|
If the Mini and Metro are excluded because of their poor crash performance, why isn't the Saxo excluded as well. It is one of the flimsiest built cars in production, very ligt but very weak.
|
Here goes my questions with regards to the thread~
1 Who is paying the insurance? (more powerful or bigger cars cost more which maynot be as much as a problem if you are going to be the policy holder, don't forget she won't build up her no claims if that is important)
2 How much would u like to spend and how much time or effort do you want to put into the car? ( a bander wil more likely mean more work for you)
3 How important is reliability? does she need a car for work?
4 Does syle matter? (I know it will honestly in her mind but if you are paying you get to decide)
5 What sort of milage will she be driving? (don't woory she is bound to do more than she thinks and the insurance company know)
If you could rely to these questions I will try and give a shorter reply than if you had not answered the question
P.S. I hopefully know a bit about cars and being young myself know the pitfalls
|
|
|
Roger,
The old Mini and the Metro were given as a "for instance" only, not as an exclusive list. I agree that the Saxo seems quite a weak car but I didn't want to jump straight into a disagreement with those who had already recommended it.
We bought our daughter a Peugeot 106 Roland Garros (new style) three or four years ago even though I've little doubt that this falls into the same category as the Saxo. Also, it is set up in such a way that she has to sit very close to the air bag in order to reach the pedals. I don't like this at all but she had set her heart on this car (and, incidentally, still wants to keep it) so we accepted the risks. However, since the money that bought it came from my wife and myself, I do now wish we had insisted on a safer car.
|
Dizzy,
Wise words Sir, wise words. Given the Auction reports of late and the low money high mileage Mondeos are making I wonder if this is the route to take? Insurance of course may be another matter!
|
Martin, it's me again!
To be fair to Peugeot (!), I thought I ought to mention that the 'new style' 106 that we bought our daughter is actually quite a bit stronger than the original version. I think it has a longer nose and strengtheners in the doors for example -- and, of course, it has that air bag which would be fine if it wasn't staring her in the face!
I wouldn't want to give the impression that the 106 is an unsafe car but, being small and light, it doesn't have a great deal of metal to cushion the impact in any crash. A bigger car ought to be able to give better protection and the late, low mileage, Mondeo that you mention seems a good one for your short list.
There is also the Skoda Fabia if it falls into your price range, this fitting nicely between the 106/Saxo supermini size of car and the family car. We have had one in the wider family for a year and I remain highly impressed with it. A new one might not be much dearer than a nearly-new Mondeo and it has lots going for it as a young lady's car whereas the Mondeo is perhaps more of a family car. Our Fabia is an 8-valve 1.4 which is a bit underpowered on 'paper' but is quite adequate on the road. It is a surprisingly flexible engine, thus reducing those dreaded gear-changes! The Fabia is holding its value very well at present so used bargains are rare.
|
I'm surprised no-one's mentioned the VW Polo yet, so I'm going to. Solid little car, strong image and standard ABS and PAS from 2000 onwards. Cool instruments on these later cars as well.
Richard Hall
bangernomics.tripod.com
|
|
I started off with a Volvo 340. Although it didn't have ABS, PAS or anything like that, I got it due to the strength. So I have to agree with Richard Hall and go with his recommendation of a Polo.
|
A Polo Coupe 1L or 1.3L a great wee car. Two of my chilren have gone this route. The first was a C plate and was purchased at 70K and sold on at 131k and is still going. The second was a K plate for my daughter at 42k and is just being sold at 96k as she is now leaving the country for a year. Low running costs and good on insurance particularly for girls. Strong, reliable but no ABS until the mid new models in 2000.
Great car enjoy.
|
|
|
|
The Saxo is a good car, optional ABS on the Desire models which are available for just over £6000. True, the residuals aren't as good as a Yaris or Polo. The Saxo also uses a proven engine, although some gearboxes are weak, although you should find out fairly quickly and be able to get a replacement on warranty.
Other than that, the Saxo security is quite poor, while the immobiliser will stop the car being driven away, the locks are vulnerable, so I recommend a good alarm.
The Saxo has excellent handling and is very entertaining to drive, even over long distances.
Ignore what the magazines say about pedal room and head room, I am 6'3" and have size 14 feet, it was cozy, but not uncomfortable. I would buy a Saxo if I wanted a small car, but I now drive a 1.4 Xsara, all the good points of the Saxo, but with more space and better (more predictable) handling.
Best way to find out is to try the cars.
Ben
|
|
OOps, I missed the NOT new part, you will find it very hard to get a Saxo used with ABS. I've only seen the sporty models, although they do exist.
|
Surely there is a reason why these small cars don't come with ABS? Is it really required on small light motors like these? I wouldn't have thought so.
SEAT Ibiza is my recommendation. Cheaper than a Polo, but basically the same.
|
Surely there is a reason why these small cars don't come with ABS? Is it really required on small light motors like these? I wouldn't have thought so.
All vehicles have brakes. Why should it matter whether the vehicle be large or small. Even some motorbikes have ABS now you know!!
|
|
all cars should have abs i have been given a corsa which didn't have abs (availiable as a £300 option) and a clio which has abs as standard and i know which one i felt safer in (especially when i was going down the country lanes. abs has been around so long now thta it should be standard the same applies for electric windows in £10'000s cars i hope someone from volkswagen is reading this.
|
|
All my recent cars have had ABS but I'm not sure that I feel any more or less safe in normal driving. AFAIK the ABS doesn't have any effect whatsoever until you lock a wheel. If you are continually doing that, I wouldn't feel safe with you in any car, ABS or not.
|
|
i agree abs is only used a few time in somecars lifetimes but even if it is only once but it only needs to be used once to help people. i agree with you however about continually locking wheels must show somthing as wrong but you only need it not to be there once and it will have paid for itself
|
I've got ABS for the first time on my Omega, but didnt have it on my previous cavalier. I was brought up learning to drive without abs so I developed the soft progressive braking method, but I know in an emergency this all goes out the window, you just stamp on the brakes and hold the wheel tightly! I tried abs on my omega and found that its not perfect, there is still a bit of wheel locking - perhaps I didnt hit the brakes hard enough. It takes a lot of bottle to stamp on the brakes hard after not having abs, and I also suspect that abs doesnt work at slow speeds (below 20mph?). In any case it has more advantages than disadvantages and I think it should be fitted to ALL new cars, just as airbags should be. Remember the days before laminated windscreens?
Simon
|
All of the above is very illuminating and isntructive, as much about the subject as the respondents (myself included.. the words arrogant self-important big-'ead spring to mind in my case):
Someone asked what difference does it make if it's a large or small car. Some suggest that a crash (I've never understood the bizarre usage "acccident" when almost no crashes are accidents..) IN EXACTLY THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES you (usually) are likely to experience less personal discomfort and damage as a driver/passenger in a big car than in a small car. As my mate Rob found out after writing off his MX-5 at 30mph in the snow, then going out and getting a big merc.
Also other road users tend to "intimidate" drivers of big cars less than small ones (try it!).
Two downsides are
i) it is often easier to go faster in a big car.
ii) Larger cars are usually more expensive to buy and run.
And finally, buy you daughter a car with lessons and the test for the "Institute of Advanced Motorists". It may be the best investment you ever make on her behalf;<))
Yours aye
|
I also suspect that abs doesnt work at slow speeds (below 20mph?).
It works as soon as you are no longer stationary (providing ignition is on of course)
|
|
8km/h (5mph) is the threshold actually.
|
It is fairly common to have mis-conceptions about ABS:-
1) it does NOT shorten your stopping distance - in fact it might LENGTHEN the stopping distance.
2) it does NOT stop wheel locking (wheels locked being the quickest stop on dry roads)
What is DOES do is lock-release-lock release.
This gives you (maybe just once importantly in your life) STEERING as you slow.
"It takes a lot of bottle to stamp on the brakes hard after not having abs".
You should haved stamped on the brakes BEFORE in an emergency.
"the soft progressive braking method" has NOTHING to do with ABS.
It of course the way ALL sensible drivers drive 99% of the time, ABS or not.
"In any case it has more advantages than disadvantages"
I cannot think of ANY disadvantages, so, like you I think all cars should have it - not have it as optional on cheaper versions as an economy measeure.
|
You’re right Trev, you have got some misconceptions!
true that ABS will not reduce your THEORETICAL minimum stopping distance. It does however reduce your ACTUAL stopping distance compared to not having it, especially in tricky conditions. It does this as a result of its ability to monitor & modulate the braking conditions at all four wheels independently, unlike your right foot which cannot measure the braking conditions with the same accuracy and can only modulate the brakes from one point of input. ABS maintains your actual stopping distance in very close vicinity to the theoretical minimum. I’ll come to your point about lengthening braking distance further down.
ABS does stop wheel locking. The ABS brain measures the rotational speed of the wheel and looks for short duration, high value rotational decelerations which characterize the conditions present in the milliseconds before wheel lock. It will then hold the wheel rotation speed at a value which gives 3 – 5% slip by keeping the fluid pressure near constant, pumping some back to the master cylinder if necessary (this is the pulsing you feel at the pedal). The ABS brain monitors these conditions many times per second since the braking conditions at all four wheels may be different and continuously varying.
Wheels locked does not give the shortest stopping distance on dry roads. If it did then ABS would be a safety disadvantage, would it not? What happens when you lock your wheels in the dry is that the friction at the wheel / road interface heats the rubber and melts a thin layer. You are effectively skating along on a thin layer of liquid rubber. What you are trying to do with your brakes is turn the kinetic energy of the moving car into heat energy in the discs, which can then be dissipated into the atmosphere. The brake disc / pad combination is a much more efficient converter of kinetic energy to heat than is a locked tyre. Also, once the molten layer is in place (almost instantly) the friction at the tyre / road interface drops considerably so the maximum retardation available to the car is also severely limited.
ABS does not lock-release-lock-release. It maintains wheel rotation at a speed very close to the point of maximum available grip by maintaining a slip angle of 3% ish. This is how ABS allows you to steer under heavy braking without losing control (not guaranteed under ALL conditions). As the tyre puts effort into steering the ABS measures this as an increased tendency to lock, so it further reduces the braking effort thus allowing the tyre to put more of its available grip into steering the car. Once the wheels are straight again, the braking will be allowed to increase again (if conditions allow). The tyre only has so much grip to go round – the ABS helps to slit that grip between steering and braking safely.
You cannot think of ANY disadvantages? You state further up that ABS can lengthen braking distance – surely this is a disadvantage? The conditions under which ABS is disadvantageous are when you are trying to brake when there is very little available grip at the tyres – primarily on ice, snow or gravel. What happens here is that since there is little grip at the tyre / road interface the wheel goes into lock up as soon as you touch the brakes. The ABS cuts in and you just keep going with no braking. The best way to stop under these conditions would be to disable the ABS, lock the front wheels and oscillate the steering from side to side quickly. This has the effect of allowing the tyre to scrub sideways over the surface increasing friction levels – before this has the effect of steering you sideways you move the steering to the other direction. Repeat until stationary. This is why Audis (most notably the original Quattro) had an ABS off switch on the dash.
To get the best out of your ABS, when you feel it cut in do not slacken off the pressure on the pedal. Keep pushing the pedal as hard as you can. This will ensure that if lock up is only occurring at one wheel, the braking effort at the other three will continue to be increased. Keep both hands on the wheel at ten to two and correct any slithering about that the car may do. Do not pull on the wheel - this prevents you steering properly - react the pedal pressure in the seat using you bum and back. Also dip the clutch early in the process – you want the ABS to control the wheels not the engine.
Interesting to note that in the USA, to increase the cost competitiveness of its compact & mid-sized cars GM has removed standard fit ABS and made it a cost option. Relevant authorities are considering making ABS mandatory fit to all cars in the near future.
Trev: go to your local library and see if they can get you a copy of the Bosch Automotive Handbook, alternatively any automotive textbook on braking systems. Haynes manuals also have a fairly good (though brief) description of how ABS works.
|
Somewhat intimidated by that cyclone of a post, I`m going to contribute anyway by saying that I`ve sometimes had occasion to descend a nearby steep hill in fresh snow early in the morning.
I`d be worried that the ABS would allow the car to pick up speed down to the T junction, and in the absence of an ABS switch, I turn off the ignition switch one click to cut ABS (and inevitably everything else with it) and brake as skilfully as I know how in neutral.
Care is needed as you wouldn't want to remove the key and so activate the steering-wheel lock.
|
LeZebre
Any offroader will tell you the best way to have an accident decending slippery hills is to use neutral and the brakes. Use first gear and engine braking (no throttle) and use the ABS if you have to it's far, far better than you are at getting the car to halt on slippery roads. Cyd has explained beautifully how it works, and it's impossible to replicate via the brake pedal as each wheel is operated independently as necessary. If you really think you can modulate the brakes pedal better than that, then carry on.
Regards
John S
|
Very true John, however off roaders have the advantage of extremely low gearing to give plenty of engine braking at very low ground speed. Unfortunately cars do not have this and so you tend to be more reliant on the brakes, especially if you have an auto.
I live in the country, where we get very icy roads in winter. I've rewired the fuse for my ABS so that I now have an in-line fuse wired through a push-to-break switch so I can disable the ABS. I can now get out of our estate without worrying about sailing straight out onto the main road - even at less than walking pace a 1500kg car will go a long way on ice. Extreme care is still a must though.
|
Cyd
True - I should have mentioned the low ratio box on 'proper' off roaders. Even so, I don't believe coasting downhill on snow with the ABS switched off is the best idea. I understand it may not give shortest stoping distances on gravel for example, where wedge builds up, but you clearly understand when it's best not used. I leave it to the electronics; I can only repeat - it's far smarter than a foot on the pedal. I've found the ABS has sometimes cut in on one wheel when I didn't expect it, and frankly if I had a cut switch I wouldn't use it. I certainly would rely on it downhill in snow!
Your ice 'problem' is a case in point - ABS may give the shortest stopping distance, but it will still be a very long one. This is the other misconception about ABS - it can't substitute for observation and care, and it can't prevent accidents caused by stupidity.
Regards
John S
|
Should also have included this link:
www.howstuffworks.com/anti-lock-brake.htm
Ther's loads of good info here, including links to NHTSA and studies which show ABS hasn't actually reduced road fatalities.
|
Thank you for the explanation.
Yes, I did over-simplify by saying "lock-release-lock-release".
I do understand that a closer wording would have been "point of locking-release-point of locking-release".
As to stopping, I here quote my "tame expert":-
"I've conducted hundreds of skid tests using many different vehicles both at accident sites (in other words on real roads) and for training purposes e.g on airfield sites.
What we first have to remember is that the shortest braking distance for any vehicle is when the brake pedal is being pressed as hard as possible. If it is not, then the braking distance is dependent on how hard the DRIVER is pressing the brake and not on the capabilities of the vehicle. Before anyone starts to jump on the "but I was told not to lock my wheels..."quote, this might be true under track conditions or when some amount of steering is required but when the minimum braking distance is required then either a locked wheel or full use of ABS is needed (ABS will produce a slightly longer stopping distance than a locked wheel.).
Under locked wheel conditions it is the friction between the tyres and the road surface that determines the braking distance from any given speed, FOR ANY VEHICLE UP TO 20 TONNES (I've done it and so I know this statement is true) provided all wheels are being braked to their maximum efficiency ON A
DRY ROAD. For example, a car and a caravan will skid to a stop in the same distance as the car alone, provided the caravan's brakes are working properly.
Now, having got the basics out of the way, different road surfaces provide different grip ratings (quite properly quoted as the coefficient of friction). For example:- A normal tarmac road ('A' class trunk) gives a coefficient of 0.7 to 0.77g Stone chippings ('B' class) gives 0.6 to 0.65g Concrete (old motorway) 0.5 to 0.6g
New (up to one year old) tarmac can be as low as 0.3g but the best is 'Shellgrip' type (as seen in urban areas on the approach to pedestrian crossings and roundabouts etc) which gives 0.9g + and can exceed
1g. (the HC figures are based on a coefficient of 0.67g (don't know where they got it from))
To calculate the braking distance for any speed we can use a simple formula where u is the speed
c is the coefficient of friction g is the acceleration rate due to gravity (9.81 m/s per second in the UK)
and s is the braking distance so s = u^2 (squared) divided by (2cgs)
However, first it is easier to convert from mph to metres per second by multiplying by 0.447.
So to find the minimum braking distance on the average urban 'main road' from 30 mph we multiply by 0.447 giving 13.41 m/s, square it to give 179.8281 and divide that by (2x0.75x9.81) (which is 14.715 on my calculator) giving 12.22 metres (convert to feet by dividing by 0.305) or 40 feet.
So it's not the vehicle but the road that produces the different braking distances and you can now calculate your own"
Trevor Dickenson
Accident Reconstruction Consultant
|
"ABS will produce a slightly longer stopping distance than a locked wheel"
Well, if ABS were to hold the wheel just short of the point of skidding, this shouldn't be true. It is a true statement of the physics of friction that the coefficient of sliding friction is always less that the coefficient of stationary friction. e.g. place an object on a plank, slope the plank, and once the object starts to slide it will not stop again (unless the slope is decreased).
However, if the ABS releases the brake totally for a fraction of a second when lock up point comes close, then the stopping distance may well be greater than for the dry skid.
Anyroadup, I would argue that on a wet road (50% of the time in the UK?) ABS will definitely stop you quicker than a skid. Also, and the point's been made, it allows you to steer while exerting maximum force on the brake pedal.
|
Vin is right. The coefficient of sliding friction is less than the coefficient of static friction. The optimum stopping distance will be achieved with the wheel on the point of locking, and not with locked wheels, which is exactly what ABS seeks to achieve.
Regards
John S
|
|
|
|
|
