Traction Control

[jefcam]

Its good to include traction control to all cars. This helps a lot keyboard drivers.

[Tweaker]

Traction control is only given to the cars that would really have it in real life.

BF1 uses it. And the FZ50, which is similar to a Porsche with TC, uses it also.

[ajp71]

This is a simulation of real life so few racing cars do have it IRL.

[Batterypark]

To my understanding, you can get TC in pretty much any modern car from the factory. Certainly on a car like the FXO Turbo.

And even if it isn't often used in racing situations, it would still be neat to see how it works on FWD cars etc :)

Hopefully someone will make a LFStweak-esque program which you could use to experiment with TC offline on any car. For one, I'd like to compare tyre wear and lap times for the XFR with and without TC.

[Bramski]

I wouldn't have a problem with every car having the option of Traction Control as long as servers admins have the ability to force it off if they wish.

[duke_toaster]

Yes. The devs could have put it on all of the road cars in this patch. I guess they didn't want to make it too easy :shrug: .

I am in favour of TCS on all cars, but an option for admins to either ban TCS or to make TCS users carry a passanger or something like that.

[Tweaker]

I wouldn't like it at all for every car. BF1 and FZ50 is just fine. Then you are getting into what other simulations do... creating driving aids for every possible car. No, No, and NO!!!

Please keep the cars respectable to a reallife counterpart, and don't give it TC if it shouldn't have it :doh: sheesh.

[ajp71]

Most road cars of the late '80s did not have traction control, and this is when it seems most of our cars come from.

The devs could waste their time setting up TC for all road cars, which would be even more pointless with the new physics. TC only helps putting the power down and won't stop unpowered oversteer.

[Gekkibi]

BUMP!

It is strange that only one road car has traction control. I do understand that it would be rather stupid to include it to GTR-cars, but TC has been more or less available nearly to all cars back from the 80's to present. It is possible that few would actually use it, but still, if it is in RL-car, why shouldn't it be in a LFS-car?

Other (Rather off-topic) is that most 90's cars (And nearly all 2k cars) has cruise control. Yes, I know that pit limiter != cruise control, but for some reason I hear alot from servers that people would like to have it in road cars also. I have no opinion on this one, I can manage without it.

[tristancliffe]

No car. None. Zilch. Not one. Uno minus uno. Nada.

The number of cars with less than 500hp that need traction control.


Unless the driver is a complete wanker behind the wheel. Is that you?

[Woz]

BUMP!

It is strange that only one road car has traction control. I do understand that it would be rather stupid to include it to GTR-cars, but TC has been more or less available nearly to all cars back from the 80's to present. It is possible that few would actually use it, but still, if it is in RL-car, why shouldn't it be in a LFS-car?

Other (Rather off-topic) is that most 90's cars (And nearly all 2k cars) has cruise control. Yes, I know that pit limiter != cruise control, but for some reason I hear alot from servers that people would like to have it in road cars also. I have no opinion on this one, I can manage without it.

TC is fine on just the FZ5 and the BF1. The UF1, GTi and GT would never have IRL and as the TBO cars are 80s cars niether would they.

The RAC does not have it IRL and I doubt any GTR spec cars are allowed in the reg. So its fine how it is.

In most cars that you can get TC on today it is an option on the higher spec cars, it is even an option on most BMWs.

As for cruise control to use as pit limiter, no. I get the feeling this is people asking for aids to come back now most have been removed.

[Gekkibi]

No car. None. Zilch. Not one. Uno minus uno. Nada.

The number of cars with less than 500hp that need traction control.


Unless the driver is a complete wanker behind the wheel. Is that you?

Nolla, ei yhtään, tyhjä arpa.

The number of cars we need in a car simulator. After all, we have plenty of cars in real life...

Isn't the point of simulator to simulate something? In this time, simulating cars. And if car has TC, why shouldn't that been simulated? As well we shouldn't simulate handbrake, because who really uses that in a racing situation..?

EDIT:

In most cars that you can get TC on today it is an option on the higher spec cars, it is even an option on most BMWs.
So it could be an additional option in LFS?

Maybe I should calm down. I don't need TC for other cars this bad. Sorry tristancliffe about my temper, I am just so tired right now.

[Nathan_French_14]

I would have thought that the FXO would have TC though. Im not saying i need it, but it seems to be a relatively newish car. Its FWD, over 220hp and it likes to spin the wheels as it is, yet a MK1 95 mondeo, which in 2.5 V6 form, is producing 170hp stock, and yet that has TC.

Imo, if the FXO was a real car, and it came from the era we think it does, it would come with TC.

[Woz]

So it could be an additional option in LFS?

I would have thought that the FXO would have TC though.

Why. People should just learn that if you are heavy on the gas you cook the tyres. This is what car control is all about. It has been decided they don't have TC so that is the way it is.

[JO53PHS]

Does the LFS TC actually work like real TC... It just seems more like an accelerator limiter... I'm sure TC systems are more complicated than that :scratchch

[Woz]

Does the LFS TC actually work like real TC... It just seems more like an accelerator limiter... I'm sure TC systems are more complicated than that :scratchch

The TC that was on my BINI (BM Mini) controlled brakes on a wheel by wheel basis along with throttle input to keep the car in shape. It used the ABS sensors to determine what was going on.

[Stang70Fastback]

Are we going to lose traction control in the Formula 1 car? I hear that's what's happening in reality...

If so, I'm so screwed, lol.

[Lateralus]

Are we going to lose traction control in the Formula 1 car? I hear that's what's happening in reality...

If so, I'm so screwed, lol.

No. It's a 2006 car, not a 2008 car. If we get a new F1 then probably, but that doesn't seem to likely.

[wheel4hummer]

My Saturn has traction control. I only encountered it once on dry pavement, and that's when I decided to floor it turning right away from a stop sign. And then later I tried it without the traction control, and I made tire smoke! Except the differential in Saturns is very fragile. If I decide to start doing autocross, then I will most likely get a LSD kit for the differential.

[Lateralus]

I didn't know that too many modern family-type passenger cars had TC, especially front-wheel drive ones. I have a '98 Acura CL which definitely does not have traction control. Not that I would want it anyway.

[duke_toaster]

/me starts ferreting

By the looks of it the Vauxhall Calibra Turbo* doesn't have TC but it does have ABS though, and properly modelled ABS would be a really nice thing.

*my yardstick for the FXO, given that the specs are almost the same and the age looks right, IMO the TBOs are early to mid 90s, some modern technology but nothing too poncey.

As for the RB4, the Celicas of that era, by the looks of it, didn't have TC either.

On the XRT front, the Mitsubishi Starion didn't look like it had it. As for my timing yardstick, if the XRT is supposed to be a Starion it's OKish as Starion production ended in 1990.

So that looks like a no for the TBOs.

Citroen AX? No TC for that, no TC for XFG. Original Minis? Don't make me laugh.

However, should we get some newer cars they should have TC if they would have it in RL.

[Stang70Fastback]

I didn't know that too many modern family-type passenger cars had TC, especially front-wheel drive ones. I have a '98 Acura CL which definitely does not have traction control. Not that I would want it anyway.

Many, many modern cars have some form of traction control. All Audis, BMWs, ALL sports cars have it. Then there's stability control such as ESC, StabiliTrak, DSC, ESP, AdvanceTrac, RSC, etc (depending on the manucafturer - they all have their own sill acronyms.) Then you'be got ABS, ECS... Subaru has VDC - the list goes on and on...

Many front-wheel drive cars have some sort of traction control to help in slippery conditions.

[JO53PHS]

Many, many modern cars have some form of traction control. All Audis, BMWs, ALL sports cars have it. Then there's stability control such as ESC, StabiliTrak, DSC, ESP, AdvanceTrac, RSC, etc (depending on the manucafturer - they all have their own sill acronyms.) Then you'be got ABS, ECS... Subaru has VDC - the list goes on and on...

Many front-wheel drive cars have some sort of traction control to help in slippery conditions.


I just looked up Volvo Cars on Wikipedia:


Safety milestones


1984 ABS anti–locking brakes
1985 ETC – Electronic Traction Control
1986 Brake lights in rear window
1986 Three–point safety belt centre rear seat
1987 Mechanical safety belt pre–tensioner
1987 Airbag – driver
1990 Integrated child safety cushion in centre rear seat
1991 SIPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIPS) – Side Impact Protection System
1991 Automatic height adjusting safety belt
1992 Reinforced rear seats in estate models
1992 Passenger airbag front
1993 Three–point inertia–reel safety belts – all rear positions
1994 SIPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIPS)–bag, side airbag
1995 DSA – Dynamic Stability Assistance
1995 Integrated child safety cushion outer rear seats
1997 ROPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROPS) – Roll Over Protection System (C70)
1998 WHIPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHIPS) – Whiplash Protection System
1998 IC – Inflatable Curtain
1998 STC – Stability and Traction Control
1998 DSTC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Stability_Control) – Dynamic Stability and Traction Control
1998 EBD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_brakeforce_distribution) – Electronic Brake Distribution
2000 ISOFIX anchorages with rearward–facing child safety seat
2000 Dual Stage Airbag
2001 SCC – Volvo Safety Concept Car
2002 RSC – Roll Stability Control
2002 ROPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROPS) – Roll Over Protection System (XC90)
2002 New integrated child seat 2nd row (XC90)
2002 Lower Cross Member (XC90)
2002 New compatible front design (XC90)
2002 Safe 3rd row seats (XC90)
2002 New Front Structure (XC90)
2003 New Front Structure called Volvo Intelligent Vehicle Architecture (VIVA) (S40, V50)
2003 Rear seat belt reminders (in S40 and V50)
2003 IDIS – Intelligent Driver Information System (in S40 and V50)
2003 Inauguration of Volvo's Traffic Accident Research Team in Bangkok
2004 BLIS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Spot_Information_System) – Blind Spot Information System (in S40 and V50)
2004 Water repellent glass WRG (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Water_Repellent_Glass&action=editredlink)
2005 Introduction of DMIC (Door Mounted Inflatable Curtain) (new Volvo C70)
2006 PCC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Car_Communicator) - Personal Car Communicator (S80)
2006 CWBS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision_Warning_Brake_Support) - Collision Warning with Brake Support (S80)
2006 ABL - Active Bixenon Lights (S80)
2007 ACC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_Cruise_Control) - Adaptive Cruise Control (S80)
2007 PPB - Power Park Brake (S80)
2007 HDC - Hill Descent Control (XC70 and future XC)
2007 EBL - Emergency Brake Light (Premier on S40 and V50, standard on all after)
2007 DAC - Driver Alert Control (V70, XC70)
2007 LDW - Lane Departure Warning System (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_Departure_Warning_System)[33] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_Cars#_note-30)

Could they think of any more acronyms? :D

[tristancliffe]

Many, many modern cars have some form of traction control. All Audis, BMWs, ALL sports cars have it. Then there's stability control such as ESC, StabiliTrak, DSC, ESP, AdvanceTrac, RSC, etc (depending on the manucafturer - they all have their own sill acronyms.) Then you'be got ABS, ECS... Subaru has VDC - the list goes on and on...

Many front-wheel drive cars have some sort of traction control to help in slippery conditions.


But none of them need it. I can understand ABS because most people are rubbish at driving. But Traction Control? Every human being has it built in. I can see that more than 500hp might catch out the village idiot now and again, but 200hp? What a joke. Unfortunately people now expect the car to save them from their own stupidity, and so driving standards become worse and worse.

[mrodgers]

But none of them need it. I can understand ABS because most people are rubbish at driving. But Traction Control? Every human being has it built in. I can see that more than 500hp might catch out the village idiot now and again, but 200hp? What a joke. Unfortunately people now expect the car to save them from their own stupidity, and so driving standards become worse and worse.
Wrong. We are talking road cars here. Have you ever attempted to move from a start facing uphill in 20 inches of snow? If you breathe on the throttle pedal, the tires will spin. Hence, traction control on a road car is not for racing or performance driving, but for the capability of driving in snow. But since you guys are looked upon by nature as so perfect in the UK, I see how you will feel that traction control is not needed because you don't usually get very much snow.

If only the rest of the world was as perfect, there would be no reason for any drivability or safety functions in automobiles.

[JJ72]

and in LFS there's no snow.

case closed!

[BigPeBe]

TC is for lame people. ;) Well it's ok in F1 but otherwise.
I just hate that feeling when electronic components try to do their own stuff while I'm driving.

And cars like XRT etc seems to be from years when cars didn't usually have TC or any other driving terrors.

[Woz]

But none of them need it. I can understand ABS because most people are rubbish at driving. But Traction Control? Every human being has it built in. I can see that more than 500hp might catch out the village idiot now and again, but 200hp? What a joke. Unfortunately people now expect the car to save them from their own stupidity, and so driving standards become worse and worse.

+1

When the seatbelt laws came in some tests were done in Holland. They got the test candidates to drive a course with and without seatbelts.

With a seatbelt on, EVERYONE pushed harder and faster, used the brakes later.

All the modern assists they put in road cars are to help people that do not understand that a car loses grip and what happens after it does. Trouble is all these assists make the same people even more of a risk on the road because it makes them feel safter.

Take away ABS and people won't push as hard because they know there is a risk of wheel lockup.

---------

That said, LFS is about driving skill. Why do people want to change it to who has the computer assists configured the best?

:)

[tristancliffe]

Wrong. We are talking road cars here. Have you ever attempted to move from a start facing uphill in 20 inches of snow? If you breathe on the throttle pedal, the tires will spin. Hence, traction control on a road car is not for racing or performance driving, but for the capability of driving in snow. But since you guys are looked upon by nature as so perfect in the UK, I see how you will feel that traction control is not needed because you don't usually get very much snow.

If only the rest of the world was as perfect, there would be no reason for any drivability or safety functions in automobiles.

Traction control does nothing a human being can't do. If some twat can't get up a snowy hill without electronic aids, then they shouldn't be driving at all in those conditions. Just use less throttle, more clutch slip, or even a higher gear to give less torque multiplication.

[DeMS]

I agree that there should be no TC on LFS, except if it was a very limiting version of the same, since there is no "perfect" TC system that can get to the limit as good as a human being can (as being proven this pre-season of F1), so it would make turning/applying throttle while turning slower than it's manual counterpart.

Then again, considering the hypothetical age of the cars on LFS, it would feel silly that they had it, specially, as pointed out by tristan, it's a simulator where you need to show skill (meaning there are no driving aids, so everyone is on the same level for competing purposes) and there's no physical risk on the driver's side.

It would be nice if the devs would get hold of another F1 from the 2008 season, without TC, not only for comparation but also for the fun of learning how to handle over 500HP without assists.

So, if it was a matter of casting a vote, mine would be a 'no', specially minding Woz's post, and keeping in mind that people who finds controlling current cars hard either has no car or is too used to drive with all those electronic and mechanical aids, which actually influences people's point of view.

Nice thread, by the way :]

[wark]

Look at the FZ50. Who drives with T/C on in that car?

It'll just slow you down and put an annoying blue light on the dash.

I would always turn the T/C off in my Mini Cooper S if I were going to drive it hard. Very annoying. Enemy of smooth driving.

T/C's even out of F1 this year. I say update the BF1 to 08 and get rid of it altogether. ;]

[Stang70Fastback]

Traction control does nothing a human being can't do. If some twat can't get up a snowy hill without electronic aids, then they shouldn't be driving at all in those conditions. Just use less throttle, more clutch slip, or even a higher gear to give less torque multiplication.

Not really. A human being cannot continuously modulate throttle to the right and left front tires in different amounts, OR apply the brakes individually to each tire. You seem to be stuck on the idea that no system is better than a human, but that is simply not the case. The fact of the matter is that even the best driver in the world will have a much easier time getting a FWD car up a steep, snowy/icy hill WITH traction control than without it. I agree that people should be able to drive safely without these systems, but they are nonetheless useful in everyday situations even for those people who CAN drive.

At the very least, there's nothing wrong with a system that makes it that much easier for you to accelerate on a snowy road without having to fight with the throttle and steering. Obviously in LFS people enjoy this challenge, but the fact remains that in most cars in real life, these systems are not only present, but successfully reduce the number of accidents on our roads. A Subaru with VDC can be put through a much more aggressive series of evasive maneuvers than one without this system. Period.

To quote Jeremy Clarkson, "This system can make any driver look like Michael Schumacher."

[Gekkibi]

It would be nice if the devs would get hold of another F1 from the 2008 season, without TC, not only for comparation but also for the fun of learning how to handle over 500HP without assists.

Almost every keyboard has a button "O". ;)

[DeMS]

Almost every keyboard has a button "O". ;)

My keybOard has nO "O" buttOn, mister :razz:

Will try, thanks for the info :)


On the other side, the point of my sentence was to allow people to drive a car that has been built to take advantage of TC and compare it to one built around the idea that TC might not be present, as both are made around that idea (not exclusively, but it TC used to be an important piece of technology on F1 last years to give it enough importance) of 'being made to comply with the rules - yet minimizing the drawbacks of rule changes'.

As a matter of a fact, this season's F1 cars have been faster on the pre-season trainings, and crashes/running out of the track were not as common as many people thought it might be.

Cheers :]

[wark]

Not really. Bear in mind not all traction controls were created equal... cheap ones can be more of a hinderance when you know what you're doing.

[Woz]

Not really. A human being cannot continuously modulate throttle to the right and left front tires in different amounts, OR apply the brakes individually to each tire. You seem to be stuck on the idea that no system is better than a human, but that is simply not the case. The fact of the matter is that even the best driver in the world will have a much easier time getting a FWD car up a steep, snowy/icy hill WITH traction control than without it. I agree that people should be able to drive safely without these systems, but they are nonetheless useful in everyday situations even for those people who CAN drive.

At the very least, there's nothing wrong with a system that makes it that much easier for you to accelerate on a snowy road without having to fight with the throttle and steering.

I have to ask, what has driving in the snow on roads got to do with racing.

Obviously in LFS people enjoy this challenge, but the fact remains that in most cars in real life, these systems are not only present, but successfully reduce the number of accidents on our roads. A Subaru with VDC can be put through a much more aggressive series of evasive maneuvers than one without this system. Period.

I think you are overstating that TC is present on MOST cars a huge amount. If you look at spec sheets for various manufacturers you will find that VERY few come with TC and most of those will be optional extras.

Just noticed you are from the US, the place that let a moron take McD to court when she burnt herself by putting a hot coffee cup between her legs. So car makers might fit more TC to minimse the risk of court cases :) (Not a US bash, apart from your legal sytem that is :))

To quote Jeremy Clarkson, "This system can make any driver look like Michael Schumacher."

And this is why it has no place in LFS, a game of driving skill not throwing a car into a corner and letting TC take care of the problem :)

[mrodgers]

I have to ask, what has driving in the snow on roads got to do with racing.

A spin off of Stang stating that most cars today have TC thus LFS cars should have it, and Tristan flaming that it shouldn't be needed because if you can't move yourself when you barely are touching the throttle and the tires are spinning, you are a moron.

[Denthul]

I think TC being present on the BF1 is a good thing, because it lets people new to the game get used to driving that car at those speeds, taking corners comfortably etc. and generally makes it easier for them. Then, when they're comfortable with that, they can start playing without it and getting used to managing the throttle coming out of slower corners and obviously starting from standing on the grid and in the pits.

I think that if a car is put into the game and it would have TC and other aids outside of the game, then it should have them in the game if someone wants to drive the car in as realistic a fashion as possible (that is, as close to the real thing) but they should, of course, be able to turn them off.

I'm a big Formula 1 fan and I'm now glad that TC and EBS have been banned because other, lower Formula categories, such as Formula Renault, Formula 3, GP2 etc. don't have these aids, so why should they be in F1? Especially when you consider the fact that these drivers are considered to be amongst the best in the world...

Slightly off-topic with that last part, but I think my point has been made clear here. :)

[Bob Smith]

I think the US perspective mentioned is an important one. I suspect TC is far more common over in the states than it is here in Europe. Since the LFS cars are blatantly European or Japenese, it is logical that they should be without TC.

I also agree that driving standards on the roads are appalling (myself not excluded either), but that's a way off-topic rant for another time.

[Gekkibi]

TC doesn't make you fast, instead it is a guarantee that you lose seconds in a laptime if using it. However, it stabilizes the car and thus makes it easier for freshstarters.

I agree: It is not for racing.

[Denthul]

I think the US perspective mentioned is an important one. I suspect TC is far more common over in the states than it is here in Europe. Since the LFS cars are blatantly European or Japenese, it is logical that they should be without TC.

I also agree that driving standards on the roads are appalling (myself not excluded either), but that's a way off-topic rant for another time.

That's definitely true, which is why I thought it would be good if it only applied to cars that actually have those systems. So the majority of cars on there would still be left without TC anyways, wouldn't they? I like that the cars are realistically represented in LFS, especially when it covers things that other games do not. One example is the pit lane speed limiter, which does feature in the F1 games I play, but is automatically engaged when you hit the pits, so you can't be penalised for speeding.

Another is the penalties - rather than being hit with a rev limiter, you have to take a drive-through or stop and go, which is much better. So yeah, for the sake of realism, TC shouldn't be applied to the cars that shouldn't have it, but should to those that would. In my opinion, of course. :)

[Gekkibi]

What if TC is an option in setup? Some cars have it as an option, so why can't it be that (An option) in LFS?

Well, same thing to ABS and everything else, but I already know what you are going to say about helping-systems... :)

[Denthul]

What if TC is an option in setup? Some cars have it as an option, so why can't it be that (An option) in LFS?

Well, same thing to ABS and everything else, but I already know what you are going to say about helping-systems... :)


I guess that's always something that will come up. I know that when I first started playing racing games, I had every aid I could find turned on. Steering and braking assistance, ABS, automatic gearbox, stability control, virtual racing line etc. but gradually, as I got used to the game, found braking and turning points and so on, I began turning them off one at a time until eventually I cracked it. Now I have only traction control on, on F1 2006, but that's mainly because I am using a PS2 controller rather than wheel and pedals, so it's hard to apply variable pressure on the controls, and there's no way to turn it off globally for the rest of the grid.

On LFS, I do use the TC on the F1.06 because I'm playing with a keyboard. I have most of the other cars sorted, the only one I can't really drive around a circuit without spinning in is the FO8, but I'm sure that will be a thing of the past when I find a wheel that will work with my computer. :)

[JO53PHS]

I guess that's always something that will come up. I know that when I first started playing racing games, I had every aid I could find turned on. Steering and braking assistance, ABS, automatic gearbox, stability control, virtual racing line etc. but gradually, as I got used to the game, found braking and turning points and so on, I began turning them off one at a time until eventually I cracked it. Now I have only traction control on, on F1 2006, but that's mainly because I am using a PS2 controller rather than wheel and pedals, so it's hard to apply variable pressure on the controls, and there's no way to turn it off globally for the rest of the grid.

On LFS, I do use the TC on the F1.06 because I'm playing with a keyboard. I have most of the other cars sorted, the only one I can't really drive around a circuit without spinning in is the FO8, but I'm sure that will be a thing of the past when I find a wheel that will work with my computer. :)

Braking & steering assistance in F1 2006 is a joke. It does ALL the braking for you and ALL the steering, and you could get round a track full throttle with ease.

[Denthul]

Braking & steering assistance in F1 2006 is a joke. It does ALL the braking for you and ALL the steering, and you could get round a track full throttle with ease.

Really? I haven't used them on F1 2006. I haven't had to use any aids for a long time now, but when I first started out (F1 '98), I tried the game without them and it was frustrating because I'd be off the track more than I was on it. And back then, you weren't shown your braking and acceleration areas, or even your turn-in points. You just had to learn that.

Without aids being there, I doubt I would've continued to be interested in the games after that. I'd just have stuck to watching the races on television. They were exciting, especially with Murray Walker commentating! :)

[Stang70Fastback]

I have to ask, what has driving in the snow on roads got to do with racing.

That was in response to tristan's post.

I think you are overstating that TC is present on MOST cars a huge amount. If you look at spec sheets for various manufacturers you will find that VERY few come with TC and most of those will be optional extras.

Just noticed you are from the US, the place that let a moron take McD to court when she burnt herself by putting a hot coffee cup between her legs. So car makers might fit more TC to minimse the risk of court cases :) (Not a US bash, apart from your legal sytem that is :))

I just looked up major cars sold by major manufacturers in the US, and EVERY car I looked up is listed below (so I didn't omit any just because they DIDN'T have traction control.)


As a Subaru owner, I know all Subaru models have VDC as either standard or optional.
Ford Tarus has AdvanceTrak
Chevrolet Malibu, Saturn Aura have StabiliTrak
Toyota Camry has "Vehicle Stability Control (VSC) with Traction Control (TRAC)"
Honda Civic has a traction control system (dunno what it's called)
Infinitis have VDC and TCM
Dodge Avenger has ESP
The fact of the matter is most cars DO have it. Maybe it's not the same for you overseas - but over here, it is very common. Those aren't even the high-end cars or sports cars. Those are common, everyday family sedans.

And this is why it has no place in LFS, a game of driving skill not throwing a car into a corner and letting TC take care of the problem :)

No, the argument was that it should be AVAILABLE in cars in LFS if it would be in real life. You can always turn it off - and you could even implement a system that does not allow use of traction control in races if you didn't want to - which I would fully support, as I am against use of TC in a race as well. The point is that LFS gives cars the features they'd have in real life, be it a roll-cage, ABS, adjustable downforce, OR TRACTION CONTROL. I would never use it - but the argument here is that it should be available.

[Woz]

I just looked up major cars sold by major manufacturers in the US, and EVERY car I looked up is listed below (so I didn't omit any just because they DIDN'T have traction control.)

...

The fact of the matter is most cars DO have it. Maybe it's not the same for you overseas - but over here, it is very common. Those aren't even the high-end cars or sports cars. Those are common, everyday family sedans.

I get the feel the US market is very different than places like the UK. From what I know a high proportion of cars sold are auto where as most in the UK are manual and TC is far less common or an optional extra.

The NZ market is different again in that most cars we get as most are imports from Japan and most are auto. I laugh at the young hoons in their auto WRX, why get a car like that with a slush box :)

[Ian.H]

Considering how bad most US manufactured cars are at handling, is it any wonder many of them come with TC as standard!?

No TC on my 325i E30.... thankfully :D


Auto WRXs!? hah... that's just comical!



Regards,

Ian

[JJ72]

While cars in real life are messed up by all sort of laws and marketing preferences, in LFS lets keep it simple and to the point.

Why add something that for most of us do nothing but damage our enjoyment in the driving experience.

[Stang70Fastback]

Considering how bad most US manufactured cars are at handling, is it any wonder many of them come with TC as standard!?

No TC on my 325i E30.... thankfully :D


Auto WRXs!? hah... that's just comical!



Regards,

Ian

It's not just American cars though... they ALL have it (this INCLUDES Audis, BMWs, Mercedes, etc...) My dad's last two AWD Audis have both had traction control.

[JJ72]

and all we have in LFS are basic 90's bangers nothing like Audi BMs and Mercs.

And once again just because cars in real life have it doesn't mean we do, unless it relevant to the the racing experience.....I mean who gives a damn whether your XRT has 4 cup holders and individual climate control for your passengers in the back wearing identical helmets.

[tristancliffe]

That's the US litigation culture for you. Add moronic driver aids to stop them from claiming when they drive into walls.

[Ian.H]

It's not just American cars though... they ALL have it (this INCLUDES Audis, BMWs, Mercedes, etc...) My dad's last two AWD Audis have both had traction control.

I guess you failed to realise that an E30 is a model of BMW, of which, as I stated already, I don't have TC anywhere near the damn thing.. and very grateful for that.. ironically, neither did my previous car.. a Mercedes 300TE.. so please, look up the definition of 'ALL'.. I think you'll find you haven't grasped the concept of the word.. much like people's confusion with 'want' and 'need'.



Regards,

Ian

[Jakg]

n
Just noticed you are from the US, the place that let a moron take McD to court when she burnt herself by putting a hot coffee cup between her legs.She was suing because McD's coffee is heated to 180 Degrees, and that it would be just as good (but take a tiny amount more time to make) if it wasn't at such a ridiculous temperature - rather than fix this (i.e. 150 or 130 degrees) they simply labelled it "caution - hot" and let the media think she was some sort of fool who was suing because her coffee was hot.

[xaotik]

She was suing because McD's coffee is heated to 180 Degrees, and that it would be just as good (but take a tiny amount more time to make) if it wasn't at such a ridiculous temperature - rather than fix this (i.e. 150 or 130 degrees) they simply labelled it "caution - hot" and let the media think she was some sort of fool who was suing because her coffee was hot.

I seem to recall the whole case literature was even more complicated and ridiculous than that.

Mandatory Weird Al plug (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfO9JUNXN7U).

[Stang70Fastback]

I guess you failed to realise that an E30 is a model of BMW, of which, as I stated already, I don't have TC anywhere near the damn thing.. and very grateful for that.. ironically, neither did my previous car.. a Mercedes 300TE.. so please, look up the definition of 'ALL'.. I think you'll find you haven't grasped the concept of the word.. much like people's confusion with 'want' and 'need'.



Regards,

Ian

I think you failed to realize that we had already come to the decision that I was talking about AMERICAN cars and not EUROPEAN cars. Please read the whole thread if you're going to jump in and start calling people out.

[Ian.H]

I think you failed to realize that we had already come to the decision that I was talking about AMERICAN cars and not EUROPEAN cars. Please read the whole thread if you're going to jump in and start calling people out.

Huh!? Read what you posted above... here, I'll help you, as you clearly have comprehension difficulties:

It's not just American cars though... they ALL have it (this INCLUDES Audis, BMWs, Mercedes, etc...) My dad's last two AWD Audis have both had traction control.

All 3 of the 'includes' you mention here are European cars, not American cars... the mind boggles.

Rests, your honour, case, etc etc.



Regards,

Ian

[Stang70Fastback]

Huh!? Read what you posted above... here, I'll help you, as you clearly have comprehension difficulties:



All 3 of the 'includes' you mention here are European cars, not American cars... the mind boggles.

Rests, your honour, case, etc etc.



Regards,

Ian

What I meant was cars SOLD in America. Those same cars sold in the UK might not have those systems, but all cars SOLD in America.

[Murray Peterson]

I have to ask, what has driving in the snow on roads got to do with racing.


Lots of racing occurs in snow, albeit not on public roads:
http://forums.beyond.ca/st/208603/edmonton-rx-7-club-winter-autox-03/

And this is why it has no place in LFS, a game of driving skill not throwing a car into a corner and letting TC take care of the problem :)


It's amusing to watch someone use TC on an autocross course. Amazingly slow times are the only result, even when the course is almost completely ice. I would happily race against someone that depended on TC.

As for LFS, I don't see why TC couldn't be allowed as an aid for newbies. It won't get them good times, so it's not exactly a cheat of any sort.

[Stang70Fastback]

It's amusing to watch someone use TC on an autocross course. Amazingly slow times are the only result, even when the course is almost completely ice. I would happily race against someone that depended on TC.

I feel fairly confident that my Subaru (with no traction control of any sort) would completely destroy my dad's almost-new Audi (with traction control on) in a race on snow. His car just really refuses to move on ice. It's NICE when you don't feel like fighting for traction in wintry conditions - it really is - but it can get a bit annoying when you want to just GO! He doesn't use that 'ESP off' button nearly as much as I would :D

[Ian.H]

What I meant was cars SOLD in America. Those same cars sold in the UK might not have those systems, but all cars SOLD in America.

Then I suggest you say what you mean. I doubt many here are mind readers ;)



Regards,

Ian

[Stang70Fastback]

Then I suggest you say what you mean. I doubt many here are mind readers ;)



Regards,

Ian

I think most people understood way back before you started this quibble, but yeah - I'll try to be super, EXTRA clear next time :thumb:

[Woz]

She was suing because McD's coffee is heated to 180 Degrees, and that it would be just as good (but take a tiny amount more time to make) if it wasn't at such a ridiculous temperature - rather than fix this (i.e. 150 or 130 degrees) they simply labelled it "caution - hot" and let the media think she was some sort of fool who was suing because her coffee was hot.

I take it you mean 180F (87C) as it is not possible to boil water to 180C.

However you look at it. Coffee is known to be hot because you use hot water to make it. I never understeed WHY they had to label it hot.

The woman was a moron though. Lets face it, she put a HOT cup of coffee between her legs to hold it WHILE she was driving. She actually deserved to get burnt and then she deserved to have her licence taken AWAY because she is actually too STUPID to have a licence in my books :)

Thats all well OT though.

As for TC. I don't believe that any of the current LFS cars apart from the FZ5 and BF1 should have it currently. But as new cars come in it will depend on what they are as to if they should get it.

[Ian.H]

[ snip ]

However you look at it. Coffee is known to be hot because you use hot water to make it. I never understeed WHY they had to label it hot.

[ snip ]


heh, like bags of peanuts labelled with 'may contain traces of nuts' :really: and the funniest I came across was Nitol (sleeping tablets) that had a label saying 'may cause drowsiness'.. I damn well hope so! :D



Regards,

Ian

[Lateralus]

I take it you mean 180F (87C) as it is not possible to boil water to 180C.

This has frighteningly little to do with traction control, but this statement is incorrect. It's very possible to heat liquid water up to and past 180C, but only at very high pressures. This is the principle behind pressure cookers - the superheated liquid cooks food more quickly because it's much hotter than 100C.

[tristancliffe]

I don't think MaccieD's has high pressure coffee makers. Certainly not enough to reach 180°C!! :D

Edit: Jack, it either wasn't 180° or it wasn't celcius. Trust us on this one ;) Put 180°C water in a cup and it'll pretty instantly vapourise.

[Jakg]

I take it you mean 180F (87C) as it is not possible to boil water to 180C.180 degrees C is what I remember it saying. She got 3rd Degree Burns because it was so hot. Like i said the "Warning Hot" is a getout clause (rather than not make it quite so hot) and they twisted the story so the media made her look like the stupid one.

[atlantian]

Traction control does nothing a human being can't do. If some twat can't get up a snowy hill without electronic aids, then they shouldn't be driving at all in those conditions. Just use less throttle, more clutch slip, or even a higher gear to give less torque multiplication.
when you drive AWD can you modulate power distribution between 4 wheels? can you make your car 1 wheel drive in exteme conditions? :really:

[atlantian]

However you look at it. Coffee is known to be hot because you use hot water to make it. I never understeed WHY they had to label it hot.

heh, like bags of peanuts labelled with 'may contain traces of nuts' :really: and the funniest I came across was Nitol (sleeping tablets) that had a label saying 'may cause drowsiness'.. I damn well hope so! :D



Regards,

Ian
woz, it's to avoid lawsuits :D remember, the average iq of the world is about 84

[tristancliffe]

I work on the principle that if a car can't up an icy hill without fancy electronic trickery then the conditions are too bad for driving regardless of electronics. And if the driver can't manage without electronics, then the conditions are too bad for him/her.

Sadly, it's now a case of "If the electronics work, I'm safe driving"

Please start using capitals. I know you like appearing like a complete clutz, but we won't mind you trying.

[duke_toaster]

woz, it's to avoid lawsuits :D remember, the average iq of the world is about 84

No, the point of IQ when it was set up was that 100 was average. Although it has probably gone up since then.

[Stang70Fastback]

I take it you mean 180F (87C) as it is not possible to boil water to 180C.

Woz, you're doing it again. I think 90% of the people here realized he meant Farenheight - and what does it matter for the other 10%? The point was that it was VERY hot. That's all that matters. Stop nitpicking - you're just being a smartass...

And you know what - maybe it WAS Celsius - in which case you've just made things complicated for no reason. If it doesn't matter - don't bother arguing it.

I work on the principle that if a car can't up an icy hill without fancy electronic trickery then the conditions are too bad for driving regardless of electronics. And if the driver can't manage without electronics, then the conditions are too bad for him/her.

You are absolutely correct, and NOONE recommends driving in adverse weather conditions if at all possible, but there are many instances when the unexpected occurs - and that's when traction/stability control comes in handy.

[wien]

Sadly, it's now a case of "If the electronics work, I'm safe driving"The biggest problem in countries where we actually have snow and ice (i.e. not the UK) is getting up those last few metres of someone's driveway. The roads can be perfectly drivable and safe, but not being able to park you car in your garage because of ice and snow in the driveway can be a bit annoying. In these cases traction control is simply a very good tool. If you're a superhuman driving-stud, I'm sure you could modulate the throttle every 10 milliseconds and get the same effect, but personally I'd rather save my energy and let the car handle it.

This isn't about driving around in horrible conditions where you shouldn't be on the road in the first place. It's simple convenience in those rare conditions where you do need it.

[Woz]

Woz, you're doing it again. I think 90% of the people here realized he meant Farenheight - and what does it matter for the other 10%? The point was that it was VERY hot. That's all that matters. Stop nitpicking - you're just being a smartass...

And you know what - maybe it WAS Celsius - in which case you've just made things complicated for no reason. If it doesn't matter - don't bother arguing it.

Actually it does matter. You see the world is more than just one country.

Temperatures, speed etc are all measured in different units. Even the gallon is a different amount in the US and UK. Or a billion has very different meanings between US and UK, US is 1000 million while UK is 1 million million. So adding units to a forum that can be read around the world DOES matter.

If McD had heated the coffee to 180C then yet that would be their fault. But as 87C is less than my kettle heats water to I would consider that a normal temp for a cup of coffee as would most other right minded people.

I could say I drove at 100. But that could mean 100Kmh or 100mph, one is a speed that will cost me my licence and the other I can pass a police officer here at and not get pulled over. Units DO matter otherwise people assume.

The point I was trying to get at is that 87C is temp you might expected a freshly made cup of coffee to be at. Because the drink is made with HOT water. This is a well know fact, even for very stupid people.

I actually can't believe that a judge would actually side with her and not have punished her for putting other drivers at risk with her act of complete stupidity. I hope that nobody here actually believes is OK to put a cup of coffee between your legs and drive.

This thing is I live in a country where it is still OK not to be PC. Where you can speak your mind and most people do not get offended. A country when you talk direct and not have to bite your lip and sugar coat things. This is a GOOD thing.

PCness in the US means that an illegal imigrant can live, work, get a credit card and mortgage and get all the benefits of the country but not pay taxes etc. Here they find these people and kick then out.

I am sorry if you have been too wrapped in cotton wool with PC BS to be able to accept that :)

[Lateralus]

Or a billion has very different meanings between US and UK, US is 1000 million while UK is 1 million million.

Um, no. That isn't true at all. A thousand million = one billion. A million million = one trillion. This is the case everywhere, except for a few silly places which don't use a base 10 number system.

[wark]

I get the feel the US market is very different than places like the UK. From what I know a high proportion of cars sold are auto where as most in the UK are manual and TC is far less common or an optional extra.

The NZ market is different again in that most cars we get as most are imports from Japan and most are auto. I laugh at the young hoons in their auto WRX, why get a car like that with a slush box :)

So true, and so sad. :(

[Woz]

Um, no. That isn't true at all. A thousand million = one billion. A million million = one trillion. This is the case everywhere, except for a few silly places which don't use a base 10 number system.

See exactly how wrong you are here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trillion

BTW. The UK officially is the larger version but most people now think in the US version. As I said. It depends on what country you are from.

[JO53PHS]

See exactly how wrong you are here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trillion

BTW. The UK officially is the larger version but most people now think in the US version. As I said. It depends on what country you are from.

What is a billion in Australia lol :scratchch:)

[Lateralus]

Hmm, interesting. I did not know that.

[JO53PHS]

Hmm, interesting. I did not know that.

The moral of the story is

Don't tell people what's what if you don't even know what it is yourself. :)

[atlantian]

i know i always get jumbled up with numbers... like when tryed to translate for my parents when we where at the car dealership getting my impreza..

dealer:"so this car is 24 grands..."

me: (in chinese)"this car is worth 24(word for 10 grands)"

my mom*freaks out*:"what?!?! a compact sportscar is 240,000?!?!"

me:"oh, sorry, i ment 2(word for 10 grands) 4 thousand...he he he..."

[Lateralus]

The moral of the story is

Don't tell people what's what if you don't even know what it is yourself. :)

Well, in my defense:

Trillion = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28numbers%29#1018) (one million million million) - increasingly rare meaning in English languageSo he was technically correct, while I was practically correct. So I'd say we tied. If anyone objects, pistols at dawn.

[Woz]

Well, in my defense:

So he was technically correct, while I was practically correct. So I'd say we tied. If anyone objects, pistols at dawn.

Actually English is not the main language in the world, probably Chinese but I have no idea what is the correct version there :) That one matters though as they have a population of over 1 billion :)

What is a billion in Australia lol :scratchch:)

No idea about the West Island as I live in NZ. I know the flags look similar, just that one star difference :)

TBH, I have no idea about what is the correct version in NZ. Only lived here 3.5 years and never had to use Billion etc in any meaningful way. Here it feels that everything is a mix of UK and US so all bets are off :)

Anyway. I think that is enough of that interesting sidetrack :)

Back OT

[JO53PHS]

Well, in my defense:

So he was technically correct, while I was practically correct. So I'd say we tied. If anyone objects, pistols at dawn.

I object, so I suppose:

We will start with....

:fence3d:

... which will be followed shortly by.....
:jedi:

...And If we don't come to an agreement then....
:chair:

Beating you to death with a chair is not really what I want to do though :razz:

[atlantian]

and by the way... AUTOMATIC SPORTSCAR?!?! WHAT THE ************************************************** ***?!?~ if you are going to get such a nice car such as an impreza, get the maunual, and BTW, they f'd up the semi auto in the WRX;)

[Jakg]

Woz, you're doing it again. I think 90% of the people here realized he meant Farenheight
You didn't read my post, did you? I meant °C, i just can't type that symbol on my laptop (for some odd reason ALT codes don't work).

Firstly the car was NOT moving at the time...

On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49¢ cup of coffee from the drive-thru of a local McDonald's restaurant. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her Ford Probe, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. She placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap.[7]

Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin as she sat in the puddle of hot liquid for over 90 seconds, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[8] Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[9] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. Two years of treatment followed.

It does seem that while i was sue it was 180°C, it's Farenheit...
During the case, Liebeck's attorneys discovered that McDonald's required franchises to serve coffee at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C). At that temperature, the coffee would cause a third-degree burn in two to seven seconds. Stella Liebeck's attorney argued that coffee should never be served hotter than 140 °F (60 °C), and that a number of other establishments served coffee at a substantially lower temperature than McDonald's.

Liebeck's lawyers presented the jury with evidence that 180 °F coffee like that McDonald’s served may produce third-degree burns (where skin grafting is necessary) in about 12 to 15 seconds (as a reference, the boiling point of water is 212 °F or 100 °C). Lowering the temperature to 160 °F (71 °C) would increase the time for the coffee to produce such a burn to 20 seconds. (A British court later rejected this argument as scientifically false.[10]) Liebeck's attorneys argued that these extra seconds could provide adequate time to remove the coffee from exposed skin, thereby preventing many burns. McDonald's reason for serving such hot coffee in its drive-through windows was that, because those who purchased the coffee typically wanted to drive a distance with the coffee, the high initial temperature would keep the coffee hot during the trip.[4]

Also, she didn't ask for the warning (all she wanted was some cash so she could have Skin Grafting that she needed but thanks to the US health care system couldn't afford...)..
Applying the principles of comparative negligence, the jury found that McDonald's was 80% responsible for the incident and Liebeck was 20% at fault. Though there was a warning on the coffee cup, the jury decided that the warning was neither large enough nor sufficient. They awarded Liebeck £100,000 (US$200,000) in compensatory damages, which was then reduced by 20% to £80,600 ($160,000). In addition, they awarded her £1.36 ($2.7) million in punitive damages. The jurors apparently arrived at this figure from Morgan's suggestion to penalize McDonald's for one or two days worth of coffee revenues, which were about £0.68 ($1.35) million per day.[4]

Wiki Article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants)

[JO53PHS]

You didn't read my post, did you? I meant °C, i just can't type that symbol on my laptop (for some odd reason ALT codes don't work).

Firstly the car was NOT moving at the time...



It does seem that while i was sue it was 180°C, it's Farenheit...


Also, she didn't ask for the warning (all she wanted was some cash so she could have Skin Grafting that she needed but thanks to the US health care system couldn't afford...)..


Wiki Article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants)

Apparently McDonalds state in their Terms & Conditions that they will sue anyone who thinks their food/company is crap :)

[tristancliffe]

She's still a daft woman, and sadly she's already had a sprog, which means yet more stupidity entering the world.

If I want coffee (or tea, or hot chocolate) I want it 'fresh from the kettle'. I don't want it pre-cooled down for me. Who wants a cup of coffee at 60°C? Whilst it's not that drinkable closer to boiling, I'd still want it to cool down in my presence, not by some articifical means.

Anyway, the world has gone litigation and politically correct mad. And it's come from the States.

[JJ72]

This had been the most balatently off-topic improvement suggestion for a quite a while.

[Stang70Fastback]

You didn't read my post, did you? I meant °C

I know - which is why I added that bit at the end about how even if you DID mean C it's irrelevant. I was just getting annoyed at him nitpicking at all these tiny errors in people's posts...

[AndroidXP]

I don't understand why this thread sparks so much discussion and rage. It's completely pointless.

[Stang70Fastback]

I don't understand why this thread sparks so much discussion and rage. It's completely pointless.

STFU NOOB!!!

Juuuust kiddinggggg :D

[Woz]

I don't understand why this thread sparks so much discussion and rage. It's completely pointless.

Actually in me it did not spark any rage at all. I actually wrote what I did in a calm calculating state of mind.

The discussion part is easy though. It highlighted differences in the "cultures" present here and thats always interesting. Even when things do get well OT.

It could be that nobody here was angry. Reading back I detect frustration from Stang at what he perceives as nit picking from me, hope I clear that up later :)

The rest just looked like unguarded words IMHO. Cant see any rage

STFU NOOB!!!

Juuuust kiddinggggg :D

lol

---------------------

Time for some zen shite now :)


When I write I write very direct. I NEVER sugar cost and I never worry if the words I write might cause offiense if someone reads in the wrong light.

I have lived long enough and in enough different cultures to know I will always find someone that will take offense no matter what I write, say or do no matter how I wrap it for them. That is just the downside of human language and communication.

Unless you can see a face move while talking there is no context :)

We have all had very different lives and so our perceptions, moralities, views on what is acceptable, right and wrong and are all different. Because of this we all read the same words and pick up a different tone :)

I am a software developer that spends most of my working life below the user interface level. So for much of my day I deal in very black and white mind states, things like units matter, everything has to be nailed down in meaning 100%.

When context is missing I try and get people to refine their word because english is a VERY imprecise language. Most flame wars start because people have read words in a light they were not meant. When people assume the real fights start :)

AndroidXP: I raised the coffee issue to highlight why TC is probably far more common in the court happy world of the US than say UK or other countries. We already know its an industry that calcuates the cost of deaths aginst the cost of fixing a car issue.


BTW: I never realised she was the passenger in stopped car. Knowing that now actually makes me feel she was actually even more stupid.

I have only seen one person spill coffee in their lap. I was at a friends, a group of 8-10 of us in the lounge watching TV. One mate all of a sudden jumped up and stripped in great panic with everyone thinking WTF.

We then found he had been sat on sofa with a coffe cup in lap, jumped at the film and emptied the coffee in his lap.

He did not sit there for 90 seconds thinking "hmmm, yep that hurts a lot". It was painful enough that he just stripped in public to get the hot liquid away from his skin. She sat there for 90 seconds in the hot liquid. I can almost hear her thoughts "Aaaaaargh, **** that hurt. What should I do. I know I will just sit here and see if it goes away. Aaaaargh. **** no. Still hurts. Hmmm what should I do. ....." goes on and on lol

[tinvek]

i've just read thorugh all this thread and had to go to top of page as i couldn't remember what the blooody suggestion was in the first place !! :)


re traction / stability control availability, i was amazed to find the other day that the previous model skoda fabia's have one or the other depending on spec. given their power output and their suspension and mechanicals being vw derived i wouldn't have thought they needed it given that an '80s small hatchback with same power and worse tyres / suspension development managed quite well without it.


however i do remember told a true tale about an eldery customer who bought a new 1300 fiesta from our local ford dealer in about 1980, trading in her 1100 mk2 escort. she brought the car back, complaining of a strange noise from the engine when she pulled away, the mechanics couldn't find anything but she insisted it was there so the workshop foreman went in the car with her. everything was ok till she pulled out onto the main road and exclaimed "there's that engine noise! ". actually it was her spinning the inside wheel as she , having being used to rear wheel drive and a badly out of tune 1100cc's "power", droped the clutch at about 6000 rpm.:)

way off topic :- we had a customer who insisted we changed the rear axle in his cherished cortina estate as the diff was whining, we couldnt hear it ( i should mention there was no radio fitted for reasons which wil become apparent so there was nothing to hide any noise ) but he insisted and provided an axle. a week later he wanted another one fitted as it also had a whine, once again we couldn't hear anything but said we'd do it. the suppliers agreed to provide another unit so we swapped it. a week later and you can guess what he's complaining about. understandably the suppliers didn't want to know and were beginning to question our ability to remeber things like diff oil, he wanted to bring trading standards in and it was all beginning to get messy.

then our YTS lad was moving it and beign a typical 18 year old had a set of earphones in listening (despite being warned not to ) to his walkman and coments on how much interfearence there was from the alternator. the penny began to drop, this old guy had 2 hearing aids so we quickly went well over the top on surpressing every elctrical item we could. we called the axle supplier and trading standards and they all agreed to that we should tell him we'd changed the axle again and see what happened. as predicted the "diff whine" was cured and we had a happy customer.

at times i did feel guilty about him paying for an axle and the labour to fit it but on reflection, we'd told him there was no fault, we'd changed the bloody thing twice, surpressed his car so effectively they probably based the stealth bomber on it and had gone through a month of agro for a job which we'd actually charged less than what we normally would have because of his age and we felt sorry for him.:shrug:

oh and then the git went and traded it in for a new mondeo saying that he'd only wanted to change the axle so it would be ok for the next owner !!:(

[Bob Smith]

oh and then the git went and traded it in for a new mondeo saying that he'd only wanted to change the axle so it would be ok for the next owner !!:(
Classic. :D So why didn't you just tell the guy the truth?

[Stang70Fastback]

Classic. :D So why didn't you just tell the guy the truth?

Because he paid for the first axle replacement, when that wasn't actually the trouble to begin with... right?

[tinvek]

to be honest he was a really nice old guy who thought he was doing the right thing for other future owners and drivers, if he'd said he was going to get rid of it we'd have told him not to bother as the dealer would have fixed it, having said that he wouldn't listen when we told him the axle didn't need changing so probably would still have ha dit done. basically he went awya happy as he'd got the job done and he had the piece of mind that he woulndt leave problems for another person.

the fact he'd turned all of us into nervous wrecks who were thinking of booking in for hearing tests is besides the point :)

[Stang70Fastback]

Lol. I remember about 6 months ago, before I correctly wired my car, I had the wires to the outdoor PA speakers mounted in the car running under the dash right next to all sorts of stuff, and I could turn on the speakers and get all kinds of awesome sound effects as I revved the engine due to the interference. Sometimes it just sounded like a huge turbo, and sometimes it sounded like the Batmobile. It was pretty funny.