ESP

[jameslb101]

I'd rather be driven by a good driver in a non-ESP equipped car than a poor driver with ESP. I'd also rather take it a bit easier myself than hope the technology will step in if I don't.

As far as I'm concerned, emergency manoeuvres are rare enough to be negligible and, even then, there's no guarantee ESP will save the day.

It's not an either or situation though, is it. Wouldn't you rather be driven by a good driver in an ESP equipped car than that same driver in a non-ESP equipped car?

You can "take it easy" (whatever that means) but may still have to make an emergency manoeuvre because that's exactly what it is - an emergency, i.e. something you haven't or couldn't have planned for.

[Silk]

I'd rather be driven by a good driver in a non-ESP equipped car than a poor driver with ESP. I'd also rather take it a bit easier myself than hope the technology will step in if I don't.

As far as I'm concerned, emergency manoeuvres are rare enough to be negligible and, even then, there's no guarantee ESP will save the day.

It's not an either or situation though, is it. Wouldn't you rather be driven by a good driver in an ESP equipped car than that same driver in a non-ESP equipped car?

I would consider ESP irrelevant if the driver was of a high enough standard, although I may be secretly counting on it if the driver was a moron.

You can "take it easy" (whatever that means) but may still have to make an emergency manoeuvre because that's exactly what it is - an emergency, i.e. something you haven't or couldn't have planned for.

I'm more than a little concerned that you have trouble with the concept of "taking it easy" - do they teach you nothing at the HPC? As I have no problem with it, I don't really see the need for ESP.

[Grahar]

'I'm sure there may be some evidence statistically that ESP mitigates the effects of bad driving when it comes to paying out on claims, but it's irrelevant if you don't crash.[/quote]

How can ESP be irrelevant if you don't crash?! it might prevent a driver from doing so.

Perhaps you meant it is irrelevant if you don' find yourself in a emergency situation; but even the best advanced driver can't completely protect themselves from the mistakes of another driver.

Am I understanding you correctly Steve or did you mean the statistic itself was irrelevant?

[stefan einz]

Silk

You talk of "taking it easy". I am not 100% sure what you mean by this, but I assume you are talking about keeping safety margins high (well within the car's grip levels).

These is clearly a good aim, and with good planning achievable almost of all of the time.

I say almost, because there is always the risk of the completely unexpected. Even the best AD in the world can't eliminate risk, so matter how easy they take it.

A quick hypothetical for you. You are on a motorway. There is a reasonable amount of traffic, and you are in lane 2 overtaking a line of trucks. You are doing 70 mph. You are a safe following distance from the car ahead. The road is dry.

Suddenly a tyre blows out from the right hand rear wheel of a truck ahead in lane 1. There is significant debris (the massive carcass of the steel reinforced tyre) now in your lane, which could cause serious damage to your car, perhaps even to cause a loss of control.

Because you are a good AD you know that lane 3 is clear alongside you, and that is the path to safety.

But the closing speed on the debris is high. You need to execute a high speed lane change immediately to avoid a collision.

Now, in these circumstances, would you not be pleased to have ESP, which would allow you to steer rapidly to lane 3 with assistance from the system which will brake the appropriate wheels to ensure you do not loose control?

Now let's re-run this. Everything is the same except it is wet and you have enough time to get some speed off by braking sharply before moving into lane 3. You are in a car with ABS. You confidently brake with maximum force, retaining steering control.

Again, will you tell me that you would prefer a car without ABS? I bet you won't. And so I have to ask, why do you think ESP is any less of a life saver?

[Silk]

Silk

You talk of "taking it easy". I am not 100% sure what you mean by this, but I assume you are talking about keeping safety margins high (well within the car's grip levels).

These is clearly a good aim, and with good planning achievable almost of all of the time.

I say almost, because there is always the risk of the completely unexpected. Even the best AD in the world can't eliminate risk, so matter how easy they take it.

A quick hypothetical for you. You are on a motorway. There is a reasonable amount of traffic, and you are in lane 2 overtaking a line of trucks. You are doing 70 mph. You are a safe following distance from the car ahead. The road is dry.

Suddenly a tyre blows out from the right hand rear wheel of a truck ahead in lane 1. There is significant debris (the massive carcass of the steel reinforced tyre) now in your lane, which could cause serious damage to your car, perhaps even to cause a loss of control.

Because you are a good AD you know that lane 3 is clear alongside you, and that is the path to safety.

But the closing speed on the debris is high. You need to execute a high speed lane change immediately to avoid a collision.

Now, in these circumstances, would you not be pleased to have ESP, which would allow you to steer rapidly to lane 3 with assistance from the system which will brake the appropriate wheels to ensure you do not loose control?

Now let's re-run this. Everything is the same except it is wet and you have enough time to get some speed off by braking sharply before moving into lane 3. You are in a car with ABS. You confidently brake with maximum force, retaining steering control.

Again, will you tell me that you would prefer a car without ABS? I bet you won't. And so I have to ask, why do you think ESP is any less of a life saver?

I'm not disputing that these driver aids can ultimately improve safety in certain situations. My point is, there's no substitute for a safe driver. There's also no guarantee that a driver aid will help - it's still subject to the laws of physics after all.

In the scenario you describe. Imagine the driver of the car is your typical "press on regardless" type who expects his way to be clear and anything that gets in the way is someone else's fault. He's not going to be checking for an escape route and will probably end up on top of the debris before even starting to take evasive action, by which time it'll be too late. In fact, he may be better off ploughing straight into it than risk a collision with a vehicle in another lane by taking the wrong kind of evasive action.

[jcochrane]

I'm not disputing that these driver aids can ultimately improve safety in certain situations. My point is, there's no substitute for a safe driver. There's also no guarantee that a driver aid will help - it's still subject to the laws of physics after all.

(Bold print added by me)
Your views echo those held by some when seat belts became compulsory. They also believed they were so good that it would never happen to them. Not been my experience, I have seen numerous accidents where innocent parties were involved through no fault of their own. Just one example...a car swerved over from the oncoming carriagway knocking the car ahead of me into a ditch where it landed upside down. The two occupants managed to climb out unscathed. I'm not sure that would have been the case without the seat belts. The driver that swerved across the road flew over the ditch crashed through a fence and stopped in a field. When I attended him he was safely belted in and unharmed except for his right foot that was firmly jammed between the pedals. He had apparently fallen asleep at the wheel.

I'm with stefan einz on this. I don't believe that however good we may think we are accidents can never happen to us. I accept that driving always carries a risk, AD driving helps to reduce but not eliminate those risks. If you want to be risk free of a road accident then don't venture onto the road. Any aid that might help is worth having in my view.

[jcochrane]

Silk

You talk of "taking it easy". I am not 100% sure what you mean by this, but I assume you are talking about keeping safety margins high (well within the car's grip levels).

These is clearly a good aim, and with good planning achievable almost of all of the time.

I say almost, because there is always the risk of the completely unexpected. Even the best AD in the world can't eliminate risk, so matter how easy they take it.

A quick hypothetical for you. You are on a motorway. There is a reasonable amount of traffic, and you are in lane 2 overtaking a line of trucks. You are doing 70 mph. You are a safe following distance from the car ahead. The road is dry.

Suddenly a tyre blows out from the right hand rear wheel of a truck ahead in lane 1. There is significant debris (the massive carcass of the steel reinforced tyre) now in your lane, which could cause serious damage to your car, perhaps even to cause a loss of control.

Because you are a good AD you know that lane 3 is clear alongside you, and that is the path to safety.

But the closing speed on the debris is high. You need to execute a high speed lane change immediately to avoid a collision.

Now, in these circumstances, would you not be pleased to have ESP, which would allow you to steer rapidly to lane 3 with assistance from the system which will brake the appropriate wheels to ensure you do not loose control?

Now let's re-run this. Everything is the same except it is wet and you have enough time to get some speed off by braking sharply before moving into lane 3. You are in a car with ABS. You confidently brake with maximum force, retaining steering control.

Again, will you tell me that you would prefer a car without ABS? I bet you won't. And so I have to ask, why do you think ESP is any less of a life saver?

In the scenario you describe. Imagine the driver of the car is your typical "press on regardless" type who expects his way to be clear and anything that gets in the way is someone else's fault. He's not going to be checking for an escape route and will probably end up on top of the debris before even starting to take evasive action, by which time it'll be too late. In fact, he may be better off ploughing straight into it than risk a collision with a vehicle in another lane by taking the wrong kind of evasive action.

I'm slightly confused. Are you now suggesting that it is "irrelivent" for the "press on regardles" type to have safety aids as they would not be likely to be able to take evasive action but might help an AD driver that could?

[Renny]

I agree with Stefan and J, whilst an AD may not benefit as much from ESP as they should have greater awareness and ability to control the car in an emergency situation, the majority of car drivers only see driving as a means of getting from A to B and have little or no awareness beyond instinctive reaction to steer or brake, or maybe both. It is these drivers that have the potential to get the greatest gain from ESP when it intervenes and stabilises the car, probably without them even realising what happened.
There is also the small, but in my opinion dangerous, group who will rely on ESP to get them out of trouble and will drive in a manner that will probably lead to its intervention. This will be rather like the group who belive that ABS will enable the car to stop in a shorter distance. Potentially fataly flawed understanding.
Notwithstanding this, for most, including preformance drivers who understand the system and how it can intervene, then ESP can be a life saver. Just don't drive relying on it.

[MGF]

The above arguments for ESP look very much like arguments for reducing speed limits.

[Silk]

I'm slightly confused. Are you now suggesting that it is "irrelivent" for the "press on regardles" type to have safety aids as they would not be likely to be able to take evasive action but might help an AD driver that could?

I suppose what I'm trying to say is, every situation is different. I would rather trust a safe driver than a safety aid in the hands of a dangerous driver. The reality is, collisions are very rare and a situation where ESP will save the day rarer still. If it's fitted, then fair enough but I wouldn't want to label anyone as public enemy number 1 just because they make the decision to save their money.

To use an analogy: how many people fit a fire alarm and sprinkler system to their house when these are proven to save lives? It's a question of balance.

[Silk]

The above arguments for ESP look very much like arguments for reducing speed limits.

The arguments that matter most are those that Mr Bosch put to the EU in order to make ESP compulsory on new cars. In the name of safety of course.

[jcochrane]

To use an analogy: how many people fit a fire alarm and sprinkler system to their house when these are proven to save lives? It's a question of balance.

OK I admit it I have a fire alarm but could not afford a sprinkler system.

Seriously though I have been in a couple of hotel fires and was glad of the fire alarm system. My neighbour suffered a house fire, in the early hours, that devastated most of the house. Thankfully the fire alarm woke the family and they escaped without harm. The insurance company paid for them to live in a hotel for a few months whilst their house was put back into order.

Way off topic, sorry.

[Grahar]

Although I stand behind my arguments for the benefits of ESP I am totally against the Orwellian legislation that makes it compulsory for them to be fitted.

[Silk]

To use an analogy: how many people fit a fire alarm and sprinkler system to their house when these are proven to save lives? It's a question of balance.

OK I admit it I have a fire alarm but could not afford a sprinkler system.

Seriously though I have been in a couple of hotel fires and was glad of the fire alarm system. My neighbour suffered a house fire, in the early hours, that devastated most of the house. Thankfully the fire alarm woke the family and they escaped without harm. The insurance company paid for them to live in a hotel for a few months whilst their house was put back into order.

Way off topic, sorry.

The thread has probably run its course. I now have ESP whether I want it or not - I hope I never have to use it.

[Silk]

Although I stand behind my arguments for the benefits of ESP I am totally against the Orwellian legislation that makes it compulsory for them to be fitted.

Indeed, and in spite of the claims from the manufacturers that it's for safety only, I'm sure there will be certain drivers out there who will want to "explore" it.