markcincinnati

The following opinion will probably not be popular:

Every "cycle" cars get more HP and torque and many cars simply become almost "electric" in their ability to virtually do what you think within a second or so of thinking of accelerating. And, even though it may seem like it, I am not limiting my comments regarding the capability of cars to horsepower and torque. Cars "performance" overall continues to "accelerate" (I crack myself up), but the humans (the drivers) have virtually no training and/or education that would enable them to drive them.

Here's where we are by example: A person (the first person) can take some courses and lessons and pass some tests and -- assuming they can afford it -- can be awarded a pilot's license. Many folks take flying lessons and become rated to fly a single-engine plane (perhaps with an instrument rating). Simultaneously, another person (the second person) can take some courses and lessons and pass a test and will be awarded an automotive driver's license.

The first person will not be allowed to pilot a multi-engine airplane even though they have earned an instrument rating pilot's license for a single-engine prop plane, nor will they be allowed to pilot a jet-engine plane or pretty much anything other than the single-engine plane they learned to fly in (after passing both written and hands-on flying tests they "studied" for).

The second person can, with their driver's license in hand, be given the keys to a Mustang Shelby GT or an Audi R8 or a Corvette or a Porsche 911 or, or, you get the picture, and drive off without one second of additional training and education (even if the car they learned to drive and pass the driving test in was a 10-year old Chevy Malibu).

How is it that we will let you drive virtually anything you can afford without any training beyond what was required at age 16 to pass the driving test THEN. Indeed, you can pass your driving tests at age 16, then when you are able, years later, to afford a Porsche 911 or a Dodge Hellcat or Audi RS5 you will be given the keys and a handshake and be allowed to drive off with only an introduction to the "new" features, often Infotainment-centric, period.

A 2018 S4 could be a handful -- yet no "endorsement" for a 350+ HP sub 5-second capable car is required.

It seems to me that the sky's the limit in terms of the performance capabilities of new cars -- perhaps especially German cars -- yet most folks take driver's ed in high school and that is the last training and education they get, even though the cars they are able to buy some years later have incredibly more power and performance capabilities.

The number of cars on our highways continues to grow in numbers and in "numbers" -- and it is the second kind of numbers that one would imagine ought to REQUIRE certification.

Let me give you an example: A driver I know told me that her car had anti-lock brakes and that when her brake pedal "buzzed" it meant she should release the brake pedal until the buzzing stops. I told her that I had been through ABS training and that if her goal was to stop the car in the shortest possible distance the general rule was to press harder and harder on the pedal when the buzzing started and if she released the brake pedal once the "buzzing" started, she was potentially causing the car to take LONGER to stop than if she would have increased the pressure on the brake pedal, rather than decreasing the pressure. She responded: Really? I never knew that.

Another time, I told a friend of mine that the way to recover from a skidding rear end was to steer INTO the direction of the skid. His response was that was illogical, if the car started to skid you steered opposite of the skid not into the skid (you moron). Finally, months later, when we had a snowfall, I drove my friend of mine to a large EMPTY parking lot and deliberately initiated a skid and demonstrated what happened when I turned the steering wheel into the direction of the skid vs his approach of turning in the opposite direction of the skid (DONUTS!)

No training, beyond the watered down crap that passes, often, as driver's ed in high school, is required and often it is difficult to find any training other than that which is offered for 16-year olds looking to pass their test to be able to stop driving with their "temps."

The aircraft model (modified, of course) needs to be adopted -- for some of us that could mean we need training before we're allowed to drive (alone) our new Audi or Porsche or Shelby or -- you probably get the spirit of what I'm saying.

I believe there are folks in my office who might hurt themselves if given the keys to a new S4 -- not because they're bad drivers, but because they're just not ready or trained for a car as powerful and capable as an S4.

I'm not claiming I'm some kind of [idiot] savant driver. I have been through the high-school driver's ed offered 50 years ago, additionally, I have been through 7 multi-day driver "safety" courses (that I paid thousands of dollars for -- each) plus numerous "free" 1/2 day driver training courses sponsored by companies like Cadillac, Porsche, Jeep and BMW. Even with these courses, all I believe I know about is "the basics" of braking, over-steer and under-steer, skid recovery (and avoidance), acceleration and steering. Also, I have taken driving lessons where the subject matter was ABS, ESP (or ESC), and driving on dry, wet and icy conditions.

I think I have had the BARE MINIMUM -- sadly, my experience suggests I have had more training than most.

dbuxton13

Due to size I'm not going to re-quote, but this is my 2-pence reply to Mark's excellent expository.

I can agree with the sentiment for better driver's education under certain criteria, and the aviation analogy is keen, but should add that the difference in knowledge and skill between flying and driving is quite wide. If your car's engine stops working your 'emergency procedure' is to pull over to the side of the road; different story in an aircraft.

I started flying small aircraft in 1994, with an eye towards the airlines. Completed the private pilot license, then another year for an instrument rating (did this while in high school, so had to balance that plus paying for it myself with a minimum wage job). Next was a commercial license, then multi-engine rating, flight instructor certificate and instrument/multi-engine instructor while in college. 9/11 happened my junior year at university and all hopes for the airlines were dashed (they took essentially a decade to recover), so I went the military route. 16 years later, I am happy with that decision and am quickly approaching military retirement and can get back to my initial desire to fly passengers for Delta.

All that to say, I have some insight into this notion of operator skill and training. I also currently live in Germany and can personally vouch for the skill level of German drivers... but they earn it with much stricter training and licensing requirements. Age? 16 years for a restricted motorcycle up to 125 cm³, 17 years for a car with a legal guardian, 18 years for unrestricted car and 21 years for buses and cargo vehicles. My oldest son is approaching [German] driving age and we are looking at a final cost of around $3000 to get him trained and licensed, and then he can't even drive by himself for a full year. Most Americans here opt to fly their youth back to the States, get licensed there under our ridiculously simple 'requirements' (have a pulse, here ya go!), then return and apply for a special driver's license available under agreement between Germany/U.S. for military and their dependents.

So, other than upping our US driver training in general, I think Mark is on to something when it comes to higher performance vehicles. I recall sometime after earning an instrument rating I signed up for a special mountain flying course that required a 'high performance' endorsement to fly a turbocharged Cessna 182T. Federal aviation regulations require pilots to have a high-performance airplane endorsement in order to act as pilot-in-command (PIC) of a high-performance airplane. Any airplane with an engine of more than 200 horsepower is considered “high-performance.” (in the late-90s it was 180hp). Someone smarter than me would have to come up with the equivalent threshold for a car (maybe 300hp, forced-induction, 150+ top speed, or sub 5 sec 0-60?), but the concept is the same. Drivers buying a car given DOT-labeled "high performance" would have to earn an endorsement on their license to be able to operate it.

Comparably, jet-engine aircraft are so technically advanced and specialized, that being able to fly one doesn't mean you can fly another. You have a rating to fly one specific model of jet aircraft, and in order to fly another you have to undergo lengthy and intense training (academic ground school, simulator training, and finally practical training and evaluation in the actual aircraft). Even among the same type of aircraft, say a 747, you have to have specific training among the variants to fly them. Holding a 747-300 type rating doesn't allow you to fly a 747-400 or 747-8, because the upgraded avionics are different enough that it is essentially like flying a different aircraft. Modern cars like the S4, with their advanced 'avionics', merit some thought in this regard as well.

I'm sure talking about it here in Audiworld will get lawmakers all over this but hey here we are, and at minimum it is fun to discuss.

superswiss

I think the primary issue is driver education or lack thereof in the US. I also learned to drive in Europe. It was cheaper back then, but still a significant cost. Mandatory hours with an instructor etc. before even allowed to take the test and then a full hour practical test having to demonstrate all the various driving skills. In addition I grew up in the alps, so driving mountain roads is second nature to me and lots of high speed driving on the German Autobahn.

There is a certain leveling of the playing field when it comes to driving a car. Just because a Porsche 911 has more power than say a Prius you are still bound by the speed limits etc, and driving either one at 55 mph on an Interstate is no different. As @dbuxton13 pointed out, one plane isn't like another plane, but other than differences in power, one car is pretty much like another car. Flying a military jet for example subjects one's body to g-forces that one has to be trained to handle. Not so with a car. Throttle, brake, gear shifter are mostly in the same place, the major instruments are the same, steering wheel, 4 wheels etc. all the same and you don't need to be in better physical shape to drive a Porsche vs a Prius on public roads. I would argue that driving a Porsche at 55 mph on an Interstate is actually safer than driving a Prius, because a Porsche or any performance car for that matter has much better brakes, so in an emergency you'll have a shorter stopping distance and the handling and grip are better as well, so if you have to make an evasive maneuver the chances to pull it off in a Porsche is higher than in a Prius. Or perhaps I should use Audi instead of Porsche. Modern Quattro is much more capable in an emergency and can compensate for lack of driver skills.

That's not to say driver skills are not required, but I think to go as far as to say somebody driving a Porsche vs a Prius needs some kind of endorsement isn't necessarily something that I think would make things any better. The people who are standing out for obvious lack of driving skills don't seem to be driving Porsche's etc. based on my experience. They are driving cheap econo cars etc. Somebody who buys a performance car in my experience is more invested into driving. It's also very likely they have done high performance driving training or are just in general very interested in improving their driving skills. There are always exceptions, but I see a lot more Prius drivers doing dumb $hit on the roads than I see Porsche etc. drivers.

Fundamentally, I think it's the general poor driving education and the fact that there is no requirement to continuously prove that you are still capable of driving and know the rules of the road. Once you've got your driver license, you are pretty much set. An eye test when you need to renew your license is as far as it goes. But things can change. For example when my parents got their driver license there was no such thing as a roundabout, traffic circle or whatever you call it in your neck of the woods. When they started to pop up, nobody was required to go back to training and learn how to properly negotiate them. Or somebody who learned to drive in the flat Midwest with barely any curves, then moves to California and now thinks they can just drive up a mountain road and be a huge obstacle driving 30 mph below the posted speed limit. There should be a requirement to get trained on the roads of the state that you move to, before you are allowed to drive.

rsilvers129

Multi-engine planes have different procedure for engine failure. Jet aircraft have higher stall speed.

Porsche 911 is no different or harder to drive than Camary. Actually it is safer with better brakes, more grip, etc.

The biggest risk to driving is being young or old. Young people have higher insurance rates. They don’t do that to older people, as it would be bad PR.

markcincinnati

Based on the observations and opinions expressed by dbuxton and superswiss, I have identified a common thread that, more than a suggestion, outlines and lays bare our (US) lightweight driver training and licensing requirements and, as a remedy, calls for "more" training, more robust training and, to a certain extent, more ongoing training. Moreover, I think such observations probably should include conclusions that our remedies must require certain endorsements (licensing) to demonstrate the training and education "was successful" in order to be granted the license to drive "this" (class of) automobile. My car would be a class called "Level 2 automation, all wheel drive and between 350 and 400 HP." The class designation regarding HP would, of course, be associated with GVW or some other measurement that would suggest "weight per HP," or similar designation.

Upon further review, I also agree that SOME of us who acquire Audi S4s or Porsches (for example) may also be the folks who "bother" to enroll in continuing or advanced driver training, training that, based on US requirements and regulations is not required. Each one of the paid driver "safety" (or performance) training courses I took from Audi and BMW had a cost, per day, of between $500 and $1,000. I estimate my "investment" in these courses has been at least $12,000 (in aggregate) not including airfare and other travel expenses. Also, the "free" 1/2-day classes, despite their primary intention of persuading me to buy a new Cadillac, or other performance oriented car, did require at least an investment of 6 hours plus burning a PTO day.

Yet, I remind "us" all about the example of the person in my office who buys her first car equipped with ABS (and ESP, truth be told) and believes that she should release the brake the instant the ABS pulsing begins. Recently (here in Cincinnati), the 40-something CEO of a fairly recently financially successful company, buys his dream car a new Shelby GT (600+ HP Mustang) convertible and takes his friend out for a ride-along. The CEO had gone through US driver's ed over twenty-years prior and was given no additional training of any kind. He was handed the keys to the Shelby. Police reports, after examining the black-box noted that the Shelby's throttle was applied 99% with a road speed of less than 1MPH. The car, based on my interpretation of the news article written about the "accident" seems to suggest the car had so much torque that when the driven wheels hit a patch of gravel almost immediately upon being floored caused the car to flip killing the CEO's best friend, a recently minted Catholic Priest. The CEO was charged with a misdemeanor and was given a fine.

Would "performance" training have prevented this unnecessary death? I'm tempted to think the answer is obvious -- yes it would have -- but of course, the type of training would really tell the tale.

Repeatedly here in SW Ohio (where we have moderate snowfall but many days that are on the cusp of 32 degrees meaning we have some wet precip that often turns into ice once the sun goes down) drivers get involved in "accidents" that seem to me could have been largely avoided if the drivers knew how to "steer into a skid" and understand how to properly use ABS (and ESP).

Moreover, I have repeatedly seen customers at the Audi store, bring their kids (they all look young to me) in to pick out their new S3's. There is only a small chance that these "graduating" high school students have had "barely" adequate training regarding such subjects as skid recovery and more importantly skid avoidance.

As I mentioned previously, few even understand the concept of "turning into" a skid -- and when you explain it to them, they think it seems illogical, false, and/or counter-intuitive. These -- perhaps the majority -- drivers also have little grasp of the concept of "assured clear distance" especially with respect to the stopping distance of their daily driver.

The first time most US drivers learn of the stopping distance required for their cars is literally the first time they are in an emergency braking situation. Also, the ability of their car's capacity to safely accelerate and merge into rapidly moving traffic is -- apparently, based upon observations -- "discovered" when they make the move in their new Chevy Cruz or Honda Mini-van (or Prius) only to find their 0-60 acceleration ability of 9 seconds was (or is) inadequate for the circumstances (because they had no clue what would happen when they needed some urgency from their vehicle).

The conclusion, then, would seem to be a synthesis of the two previous posts: More robust driver education should be required in the US. The German model seems much closer to what is necessary if the goal is to equip drivers with the requisite skills to avoid mishaps. The Audi training I have had seems to suggest the notion that "Performance driver training yields safer and more competent drivers."

It may NOT be necessary to retrain drivers everytime they buy a new car. However, simply showing new car owners how to tune the radio and set the temperature using the car's climate controls is woefully inadequate, because despite the fact that the brake pedal, steering wheel and accelerator may be similar from car to car, the constant and rapid technology changes that new vehicles come with along with rapidly increasing and remarkable horsepower and torque changes ought to be compelling reasons to require license endorsements asserting the skills of the driver are commensurate with the advances in automotive features and power.

Many cars, today, have achieved quantum leaps in power and in their ability to accelerate; but, due in large part to the laws of physics, are only somewhat more capable in terms of braking abilities. Just because the CEO was able to afford the new Shelby, there was nothing in his past experience or training that suggested he knew what would happen if he floored the car -- he was dangerous behind the wheel of a 600+ HP car. He may have also been dangerous in a 200+ HP car, but it is unlikely the 200+ HP version would have even been capable of such a violent reaction to "99% throttle".

Training and certification on the 600HP vehicle would not prevent "a stupid attack" but such training may have imbued our hapless CEO with the skills to regain control of the vehicle in time to prevent the negative outcome described above.

A few short years ago, I would have had virtually no concern in tossing my car keys to my 40-year old bookkeeper -- today, I am fairly confident such a casual action would be an invitation for trouble, assuming my bookkeeper could even start my S4.

While some may have the financial ability to drive into the dealership in a 10-year old Subaru and drive out in a new S4, it is perhaps unlikely they should be allowed to do so without some driver education beyond a tour of the MMI. If the new S4 has Driver Assistance, yet additional training should be required (with appropriate certifications), perhaps to eliminate the repetition of the situation that occurred with the owner of a new Tesla who turned on "auto-pilot" expecting to be able to become "uninvolved" with driving the damn thing.

https://www.recode.net/2017/9/12/162...musk-autopilot

The ability to afford a new Tesla configured with a mode called "ludicrous speed" (and with auto-pilot) has become all-too-commonplace and dangerous, considering the complete lack of any training, education or certification to drive such a vehicle.

rsilvers129

Advanced driver training should be much more common. I went to Skip Barber and we used Dodge Neons and Vipers. They sprayed water on the track and we went in circles riding the skid for minutes at a time. It was very useful to counter steer and control it with the wheel and throttle.

As for people who release their ABS brakes when they pulse - I am pretty sure that is only true of people who learned to drive forever ago. Pretty much people age 80 or over now who were already set in their ways when ABS came out. But along those lines, before ABS, you needed to learn threshold braking. It was the people who knew how to threshold brake who would get in trouble with ABS. Now I am wondering if it is the people who know how to turn into a skid who get in trouble with ESC? The car may get confused as to what you are trying to do if you don't point the steering wheel where you actually want to go.

markcincinnati

As a data point: I took the Audi Performance (formerly called "Safety") driving school on ice. The cars had fully defeatable ABS and ESP/ESC (defeatable by the instructors, that is). During the training, we were "encouraged" to drive faster and faster until the cars became unresponsive to the steering wheel. This exercise was to demonstrate under-steer but at speeds (since we were on ice with AWD cars with four studded winter tires) much lower than would be required on dry or even water soaked pavement.

The point of the exercise was to demonstrate the value of ABS and ESP. We performed the same exercise multiple times (with and without the electronic "nannies"). Without ESP if the car begins skidding to the right (the way humans perceive the skidding that is) the correct maneuver is to turn the steering wheel to the right (clockwise). With ESP the correct maneuver is to turn the steering wheel to the right (clockwise). The laws (of physics) are the same regardless of how much help the stability program is able to provide. Turning the wheel "counter-clockwise" which is apparently many folks "intuitive" maneuver only serves to exacerbate the skid's severity and lengthen the time and distance required to recover from the skid. I was surprised how many of what I assumed were millennials had never been trained to "turn into the skid" as the instructors kept yelling over the in-car walkie-talkies.

With respect to the brake release at the onset of the ABS pulsing or juddering sensation, I was taking the BMW 2-day "X-drive" training in SC and the very first exercise was to "slam on the brakes" at the cone laying on its side. We were instructed to accelerate to 50MPH, hold 50 and brake in the shortest distance we possibly could muster using only our right leg mashing on the brake pedal. Three students, one instructor per car. Each student was afforded four tries and, in total were able to be in the car for two tries with the instructor demonstrating the proper technique and then each student having a go at it. Each student, therefore, was in the car for 14 runs at the same exercise (four of them driving).

Repeatedly -- and most of the folks taking the class were (by observation) 45 years of age (or younger, except me, I was probably more than half-way to 60) -- the students would, upon feeling the brake pulse, lift off the brake. Some students "forced" themselves to brake, release and then re-brake, but I would say 2/3rds of the students "didn't like" the feeling of the brakes pulsing so they simply lifted off the brake until the pulsing stopped -- considerably lengthening their stopping distances. Some of the students NEVER were able to muster a full, total, complete dead-stop, in fact. No one there was anywhere close to 80.

Perhaps Millennials (perhaps) don't know how to use ABS and ESP. Perhaps some baby boomers don't either. I'm not suggesting anything that would be age related. I'm suggesting "we" Americans seem to demonstrate a certain cluelessness about driving and the "skills" required to actually obtain a driver's liscense appear to be, as someone said, pretty much just "Having a heartbeat."

It was absolutely mind blowing for some students to be told, "If you want to turn left and your vehicle is seriously understeering, all you have to do is turn the steering wheel to the right." Time and time again, I would be one of the passengers when the A4 we were in had been induced to under-steer and the student simply added crank in the direction of the curve, thus assuring the car would, essentially, go straight.

We need more training and we need it over our lifetime of driving.

superswiss

Yep, the biggest hole in driver's ed is that there is no mandatory training on what to do in an emergency or learning how one's car behaves at the limit, so you can anticipate how the car will react and how to recover in case of an emergency, except in Finland. Finland has by far the best driver's ed of any country. As a result, they produce the most rally drivers per capita. Or even things like driving on snow. Unless you happen to learn how to drive during the winter, nobody gets ever taught how to drive on snow. All these things have to be done voluntarily, either through years of experience or advanced driver training. In comparison, pilots spend a lot of time training emergency situations. For example, a pilot is taught to continuously think about where they would land if they had an engine failure in this very moment. Drivers are never really taught to be vigilant and anticipate dangerous situations. Even just the simply things like learning how to properly adjust your mirrors to minimize or even eliminate the blind spot. Most people adjust their side mirrors so they can see the side of their car, creating that dreaded blind spot instead of moving the side mirrors further out. It's also amazing how many drivers are just cruising along hanging out in the blind spot of another car or worse a semi-truck. How many out there know that if you can't see the truck driver in the mirror, they can't see you?

I make it a point to take any new car to an empty canyon road and progressively explore its limits, so I know how the car reacts at the limit and I'm prepared for an emergency situation. Over the years I also have learned to anticipate other driver's idiotic maneuvers and read the signs of something about to happen. Most accidents I come across and read about are very clearly human error and it's often clear very quickly that the driver was simply not paying attention and/or never learned what to do in the situation that led up to the accident, or even more important never learned what not to do and not to panic.

Instead speeding tickets have become a lucrative revenue source for most cities, creating a conflict of interest to invest money into better driver's ed and risk losing that sweet revenue. Speed kills is one of the most stupid mantras that's being repeated in this country. No, it doesn't, the sudden stop does if you were never trained to handle speed or your car in general and you are causing an accident.

markcincinnati

Super, you're so right in what you have observed (at least insofar as it pertains to US drivers). When I took "advanced" driver training in college, anti-lock brakes were "invented" but not really yet innovated. We had to rely on our own bodies to essentially imitate what ABS does naturally (and far more accurately and rapidly).

Even today, previous driving techniques require some scrutiny, some study -- simply so that we drivers will understand why ABS works, for example ("you can't steer a sliding tire/wheel; to be able to be steered the wheel must be turning, the tire must NOT be sliding"). When I was taking advanced driver training our instructor -- who actually had a doctorate in the subject -- told us we should always focus on "the three e's of driving: Education, Engineering, and Enforcement!" In the US we seem to focus on Enforcement first, Engineering second and as a distant third, Education. No wonder we have raised a society full of almost always helpless and always hapless drivers.

Awareness of what the hell's going on would be so refreshing. Every day I drive 34 miles on one of our Interstate highways; every day at least once per day, there will be someone who insists upon entering the Interstate on the right and promptly making a b-line to the left-most lane where he/she settles in at speed limit minus 10MPH seemingly oblivious to the chaos this behavior causes as fed-up drivers (over and over and over) make the dangerous move of passing on the right meanwhile two lanes over, drivers are attempting to move left repeatedly creating "near miss" situations that would simply not happen if the left-lane bandit were to ply his trade in the right lane (where few folks would care). If only passing on the right and left lane "cruising" were "ticket-able" offenses supported by road signs proclaiming stiff fines for either behavior should you be caught disobeying this simple "safety" admonishment. If only.

As I review what I've written and what others here have written on the subject, I wonder if I'm out of my mind thinking I'll get an RS5 SportBack -- I mean, it's seriously approaching "impossible" to be able to use such a vehicle.

The above is just nother reason to beef-up our driver's education in the US and to make it a life-long commitment somewhat similar to the requirements that must be met to keep a pilot's license or drive the latest and greatest vehicle to come on the market.

millersntx

Red Calipers aside - you'll want/need the Sport Diff. I think they've done a better job of integrating it into the car with B9. The B9 is really neutral feeling. My B8 understeered until I gave it some throttle and the sport diff would bring the ***-end around.
I have to admit I really like the Virtual Cockpit.

After a couple of weeks in my B9, I love the car overall. I do miss the supercharged engine in my old B8. It had better throttle response off idle. The B9 throttle response is great when it's on the boost, but it's a bit soft off the line in day to day driving.

Mine's a Prestige with the Sport Package. I WISH I had the driver assistance package, but not missing it too much in every day driving.