Wrecked my Blue Crown Vic.

[zzyzzx]

Originally Posted By: madRiver
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Sorry to hear about your loss but glad that your ok. The Crown Vic is one of the safest cars on the road period.


The car is not one of the safest because it kicked out the rear end and had no ability except driver reflex to place back into control. A modern stability control likely would have prevented this accident or made it easier to recover.


Front wheel drive would have prevented this accident as well. Stability control is a waste of money.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
The unibody junks around me in a downpour are all over the roadway hydroplaning into ditches. In the winter I put on the Firestone Winterforce snow tires and two 45 LB barbell plates in the huge trunk and go right by other people driving unibody junks who crash off of the roadway into ditches while my Vic stays firmly planted on the road. lol


Unibody junk?

Methinks you are confusing tire tread with chassis type...

You should come to NH. Plenty of full framed vehicles in the ditch, in the winter, while the "unibody junk" manages to stay on the road.



Both of my Unibody vehicles do quite well in the snow!

 

[Andrew1972]

Originally Posted By: zzyzzx
Originally Posted By: madRiver
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
Sorry to hear about your loss but glad that your ok. The Crown Vic is one of the safest cars on the road period.


The car is not one of the safest because it kicked out the rear end and had no ability except driver reflex to place back into control. A modern stability control likely would have prevented this accident or made it easier to recover.


Front wheel drive would have prevented this accident as well. Stability control is a waste of money.


Stability control is last resort and does not cost money since its there on certain used vehicles and standard on new(2012-present).....

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: asand1
Technology should not be a substitute for competence and personal responsibility.

No offence to colt45, I just don't believe more complex systems to break down and repair is the answer.



Typically BITOG rhetoric. These systems make cars safer. The reason why BITOG members don't like them-is because in the event of an issue, they can't fix them. So it's off to the dealer....and we all know the attitude about dealers on this board as well.

 

[01rangerxl]

Wow, sorry to hear about your wreck. That was a really nicely optioned and modified car. Sad to see it taken out of commission.

 

[Gasbuggy]

I had that traction control system on the 99 Mustang Cobra I bought in college. I have a lead foot. It kept me in line in the rain. Same system was on my next 03 Cobra making way more power, it provided some security. A friend of mine wrecked a lincoln towncar going up a large bridge in heavy rain. He lost traction and the car spun. RWD isn't for everyone.

I have an even older system on a 93 MarkVIII. It does not cut engine timing. The system applies one brake at a time and it takes some time to kick in. Pretty funny, you punch it and light up the right rear tire, it brakes at the right rear so the left tire starts smoking, then it applies the left brake and the right rear goes back to smoking. You end up with the strangest set of tire marks.



Originally Posted By: Colt45ws
I doubt it. Its pretty dumb on these older ones. All it does is cuts the engine to like zero output and yeah it pulses the brakes on the slipping tire but I don't think it would have helped here.
This is the traction control implementation that gave traction control a bad name and why you have people complaining about it.

Example. You are pulling out onto a busy two lane highway (50mph) to go left. You see a nice spot to slip in and you gas it.
Unfortunately, there was a little bit of gravel on the road and your tire slips. The traction control intervenes and cuts the engine to an idle. You are now in the middle of the lane with no power. Luckily the traffic was attentive and slowed to avoid plowing into you.
After a couple seconds, the engine returns to normal power.
You go home and jumper the traction control switch out so it defaults off every time you start the car.

This is a situation that happened to a friend with a 2004 Grand Marq.

 

[Alfred_B]

Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: asand1
Originally Posted By: madRiver
The car is not one of the safest because it kicked out the rear end and had no ability except driver reflex to place back into control. A modern stability control likely would have prevented this accident or made it easier to recover.


Yes that's right, we need more intrusive technology in cars to nanny drivers, rather than better training and common sense. Hopefully the government steps in and makes us crush all our old cars and get Subarus with TC and ABS. Sometimes I don't know how I get out of the driveway without ABS, Traction Control, a backup camera, Lane Departure, Collision Detection, Adaptive Steering, and Onstar to tell me my EGR is not flowing.


So called "intrusive technology" is another nagging point here on BITOG. Nothing new here. This technology ranks right up there with Subarus, Chinese Tires, and you name it as far as negative comments. Whether BITOG members like this stuff or not they make driving safer.

BTW- we all think we are better drivers than we actually are. FYI.


Dunning-Kruger Effect.

 

[CKN]

I think it's the other way around....drivers who think they are better than they are and they don't need any "intrusive technology".

 

[zzyzzx]

Originally Posted By: madRiver
Stability control is last resort and does not cost money since its there on certain used vehicles and standard on new(2012-present).....


The above comment makes no sense to me since obviously adding stability control to new cars does add to their cost.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: zzyzzx
Originally Posted By: madRiver
Stability control is last resort and does not cost money since its there on certain used vehicles and standard on new(2012-present).....


The above comment makes no sense to me since obviously adding stability control to new cars does add to their cost.


According to the Government-
The cost estimates developed for this analysis were taken from tear down studies that a
contractor has performed for NHTSA30. The total average incremental cost for ABS and ESC in
these vehicles is estimated at $479 (see Table V-3). This process resulted in estimates of the
consumer cost of ABS at $368, and the incremental cost of ESC at $111, for a total cost of $479.

Full info
www.nhtsa.gov

 

[dlundblad]

OP now is the time to look for a Marauder.

Saw one at a car show last September. 35k on the OD. The owner was asking $10k.

 

[Andrew1972]

Originally Posted By: zzyzzx
Originally Posted By: madRiver
Stability control is last resort and does not cost money since its there on certain used vehicles and standard on new(2012-present).....


The above comment makes no sense to me since obviously adding stability control to new cars does add to their cost.


You have no choice as its mandated on 2012+ and if you buy a used vehicle it adds little in terms of resale as an option.