Talk:Electronic Stability Control

message: I think this page should be moved to Electronic Stability Control. The article itself says this is the more generic name several times. However, there seems to be a small technical problem preventing the move at the moment (the database seems to think the strings 'Electronic Stability Program'='Electronic Stability Control', but it might be something else). -- Solipsist 11:09, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The destination had a history and that was preventing the move.  I've fixed it now.  violet/riga (t) 13:19, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Page move

message: "the perception of safety conferred by the ESC will encourage more dangerous driving, as seems to be the case with seat belts" - that "seems" a bit subjective. A citation of some study would help, though.
Avada Kedavra 12:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation or less subjective wording needed

message: According to an article by Jason Roberson in the Detroit Free Press, Oct 20 2006, an ESC system costs the car manufacturers about $US 110
Greglocock 22:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cost 

message: Someone has rightly pinged this section with weasel. It seems to be an overlong representation of various unsupported assertions about how dangerous it might be, followed by a schizophrenic section saying that it should be fitted to every car. Would anyone object if I edited the first part down to a single short para on risk compensation thory, and then a short rebuttal referencing the studies that have been done, and perhaps a tidied version of the whinge about it not being compulsory? Greg Locock (talk) 06:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the section is also a case of undue weight and could apply to any safety feature. I'm going to edit the section down to something saner but I wouldn't oppose a full removal. BJTalk 10:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: After completely reading it I just removed it. All it asserted was a non-notable group and "driving enthusiasts" dislike the feature, of course non of that was cited. BJTalk 10:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticisms

message: EDB is quite different from ESC and should not be merged with the ESC article.  Better to leave it as a "See Also" along with ABS and Traction Control.  Each of these four devices serves a different purpose and responds to different inputs.  To understand the differences, check out this website.[]
===From moved page talk===
EBD is a different technology to ESC, they should not be merged.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Julesarian (talk • contribs) 13:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They share some components, not all. Greglocock (talk) 01:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Electronic Brakeforce Distribution

message: EBD is a different technology to ESC, they should not be merged.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Julesarian (talk • contribs) 13:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: From moved page talk

message: ====Proposed merge====
No, the electronic brake distribution  should be merged with ABS ,not this page. Greglocock 23:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They share some components, not all. Greglocock (talk) 01:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: From moved page talk

message: No, the electronic brake distribution  should be merged with ABS ,not this page. Greglocock 23:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They share some components, not all. Greglocock (talk) 01:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge