Feds to require stability control on all vehicles

OCBob

VIPER POWERED
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
10,488
Reaction score
15
Location
splitting lanes at a buck ten
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced a proposed rule Thursday that will require Electronic Stability Control on all passenger vehicles in the United States.

Electronic Stability Control (ESC) uses a variety of sensors to detect when a car is a skid or rollover is happening, or is about to happen, because of hard cornering or slippery road conditions.

The system will rapidly apply the brakes for fractions of a second at individual wheels and simultaneously reduce engine speed to keep the vehicle under control. Such systems can often react even before the driver is aware that there is a problem.

The proposed rule would require all manufacturers to equip passenger vehicles under 10,000 pounds with ESC starting with the 2009 model year and to have the feature available as standard equipment on all vehicles by the 2012 model year.

Several studies have shown ESC to be extremely effective in preventing the most dangerous types of crashes.

About 43,000 people are killed in auto crashes in the United States each year. The agency estimates that ESC will save between 5,300 and 10,300 lives annually and prevent between 168,000 and 252,000 injuries.

NHTSA Administrator Nicole Nason called electronic stability control for cars "the greatest life saving improvement since the safety belt."

ESC tends to prevent more single-vehicle crashes, which usually involve a vehicle running off the road, the study found, but it also helps prevent the most serious, high-speed multi-vehicle crashes. The technology had little effect on less serious "fender bender" crashes, presumably because those types of crashes usually do not involve loss of vehicle control.

ESC is currently standard on about 40 percent of 2006 passenger vehicle models and is offered as an option on another 15 percent. On some vehicles, it is only available as part of a more expensive option package.

Adding ESC to vehicles that already have anti-lock brakes will cost car companies about $111 per vehicle, the agency estimates.

Ford Motor Co. recently announced that ESC would be standard on all of its cars and trucks by 2009.

General Motors has also said that it will make ESC standard on all of its vehicles by the end of the decade.

DaimlerChrysler's U.S. Chrysler Group has said it will have the technology as standard equipment on all of its SUVs, including Chrysler Jeep and Dodge vehicles, by the end of 2006.

Unlike other technologies, such as airbags and anti-lock brakes, car companies have a variety of different names for ESC. For example, General Motors calls their system StabiliTrak on SUVs and trucks and Active Handling on its cars. Chrysler calls their system Electronic Stability Program (ESP). Ford calls its ESC system AdvanceTrac.

NHTSA will be taking comments from the industry and the public about the proposed rule for the next 60 days.
 
I'm not sure why, but this really pisses me off. Why do we insist on protecting the stupid instead of making them responsible for themselves?

BTW, $111 to add stability control to an ABS car is a complete crock. All ABS does is detect wheel lockup with wheel-speed sensors, them pulse pressure to the brakes via a solenoid. Stability control requires acceleration, yaw, and steering angle sensors to decide when the car is sliding. Then you need a valve block able to control each wheel independantly, and pressure pump to create fluid pressure when the driver isn't stepping on the pedal. And a more powerful computer to run it all. A BMW DSC(Dynamic Stability Control) comp starts around $1200, and that's just the computer.
 
Yea I don't like it one damn bit. I was really looking forward to the new Challenger when it finally hits the showroom floors. But,... if it has some stupid Stability control, it'll make my wallet stabil with the money that STAYS in it.
 
RatMotor said:
I'm not sure why, but this really pisses me off. Why do we insist on protecting the stupid instead of making them responsible for themselves?

Agreed.

All those numbnuts that ought not be behind the wheel in the first place, or have the sense enough to pay attention, might as well be thinned from the gene pool.:idea:
 
You know for the most part I agree. however, the fact that these idiots drive the same roads that I do, and that my kids may be travelling on, kind of changes my perspective. I don't want one of them to lose control and take out someone else!

If they are that numb, they will eventually show up on the Darwin Awards !!
 
I'm sure most performance cars will keep a button to turn it off. Otherwise, yank the fuse and live with some warning lights on your dash.
 
RatMotor said:
I'm not sure why, but this really pisses me off. Why do we insist on protecting the stupid instead of making them responsible for themselves?
I find it odd that we are required to wear seat belts and other safety laws like the new ESC, air bags and so on but yet here in Illinois motorcyclists do not need to wear a helmet :dontknow:
 
Stingray said:
I find it odd that we are required to wear seat belts and other safety laws like the new ESC, air bags and so on but yet here in Illinois motorcyclists do not need to wear a helmet :dontknow:

How about no helmet, shorts, no shirt and flip flops!!!!! Thats what I see all the time here!!! Stupid!


patrick
 
We have helmet law here in Cali, so we get guys wearing $900 Arai helmets with short, flipflops, etc.:confused:
 

Latest posts

Support Us

Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Back
Top