CR puts out don't buy warning on Lexus SUV

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
The alternative is that CR was right about something, and my world view won't allow that.....lol.

Eh, they are bound to be right every once in a while, just as a matter of random luck. Still doesn't mean they're competent.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I'd be perfectly happy if SUVs didn't have that ESC [censored] at all.

I'm pretty sure I agree with you.



Because SUVs before it were SOOOO much safer. (think older expeditions, explorers, tahoes, suburbans)


They weren't unsafe given the fact that they were built on high COG truck frames. I've driven plenty of older 'utes and there has been only one time when I truly thought I was going to roll one. I was 15 and driving a 1998 2WD Blazer 2-door down a rough gravel road at about 30 MPH. There was a turn with a mud filled rut in it, and of course I went right for that. I would guess that I was still doing 20 MPH when I hit the mud and the Blazer leaned hard to the left and I thought I was going over. It leveled back out though and I kept on going. 2WD Blazers are right up there with Samis, 2WD Explorers, Montero Sports, etc. as far as its tendency to roll. Even at 15 I didn't put one on its side. You either have to be stupid, reckless/really pushing the limits, or in a truly exceptional emergency situation for these vehicles to become dangerous. I've done a lot of stupid things while driving Explorers and Blazers and I still haven't wrecked one.

Personally, I think all the safety nannies that affect the way the vehicle drives should be options for the people who need them.

 

[Nick R]

I read edmunds review of the 2002 Ford expedition, and they noticed a very twitchy steering setup, not good when the vehicle has such a high center of gravity, with lots of body roll.

 

[BuickGN]

I think most people know my opinion on electronic nannies. I think they're partially to blame for the terrible drivers today. If people actually learned how to control a vehicle and learn it's limits, it would be much more effective than electronic band-aids.

With the sticky tires on my TL, I can outstop the ABS by over 20' from 80mph! Anyone realize just how significant this is if you're trying to avoid an accident? If it weren't for the annoying light and potential insurance liability I would drive with no ABS all the time. I want the car to do what I want it to do when I want it to. If I want to use the throttle to adjust the attitude of the rear, I want to be able to do it, not have the computer think about it and make a decision for me.

I nearly crashed my car when I entered a corner hot and the inside front tire started to barely lock. The all knowing ABS basically let off the brakes to all 4 tires and I had no brakes. I've done the same thing in the GN hundreds of times with the inside tire on the verge of lockup but it took the electronics to make me almost crash for the first time.

 

[Nick R]

Until you try to drive in the winter, because no driver can react to locked up wheels as fast as the computer can, and NO DRIVER can lock and unlock the brakes as fast as a good ABS system can.

Not to mention, when most people see a puppy, or a deer or another car cross in front of them when they weren't expecting it... Their first reaction is going to be to slam on the brakes. Without ABS, this will cause all 4 tires to lockup, and you lose steering completely, potentially flipping the car in the process. With ABS, the wheels will still turn, and you may be able to steer around said obstacle.

 

[d00df00d]

BuickGN, I agree generally with what you're saying, and I agree wholeheartedly with the first paragraph.

I would only add a qualification on the topic of ABS: good multi-channel ABS doesn't have the limitation you described because it can pulse each brake separately and decide on-the-fly what to do with what wheel. That was one of the biggest differences I noticed when I went from my 1995 Maxima to my current car, and I'm sure you'll agree that's saying something. Modern incarnations of the technology act seamlessly and really have no downsides whatsoever, especially when combined with electronic brake force distribution. All you have to do is stomp on the brakes and the car makes the best possible use of all four tires.

Not that I'm going to talk you out of your opinion of your TL's ABS, of course. I'd be pretty annoyed by what you described, too. Just saying not all ABS is like that.

 

[Nick R]

Hmmm... Which one would you rather have?




vs

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Until you try to drive in the winter, because no driver can react to locked up wheels as fast as the computer can, and NO DRIVER can lock and unlock the brakes as fast as a good ABS system can.

Not to mention, when most people see a puppy, or a deer or another car cross in front of them when they weren't expecting it... Their first reaction is going to be to slam on the brakes. Without ABS, this will cause all 4 tires to lockup, and you lose steering completely, potentially flipping the car in the process. With ABS, the wheels will still turn, and you may be able to steer around said obstacle.

The operative word here is "good."

A bad ABS system is still often better than nothing, but IMO the benefit is small enough that you still need to be a decent driver to work with it... at which point you almost might as well remove the ABS system and save the weight.

Plus, I have a feeling BuickGN has a good deal more experience than you do in low-traction conditions.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Hmmm... Which one would you rather have?

Mercedes ABS. Good ABS.

BuickGN was talking about bad ABS. Big difference.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Until you try to drive in the winter, because no driver can react to locked up wheels as fast as the computer can, and NO DRIVER can lock and unlock the brakes as fast as a good ABS system can.

Not to mention, when most people see a puppy, or a deer or another car cross in front of them when they weren't expecting it... Their first reaction is going to be to slam on the brakes. Without ABS, this will cause all 4 tires to lockup, and you lose steering completely, potentially flipping the car in the process. With ABS, the wheels will still turn, and you may be able to steer around said obstacle.

The operative word here is "good."

A bad ABS system is still often better than nothing, but IMO the benefit is small enough that you still need to be a decent driver to work with it... at which point you almost might as well remove the ABS system and save the weight.

Plus, I have a feeling BuickGN has a good deal more experience than you do in low-traction conditions.


Probably. But you find me a driver in which the scenario I described will not result in a panic braking. The ABS on my cavalier isn't that great, but without it I definitely would have been in an accident this past winter. I pulled into the school parking lot, which is a slight downslope. Doing, 10ish mph, road looked clear. Vehicles up ahead waiting in line.... put brakes on to stop. Kept sliding, ABS kicked in and I managed to steer to the side. Black ice, completely invisble on the road surface they used.

 

[brianl703]

Is this a mult-channel ABS system? The use of 4 solenoid valves makes me think so.


Quote:
Anti-lock brake system (ABS) operates as follows:

l When the brake pedal is applied, fluid is forced from the brake master cylinder outlet ports to the inlet ports.

l This pressure is transmitted through four normally open solenoid valves contained inside the brake pressure control valve block, then through the outlet ports of the brake pressure control valve block to each wheel.

l If the anti-lock brake control module senses that a wheel is about to lock, based on sensor data, it closes the normally open solenoid valve for that circuit. This prevents any more fluid from entering that circuit.

l The anti-lock brake control module then looks at the sensor signal from the affected wheel again.

l If that wheel is still decelerating, it opens the normally closed solenoid valve for that circuit. This dumps any pressure that is trapped between the normally open valve and the brake back to the accumulator.

l Once the affected wheel comes back up to speed, the anti-lock brake control module returns the valves to their normal condition allowing fluid flow to the affected brake.

 

[d00df00d]

Looks like it.

 

[Ben99GT]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Safety issues concern me. If CR bashes a car because they don't like plastic trim, cabin space, over all layout, or some other [censored] I tend to ignore them. If they say a vehicle is unsafe and not to buy it that grabs my attention. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.


Considering CU hasn't been above forcing vehicles to roll over to get publicity (Trooper), I would then to ignore them regardless.

Just a bunch of leftist, ignorant to all things automotive hacks hiding in a cloak of impartiality.

 

[nthach]

CR has traditionally been in Toyota and Honda's pocket. Me thinks that CR is now Hyundai's mouthpiece.

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d


Eh, they are bound to be right every once in a while, just as a matter of random luck. Still doesn't mean they're competent.


Just like a broken clock! Its right once in a while, but useless otherwise.

 

[d00df00d]

Exactly.

 

[edwardh1]

Odd Toyota is now (per the news) testing the SUV s for rollover.
Are they RE testing them? Did they test them ever???

 

[brianl703]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Looks like it.


I thought so--there are 4 lines coming out of the ABS hydraulic module too.

This is the Teves Mark 4 ABS in the Crown Victoria.

http://www.aa1car.com/library/abs_list.htm

has a whole list of what's in what.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Until you try to drive in the winter, because no driver can react to locked up wheels as fast as the computer can, and NO DRIVER can lock and unlock the brakes as fast as a good ABS system can.

Not to mention, when most people see a puppy, or a deer or another car cross in front of them when they weren't expecting it... Their first reaction is going to be to slam on the brakes. Without ABS, this will cause all 4 tires to lockup, and you lose steering completely, potentially flipping the car in the process. With ABS, the wheels will still turn, and you may be able to steer around said obstacle.


You're making me feel old! Back in my day, we learned threshold braking, and that braking and steering are best done separately. I've never found any need to pump the brakes. If they start to lock up, let off a little. When/if you need to steer, get off the brakes. It's pretty simple, and you learn it quickly during youthful aggressive winter driving (hopefully away from other cars).

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
I read edmunds review of the 2002 Ford expedition, and they noticed a very twitchy steering setup, not good when the vehicle has such a high center of gravity, with lots of body roll.


They are on crack-cocaine. We've owned THREE Expeditions of that body style and accrued 400,000Km over the group of them. They are not "twitchy". Though the factory tires are JUNK. But that goes without saying for just about any car.

Before you knock the older gen, you should REALLY go take one for a drive; rent one or something. Basing one's opinion on how a vehicle feels via a magazine article is really not a good way to do things.