The end of autocross?, anti-rollover mandate... Options

[wannafbody]

saw a segment on the news about the 2012 requirent for vehicles to have anti-rollover potection. The technology uses braking and steering control to reduce the chance of rollover. do you think this will kill autocrossing?

[nape]

saw a segment on the news about the 2012 requirent for vehicles to have anti-rollover potection. The technology uses braking and steering control to reduce the chance of rollover. do you think this will kill autocrossing?

I think there will have to be a way to disable it just like TCS on 4th gens. I had a similar thought as you while reading the paper today.

This solution really fixes the problem... Don't teach people to drive better, just make the rolling casket do more for them so they get even lazier.

[slowTA]

I'm on the fence about this one.

On one hand you know there are people who need it most of the time and others who would only use it once in a while. Saying even the best driver never needs it is completely wrong.

As for the sporting side of things, I see how it can be used as a training device (assuming it has a big light that lets you know when it is working). I can also see how it is an unfair advantage. This can also keep people from being scared of driving their rear wheel drive cars in the winter!

Would we need a stabilitrack class for autocross, a completely different PAX system, can we tell everyone to shut it off (and actually enforce it)?

Damned if I know the answer.

[DavidDymaxion]

It does things you can't do (braking on just one wheel), so in theory a car with stability control should be faster. Also, you can tune a car a bit more neutrally, but the electronics make it act like it has safe understeer. So far really good drivers are still faster, but who knows how long that will last. The one advantage humans have is anticipation, which reactive electronics can never do.

I'd say "bring it on." So far the electronically enhanced cars are not dominating autocross.

I'm on the fence about this one.

On one hand you know there are people who need it most of the time and others who would only use it once in a while. Saying even the best driver never needs it is completely wrong.

As for the sporting side of things, I see how it can be used as a training device (assuming it has a big light that lets you know when it is working). I can also see how it is an unfair advantage. This can also keep people from being scared of driving their rear wheel drive cars in the winter!

Would we need a stabilitrack class for autocross, a completely different PAX system, can we tell everyone to shut it off (and actually enforce it)?

Damned if I know the answer.

[poSSum]

Would we need a stabilitrack class for autocross, a completely different PAX system, can we tell everyone to shut it off (and actually enforce it)?

We've got TCS and Stabilitrack in our Trailblazer SS. There's not a chance that it would be faster with the systems "on" in the hands of an experienced driver.

As long as there's a way to turn them off I don't think they'll be a factor at the higher level of the sport.

[RedHardSupra]

so you minimize the changes it can do, kinda like turning off torque management. it's all in software, no one's gonna know (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
it's going to be fun, my traction control is faster than yours, just like F1 and motoGP...

[35th_Anniversary...]

Corvettes have had active handling for years. When I first got my C5 I tested the TCS / AH in wet & dry conditions and found out that I was MUCH faster with the electonic crap turned off (even with just AH on). That being said I always leave active handling on for street use, but always disable traction control. So if someone wants to use their electronic helpers then that is fine with me, they are losing seconds by using it. I know one guy with a C5 always leaves it on after he wrecked his first Z06 in an autocross after hitting a curb.

[rushman]

I don't know, once they roll over they tend to get out of the way :-) .

Hopefully it will be defeatable. Its really going to mess with the people that do know what they are doing, imagine how odd its going to be when you hit a patch of ice, and go to save it at the same time the car is trying to save it.

[BigEnos]

I instructed at a M-Benz track day for AMG cars (basically people were invited to pay to drive all the cars around a racetrack and I got to ride with them/drive them (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/ph34r.gif) ). At the end we got some track time for just us and I drove an S55 around (was the only thing left). The ESP system is not completely defeatable or at least it wasn't on these cars. Well, the S55 didn't like me trying to save it in a skid because it started tank-slapping. Being a big car it just doesn't do anything very fast, and my reactions were either before or corresponding with the ESP system's actions. So I started to think about what was happenning (while it was happenning, like I said lots of time with a whale of car like that) and once I had scrubbed a bunch of speed off it settled down. The next time it started to slide I just punched it and pointed the steering wheel where I wanted to go and it just did it. It was tough to not try and save it, but the computer did a fine job and didn't nanny me too much.

And, this winter I got to test out my 330xi in the snow. Holy cow was it horrid with the DSC enabled! I began to accelerate across an intersection and it detected slip and just completely took control of the throttle. I was dead in the water doing about 5mph and absolutely not response from the throttle. Very scary. After that I disabled the DSC, I'd rather use my skills to keep myself out of trouble than lose my ability to control a car.

That said, for most people, traction/stability control is probably a positive thing. WRT rollover protection I don't see the need on most normal cars. They just don't roll over very easily. Big vans, 'utes, and overly tall econoboxes sure, but I just don't see the point on most regular cars.

[poSSum]

That said, for most people, traction/stability control is probably a positive thing. WRT rollover protection I don't see the need on most normal cars.

Are stability control and rollover protection not essentially the same thing said in different ways?

[BigEnos]

That said, for most people, traction/stability control is probably a positive thing. WRT rollover protection I don't see the need on most normal cars.

Are stability control and rollover protection not essentially the same thing said in different ways?

It can be, I don't know that stability control as it is usually applied to cars now implements sensors to monitor and correct for a rollover event or the precursor symptoms of such an event. From what I know of it as an "informed consumer", right now they monitor steering angle, yaw rate, and wheel speed and possibly 2D or 3D accelerometers (from which the yaw rate is inferred I guess). I know GM's stabilitrak implementation on Express vans employs anti-rollover, but on that vehicle it is desirable IMHO.

My worry would be that such a system in the future would sense a high lateral G-load and translate that into something that will lead to a rollover. Automakers are already looking at non-connected steering systems or systems (like on the Lexus that parks itself) that can actually turn the steering wheel for you. How long before they use legislation to forcefully implement "active steering" that can make "corrections" for you. I have heard that CTS-V drivers have had their cars go into a limp-home mode due to high cornering G's experienced at a racetrack and they've had to have the On-star folks clear it (after they called and asked if the drivers had been in an accident). Not good.

So yes, the sensors and controls are there, but the programming as it is now may not implement anti-rollover as one of its "situations" (vs. the garden-variety slide, push, or loss of traction under acceleration or braking).

[00 SS]

I've heard this will be required in the future as well. I doubt they will make it defeatable. What they should do is make it mandatory for it to be available on all models. That way we could order cars with out it if we didn't want it. I know the liberal weenies will whine about it being a safety feature only the rich can have, so make it a no cost option and just price it into the car whether it has it or not. BTW, I think they should do the same thing with air bags and the tire pressure monitoring systems. For what it's worth I don't think it will kill autocross, just slow it down a bit.

This post has been edited by 00 SS: Apr 9 2007, 01:57 PM

[trackbird]

And, this winter I got to test out my 330xi in the snow. Holy cow was it horrid with the DSC enabled! I began to accelerate across an intersection and it detected slip and just completely took control of the throttle. I was dead in the water doing about 5mph and absolutely not response from the throttle. Very scary. After that I disabled the DSC, I'd rather use my skills to keep myself out of trouble than lose my ability to control a car.

The TCS and ASR in our Mazdaspeed 6 doesn't have that problem. In the snow, I can take off across a parking lot sideways (45 degree angle) with all 4 wheels spinning and throwing snow off in a big way. It lets me have about 5 seconds of sideways fun, then it just settles the car, pulls power back and straightens it out. It was pretty decent. When I tried to dump the clutch and clean a pair of tracks up the driveway, it killed my fun right away. It seems smart enough to avoid pulling off power in a serious slide, it gives you time and then just fixes things.

[pknowles]

I can see this happening on trucks, vans, and SUV's, but you have to hit a ramp or something to flip most cars and rollover protection can't anticipate that. This legislation at least makes more sense than mandatory tire pressure monitors. My biggest question is what is the vehicle going to do to stop the roll over? I'm not sure I would want a vehicle to correctively steer for me in any situation. I can imagine steering to avoid an accident and the computer senses to many instant G's and steers me back into the accident. Applying the brakes on the loaded wheels would be OK and might prevent a roll over.

My mom had a Ford Bronco II which is the vehicle that is rated one of the (if not the) worst in roll over . I drove it a few times and yes I could get it to lift a wheel easily (which for crap street tires is scary), but you still had to try to roll it, have bad shocks (probably why most rolled over), or hit something to roll it. I truly believe that if I braked, snapped the steering wheel hard one way while going over 50mph that I could have rolled it, but my moms did have bad shocks. But I don't think I could roll a Camaro unless I hit something, which again no computer can account for.

[z28jeff]

I'd say "bring it on." So far the electronically enhanced cars are not dominating autocross.

A perfect example of this is the G35. It's mostly because of the electronic driving aids that the car is classed in FS, and not BS like it's twin the 350Z.

[Crazy Canuck]

I can see this happening on trucks, vans, and SUV's, but you have to hit a ramp or something to flip most cars and rollover protection can't anticipate that. This legislation at least makes more sense than mandatory tire pressure monitors. My biggest question is what is the vehicle going to do to stop the roll over? I'm not sure I would want a vehicle to correctively steer for me in any situation. I can imagine steering to avoid an accident and the computer senses to many instant G's and steers me back into the accident. Applying the brakes on the loaded wheels would be OK and might prevent a roll over.

My mom had a Ford Bronco II which is the vehicle that is rated one of the (if not the) worst in roll over . I drove it a few times and yes I could get it to lift a wheel easily (which for crap street tires is scary), but you still had to try to roll it, have bad shocks (probably why most rolled over), or hit something to roll it. I truly believe that if I braked, snapped the steering wheel hard one way while going over 50mph that I could have rolled it, but my moms did have bad shocks. But I don't think I could roll a Camaro unless I hit something, which again no computer can account for.

only thing i see is that with active suspension, they can try and minimize some body roll that is becoming dangerous... especially on high center of gravity cars.
Apart from that... the only thing that can offer good roll-over protection is having a more rigid cage (frame) over the head as well as better seatbelts... heck, I'd wear a 5pt everyday. As for convertibles, i think they'll legislate the hoops or at least the hoops that pop out in case of a rollover.

[2000Z-71]

I'd say "bring it on." So far the electronically enhanced cars are not dominating autocross.

A perfect example of this is the G35. It's mostly because of the electronic driving aids that the car is classed in FS, and not BS like it's twin the 350Z.

I'm now driving a G35 sedan, basically the same car as the G35 coupe and 350Z. The sedan is in DS and the coupe now in FS while the Z is in BS. I believe the reasoning for the different classes is weight and different tire sizes. Traction control is optional on the Z and comes as standard with some trim packages. I don't think that the traction control incorporates the stability control features of the Inifinitis.

I've forgetten a couple of time to turn stability control off before starting an autocross run, it sucks and it definately isn't any faster. It pulls the throttle out as soon as it senses slip. At least with the Inifiniti it can be turned completely off. One of the big detractors for me when i test drove a Dodge Charger is that even when turned off, stability control runs at 80% in the background. So yep, even with the big bad Hemi, you can only lay a patch 5'-0" long before the eletronic mother pulls throttleout and kills the fun.

i have a bad feeling if it is mandatory, there will not be any way to turn it off. At least no without pulling fuses, reprogramming or something else that will invoke the wrath of the safety nazis, liability lawyers and warranty voiding pinheads in corporate.

[m6t/a]

If there wasn't a button to turn off the "anti-roll" then do you guys think there would be something that we could do to disable it such as taking out the fuse for it or reprogramming the car? I have always hated when the car drives for you, the first thing I do when I turn on the TA is to turn off the traction control. I actually think that I can drive better with the traction control turned off in slippery conditions then with it on, I feel that the car is much more predictable and controllable with the traction turned off. Like many have mentioned, it can be dangerous when you try to correct the car manually and the car does it electronically also, that really gets on my nerves when I drive my moms car.

[prockbp]

I absolutely believe that mandatory traction control/rollover protection won't do a single thing to hurt participation in autocross...

even in 2032, when non-tcs/rp cars are no longer affordable, people will still race the latest and greatest POS that automakers are providing... if everybody has the same tcs/rp system, then the playing field is even, and i'll still try my best to be faster than you... but, i really hope that by 2032, automobiles are quickly becoming obsolete, because i am sick-to-the-death of sharing roads with disrespectful, no-skill, assclowns.