We like it when GPS is feeding us information, telling us when traffic is causing a problem and indicating when a bridge is out so that we can warm up our voices ahead of all the hootin' and a hollerin' required for our General Lee replica to clear the gap. However, we're not too keen on the All-Seeing Eye aspect of GPS, and that's what we're fearing in Ford's latest research. The company gave a $120,000 grant to the Auburn University's GPS and Vehicle Dynamics Laboratory to look into using GPS for accident prevention, and while results won't be unveiled until later this week, descriptions of "an early warning system that detects when a vehicle is about to lose control" and then tweaks vehicle traction and stability control settings based on the speed of the car and the severity of upcoming bends sounds a half-step away from the auto-braking assist in
Gran Turismo. Or, perhaps that's just Ford-speak for an
Aspid-like system for optimizing suspension based on road twistiness. Given that Ford no longer makes a car designed for going around corners quickly, we find that unlikely.
Update: Wes Sherwood from Ford took the time to comment, indicating that "wide-reaching privacy laws prevent the type of monitoring suggested in this post." That's very good to hear. Still no word on when the Mustang will get independent rear suspension, though.
[Via
Carperformance]
posted Oct 12th 2009 8:16AM
+1 for the dukes of hazard reference
How much longer until the GPS automatically slows the car down to the speed limit when you're running late for work?
You could probably turn it off when you need to?
I see that as an option at first for parents letting the kids borrow the car, but only a matter of time until Government Motors incorporates it into every one of their vehicles (or passes legislation requiring all auto manufacturers to have it) and Big Brother can control one more aspect of our lives.
in dubai all cars have an alarm that whines on if you go above the national speed limit, deal with it.
This isn't Dubai, so you deal with it.
Already being done. In Britain it is, or soon will be law that EVERY car be equipped with a speed sensor/GPS connected by satellite and monitored by the gov't. They can/will monitor your location and prevent you from exceeding the speed limit in wherever your location is.
Slowly and slowly, driving a car is becoming less about the driver, and more about the computer inside the car.
I wouldn't fear too much. That was the last of Fords cash, so they'll be going bankrupt any day now...
Between this and the health care debacle, I'm beginning to think I should move to the UK.
@Adam No it isn't it has been mooted by some think-tanks but it's nowhere near becoming law.
1984 Reference again :O, is that going to pop up on all of the sister blogs?
Hey, Ford engineer here. "Given that Ford no longer makes a car designed for going around corners quickly, we find that unlikely." is totally wrong. From Focus up to the rather large Flex, and across the new Lincoln brands, Ford's cars have fairly decent handling built in.
I think they were talking about an SVT Focus.
Never mind Motor Trend said this about the new Mustang:
Fast forward 20 years and the 2010 Mustang GT with the optional Track Pack has the best steering I have ever experienced in American car. Period. Accurate, linear, and wonderfully communicative, the Mustang's steering is in the same league as BMW 3 Series and Jaguar XF steering. Yep, you read that right -- I just put Mustang, BMW, and Jaguar in the same sentence.
But you know. It's cool to crap on American cars.
The Ford Mustang has a a solid live axle rear suspension, a thing disappeared in European and Japanese production cars for at least 20 years!
This saves a few hundred bucks per car and enables Ford to sell this thing suprisingly cheap (also good for the very american 1/4 mile), but it plain sucks in the corners. To claim it is anywhere near a decent IRS is just delusional.
Same article:
It felt light and nimble and fast, with hyper-aggressive turn-in, and terrific punch out of the corners.
Despite ceding more than 100hp to the Camaro, it easily ran with the big Chevy -- as long as the road was smooth. Throw any mid-corner bumps into the equation, however, and the Mustang's old-tech live rear axle would make its presence felt.
Just because it doesn't have the best technology available doesn't mean it's not designed to handle better than most.
I haven't encountered ANY Ford yet that isn't humbled and or embarrassed by my WRX or my 330xi on a curvy OR straight road. Ford is years behind most of the competition. I will say they seem to be heading in the right direction lately with build quality.
Well it would make more sense if it was stated like this, "Given that Ford no longer makes a car for sale in the US market designed for going around corners quickly, we find that unlikely."
@ chadow
Dude, your vehicular willy-waving is impressing no one. And besides which, you're comparing what is basically a 4wd rally car, and a top of the range 3 litre 4wd BMW, against a mass-market manufacturer's cars - the VAST majority which you'd come across are fwd and aren't sports cars. Do you feel proud of your achievement when you steam away from lights leaving that 1.6 litre Focus in your dust, and put the memory in your wank-bank for later?
The fact *you've* not encountered a Ford out there which can beat your cars means jack, my friend.
There is no willy waving. The article implied that Ford doesn't make a car designed for going around corners quickly, which was argued. I added my 2 cents ( as valueless as I KNOW that is, this is the internet after all ).
Ford does have a WRC Focus, they just have to changed nearly everything about a regular focus to make it competitive. Thats my point. Ford makes decent cars, but they have to be modified to compare to what other manufacturers make as production cars.
I just want to clarify that I wasn't saying that Ford cars have GREAT handling, but that they did put SOME effort into making the Mustang a car that performs in the handling department.
I never said that it would compare to a car that was MADE for handling like a Civic Si, WRX, Evo, etc.
Maybe the statement in the article is technically true. I just think it's unfair that everyone hates on Ford and other American car companies and that's okay. Ford is really trying these days.
For the record: I drive a Civic (non Si), before that I drove a 99 Accord V6. Before that, a Mazda 626 (which was a ford, and was a piece of crap....lost compression on 2 cylinders after 60k miles). I don't want to drive a manual transmission because it annoys me, and I want a car under $25k that's not a complete dog. Currently my top three choices are the Mustang V6, the Genesis Coupe Turbo, and the Jetta TDI. From the reviews I've read, this is the best-handling Mustang yet, so I'm not counting it out just yet, even though some would immediately take any import over any domestic . . .
You're not a man if you purchase a V6 Mustang. That's all there is to it.
"You're not a man if you purchase a Mustang. That's all there is to it." - there - fixed that for you.
@Tmacfan4321: You're wrong of course, because my manhood's not defined by what car I drive (did you miss the part where I drive a Civic now?). It's also not tied up with what people think; my best friend is going to give me crap for this and I still don't care. I do get tired of hearing it, which is why the other two options are still on the table.
I feel bad for the Mustang (especially the V6). Strip away the Muscle Car persona and what do you have:
Attractive Coupe
Decently Powerful V6
Quiet Ride with above-average handling (see Edmunds Inside Line Review)
Ford Sync (best iPod/iPhone integration available)
Nice stereo
Well-done retro interior styling
All priced cheaper than the V6 Accords, Mazda6s, and Altimas of the world.
The majority of boneheads will tell you you're not a man if you buy one.
@MF
You're kidding right? Fords (and all American cars) feel like cars riding on marshmallows, not tires. There seems to be this philosophy amongst the Big Three that people should be isolated from the road rather than connected to it. Power steering and power brakes have a completely artificial feel which do not take into account the road or driving conditions. Shoddy suspension and very little in the way of intelligent traction control is the norm... All of that is missing in most American cars (exceptions like the Ford GT and Chev. Corvette notwithstanding, though they come with their own set of problems). I have not owned an American car in more than 20 years but I do travel quite often and frequently rent cars from the major car rental agencies, most of which have predominantly American car fleets. Every time I get in one of those boats (no matter how big or small, they all feel like boats) I gasp at the utter incompetence of engineers and/or decision makers who allow this kind of utter and total craptastic product to make it out the door and be offered to people who will take it hurtling down the road.
Why do you think that it is that no other cars manufactured in any major car-producing nation in the world drive and feel the way that American cars that are produced here feel? Why is that? And why is it that even cars that American car companies produce for European markets actually drive more like European cars, not American cars? I'll tell you why: because no one in their right minds (except dumb-as-a-stick Americans) would ever drive a car that handles like that. I hope all the American car companies fail. Why continue propping up an industry that is so clearly incompetent and blind to reality and who continues making such shit products?!? If you don't believe me, just check the resale market. How much (percentage-wise) does a typical Honda or VW lose in value after one year on the road? How much does a typical Ford or Chevrolet or Dodge lose after the same amount of time? I rest my case. No one who has either a choice (because of cost) or a brain chooses the American car. And that's why the Big Three share of auto sales has fallen for four decades straight.
Last point to make: If you want to impress people don't tell them that you an engineer for Ford unless you specifically work on the Ford GT or on one of the racing teams. Admitting that is the same as admitting that you are a failure working for a company that is a failure.
@Tony
Drop the hate and get some experience. Old rental Tauruses should not define your opinion of a whole industry.
Go to your local Toyota dealer and test drive the #1 selling midsize car in the country, the Camry. Drive the 4 cylinder auto, for example. Then go down the road to the Ford dealer and test drive the competitor, the Fusion, same setup.
Try a Corolla, then try a Focus.
Or better yet, drive an Avalon, and then try a Taurus. Take it to an empty parking lot and do some pretend autocross if you like.
I guarantee you like the Ford ride/handling tuning a lot more than Toyota.
We don't make BMWs. But our cars don't cost BMW prices, either. Engineering is about tradeoffs, and Ford has made them wisely, I think.
Now, consider the competition. Honda has pretty good handling, but significant road noise. Tradeoffs Hyundai, Kia? Squishy. Mazda? Tight--oh, they're partly Ford owned. Oops. Subarus tend to be compliant, except for the Rally cars. How many people want to drive a rally car every day?
I can't wait until the European common platform Focus and Fiesta show up here in NA. They are *tight*.
I *am* proud to be a Ford employee. Our products are better than they have ever been in every way, and the stuff coming down the pipe is *spectacular*. Wish I could tell you more about it. Our quality is rivaling the best, our fuel economy too. Our cars are among the safest on the road.
Oh, and I did work on the GT program, a little. Not as much as I would have liked :-)
fords can handle just fine.
and oh yeah, screw IRS, SOLID AXLE FTW
As for the live axle:
"Ford Mustang captures Grand-Am Koni Challenge and SPEED World Challenge titles"
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/10/12/ford-mustang-captures-grand-am-koni-challenge-and-speed-world-ch/
@tony: you sir, are idiot, laughable one
@chadow: and how does your famous WRX do in WRC? oh, wait...
BWAHAHA!
@Yaroukh. Subaru didn't compete in 09, along with Suzuki, due to economic concerns. How is that relevant to the handling or performance? They were winning before 09 and they will be winning again after. If I made cars, I would rather get a "BWAHAHA" for not competing, than for the multitude of reasons most of the US automakers get laughed at.
And I don't mean to imply all our US cars are not for me. There are some US cars that perform fantastic and I would love to own. Chevys Camaro and Corvette, Pontiac G8 GT.....maybe even a Mustang. Definitely a Tesla.
While cars built for the USA market are no good in corners, European Fords are actually very good!
"Given that Ford no longer makes a car designed for going around corners quickly, we find that unlikely."
haha love it!
Hello? Do these damn editors do their research before they comment? Take a 2010 stang round some corners and tell us what you think.
Just because the thing can corner better than its predecessors doesn't mean it corners well relative to other sports cars.
Anyone who uses the term "stang" clearly has no credibility. Just saying.
This is old tech. Michael had this in the Knight Industry Two Thousand in 1982. KITT also had a flamethrower and a tear gas launcher. So, Ford, you're way behind on this one.
KITT also did that Turbo jumpy thingy too.. I'll bet that got +10 mpg easy
After having my GPS tell me I'm doing 600 m/ph once (on a bad signal in the Alps), I can't say I'm looking forward to this being implemented.
Maybe your signal was good and you were going that fast!!!! !!!!
The day that control of my car can be accessed by anyone or anything other than the person behind the wheel is the day I sell my car and move to a more bike and public transportation friendly city.
Really, people actually think it's a good idea to be able to take control of the car from me while I'm driving? Data will never be accurate enough to assess a situation better than a human can in all circumstances, and I only see this leading to more accidents than it prevents. Truly a horrifying idea to be stuck behind the wheel of a car that I can't control.
@kevin
You are not understanding. Your stability control (ESC) system on a newer car will take control from you (by firing the brakes on one or more corners) if it senses that you are in danger of spinning out. It can (and may very well) save you from a nasty outcome.
Presumably it won't be a stand-alone GPS unit, but integrated into the car. So it has access to the vehicle speed sensor, and won't be confused by poor radio reception. Most car navigation systems sold in Japan are already like that, they use inertial sensors and the vehicle speed sensor in addition to GPS. It's neat to see the position updated correctly through a long curved tunnel.
And I do hope systems like this becomes more common (i.e. GPS-based speed limiters and the like). Driving should only be done out of necessity, and under the most strict regulation and surveillance.
@kevin
I guess we should stop putting Anti-Lock Brake Systems into cars too because they "take control away from the driver" when the tires start to lose traction...
I guarantee that the ABS system can do a much better job at re-gaining traction and control than the average non-professional driver.
If this was implemented, (and I'll go on record as saying I would resist this as long as vehicles existed that didn't support this technology) I would expect all insurance premiums to fall from the sky. It amazes me that as more vehicles deploy better safety features, insurance premiums continue to rise or remain flat for most consumers. I'd like to stop getting screwed over by what I perceive as outdated methodologies for legalized discrimination.
This is idiotic. There are many areas in my city where people drive a considerable amount over the posted speed limit, and with everyone else doing that, it would be more dangerous for you to drive slowly and have people constantly weaving around you. While it'd be great if everyone could play nice and all drive at exactly the speed limit, that never happens in real life.
That would be annoying as hell.
They should have had ticket generation based on this for years now. The technology is there. Just have the unit provide data to law enforcement agencies when the vehicle exceeds the speed limit. No more lame Cops who let losers drive 1 mph over the limit. EVERYONE would be accountable for their speeding habits.
I also think we should have had auto speed limiting technology built into cars for awhile now. When you go from different speed zones, your vehicle automatically adjusts to this new limit so you can't drive over that limit. You disable it, you lose your license and your vehicle is impounded.
And for all you that would say there times when it is warranted, there is NEVER a time when normal citizens should be driving over the speed limit. If you or someone you know needs to get to a hospital or something like that, you should be in an ambulance or other emergency vehicle.
Wow.. you took the Blue pill didn't you?
I guess you are completely clueless what "emergency" means.
And the sad fact is, a lot of "speed limits" as they are posted, are artificially low for the purpose OF generating ticket revenue. Also, speed "limits" are adjusted on the same roads frequently. Remember the country wide limit of 55mph? Now some of those same roads have a posted limit of 75mph or even 80mph. So what made them so "unsafe" driving that road at 60mph when the limit was 55 as opposed to driving that road at 70mph when the limit is now 75?
"And for all you that would say there times when it is warranted, there is NEVER a time when normal citizens should be driving over the speed limit."
This above statement can only be caused by subjugating all your thought and decision making processed to someone else. in MANY occasions I have used an excessive burst of speed to avoid a very dangerous situation or get out of a pinch in a potentially dangerous traffic situation. When it is impossible to stop in time, sometimes the best thing is to accelerate through a potential disaster. Ever follow a drunk driver that is driving the speed limit? Every avoid a large object in the middle of the freeway when there is a pile of traffic behind you? What is better, accelerate around the object, or slam on the brakes when doing full speed and have a mile of cars pileup behind you? I can easily say that needing to "drive over the speed limit" has saved my life on more than once occasion, or at least let me avoid a very serious accident situation.
@ richard
Please take all means of defending yourself, and take them to the police department. Then, take all your unecessary money/belongings, and take them to your closest IRS office. Make sure to leave them the keys for your fancy new Prius--they will know what to do with it all. Any NORMAL citizen should never need these things.
USA's 55mph speed limit was introduced in 1973 by Nixon. Not for reasons of safety, but for reasons of fuel economy during an oil crisis.
If car companies wanted to stop cars from going too fast they could already be doing it, it wouldn't take GPS.
Cars WILL drive themselves someday, ala "Minority Report" or probably more accurately "The Sixth Day".
And honestly, I'd trust a network of computers more than the morons on the road.
Agreed! It is WAY too easy to get a license in this country and there are so many drivers on the road that should NOT be driving. While it is possible that any such automatic speed-limiting system could be abused by the government, it would probably cause less accidents and less death on the road. And when you think about it, speed-limiting and reckless driving recognition systems could actually make roadway travel much faster. Just think about how much traffic is caused by assholes pushing their way in at the front of the line, causing a whole line of traffic to brake and then start again. As much as I like the 'feel' of driving, I would give it up in a second if it meant faster and safer trips on the road. As a perfect example: in Beijing before the subway trains were automated they had to have 5 minutes of separation between trains at each station. Now that they are fully computer controlled the trains can be separated by less than 2 minutes at each station. This means faster travel, more trains, fewer accidents/incidents, less waiting time, and happier passengers. What's not to like about that?
By the way, for the American flag waving rednecks who are thinking to themselves, "you can take my car keys when you pry them from my cold dead fingers", nowhere is it mentioned in the constitution that driving cars is a right of the people. It is a privilege, so get off your high horse and stop making out with your sister.
I agree re: minority report......let's just hope Microsoft/danger has no hand in the infrastructure.
We at Ford stand by the countless independent product reviews that rate our vehicles at or near the top of their respective segments in terms of quality, fuel economy, driving dynamics and safety. The Big Brother concern is more valid. However, wide-reaching privacy laws prevent the type of monitoring suggested in this post.
Most of today’s cars already collect similar data in black boxes primarily for accident investigations. Law enforcement agencies only can access several seconds of data about the status of vehicles just before/during accidents. In many states, the vehicle owner must give permission for the data to be used.
We appreciate the opportunity to respond, and look forward to sharing other innovations with you soon.
Wes Sherwood
Ford Safety Communications Manager
Seriously? Two 1984 references in one day? First Joystiq now this? Lol. Nice guys. Like I said on Joystiq, this is funnier because I'm reading it right now for school.
Just FYI, the Cobra has had IRS for quite a long time, and while you may say that's not a Mustang or even not a Ford, you know as well as I do that it certainly is. Sure it costs a pretty penny, but what are you going to compare it to? Last I checked, the Camaro wasn't exactly a budget wagon.
And while I don't necessarily disagree with you about Ford's continued policy of ignoring the performance crowd in most ways, there are plenty of Ford vehicles without Ford emblems on them that absolutely do have IRS and definitely go around corners quickly. I drive one of those myself. They really just use the Ford name for the mainstream American car, and more interesting designs are sold under other brands. So really it's a branding thing, not a technology or design thing.
Now all that said, I'm pretty sure if they dropped a decent IRS into the 2010 Mustang GT, I'd be looking at making a spot in the garage for one.
I don't know why anyone would say the cobra isn't a mustang or a ford. Thats just idiotic. The cobra only had irs from 99-04. It was garbage. Hence the popularity of solid axle swaps. A properly built 3 link will out handle ford's IRS all day long.
My friend has an '03 Cobra, and the IRS has kept him from decent track times. I still can't figure out how a super-charged V8 doesn't even make over 400 crank horsepower, but hey, whatever floats your boat.
@scrapmaker
Uhh.. buddy... Stock they dyno 370RWHP thats over 400 motor... and with about 10 minutes of tinkering (programmer/pulley... think running windows update for your car) it's at 460rwhp (over 500 flywheel). Emissions standards are why the HP was knocked back so much from the factory. In a car running low compression, forced induction and with the bleh PCV system the car has on it (plus having to be able to survive on silly ecohippie 91 octane in some states) they had to make the tune fat.
Hell... not to sound like a ricer.. but you do realize for less then 4,000 and about 3 hours of work with basic hand tools you can make over 800 crank horsepower on pump gas without ever touching the engine, get 20 mpg and unlike a Supra, have a powerband that makes Gasoline powered trucks look like Josh's prius.
Sorry, I feel pretty strongly on this subject, I don't want to be seen as a fanboi, because I am a very vocal critic of what was wrong with this car (cheap interior, IRS), but when it comes to making power, absolutely nothing could touch the $ to Horsepower value of the 03/04 cobra an the more you modded it, the better it got... Hell the 03/04 and the Shelby are the only 2 cars under 40k I know of that you can make over 800 motor hp with ease on pump gas and completely stock motors lower intake to oil pan.
I'm sorry, Dave, I am afraid I can't let you do that
I think it is a BAD IDEA when cars start making decisions for people, even in the interests of safety. The good intention is to reduce accidents, but in the presence of such technology bad drivers will be conditioned to think that they are good drivers. When GPS reception is poor, that protection is taken away, and they become even more dangerous: expecting the car to stay on the road as it usually does..
I believe that people should learn to control their cars and know their cars' limits. The responsibility of control should rest SOLEY on the driver.
Are you purposely ignoring the fact that between 30,000-35,000 deaths occur as a result of car accidents in the U.S. every year? That's an accurate NHTSA stat. Go to their website and look it up. And the number of injuries per year is in the hundreds of thousands. Clearly having humans controlling multi-thousand pound vehicles is not the right solution. However, up until now it has been the ONLY solution. Now that technology has improved to the point that we can take some of human error (and also willful irresponsibility) out of the equation then that is what we absolutely should do. Then maybe there will be less people who have to answer the door and have a police officer tell them that their son or daughter has been killed in a car accident that could have been avoided.
Come on, this should be cool-news not paranoid-news. The only way "GPS" can be used by big brother is if there is some mechanism to transmit the data back to someone else. You should be a zillion times more worried about the GPS in your phone rather than the one in your car.
If you take even one second to think about how this is working, it is extending ideas like cruise control and ABS. I suspect the doubters here are fine with the braking system detecting that there is no traction under one of the tires. Seems to me that all this does is use the position of the car WRT some map data to help in some things. Even if it is only as much as canceling cruise control when approching a tight turn in your route, it seems to me that it could be very useful.
03 cobra's were underated at 385 horspower. They do make 400 horsepower, its been proven.
Forget the Mustang GT... Get yourself a Focus (Zetec or newer Duratec models) and slap some mods on it. I'm really hoping they bring the European Focus RS over here for 2011.
whats the big deal?
bmw's x5's used to slow down on there own vehicles for years. this is part of stability control. so if ford will use a gps signal oh well who cares. this is good that its coming down to base vehicles. go ford for safety since most ppl are stupid idiots behind a wheel.
also unlike just gps, the cars do use other sensors, lateral and vertical, with wheel speed, eng speed, etc.
this is not something that gps speed goes past a part and the car goes oh we must slow down.
just wait till even cheap cars like ford, gm, honda etc all log engine failures into the key and see you were pushing 10k rpm at 150mph when you blew it up and want warranty work.
I understand the Nissan GTR has a similar system - its GPS system recognizes when you're on a race track, and disables the speed limiter. Which is the same thing as saying "it detects when you're on a public road and limits your speed."
Although I should hope that nobody minds being limited to 111 mph on a public road...
I thought that's why we have cops everywhere?
As an owner of an 03 cobra pushing well over 725 crank hp (pump gas, without the n20) (youtube name: sprayitdown50 that gets 20 mpg with stock idle and administrator of one of the largest ford enthusiast sites in the country (Modularfords.com), I can tell you with a definite and resounding voice, to keep your IRS.
I had nothing but problems with my IRS, part after part.. finally, I found some kid with a Mach 1 that wanted to trade axles... so now.. my 3900lbs 03 cobra convertible has almost 35 runs (most in the mid 10s (10.544@130.21 best so far on pump gas/drag radials). with a stock rear end.. not even so much as a diff cover.
I finally twisted an axle tube, but 100 dollars to straighten and weld them, and good to go!
Sorry, but for the vast majority of people who buy v-8 American cars to drive on the street, Ford's version of the IRS is an impediment. This isn't the Corvette, Viper, Supra Getrag unit, those are awesome. An IRS is only as good as the car it's designed around. Since all mustangs share the same sheetmetal from v-6 to SVT Cobra your only choice for an IRS is one that will bolt into place in existing applications.
It's substantially heavier, more prone to breakage, more expensive to fix, and the fact is, Joe Everyday driver will never have the suspension or the proper tires on his base model V-8 300hp mustang GT to ever push the handling to a threshold where the IRS would offer any benefits over the live axle. That and the slightly greater power consumption and extra weight detracts from MPG.
You gadget journalism is pretty cool, but please... stop talking about automotive topics like you have any idea as to what the hell your talking about.
The market segment that buy's the top tier Mustangs have fought so hard to be rid of that IRS, and we are not going to be stuck with it, because a bunch of snobs from Autoblog that couldn't get a low 11 second z06 out of the 13s want an IRS because it's the cool thing.
IRS Fanboi's are almost as annoying as the 500 moron high school kids a day that throw revs at you in their winged out beat up 240 that they swear up and down is a 9 second skyline after school Friday (or they know someone who's brother has one).