Ask the Car People.SM


Volvo XC70 Safety Issues

124 messages,  Last post on Nov 10, 2010 at 7:26 PM

You are in the Volvo XC70 Forum.

What is this discussion about? Volvo XC70, Car Safety, Wagon

Messages Page 9 of 13

#75 of 124 Re: Safety [dae] by volvomax

Jun 27, 2006 (9:10 am)

Replying to: dae (Jun 26, 2006 12:51 pm)
Another point here was about boron steel. There is no magic in stronger steel. You can achieve the exact same effect with thicker steel. Please, spare us buzzword filled salesmen talk. The only point is - vehicle engineered paying with attention paid to reinforced occupant cage and crush zones. Honda does it just as well as Volvo, in particular with ACE cars, such as Odyssey.
 
Obviously, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Why would you need thicker steel, which makes a car heavier and cuts fuel efficency if you can achieve BETTER results with a harder stronger alloy?

#76 of 124 Re: Safety [blueiedgod] by volvomax

Jun 27, 2006 (9:13 am)

Replying to: blueiedgod (Jun 27, 2006 8:23 am)
With all that gadgetry, what is left for the driver to do? Does Volvo even offer XC90 with a MANUAL TRANSMISSON?
 
Because not enough people want a manual XC90 to justify building one.
 
You can turn off the DSTC system in the XC90(But not the RSC system).
With the Geartronic you can drive in whatever gear you want and the system won't change gears, even at redline.

#77 of 124 Re: Safety [dae] by volvomax

Jun 27, 2006 (9:29 am)

Replying to: dae (Jun 26, 2006 12:51 pm)
 ESC systems where first developed by Bosch for Mercedes A-class. They all use steering-wheel angle sensor in combination with yaw sensor.
 
As others have posted, and I'm sure you are aware, yaw is different than roll.
Yaw is a sliding motion. Roll is a pitching motion.
It is possible to have a rollover without any yaw motion at all.
 
 Honda's version also has roll-over sensor to deploy curtain air-bag.
 
Hondas version deploys the airbag when a rollover is IN PROGRESS. It does nothing to actually prevent a rollover from occuring.

#78 of 124 Re: Safety [blueiedgod] by stmss

Jun 27, 2006 (11:02 am)

Replying to: blueiedgod (Jun 27, 2006 8:23 am)
How about letting the driver make those educated desisions. And if the driver is INCAPABLE of driving, how about TAKING THE BUS?
 
Unfortunately they don't make enough buses! All this rollover and anti skid technology is a result of early SUVs getting a bad reputation due to people driving them like performance cars - remember the Trooper or early Bronco - vehicle design or driver, maybe bit of both? And of course, from that is companies being sued.
 
Every year, at the first snow fall, it is the SUVs in the ditch.

#79 of 124 Re: Safety [blueiedgod] by calhon

Jun 27, 2006 (12:43 pm)

Replying to: blueiedgod (Jun 27, 2006 8:23 am)
To improve safety, you must build cars and the traffic infrastructure taking into consideration how people actually behave. You don't make the ridiculous assumption of the perfect driver, or that people will do what you very well know they won't - like taking the bus. That doesn't mean drivers have no responsibility, but even the best drivers make mistakes.
 
Let's put aside imprudent behavior for the moment. How many drivers have the training AND the practice to control a skid at 40+ mph due to sudden changes in road conditions, such as a puddle of water, an ice patch or gravel? How many can safely maneuver around an unexpected obstacle at moderate or higher speeds?
 
The answer on both counts is probably less than 5% and that's not going to change. If you're in the tiny minority, you are still at risk from the over 95 out of 100 drivers without those skills ... even when you're not on the road. You could be mowed down by an out-of-control SUV in your front yard or living room.

#80 of 124 Re: Safety [blueiedgod] by lev_berkovich

Jun 27, 2006 (2:06 pm)

Replying to: blueiedgod (Jun 23, 2006 4:45 am)
Of course I know how VEHICLE STABILITY CONTROL system works. The question I asked was how does Roll-over control system work, that was being touted as vastly different and superior to VSC, and you walked right into it.
  
In the end it is just a different name for the same system.
 
Actually, and this is often omited by many description, there is a point at which the XC90's roll-over control behaves quite opposite to other conventional systems, and this makes all the difference.
In a situation, where "conventional" Electonic Stability Control system will keep the pivoting wheel locked, because of the yaw sensor, the gyro sensor will override it, unlocking the wheel momentarily, allowing for the lateral move to prevent a roll-over.
 
The engineering behind of this system is truly amazing, and in my particular case, I believe it has saved lives of my entire family when I had to perform the "moose avoidance" maneuver on a pin-sharp blind 180 degree turn on the edge of cliff somewhere between Germany and Check republic.
 
I did not have time to brake and most likely would NOT make the turn at my speed, so I have recalled the Drive for Life event and just swirl the steering wheel into the direction of the turn as hard as I could. After a few moments of rocking, brake screeching (engaged by the RSC), family yelling, etc., we ended up around the corner on the right lane facing right direction.
 
I would not be writing this, if not for the amazing Volvo engineering. And once is one time too many for those accidents.

#81 of 124 Re: More electronics on vital systems, like braking and steering ?!?!?! [rodut] by lev_berkovich

Jun 27, 2006 (2:42 pm)

Replying to: rodut (Jun 23, 2006 8:12 am)
While I agree with your notion that you can not have it both cheap and good, I would like to make a couple of comment on electronics in general.
The electronics IS a best compromise to get the most for least money. The industrial/automotive electronic component are relatively inexpensive and unbelievably reliable. Anyone from the industrial QA will tell you that electronics on average far more reliable than the mechanical devices.
In my driving experience, the only potentially dangerous failure I ever have was with the Honda Accord, when I loose all braking coming to the red light, and had to use a curb as a mean of slowing down. The brake master cylinder had a casting defect, and a large cavity had opened, overflowing the braking fluid around the piston.
 
So - mechanical defect and Honda - but not the electronics and Volvo.
 
Stuff happens. No brand is completely failure-proved.

#82 of 124 Re: Safety [calhon] by blueiedgod

Jun 28, 2006 (1:49 pm)

Replying to: calhon (Jun 27, 2006 12:43 pm)
Let's put aside imprudent behavior for the moment. How many drivers have the training AND the practice to control a skid at 40+ mph due to sudden changes in road conditions, such as a puddle of water, an ice patch or gravel? How many can safely maneuver around an unexpected obstacle at moderate or higher speeds?
 
Why not start there and MAKE people learn how to drive? I took my driving test when I was 17. I have not been re-tested since. I am 31 now, a lot can happen in 14 years. It scares me to think that 50 year olds drivng around today were tested some 35 years ago.
 
And the test it self was joke. Drive straight, turn left, turn right, parallel park, make a 3 pointed u-turn. What about accident avoidance maneuvers? What about skid control?
 
Some countries, Japan for example, have very stringent testing to get a driver's license. That way it limits the number of numbskulls behind the wheel posing danger to other people on the streets.
 
In the US, we compensate for lack of driver's skill with bigger, heavier more electronic ladden vehicles. Why not solve the problem at the root, make every one go to Skip Barber or similar driving schools, make road tests a little more difficult than simple maneuvers. I guess, it would be too much to ask people to be responsible for their own actions.

#83 of 124 Re: Safety [blueiedgod] by lev_berkovich

Jun 28, 2006 (2:10 pm)

Replying to: blueiedgod (Jun 28, 2006 1:49 pm)
Why not start there and MAKE people learn how to drive?
 
Because it is impractical and impossible when it comes to the emergency avoidance maneuvers.
I consider that I drive much better than the average driver. I was in the military service driving military vehicles in a wide variety of conditions, I took several defensive driving classes, I can drive manual for hours without using clutch, for instance, but nothing would help anyway in the situation that I have described a couple of postings above. Just because I do not do stunts everyday, my reflexes are not good enough, and could not match the electronics of my XC90, although, in theory, I new exactly what need to be done.
 
Some countries, Japan for example, have very stringent testing to get a driver's license.
 
Yes, but not to the degree of teaching the defensive driving anyway.
 
In the US, we compensate for lack of driver's skill with bigger, heavier more electronic laden vehicles.
 
This is not true. We drive bigger vehicles because they a) cheaper and b) we still can afford buying more gas than people in other countries.
And when it comes to electronics, the European or Japanese versions of the same vehicle are pretty much the same.
 
I guess, it would be too much to ask people to be responsible for their own actions.
 
Yes it would, because the price for it is the death or severe injury.

#84 of 124 Re: Safety [blueiedgod] by calhon

Jun 28, 2006 (11:22 pm)

Replying to: blueiedgod (Jun 28, 2006 1:49 pm)
Every reasonable person would agree that better drivers are a part of the solution. Systems such as ESC and RSC are also parts of the solution. They compensate for the mistakes that people always make, and they do things that no human can.
 
There is no training or testing program that will make drivers behave perfectly, or give them super-human abilities.

Messages Page 9 of 13

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement