Silk wrote:Astraist wrote:I Wouldn't say. It's an active safety measure compared to a passive one. Also, the seatbelt can be seen as multi-functional when compared to the stability control, which only works in skidding situations which are less frequent than collisions caused due to outright "traffic management" related collisions (front to-rear collisions due to tailgating, e.g.).
Also, ESP has it's own limit. We once set out to judge the system's limits, and had some interesting findings. Most stability programs are capable of keeping you safe only in deviations of up to 25-30% of the critical speed for the turn. Even at lower velocities, it often takes a driver's input to assist the system, either by maintaining directional control over the car and steering it to safety (during oversteer) or by braking it lightly (during understeer).
In particular, the system showed a lower ability to handle understeer than it did with oversteer, even though it is far more common. The problem is that the system handles the skid via assymetric braking, which in the event of understeer happens by braking the inside-rear tyre, which during understeer has little weight (and thus little grip) on it, and might even be swung airborne due to the rear anti-roll bar.
The system also had problems to deal with under-inflated tyres, mis-aligned suspension and other car problems, provocative driver's inputs or very problematic driving conditions like very steep slopes or high slippery conditions like when driving on polished ice or when aquaplaning.
Goodness me. Whatever happened to taking it easy?
My current car has ESP as standard but I'd have saved the money if I'd had the option. It's completely unnecessary, IMO.
I see you've reactivated HPC membership. TBH I largely agree with you, but I expect that leaves us in a minority of two. I wouldn't spend appreciable money on it either, and the same goes for ABS.