Auto123.com reports that Transport Canada (TC) has decided to eliminate consumer confusion over automotive stability control systems. First, they're looking for carmakers to drop all their proprietary handling aids' names — ESP, VSA, DSC, etc. TC wants everyone selling cars in Canada to use ESC (Electronic Stability Control) ASAP. To that end, they're creating a "universal" logo for the various systems. Next, the government has decided to spend its taxpayer's hard-earned money to do the heavy lifting in the spread the gospel of handling nannies department. They're launching a public education campaign to extol ESC's virtues to Canadian car buyers. As Auto123 scribe Mathieu Lapointe points out, all this enthusiasm for a government push stems from a similar European initiative that included a publicity campaign by none other than F1 legend Michael Schumacher. In a striking reversal of traditional free market vs. regulatory intervention protocol, America's National Highway Transport Safety Administration has taken a different stance; they've mandated that every new vehicle sold stateside must have some form of ESC onboard by September, 2011. And… that's it.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
So, instead of fixing the basic problem (on-frame tall & tippy cheap to build SUV’s being used as family haulers / commuter cars, being replaced by unit-body, lighter, lower center of gravity vehicles) we’re band-aid’ing the problem by spending (OUR) money in mandating more equipment on our cars.
Who’d have ever thunk that Washington could have come up with such a scheme?! Wow, it boggles the mind. /Sarcasm rant over/
The ironic thing is that with 35 mpg looming, the basic problem will probably have to be fixed – ‘coz heavy truck-based Stupid Uglyass Vehicles won’t be able to get away with 12 mpg any more, or even 18 mpg with diesel engines (not currently available in the US).
ESC is not a “band aid.” It’s been shown to be effective in ALL types of vehicles, not just SUVs. Today’s naysaying about ESC (“electronic nannies”) reminds me of the anti-seat belt rhetoric of the 50s and anti-airbag rhetoric of the 70s and 80s.
Now both of the latter are widely accepted and proven effective. And automakers were widely installing ESC before the mandate, as they’ve done with side airbags.
Yeah but wearing a seat belt or having an airbag doesn’t inherently change the driving dynamics of the car.
As long as it has an off-switch, I am fine with it. I do not particularly like being forced to pay for it, even if I have no intentions of ever using it (but I would), but with that many cars having it on them I think the economies of scale would bring the price into a much better range than it is now.
glenn126: Just how anti truck/truck based people hauler are you?
The automotive industry should fight this. Does anyone think that the stability control technology on a Porsche is the same as a Chevy ? Well, if Transport Canada has their way, each company can only advertise their systems as ESC. A simple generic term that effectively kills the desire for manufacturers to develop proprietary technology to gain a competitive edge in the market place. This thinking stinks of EU.
Jonny Canada:
Luckily for us Canadians, we are such a small market that Porsche will continue to produce a better ESC than Chery.
I’m of a similar mind to Ryan on this issue. I’ve long wanted to get an IS250, except for the nanny control. And from what I understand, you cannot turn it off on the IS250.
If I can’t do slide turns in the snow, I don’t want the car.
If Canada will deny the automakers to use brand names for their stability control technology why not extend it to everything else? Do away with X-drive, synchro or quattro – let’s just all call it AWD. And engines too – no more vanos, vavle-tronic, bluetec, Vtech or VVTi – let’s have a government mandate to call them greenhouse polluting propulsion systems and, while we’re at it, those car brand names are rally confusing too.
This is an insult to Canadian consumers and yet another pointless government intervention.
So we (in the US) should count ourselves lucky that we only have to pay for this once, I guess (when we buy the car).
The Canadians will be paying for it twice: when they buy the car, and with their tax money for the gov’t run marketing campaign.
Not that I don’t believe that ESC works, but I’m not a fan of the government forcing car makers to include it. Buyers can make up their own minds about these things. Anyway, insurance companies for a long time have offered incentives via cheaper rates for having certain safety equipment, so many if not most people would go for it for that reason. This whole nanny-state thing is starting to get out of hand.
No amount of ESC, ESP, AH or whatever is called will save a driver that just didn’t learn to drive as it should.
Governments should allocate money for driver education and tough, thorough driver’s license exam. Both USA and CA driver’s licence test is a joke compared with Europe.
Electronic aids give a false sense of security and many accidents have happened just because of that: driver thinking that he is so great and pushing it beyond limits.
Make better drivers not better aids!