)
There's no edit function. Please ignore the maintenance part in above statement. I was just typing fast and didn't read my post prior to publishing.
Reply
Paul 9:44AM (6/14/2006)
The single item with the biggest effect on safety is constantly ignored - the nut behind the wheel. A skid control class and basic defensive driving course should be a mandatory requirement to get any drivers license in addition to constant driver training refreshers. Thousands of people are killed each year in senseless crashes, most of which could probably have been avoided if drivers were better trained in handling a car. As I've mentioned before, imagine if pilot's licenses were handed out as irresponsibly as driver's licenses. You can just imagine the mayhem in the sky above us..
Reply
m 9:59AM (6/14/2006)
icerabbit, check out volvo's stability system for the XC90. it intentionally allows some skidding to prevent the car from rolling over - a better explanation is on their site. This should answer your question:
volvocars.com
Reply
m 10:01AM (6/14/2006)
also, icerabbit, the first thing that should be mandatory is DRLs (daytime running lights)! I say this because when it is raining people don't use their headlights even though it is the law in many states.
Reply
MikeW 10:04AM (6/14/2006)
How about no red rear turn signals, and lateral turn signal repeater, and no amber parking lights in front (only white light like Europe, city lights) for positive turn signals. And positive signalling brake lights, like the old E39 BMW 5-series.
Give people the tools to do the job correctly, not replace people's competence with electrons.
Reply
m 10:06AM (6/14/2006)
Gil, ESC is just a general term for a stability program. ESP is a Bosch trademark
Reply
Derek 10:09AM (6/14/2006)
Lets not forget this is the INSURANCE Institute for Highway Saftey. They dont give a crap, they want less accidents, so there can be less claims. Grr, at least we're not getting those damn speed limiters like in Europe (The FIA is trying to push for them on roads, I read it in an old back issue of Evo magazine)
Reply
Dave 10:09AM (6/14/2006)
Sounds good to me as long all manufacturers can agree on what to call it. ESC, ESP, STC, DSTC, etc., etc., Is there one standard generice term similar to ABS?
Reply
m 10:09AM (6/14/2006)
MikeW, what are positive signalling brakelights?
Reply
Carlton 10:20AM (6/14/2006)
#3 Gil,
What rock have you been under? ESC=Electronic Stability Control.
Here's a hint-search engines can be your friend and prevent you from looking like an idiot.
Reply
Eric Bryant 10:28AM (6/14/2006)
"ESC? Never heard of it.
Do you mean ESP? (Electronic Stability Program)"
No, I mean electronic stability control or ESC, as stated in the first line of the post. Electronic Stability Program is Bosch's trademark for ESC.
Reply
m 10:29AM (6/14/2006)
yes, the author backs up what i said
Reply
GhostDoggy 11:05AM (6/14/2006)
But I was counting on those idiots to die. Its called natural selection. In fact, we need Electronic instability Control to kill more of those idiots!
Reply