Disabled the driving aids. Here are my impressions.

[humfrz]

humfrz

[diss7]

Explain what concessions have been made to require the aids?

Not generic assumptions. Give direction examples of why any of the aids are there for any reason other than to make up for the short comings of the driver.

Also, lol @ thinking that disclosing that you're a software developer carries any engineering weight to your opinions.

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by gutbomb

I'm a software developer for a CAD software company that specializes in 3D for product design. If you're an engineer you're probably familiar with it.

If you have to pull a fuse to disable something then it's something the car is not designed to be without. Is that simple.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 4

oh.. you write code... interesting... if you where a field engineer you would know that engineers design for the worst posibilities within a budget... so a car is designed to work in a worse case scenario, meaning that they are designed to work when no aids are available

[gutbomb]

Originally Posted by diss7

Explain what concessions have been made to require the aids?

Not generic assumptions. Give direction examples of why any of the aids are there for any reason other than to make up for the short comings of the driver.

Also, lol @ thinking that disclosing that you're a software developer carries any engineering weight to your opinions.

I don't have specific examples because I was speaking in general about modern car design. Chassis don't have to be as precisely balanced because aids can compensate. Suspension, tire selection (something you yourself mentioned in that when changing this the car's default braking gets messed up because it's not using what the aids the car is designed to use are expecting), That short of thing. I want even talking about this car specifically. Note I said modern cars, not the gt86 specifically even though I'm sure some of what I said applies to it.

Originally Posted by Luis_GT

oh.. you write code... interesting... if you where a field engineer you would know that engineers design for the worst posibilities within a budget... so a car is designed to work in a worse case scenario, meaning that they are designed to work when no aids are available

Work yes, but not optimally. I'm not implying that it's a death trap without abs. I'm saying it's not optimal, could be more of a hazard, and it's not meant to be run that way.

Jesus Christ you're a touchy bunch. Drive your car however you want and I'll have whatever opinion about your choices towards road safety that I want.

[philstar]

Come on guys, we all know that these cars come perfectly designed from the factory since the engineers built it that way so DONT DO ANYTHING TO THEM!

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by gutbomb

.............you're a touchy bunch. Drive your car however you want and I'll have whatever opinion about your choices towards road safety that I want.

Well, since @Luis_GT and @diss7 are both on islands, not connected to the mainland US ...... I reckon I'm safe ....



Happy New Year .....

humfrz

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by gutbomb

I don't have specific examples because I was speaking in general about modern car design. Chassis don't have to be as precisely balanced because aids can compensate. Suspension, tire selection (something you yourself mentioned in that when changing this the car's default braking gets messed up because it's not using what the aids the car is designed to use are expecting), That short of thing. I want even talking about this car specifically. Note I said modern cars, not the gt86 specifically even though I'm sure some of what I said applies to it.



Work yes, but not optimally. I'm not implying that it's a death trap without abs. I'm saying it's not optimal and it's not meant to be run that way.

Jesus Christ you're a touchy bunch. Drive your car however you want and I'll have whatever opinion about your choices towards road safety that I want.

Its the other way around... they design cars to work without the aids and then add the aids as a safety net for poor drivers

[enwave]

Originally Posted by Luis_GT

Its the other way around... they design cars to work without the aids and then add the aids as a safety net for poor drivers

You are wrong. Period. They design the car with the driver assists in mind because it is illegal (or unpopular, or high liability) to sell it without many of them in many countries. So in many cases there are adjustments made because the nannies will be there for 99% of their customers. However, all components are designed to work well DESPITE potential failure of individual systems on a car like ours. So yes, your brakes are more than sufficient for a non-ABS situation. Manufacturing corners are not cut for nannies.

That said, I can't quite understand why pulling the fuse for daily driving is all that beneficial. Something like ABS cutting in on the street probably means that you're driving it too hard for the street anyway. I don't engage my ABS EVER on the street, but have on the track often. Being a talented driver doesn't mean that you have to show that on the street, nor is every opportunity to show it a good one.

Canyoning (maybe), tracking (definitely), etc, sure. And if you just don't want to bother with pulling and replacing fuses because the dance isn't a full ABS disabling mode, then whatever -- more power to you I suppose. As long as you have the experience and skill you say you have, then it's no big deal.

But I think just about everyone has had a decent opinion to add, even if everyone seems to be a little aggressive and at times misguided.

Ultimately, do whatever is in your comfort zone. If you've pushed your comfort zone further than you should have, hopefully you don't cause any serious damage. But ultimately the onus is on you. You make the decision.

Now why people would come on here and brag about their respective decision is even more beyond me than any of the other decisions made in this thread. OP is most guilty of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Superhatch]

I think most of you missed this line from the OP:

Commuting to and from work, this is where I'd like to have the aids on. This is when I'm probably paying the least attention, on the phone, kid might run out etc. what id like to do is get a switch made up that just activates or deactivates this abs fuse.

I'm 100% ok with a disabled ABS system on the track, but not on the street. I know you were talking about 150hp, as if ABS is irrelevant because of HP, but it's the speed you're traveling at, regardless of HP, that will have an effect on your braking reaction times and abilities. Just wanted to clarify that.

[enwave]

Originally Posted by Superhatch

I think most of you missed this line from the OP:







I'm 100% ok with a disabled ABS system on the track, but not on the street. I know you were talking about 150hp, as if ABS is irrelevant because of HP, but it's the speed you're traveling at, regardless of HP, that will have an effect on your braking reaction times and abilities. Just wanted to clarify that.

Yeah. Our freeways here move at around 85 mph frequently as the speed limit has been upped to 75 or 80 in many places. When I'm not tracking and paying 100% attention to my lines and corners, but rather thinking about what my work tasks are for the day, I can imagine that ABS may save my life in the case of someone else being dumb and me having to react when I'm not in my peak driving condition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by enwave

You are wrong. Period. They design the car with the driver assists in mind because it is illegal (or unpopular, or high liability) to sell it without many of them in many countries. So in many cases there are adjustments made because the nannies will be there for 99% of their customers. However, all components are designed to work well DESPITE potential failure of individual systems on a car like ours. So yes, your brakes are more than sufficient for a non-ABS situation. Manufacturing corners are not cut for nannies.

That said, I can't quite understand why pulling the fuse for daily driving is all that beneficial. Something like ABS cutting in on the street probably means that you're driving it too hard for the street anyway. I don't engage my ABS EVER on the street, but have on the track often. Being a talented driver doesn't mean that you have to show that on the street, nor is every opportunity to show it a good one.

Canyoning (maybe), tracking (definitely), etc, sure. And if you just don't want to bother with pulling and replacing fuses because the dance isn't a full ABS disabling mode, then whatever -- more power to you I suppose. As long as you have the experience and skill you say you have, then it's no big deal.

But I think just about everyone has had a decent opinion to add, even if everyone seems to be a little aggressive and at times misguided.

Ultimately, do whatever is in your comfort zone. If you've pushed your comfort zone further than you should have, hopefully you don't cause any serious damage. But ultimately the onus is on you. You make the decision.

Now why people would come on here and brag about their respective decision is even more beyond me than any of the other decisions made in this thread. OP is most guilty of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You just contradicted yourself by saying that the car does better on the track when you disable the nannies, if it where nannies first to compensate for a weak chassis, people would be slower with the nannies off.

The fact it, the nannies are just a set of programs, that lock up the true potential of a car after it's built so that idiots who can't control the limits of the car... I'm talking about TC, just in case.

I don't have anything against ABS, ABS does have it advantages for the track, but it can have disadvantages.

[Rio]

You guys are so silly. I can't believe you are still going on about this.

[enwave]

Originally Posted by Luis_GT

You just contradicted yourself by saying that the car does better on the track when you disable the nannies, if it where nannies first to compensate for a weak chassis, people would be slower with the nannies off.



The fact it, the nannies are just a set of programs, that lock up the true potential of a car after it's built so that idiots who can't control the limits of the car... I'm talking about TC, just in case.



I don't have anything against ABS, ABS does have it advantages for the track, but it can have disadvantages.

There is no contradiction in my statement. The car is faster with the nannies off. But even very good drivers often get better times with nannies on because we aren't all perfect. That doesn't mean it was designed with the nannies off. You design for the 99%, not for the 1%. If you're wise, you design for the 100%, which is why our platform has been so successful. It is relatively good with nannies on, and based on driver skill slightly to significantly better with nannies off at the track. But 99% of people don't want the same exact experience on the street as they do at the track. So engineers design for the masses first, then adjust accordingly to provide the best balance with nannies on, then tweak it with nannies off, and go back and forth until they find a good balance.

And keep in mind that the changes made to a car with nannies on and off are more relevant when making large decisions like engine size and wheelbase length, or where to put a sway bar and at what stiffness.

Subaru/Toyota make these decisions knowing those who are going to pull an ABS plug and go drifting on their weekends are likely going to be making more modification to their car than just that, so they design the car mostly for the majority and allow the aftermarket to make up the difference.

It's really not hard to understand, and I fail to see any contradiction there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by enwave

There is no contradiction in my statement. The car is faster with the nannies off. But even very good drivers often get better times with nannies on because we aren't all perfect. That doesn't mean it was designed with the nannies off. You design for the 99%, not for the 1%. If you're wise, you design for the 100%, which is why our platform has been so successful. It is relatively good with nannies on, and based on driver skill slightly to significantly better with nannies off at the track. But 99% of people don't want the same exact experience on the street as they do at the track. So engineers design for the masses first, then adjust accordingly to provide the best balance with nannies on, then tweak it with nannies off, and go back and forth until they find a good balance.

And keep in mind that the changes made to a car with nannies on and off are more relevant when making large decisions like engine size and wheelbase length, or where to put a sway bar and at what stiffness.

Subaru/Toyota make these decisions knowing those who are going to pull an ABS plug and go drifting on their weekends are likely going to be making more modification to their car than just that, so they design the car mostly for the majority and allow the aftermarket to make up the difference.

It's really not hard to understand, and I fail to see any contradiction there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If it where that way, this car wouldn't be drift-able without the nannies, and it would't be faster without the nannies... and it does both quite successfully.