tuj

Its called understeer. Don't blame the DSC.

sti_eric

Wishful thinking. For one, I can tell you that the Brembos on the Evo and STi are better than the RX8's brakes. 0-60 stopping times, according to Motor Trend:

Evo MR: 107 feet
STi: 108 feet
Ford GT: 109 feet
RX-8: 111 feet

sti_eric

That sums it up quite nicely.

bascho

You missed the joke in stew's response (please reread). The first guy said the BREAKS were good. Stew was merely pointing out the typo. I got the joke stew

therm8

My research shows me that Car and Driver tested the '04 STi at 166ft 70-0, and the Rx-8 at 153ft (new) 145ft (at 40k miles...new tires I assume). They showed the Evo (non MR) at 157ft so I could see the lighter MR stopping better than the 8 in '04.

KYLiquid

get SS brake lines, and good pads/good tires.....you will drop about 8feet off your 60-0 in a straight line (according to multiple before/after runs on dry pavement) that gets you close to 100ft stoping distance........that is VERY good.

The stock rx8 stops in 113feet 60-0, the $500,000+ Merc/McLaren SLR stops from 0-60 in 112ft..........that shows that the brakes are DAMN good.

Of course from higher speeds the SLR stops faster.....but 60-0 is what your gonna use to avoid most accidents......

valpac

iTrader: (2)

Not exactly an accurate statement. 4 stars side impact rating. 6 to 10% chance of serious injury. Thats pretty good.

http://www.safercar.gov

swerver

like everyone else, good that you're okay......

...........just my 2 cents; yes, in my state if you hit anyone from the rear, period, it is considered your fault; following to closely, etc...........

but I can empathize. I just got my 8 a few days ago. I am an experienced driver but have to admit that the 8 just kinda sneaks up on you with the smooth way it handles. I know this comes under the header of "learning your car" but I too have been caught off guard how quickly I came up to (thanfully not under) traffic in front of me.

I'm so used to cars giving me violent feedback that its taking a little time to learn the way this beautiful car handles................................

yiksing

The DSC might cause understeer to stabilize car but I doubt in this case.

tuj

The DSC will actually correct for understeer if it needs to, but only if the understeer is dramatic. In this case, the guy says he 'cut the wheel as sharp as it would go.' That suggests that he turned the wheel all the way to lock, which is probably an indication that the car was understeering (or not changing direction at all) and he added steering, which is a natural but incorrect solution. Since he was already hard on the brakes, the ABS should have been engaging, and there was simply no available traction to change direction. The DSC won't necessarily cause understeer, since it is doing selective braking to get the rotational axis back in line. With the ABS engaged, the system knows that the driver is trying to get the car stopped in a hurry, and will focus on stopping as short as possible. Since all the brakes are working towards this goal, the DSC can only selectively 'unbrake' a wheel should rotation become a problem. This is very unlikely.

So this is an issue of driver error. You can't expect the car to turn while the ABS is engaged; there is simply no traction available at the front tires. There were two options in this scenario; brake hard and straight, or swerve. Not both. He says he can't remember if the wheels locked or not. Simple answer: they didn't. The ABS won't let them.

If he was traveling at 40 mph, he was going about 59 ft / sec. He said he was two or three car lengths behind the truck, which if that's correct, equals about 30-50 ft. Now assuming a 1 second reaction time, he's quickly screwed because he hasn't started braking until AFTER the point at which he could outbrake the truck.

That's why basing your following distance on car lengths is stupid. Instead, you should base it on a fixed amount of time, ideally 1.5 or 2 seconds. What I mean by this is when the car in front of you passes a fixed object (like a sign), your car should pass that same object no sooner than 2 seconds later. This applies for any speed. Assuming you will be able to outbrake the car in front of you (which is a decent assumption in the 8), you'll still need those 2 seconds to react and get on the brakes hard.

So I don't think the DSC was a factor in this incident. The RX-8 is not prone to spinning under hard braking, even if you cut the wheel hard. Which is why I take issue with this thread's title. It wasn't the DSC that cost you a new hood, it was not reacting fast enough to the situation ahead of you, and not leaving enough space.

StewC625

Thank GOD someone is paying attention! Thanks Bascho!

Time for my coffee brake.

brattesani

what might have avoided the accident would have been to do straight line breaking just to change the weight of the car onto the front wheels and then let off the breaks and turn, that way your not putting all the weight of the car on just one wheel.

wisconsinben

Yes...your information is correct, however I meant it in the relative sense. There is very little to protect your body in a side impact, compared to the amount of protection in a frontal impact. And I would know...that is what I do for a living. The facility I work at performs crash testing for NHTSA and various other companies. It's very possible that WE performed the tests you are referring to.

From my professional opinion...you, as a person, are much safer if you hit something with the front of your vehicle rather than the side (assuming all other variables are constant...speed, height of impact, etc.).

Edit: Sorry if I came off all "high-and-mighty." Vehicle safety is a passionate topic for me.

Glyphon

do you get to press the button that makes the cars go crash? if i had that job, i'd be like those little kids in the toyota minivan commerical.

kid: "do another"
researcher: "there are no more"
kid: "what about your car?"

hehe.

valpac

iTrader: (2)

?. Side air bags and side curtain airbags vs front airbag.

This may be true for other vehicles but a side impact is safer than a frontal crash for the 8.

Driver gets four star safety for a side crash (6%-10% chance for serious injury) vs four star safety for a frontal crash (11% to 20% chance of serious injury)

The HIC (head injury criterion) for a frontal crash is 485 vs. 282 for a side crash. So the melon is safer in a side crash.

Not trying to argue with you but opinions aren't facts.

Cam

iTrader: (1)

DSC's fault? Um, no. Dont tailgate and you wouldnt have rearended the truck in front.

Revolver

The title to this thread is just inflammatory.

As you heard in chapter and verse, DSC didn't exacerbate your accident.

And I agree with Gomez about the brakes. I've attended a couple of defensive drive courses in company with a variety of other cars (including "comparable" cars like the 350Z). Only an Alfa GTA bettered the 8 in a straightline stop, and the 8 left it for dead when it came time to do brake and swerve stops.

Highly recommend these courses. Even for good drivers they can be great reminders of good habits and also allow you to see just what your car can do accident avoidance-wise in a safe environment. Of course, they're also good fun.

swoope

iTrader: (5)

but you miss the ??? about the brake recall!!!

the car is wrong, not me... or is it the dsc, or the abs... i dont know , but it is not ME.

beers