The GTVeloce.com-munity

I used to believe this too. But now I'm asking "prove it". Peter Barnwell at Carsguide
suggests that "a car like this," meaning a Renault Clio Cup - an overpowered pocket rocket "is inherently safer than a mere hatchback econobox due to its dexterity, responsiveness and high quality components such as the Michelin tyres and sophisticated electronic controls that include ABS and electronic stability program (ESP)." And the evidence?

OK, I would accept that the "sophisticated electronic controls that include ABS and electronic stability program" provide some extra margin for safety over no such aids, but why would we expect that "dexterity, responsiveness and high quality components such as the Michelin tyres"
would make a measurable positive difference? Surely a car and its tyres either meet the road-worthiness standards or they don't, irrespective of brand of tyre. A "better" brand of tyre may have a higher speed rating - but then again we are talking of a highly stressed high-output 2.0 litre motor in a small, relatively low-weight vehicle, so it needs a higher rated tyre. As for dexterity, what the hell is that? To make a car more nimble and responsive means to take away some built-in understeer and
probably build in some oversteer. Why would this be safer for the average Joe or Josephine? Why would "responsiveness" be an aid? All cars respond, so they are all responsive. I assume Peter is claiming a greater degree of responsiveness in Steering, braking and acceleration. And the correlation with safety is...? Again we must take a leap and assume that he reasons that the thing can steer out of trouble with greater ease: if you are watching and have the skill to avoid oversteer(ahhh, but the stability program cuts in!). And again that it stops shorter: if you are watching and know how to brake hard (and turn to avoid). And the acceleration is great for those times when you must hit the throttle to get out trouble: like when, ummm, you are on the wrong side of the road overtaking? Maybe you just didn't plan that overtaking manoeuvre very well in the first place!

Yes, I am being a bit harsh, but really - let's be honest - we buy these cars (and I mean hot hatches or any car with an enhanced power to weight
ratio) to go faster than an econobox. To accelerate harder. To take corners faster. To overtake those econoboxes more often. To take more risks. To enjoy the cut and thrust of driving. Unless we really drive the thing just like an econobox, and a well-driven one at that. But in fact (and you only have to look around you to see evidence) we are choosing to reduce our safety margin with such a purchase, not increase it. Throwing in wider tyres, stiffer suspension and stability control simply helps the manufacturer match the performance increase (and the higher price) with necessary upgrades and make you feel as though you have something 'better' than standard. Which of course is true. And it's more fun. But it's not "inherently safer". Let's not kid ourselves!

posted by gtveloce  # 5:56 AM