Slashdot Mirror


New Ford Mustang May Have Electronic "Burnout" Button

cartechboy writes "Ford has decided to take the burnout into the 21st century for the new 2015 Mustang. The Mustang's new 'electronic' burnout system is intended to enable perfect burnouts every time, much like launch control has made it easier to accelerate quickly from a stop. So think of every new Mustang with a bright red 'burnout' button. While the details on how the burnout control system will work remain secret, it's possible that a combination of the features used in a typical launch control system, including traction and rev-limiting controls, together with a front brake locking system, could enable Ford to pull together existing technology in a completely new way. So far Ford has no comment."

290 comments

  1. Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I'd be pretty surprised if this were true... and if it is... lol, noobs.

    1. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you know that it's possible to do burnouts in places that are not public roads? Or did you think that tires just silently spin smoke-free on race tracks and private property?

    2. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by iamhassi · · Score: 4, Funny

      Does it have an electric mullet button?

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    3. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you only want to drive your car on private property, sure, you can have an "easy button" for burnouts.

      Unless the button magically disables itself on DOT roads, you're not going to see it in a production car.

    4. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Does it have an electric mullet button?

      No, but maybe you can install the Donald Trump button backward.

    5. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      what is a burnout

    6. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

      what is a burnout

      An IT worker over 30.

    7. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by bhcompy · · Score: 2

      There is a magical easy button for burnouts. It's called a gas pedal

    8. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

      Electric Mullet is the name of my modern country band.

    9. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      "Modern country [music]", isn't that an oxymoron? What's next, Modern Renascence music? Complete with the Electric Racket?.....Hey, I think I'm getting the hang of this.

    10. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Modern Country Band" is the name of my Mumford and Sons cover band.

    11. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      "Modern Country Band" is the name of my Mumford and Sons cover band.

      Was "Trust Fund Wurzels" already taken?

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    12. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by ackthpt · · Score: 2

      So I'd be pretty surprised if this were true... and if it is... lol, noobs.

      Back when I was in college I had a monster of a car from the 1960's, in near mint shape with a whopping 425 CuIn (that's 7L in today's parlance) V8 (that's two inline 4's joined at the hip in today's parlance). One night when I thought I was alone on a country back road, I decided to see what it had off the line at a stop sign. It had quite a lot and several left over. Alas, as the tires finished skidding a pair of headlights came on in a parking lot I was unaware of and proceded to pull me over, with the assistance of some flashing blue and red lights. After complimenting me on a true classic automobile, the deputy let me off with a warning and told me if I wanted to be an asshole, to go do it somewhere else.

      I miss that car.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    13. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by updatelee · · Score: 1

      Maybe it'll be labelled 'douche' or 'my moms car'

      UDL

    14. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

      "Modern country [music]", isn't that an oxymoron?

      Considering most, if not all, country music played on the radio today is little more than rock/pop with a southern accent and possibly a violin (sorry, fiddle), on occasion, I'd say it's not. I like all kinds of music. But solid body guitars with heavy distortion don't mix well with what I consider to be country music. It's kind of like adding a theremin to an a cappella group. Hell, the Eagles would be considered country music by today's standards.

    15. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by aaronb1138 · · Score: 2

      Might be more necessary than you would think with the change from a solid rear axle to a IRS. IRS is well known for being much hoppier and letting the wheels launch into the wheel well during burnouts and hard launches.

    16. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by lgw · · Score: 1

      My V8 may only be 5.6L, but it will still leave a patch if I let it (realistically, it probably has more power than any of the 60s muscle cars, given the way that measuring power has changed over the decades). I've dione it by accident before in reverse (there's no traction control in reverse).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    17. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by jd2112 · · Score: 1

      "Modern country [music]", isn't that an oxymoron?

      Considering most, if not all, country music played on the radio today is little more than rock/pop with a southern accent and possibly a violin (sorry, fiddle), on occasion, I'd say it's not. I like all kinds of music. But solid body guitars with heavy distortion don't mix well with what I consider to be country music. It's kind of like adding a theremin to an a cappella group. Hell, the Eagles would be considered country music by today's standards.

      The Eagles have always straddled the line between country and rock but their last album (particularly the tracks released as singles) was decidedly leaning more to the country side.
      Probably because rock radio is practically non-existent anymore.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    18. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried to do that once. The only patch I left was in my no-longer-whitey-tighties. There was a girl in the passenger seat at the time. Instead some awesome head action I got a nickname and a reputation. At least the seats were leather and cleaned up, even if the smell didn't.

    19. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Quasimodem · · Score: 1

      "Modern country [music]", isn't that an oxymoron?

      It only became an oxymoron when you added "[music]."

      Sponge Bath wrote "modern country band."

    20. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by tompaulco · · Score: 4, Funny

      I used to have a Lotus Esprit, but no matter how hard I mashed the pedal, it would never smoke the tires. It would just go faster. It was so infuriating how it would just sprint away from the other vehicle instead of sitting there smoking the tires like the other vehicle.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    21. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 5, Informative

      31 year old IT worker here, can confirm. The money is fantastic, unfortunately you trade in your soul.

    22. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Texas Transportation Code - Section 545.420. Exhibition of acceleration. It's illegal in the state of Texas.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    23. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not on private property, like a drag strip.

    24. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Spinning the drive wheels much faster then you're moving (if you're even moving) so the tires burn up and make smoke and burn a hole in your wallet when you visit the tire store the next day.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    25. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You're doing it wrong then.

      I leased out my soul. I get better returns at the end of each year at tax time.

    26. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm...being 29 I must be in the burn-in stage then.
      Although, my burn-in feels a lot like your burnout...

    27. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      Which one?

      It seems they ranged from 265 to 350 hp, and 140 to 290 ft-lbs torque. The tires and road conditions make a big difference too.

      When I bought my '00 WS/6 (stock 320hp and 345 ft-lbs torque), it game with some awful tires. The test drive was in the rain. The tires spun anywhere under 3rd gear. It was a "fun" test ride, and the salesman loved it, but I would have preferred to drive it. It had a new set of tires the next week, and that got rid of the unintentional tire spins.

      12 years and 130,000 miles later...

      The last dyno run measured it at 330hp and 345 ft-lbs torque. That's with the original engine, and even spark plugs. It just has some bolt-on stuff, but nothing internal done.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    28. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      Ya, most states have laws against it. Except on private property.

      Florida defines any surface made for vehicle travel, attached to a road, as being "public" for the purpose of motor vehicle citations. So a burnout in your driveway is illegal. Rolling a stop sign in a store parking lot is illegal too. If you do a burnout in a store parking lot after hours, and you exceed the posted speed limit (usually like 15mph or less), you can get cited with speeding, unlawful exhibition of speed, careless driving. If you go past the line at the end of a row without stopping, you can get a ticket for failing to obey a traffic control device. So 5 easy tickets, and they don't even have to contact the property management to try to cite you for trespassing and/or vandalism.

      Usually, they'll just tell you to stop it and go home.

      Racetracks usually have multiple gates between the public roads and the track, which makes it legal.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    29. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      Or a bloody foreigner. Not everybody behaves like an American. In lots of places wasting your tires is just plain stupid.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    30. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It went up 10 hp? Did you put a "Type-R" sticker on it?

    31. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Burnouts are classified as unsafe acceleration. This system actually puts a kink in that. You cant say its uncontrolled if the computer is keeping you rock solid.

      --
      Good-bye
    32. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      I would like to see citation of rolling through a privately owned and operated stop sign inducing a ticket. I have no duty to obey signs the state has not placed themselves.

      --
      Good-bye
    33. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by necro81 · · Score: 1

      But but but... if I have to be an attention whore on private property, no one is going to SEE ME!

    34. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Correct. I used to hang out at the Royal Purple Raceway. So it's legal there. But contrast that to say Rankin Road (back in 2000 and prior), it was a massive bust on the weekend nights. Being a public road and all. Police would show upon the hour and cuff racers and spectators alike. For good reason too. Many fatalities occurred there in its long illegal tradition.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    35. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or a fart cannon.

    36. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by TWiTfan · · Score: 1

      you trade in your soul.

      What IT worker had one to begin with?

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    37. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by iamgnat · · Score: 2

      Unless the button magically disables itself on DOT roads, you're not going to see it in a production car.

      The GT-R (at least the original, I haven't continued to follow it) limited itself unless the GPS told it you were at a known race track and if I recall correctly one of the recent Mustangs required an extra or special key to enable it's full abilities. So it is possible to limit it's functionality in some way (read: limit their liability when you do something stupid).

    38. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by Petersson · · Score: 1

      Burnouts are not about acceleration. It's about tire smoke, doing donuts and having fun.

      BTW while doing burnout, tires lose traction. For acceleration you need all traction you can get.

      --
      I'm not insane. My mother had me tested.
    39. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by jacknifetoaswan · · Score: 2

      The key you're referencing is for the Boss 302, which remaps the engine tuning to provide additional power and less streetability.

      I'm definitely of the camp that no auto manufacturer is going to put a burnout button on their vehicle, both because of legal reasons, and because burnouts prematurely wear many components, including brake pads, tires, transmission, axles, etc. The maintenance/warranty issues would be absurd. Imagine you do a burnout with Ford's burnout button, dump the clutch, and it shatters, tearing a hole in the transmission bellhousing, opening up the hood, and puncturing a tire. Then imagine a smoking hot piece of clutch disc hits someone and injures them. Option 1 is that Ford says - "Well, you took the risk using that feature, so we're not covering it." Option 2 is is that the person hit with the clutch disc sues the driver, Ford, the dealership, the engineer that designed the clutch, the engineer that designed the burnout system, their insurance companies, et al, and comes away with a six-figure settlement.

    40. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      The first number was the factory spec. The second set was measured on a dyno.

      I did change a few things. There were intake restrictions that I removed. The factory Y-pipe was designed for ground clearance, but had a nasty restriction too, so I swapped it for an aftermarket Y-pipe.

      It probably was a little bit higher at some point between about 20k miles and 130k miles, since it still had the factory spark plugs for the 130k, mile dyno test.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    41. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      My V8 may only be 5.6L, but it will still leave a patch if I let it (realistically, it probably has more power than any of the 60s muscle cars, given the way that measuring power has changed over the decades). I've dione it by accident before in reverse (there's no traction control in reverse).

      The gearing in reverse usually works out that you can smoke in reverse no matter how weak the mill. The engine I had, stock, was about 330hp, but had a massive 420 ft/lb of torque. It was the short-stroke predecessor of the 455 and was loved by drag racers and boaters.

      I miss that car.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    42. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      Here's a writeup on it from the Florida Attorney General's office.

      http://myfloridalegal.com/ago.nsf/0/2be69982597761f385256eb7005f8fdf?OpenDocument.

      Basically, anywhere that is a road, or there is expressed or implied consent to drive, traffic laws can be enforced.

      You could argue that you don't have to obey them. You would lose in court. And as I mentioned in the previous post, this is Florida law, so your state may be different.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    43. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Vindicator9000 · · Score: 1

      Apparently I'm doing it wrong too. The money sucks and I traded in my soul.

    44. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      First of all its a drunk driving case, so hes on the wrong side of the argument to begin with. IN THAT light, i can see Florida extended their rights to private roadways in the name of safety. However, i dont feel that this particular argument would apply to privately placed stop signs, due to the fact that they are arbitrarily placed by untrained/unauthorized personnel.

      --
      Good-bye
    45. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      As opposed to?

    46. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      I have a '01 WS/6 and it still runs great. I use it as my winter car now mostly because it sits next to my '14 stingray.

    47. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by Tanktalus · · Score: 1

      Have you seen some of the real stop signs out there? I'd say many of them were arbitrarily placed by untrained, though authorized, personnel. Seriously, most of them could be replaced with yield signs, which is what they effectively are since few people do more than roll through them, and allow our traffic enforcement to focus on issues that might actually make a difference.

    48. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by lgw · · Score: 1

      Yup, that's the difference between a sports car and a GT cruiser.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    49. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      Actually it's not even illegal in Texas, at least not by that law unless you are (and can be proven to be) attempting to impress or show off to another person.

      IANAL, but I do know my rights pretty well.

    50. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Considering most, if not all, country music played on the radio today is little more than rock/pop with a southern accent

      Funny, I was saying that in the 80s. It's just moreso now.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    51. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by greenzrx · · Score: 1

      So, do a burnout on the lawn.

    52. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by vac65 · · Score: 2



      <quote><p>what is a burnout</p></quote>

      <p>An IT worker over 30.</p></quote>

      Hummm, so when we get the electronic crash button?

    53. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by iamgnat · · Score: 3, Informative

      dump the clutch

      In principle I agree with everything you said except that. If you are doing a burnout that means power is already going to the wheels and therefore the clutch is already engaged.

      What you are thinking of there is what launch control systems help with (engaging the transmission at the optimal time for the best off the line start) and all of the cars I'm familiar with that have such an option also use transmission and drive line components that can handle torque values much greater than the engine (from the factory) can provide. I expect constant use, however, would shorten the lifespan of wear components (clutch, transmission fluid, etc..) considerably though.

    54. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Low hanging fruit. If a COP sees you burning out at a stop sign/light, expect to get ticketed for it. I know because it happened to both me and a friend of mine.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    55. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      I ran across a T-junction with a yield sign at the base of the T not too long ago. As there was also gravel in the intersection, I believe it may have been very slightly uphill, and night, I didn't immediately realize it was a T-junction and very nearly had a heart attack.

      Only in the rural Midwest...

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    56. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

      Many of the big hills with intersections at the top in my area have three stop signs. Uphill traffic doesn't have to stop. The reason is the grain trucks can't get going again when they come to a stop pointing uphill.

    57. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      The general rule everywhere else I've driven is that traffic going straight has right-of-way, and those turning yield, which I suppose is why I was so surprised.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    58. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I had an '88, so it was the 4 banger with a turbo, but it was already more than powerful enough. I test drove a V8 turbo with the 350 HP, and it was just crazy quick. It didn't smoke the tires off the line either, but the back end liked to try to crawl out from under you on left turns.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    59. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      I've gotten a ticket for excessive wheel spin, but that's Illinois.

    60. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      British brakes?

    61. Re: Burnouts are illegal. by jacknifetoaswan · · Score: 1

      I was implying that you had intent to do a burnout, and when you dumped the clutch, the disc exploded and destroyed several components. I should have been more clear, though.

      As for vehicles with launch control, most of the vehicles that come equipped with it are far more expensive than even the most expensive factory Mustang. While the GT and other high performance variants will be built with heavier duty halfshafts and driveline components, the base models will sacrifice strength for cost and weight.

    62. Re:Burnouts are illegal. by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      Did you swap your Y-pipe yet? That was the single most significant change I made. I did the air lid years ago. I don't know that it made a difference in performance, but it looks better. The other change I liked most was putting on a lightened flywheel. Between the two, it makes downshifting a bit different, but it has helped torque. I didn't really notice the difference in time to rev up, until a friend with a stock '00 Camaro SS (same specs as my WS6) was sitting beside me at a light, and it sounded like the Camaro engine had to work harder to spin up.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  2. lock front brakes + accelerate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wouldn't be hard to do, if you could lock only the front brakes and accelerate you could easily do a burnout.

    1. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by Paleolibertarian · · Score: 2

      This used to be called line lock. For 1/4 milers it was a help to get the engine revved up to the torque band while heating the rubber on the tires to get better traction. When the green light comes on you release the brakes and go.

      When I was a kid we got tickets for negligent driving if we squealed the tires. The cops will have fun with this.

    2. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why they have, wait for it, line locks / transbrakes on strip cars. "The more you know"

    3. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by cultiv8 · · Score: 1

      Still is called line lock, which I installed on my mustang cobra, and takes about 10 seconds of spinning to get the slicks hot and sticky. "Launch control" is the same as revving up the engine and engaging the clutch at the right RPM, which is about 3500 rpms for me. It took about a dozen passes at the local dragway before I broke the rear axle, and I'm sure this will happen on the new cars too. I'm sure mechanics will have fun with this. :)

      --
      sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
    4. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by rsborg · · Score: 1

      This used to be called line lock. For 1/4 milers it was a help to get the engine revved up to the torque band while heating the rubber on the tires to get better traction. When the green light comes on you release the brakes and go.

      When I was a kid we got tickets for negligent driving if we squealed the tires. The cops will have fun with this.

      Due to cops being more worried about simple revenue generation activities (i.e., enforcing unrealistically low speeding guidelines and snooping on stopped vehicles where driver is using their phone), all it's going to do is to annoy residents where the local bad boys like to street race (i.e., major road a few blocks away from my house).

      Thanks Ford. Just like selling an exploit script to script kiddies - profiting off the misery of the many while catering to the few dumb idiots who are too unskilled or lazy to learn how to do it properly.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    5. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by Paleolibertarian · · Score: 1

      We never had anything with enough power to break anything. We had to go to the strip and watch the nitro boys blow shit up.

    6. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You broke the weak axle the 99's specifically had. It was 28 spline in 99 and then in 2001+ they upgraded to 31 spline.

      I used to own a 1997 Cobra, then fell in love with the AWD Turbo Lancer Evolution IX/X which make power easier and put it down better. I hypermile mine to 31mpg then blow away pretty much anything from a stop and run low 11's with less than $3K invested on a street car.

      You should go drive one despite the initial looks that might throw you off.... It's a race machine. I just drove mine in the snow last night and had *fun*. Boy I used to hate the rain/snow back with the Cobra.... Plus stuff broke. You can even tune the stock Ecu on the Evo for $120 using your own computer/software.

      Check it out.

    7. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      This used to be called line lock. For 1/4 milers it was a help to get the engine revved up to the torque band while heating the rubber on the tires to get better traction. When the green light comes on you release the brakes and go.

      Sounds like a good way to lose. I can't say I've been to a track for years, not that 1/4 mile was ever that exciting to me. But the burn outs were done in a "bleach pit" The thought being that the bleach would somehow help to soften tires. It was more to create tons of smoke than anything. Once the tires were hot and sticky, you wold go to the starting line. The idea was to have better traction at the launch so you could get more power to the ground. If you were spinning your tires, you weren't applying it to forward momentum.

    8. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by PNutts · · Score: 1

      I hypermile mine to 31mpg then blow away pretty much anything from a stop

      So, you're an asshole coming *and* going.

    9. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "hypermile" was a dead giveaway.

    10. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by jacknifetoaswan · · Score: 1

      Bleach doesn't soften the tires, it's just more slippery than water, so people with underpowered cars use it to do burnouts. At a drag strip, they use water, because normal people that understand how to drag race wouldn't let bleach touch the paint on their vehicles. The idea is to heat up the tires (by doing a burnout) and thus, soften them to get better traction.

      That said, you NEVER do this with street tires or drag radials, only slicks.

    11. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by greenzrx · · Score: 1

      Watch the guys that are making big HP, and they burnout all the way across the start line. Then, back up and stage. The idea being this would leave a strip of sticky rubber on the ground for them to launch off of.

    12. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Bleach doesn't soften the tires, it's just more slippery than water, so people with underpowered cars use it to do burnouts. At a drag strip, they use water, because normal people that understand how to drag race wouldn't let bleach touch the paint on their vehicles. The idea is to heat up the tires (by doing a burnout) and thus, soften them to get better traction.

      That said, you NEVER do this with street tires or drag radials, only slicks.

      Like I said, it's been some time since I went to a 1/4 mile track. It was very common practice back then. When I went, I always drove around the bleach pit.

    13. Re:lock front brakes + accelerate by jacknifetoaswan · · Score: 1

      No, it's just that when you're making 10,000 horsepower in a top fuel car, which really have no brakes, you have to do the burnout, then let the drag on the tires and aero package slow the inertia of the car.

  3. 1940s technology, here today! by Trepidity · · Score: 1

    You have this low-tech piece of equipment that brakes the non-drive wheels while spinning the drive wheels (called a "line lock"), problem solved. I guess they are going to do that, but with some electronics?

    1. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      More to the point, I think: where's the fun?

      IIRC, when the guys did this when I was a kid, it was about the fun of managing to do it properly yourself.

      Of course there was also the bit about having enough of the manhood-substitute horsepower to do it. But the point remains: it was something the guys did to show off. With this, what's to show off? "Look folks! I can push a button!"

      Meh.

    2. Re:1940s technology, here today! by m2shariy · · Score: 1

      Remember, it is controlled by a button, not a lever or valve. Buttons are electronic!

    3. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by iamhassi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Show off? It's a mustang. Last mustang worthy of showing off was built 50 years ago

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    4. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      With this, what's to show off? "Look folks! I can push a button!"

      The Ford engineers are showing off.

    5. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Cars are so fly by wire now it becomes difficult to do things like a burnout. You can argue the need for such a thing but some people do value it. Basically the only reason there's a button to turn off your traction control is because some people wouldn't buy the car because they couldn't do a burnout. Then, once they've disabled it and have done the burnout they are now driving around without traction control on. Solution? A button that controls the burnout, does it better than the human ever could, and then automatically re-activates safety systems. Maybe they can even keep control of the car, detect if somethings gone wrong and fail out of the burnout.

    6. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      That's silly. Any traction control that can't be disabled is in a car that has no business doing burnouts anyway. It's not currently difficult in mustangs.

    7. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by JustNiz · · Score: 2

      Quite agree. Its also why Ford and Mustang owners feel the need to resort to this kind of shit to get their new cars noticed. Except they clearly don't understand the "not in a good way" thing.

    8. Re:1940s technology, here today! by StripedCow · · Score: 1

      A better question is this: what is this article from the transportation age doing here in the information age?

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    9. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Dare+nMc · · Score: 2

      >. the only reason there's a button to turn off your traction control is

      Not true, every car has times it needs to be off. Drive you car home on a spare without burning up brakes. Not to mention most suck at things like going through mud holes, deep snow. Even the really good factory systems when turned off allow pro drivers to go faster. I understand a race system in a race environment is a winner, but has nothing to do with need to disable the production systems in intense driving (but not while commuting.)

    10. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by msauve · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Last mustang worthy of showing off was built 50 years ago"

      There were no 1963 Mustangs.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    11. Re:1940s technology, here today! by dragon-file · · Score: 1

      Fly by wire? I could have sworn it was drive by wire seeing as, ya know, it's a car.

      --
      Whenever a player quits EVE to go play WoW, the Average IQ of both games increase.
    12. Re:1940s technology, here today! by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      People don't want to turn off traction control to do a burnout, they also probably want to slide around corners.

    13. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell us again how the 662 HP Mustang SVT Cobra is more lame than your Ricer.

    14. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Remember, it is controlled by a button, not a lever or valve. Buttons are electronic!

      I'm going to file a patent right now for doing this from a mobile device.

    15. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      As someone who's built a mud truck/rock crawler from the ground up, I can tell you that traction control cause me any problems on the trail. My truck has a 5 point long arm suspension, 6" lift, etc... etc... and I rarely turn the traction control off. About the only time I can remember doing it was when I broke a drive shaft, I was able to lock up my diff to drive away but the traction control went nuts because it thought the right tire was in a skid. I doubt the average public would ever have such a problem and I could have just gotten towed out... It's rare that I break something and don't get towed out anyway.

    16. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by bmimatt · · Score: 2

      Apples to oranges maybe, but: It's been called the 'M' button for quite a while now and installed in certain 'M-class' automobiles. The Ford version will probably end up being a toy version of it - you can do a burnout once you engage, but for the front brakes to release you'll have to disengage the 'B' button. You know, the 'safe' way.

    17. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2

      There were no 1963 Mustangs.

      Yep - Appeared in Goldfinger in 1964 -

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLuNstLjP1c

    18. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Try driving a 4WD Honda Pilot across deep, slushy snow or through a mudhole with traction control on...you'll end up stuck. Turn it off, gun it, sail free.

    19. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, please be more precise. 49.441 years ago.

    20. Re:1940s technology, here today! by lexman098 · · Score: 1

      Some manufacturers don't even let you do that. It's the difference between "stability" and "traction" control.

    21. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      Shouldn't it be the 'P' as in P for poseur or P for pollute, hell it could even be a really tiny 'p' and we all know exactly what that represents, at least it would be accurate.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    22. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was a 1964 1/2 mustang in that 1964 movie.

    23. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's easy, rice actually sticks to the road while Mustangs and their cousins go looking for the nearest ditch. Throwing some ponies under a hood is easy. Building a car worthy of them isn't.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    24. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ages don't refer to a time when only "that" existed. No such time ever existed where there was only 1 thing going on. They refer to a time of great innovation and revolution in what ever your "that" refers to.
      You are also neglecting the fact that this isn't really the information age anyways, its the information transportation age :)
      A better question is: WTF were you trying to say anyways?

    25. Re:1940s technology, here today! by lgw · · Score: 1

      Most cars can't get out of a snow drift with the traction control on. Sometimes you need wheelspin.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    26. Re:1940s technology, here today! by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "A better question is this: what is this article from the transportation age doing here in the information age?"

      One word: Dicedot.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    27. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      I guess it wasn't traction controll, but stabilty controll that causes me problems. The switch only says traction. The problem is if I try to maintain speed through a hole, it sees the rear end slide... and reduces throttle and pulls on the brake to go straight, more important to maintain speed than be perfectly straight but stuck in the mud usualy.

    28. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nevertheless, the last mustang worthy of showing off was built 50 years ago.

      The first Mustangs(1964 was the year IIRC) were POS. Sheer junk. It was only when Ford realized that the younger people were putting V-8s in the mustang bodies and creating "muscle cars" that Ford followed suit and produced semi-screamers. Shelby switched from the AC Cobra to the Mustang and things started taking off. Even with these improvements, the Mustang is still a POS car. Always has been; always will be. IMHO

    29. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by PNutts · · Score: 1

      Apples to oranges maybe, but:
      It's been called the 'M' button for quite a while now and installed in certain 'M-class' automobiles.
      The Ford version will probably end up being a toy version of it - you can do a burnout once you engage, but for the front brakes to release you'll have to disengage the 'B' button. You know, the 'safe' way.

      Goddam lead fingered drivers. Get off my lawn.

    30. Re:1940s technology, here today! by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

      Cars are so fly by wire now it becomes difficult to do things like a burnout. You can argue the need for such a thing but some people do value it. Basically the only reason there's a button to turn off your traction control is because some people wouldn't buy the car because they couldn't do a burnout. Then, once they've disabled it and have done the burnout they are now driving around without traction control on. Solution? A button that controls the burnout, does it better than the human ever could, and then automatically re-activates safety systems. Maybe they can even keep control of the car, detect if somethings gone wrong and fail out of the burnout.

      The thing is, an auto-burnout button defeats the purpose of actually doing a burnout. It's like driving a paddle-shifter at the track or offroading the Ford Raptor's pathfinding guideline feature with hill descent control.

      Basically, you are using a computer to remove all skill from the activity. Which, in turn, removes most of the fun from it... unless you like being a poser.

      That's why many people insist on high-performance vehicles with the rudimentary control input option. We have computers manage most of our lives nowdays and would like to have just a little bit of freedom at the track or offroad.

    31. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, according to Wikipedia, it was introduced April 17, 1964. So that's actually 49.647 years. So that can actually be rounded up to 50.

      That said, maybe when OP said "Last mustang worthy of showing off was built 50 years ago", maybe that was intentional (ie: they all sucked are are not worthy). That's not necessarily my opinion, but just speculating.

    32. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking from a strictly scientific point of view, I’m getting really close to prove that human evolution is in regression. This article (And Ford’s product which has triggered all the excitement) could well be used as a test case.

    33. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      You're talking about a time when there were no "rice burners" on the road to stick. Before Detroit caved itself in via unions.

    34. Re:1940s technology, here today! by gl4ss · · Score: 0

      wait, you're telling us to drive in the winter with the traction control off or to hardwire a quick off button to the wheel for it or what the fuck? just ease up on the pedal...

      having done my fair bit of snow driving.. I've never ever heard anyone say that before, be it of mercs, bmw's, volvos, opels or whatevers.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    35. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the point remains: it was something the guys did to show off. With this, what's to show off? "Look folks! I can push a button!"

      No, but now it has been proven beyond doubt that it is a simple task that it easily automated. The show-off factor was insignificant to anyone who wasn't part of your gang and nobody but you cared. Everyone else saw it for what it was; a manhood-substitute.
      I don't see how burning out by button is sillier than burning out manually. It fills exactly the same function for attention-man-whores when they try to make themselves relevant for two seconds.

    36. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even though the new mustangs aren't as nice as the 1st generation mustangs, they are pretty nice cars anyway. I've had the opportunity to drive one, and i'd buy one if it didn't cost 2 arms and legs in here over pretty much any car from 80's to today (alright, choosing between mustang, camaro and challenger is pretty hard).

    37. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "Last mustang worthy of showing off was built 50 years ago"

      There were no 1963 Mustangs.

      Ah yes, off by one year due to poetic license, that's clearly stuff that matters. You get the pedanticism badge.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    38. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You're talking about a time when there were no "rice burners" on the road to stick. Before Detroit caved itself in via unions.

      Yes, back then the italians and the brits made cars that handled while America built land yachts with live axle rear suspension that, as stated, are headed straight for the nearest ditch. Yes, literally all of the American sports cars had suspension no more advanced than a pickup truck — they had features like "stiffened sidewalls" for handling... wow! And I do mean wow.

      Of course, Ford has continued this tradition. The live axles are gone, except for the Mustang. That will finally go IRS (a couple of special models aside) for 2015, the same year it gets the Ford Fusion grille that really bones the look of the car. I think it looks fine, but it doesn't really look like a Mustang from the front. Also, many of our large cars are now FWD, which is shit. It's okay for little peanut cars, but it's not reasonable to expect the same wheels to do steering and acceleration when the car is large.

      American cars have been shit since forever. The only American production car which was provably better than the competition is probably the Model T, which seems a bit of a turd until you realize what a tank it is. And it was horribly complex to operate... The only thing we've done better than the others is the muscle car, and we've already discussed how they are ditch-seeking missiles.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    39. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't it be the 'P' as in P for poseur or P for pollute, hell it could even be a really tiny 'p' and we all know exactly what that represents, at least it would be accurate.

      It's a 'W' button, for the hand gesture everyone will be making when this idiot uses it.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    40. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are plenty of American cars that will stick to the road just fine, if not better than Japanese or European counterparts in the same price range. But it's a matter of special ordering the suspension package. The default option for cars tends to be too soft because people in marketing decided that U.S. buyers don't like a "harsh" ride. Some cars it is harder if not impossible to find the performance RPO package, so you have to go aftermarket. But a lot of the sportier cars do have the packages or aftermarket kits available.

      Of course if you're ignorant of what's available in terms automotive engineering out of the U.S., you wont think there's anything but crap coming American brands. I guess you'll have to get passed like you're standing still by something from Detroit on fairly tight curve while you're in your BMW or fancy-pants ricer to figure it out. (Then again drivers of such cars are probably too smug to admit something "inferior" bested them, they'd likely just write it off as a one-off car or specially skilled driver when it isn't the case.)

      I will admit that many U.S. cars from the 1970s to the early 1990s weren't so great, which is how this outlook got started. But the big three American companies have had their shit together for a good while now, as the current automotive marketplace is too competitive to get away with building crap.

    41. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      The late 80s early 90s mustangs were awesome cars (for the money, its an important point). Disclaimer :Grew up in Detroit, seen every kind of muscle car you can imagine.

      --
      Good-bye
    42. Re:1940s technology, here today! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Its called fly-by-wire because the entire idea was pulled from planes. Also, you can accurately call operating a motor vehicle 'piloting'

      --
      Good-bye
    43. Re:1940s technology, here today! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      You do realize that paddle shift is used in F1, right?

      --
      Good-bye
    44. Re:1940s technology, here today! by weilawei · · Score: 1

      There are some limits to human performance. For instance, you can't fly a modern fighter jet manually. Due to the lack of a tail, you'd pitch the thing over without the delta wing and stability control. F1 is the ground version of this. You can't beat the computer/hydraulics for shifting speed, and you really just want it to be in the right gear right now.

      That said, human limits are pretty high. Just watch any of the riders doing the Isle of Man. Landing on the edge of a single wheel and recovering, at speed, is not uncommon.

    45. Re:1940s technology, here today! by jacknifetoaswan · · Score: 1

      It would be a simple ABS trick, as they've got independent channels (one for each wheel). The ABS computer would lock up the front tires while leaving the rear tires with no braking force. Lame.

    46. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And F1, while extremely complex, technologically, is a high speed parade lap. Who wants to watch that? NASCAR is no better. Watch some V8 Supercars, where there's real racing.

    47. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...then there's the first corner it comes to....

    48. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by krovisser · · Score: 2

      The italians and brits still can't make engines that last, though. The brits still can't make electronics.

    49. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      Are you talking about BMWs?
      BMW's M button is just their version of the sport mode/button in most other cars.
      No M button or Sport mode in any car I know of will ever lock brakes up.

    50. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The italians and brits still can't make engines that last, though.

      Right, but American engines aren't half as reliable as people make them out to be, either. They are often cheap to rebuild due to platform longevity, but that's not the same thing.

      The brits still can't make electronics.

      Nor, sadly, can Americans. The Japanese have it down, though. Germany is so-so.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    51. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you mean the fox body, they're awesome drag strip cars, but they're not good for much else. They were very light, though, for a vehicle with room for a 5-and-change lighter engine. Thing is, I can get an engine like that into a Japanese car, like a 240SX. Or into a 3 series, they're pretty cheap now with puny engines and they have room for a V8.

      There were a couple limited-edition models of Mustang in the nineties with IRS, I hear those are kind of OK around a corner. But nothing compared to a rice box half the price or cheaper.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    52. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am willing to bet that any "caving" had absolutely nothing to do with unions, except perhaps that management was focused on fighting unions, instead of being focused on creating great cars.

    53. Re:1940s technology, here today! by lgw · · Score: 1

      Did you read the "get out of a snow drift" part? Once you're stuck and trying to move 3 feet, getting the sand and shovels out of the trunk if you're the prepared sort, the physics are different. Much like the way wide tires are better on the road, but narrow tires are better in deep stuff.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    54. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      Obviously you are not talking about the stretch and poke crowd.

      Given enough negative camber rice can slide into the ditch as well as anyone.

    55. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Er, your math is a little off -- there was no Mustang fifty years ago. The Mustang came out in 1964, and its generation lasted until 1973 (citation).

      I had a '69 with a 350CI Cleveland. That small body and huge engine made the button completely unnecessary. To do a u-turn from a stop you just cranked the wheel around, gave it a little gas and popped the clutch, it would spin around with a screech and a cloud of smoke. In fact, the tires would screech every time you power-shifted it, in all four gears.

      I really don't know how fast it would go, the speedometer only went to 140 and I buried it once. It was still accelerating when it felt like it was going to become airborne so I slowed back down to a less suicidal speed.

      Great engine. Too bad all the things that hung on to the engine, like the starter, fuel pump, etc. were crap. I spent more time under he hood than I did driving it. I think I went through 5 starters on that lemon.

    56. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      I'd put up my American sports car up against anything you drive.

    57. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You kids are ignorant of history. The unions were more powerful then than ever. There were no non-union auto workers in 1964, and they were well paid, with good benefits and pensions (unlike today with your stupid anti-union sentiment). The decline didn't happen with unions, it happened when management decided to build cheap, shitty but expensive gas guzzlers in the 1970s when Japan was building well-built, quality, inexpensive transportation.

      The unions didn't kill the industry, it was the other way around.

      You win today's prize for the most ignorant comment posted at slashdot. Congrats!

    58. Re:1940s technology, here today! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You've proven me wrong -- I used to think there were no stupid questions. This is not 1940s technology, dimwit! That's like if slashdot had an article about a self-driving corn harvester (they may actually have them, I don't know) and you say "What's this doing on slashdot? We've had tractors since 1920!"

      Technology is technology, engineering is engineering, whether automotive or IT.

      If you don't want to read the story then don't click the damned link, dumbass. Nobody held a gun to your head.

    59. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by greenzrx · · Score: 1

      Why would younger people put a V8 in a car that was already available with a V8? The mustang could be purchased with a 260 from the get go. (later to be upgraded to a 289, then 302. etc. etc.) the birth of the "Muscle car" is generally attributed to John DeLorean, and his 1964 Pontiac GTO. The mustang was the first "Pony Car" to be followed by Chevrolet's Camaro.

    60. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      A kid growing up in Detroit in the 90s wouldn't be caught dead in a foreign car. I knew guys who wouldn't let you park in their driveway if you drove a foreign car. Mustangs/Camaros/Grand Nationals are what we had to work with.

      --
      Good-bye
    61. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Depends.. aircraft engines and you're in very different territory.

    62. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by greenzrx · · Score: 1

      I think it was a 351 Cleveland.

    63. Re:1940s technology, here today! by Cederic · · Score: 1

      My BMW drives better in snow with the Automatic Stability Control off and the traction control on. Less sliding.

      Getting up an icy hill though, I did once have to turn traction control off. Probably knocked a couple of years off the life of the transmission that day.

    64. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "You kids are ignorant of history. The unions were more powerful then than ever."

      No, I'm not. I didn't say it was before unions. I wrote that it was "before Detroit caved itself in" via unions. Not the same thing.

      The decline didn't happen with unions, it happened when management decided to build cheap, shitty but expensive gas guzzlers in the 1970s when Japan was building well-built, quality, inexpensive transportation.

      It was a combination of both. I do admit that it wasn't just unions that caused the problems. They did form a part of it, though.

      "unlike today with your stupid anti-union sentiment"

      I'm not anti-union. But I call it as I see it. Unions have their place, but when they become too strong they cause problems.

    65. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so we had great cars before unions?

    66. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      A kid growing up in Detroit in the 90s wouldn't be caught dead in a foreign car.

      A kid growing up in Detroit in the 90s would have had the opportunity to get a domestic car cheaply, since the auto workers could buy a car at cost every year back in the day. Growing up in California in the 90s, the supply of four bangers was more plentiful.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    67. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Er, your math is a little off -- there was no Mustang fifty years ago. The Mustang came out in 1964, and its generation lasted until 1973.

      The people who write Wikipedia kind of have an odd interpretation of that. Most people consider the 64-66 as the first generation, then there was the 67-68's, the 69-70's, and the 71-73's. Granted, they were all the same basic platform, but the 71-73's were quite a bit larger and over a 1,000 lbs heavier than the 64-66 Mustangs and in many ways a completely different car. Read all about it at...err... Wiki:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Mustang_(first_generation).

      On another note I've always found it interesting that the current "retro" Mustang is actually modeled after the '69 more than anything else.

    68. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I wrote that it was "before Detroit caved itself in" via unions.

      Which was the fucking point. Unions had nothing to do with Detroit's demise no matter what Koch's teabaggers tell you.

      I'm not anti-union.

      Prove it. Point to a pro-union comment by you made before now.

    69. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Which was the fucking point. Unions had nothing to do with Detroit's demise no matter what Koch's teabaggers tell you."

      No, it wasn't. It might have been YOUR point, but as I already told you, my point was not the one you seemed to think it was.

      "Prove it. Point to a pro-union comment by you made before now."

      I don't have any obligation to "prove" anything to you, numbnuts. And what you read here does not necessarily represent my personal philosophy. I have been known to play "devil's advocate" at times.

      The point I made above is that unions aren't perfect and CAN cause problems when they become too strong. You appear to be denying that they have any imperfections, or that they can cause problems. Ever.

      Which is more likely to be truth? I'd give you a hint but as much as you deny it, you already know the answer.

    70. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Prove it. Point to a pro-union comment by you made before now."

      Why does it have to be "before now"? You don't get to define "proof" any way you want. What was wrong with "Unions have their place," which I wrote yesterday?

    71. Re: 1940s technology, here today! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Point to one PERIOD. If you could have you would have.

      Case closed. Goodbye.

  4. Old Fashioned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How about providing a standard transmission and nice heavy duty clutch so you can just kick up the RPMs and dump the clutch? Launch the old fashioned way and forget a push button. Might as well add a voice command to the Sync system to respond to "ENGAGE!" so you can sit back like Capt Picard.

    1. Re:Old Fashioned by JustOK · · Score: 0

      Make it so.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
  5. Labeling Atop Button by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Press this button to receive citation"

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Labeling Atop Button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sponsored by Goodyear. (Car more expensive without button.)

    2. Re:Labeling Atop Button by gman003 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Excellent! Somebody buy a dozen of these for Wikipedia, I've heard they need citations.

    3. Re:Labeling Atop Button by Trogre · · Score: 2

      Stick beneath the licence plate of a known boy-racer in your neighbourhood:

      [Citation needed]

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    4. Re:Labeling Atop Button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. You "press" that "burnout button" and after burnout has taken place, the rear cameras will take
      photos of the skid-marks while the camera mounted in the steering wheel takes a photo of the
      driver. Then the entire record of the incident including customer_id, gps and time are uploaded to

      https://ford-mustang-burnout-violations.lockheed-redeye/violator?mustang_burnout

      and from there the process is pretty much the same as with any red-light camera violation except
      that for the location we substitute the identifier for the nearest traffic light camera. Right now we do
      check if the violation occurred within 10 miles of that camera, but sometimes we'll have the case
      where the violation was still outside the jurisdiction of our customer (but I'm sure they'll try and
      prosecute all the same).

    5. Re:Labeling Atop Button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent! Somebody buy a dozen of these for Wikipedia, I've heard they need citations.

      Why would Wikipedia need a bunch of shitty GM cars from the 1980's?

    6. Re: Labeling Atop Button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a Chevy citation.

      I drove it from Indianapolis to Memphis Tennessee to meet a girl and the fuel pump was completely screwed so i just pumped the gas pedal for 900 miles. Good times.

      It got lots of abuse on country back roads as well. No matter how much I wanted the godawful vehicle to die, it fought hard to keep living...perhaps out of spite.

    7. Re:Labeling Atop Button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He races boys? How horrible!

    8. Re: Labeling Atop Button by PNutts · · Score: 2

      I had a Chevy citation.

      I drove it from Indianapolis to Memphis Tennessee to meet a girl and the fuel pump was completely screwed so i just pumped the gas pedal for 900 miles. Good times.

      It got lots of abuse on country back roads as well.

      The car?

    9. Re: Labeling Atop Button by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

      I don't think so, but I've never heard of a move "pump the gas pedal". :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  6. Um, why? by tricorn · · Score: 1

    I guess I'm underwhelmed. I never realized people were that into destroying tires.

    1. Re:Um, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because chicks

    2. Re:Um, why? by LunaticTippy · · Score: 5, Funny

      The button is for thrifty people who want to get their moneys worth out of their tires. When you're about to get a new set of tires you do burnouts in the tire store parking lot until metal is showing, rotate the tires and repeat. Then proudly pull in to the service bay with absolutely no tread left on any of your tires.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    3. Re:Um, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess you've never been to Australia.

      Bogans everywhere love their burnouts. Bit of a coincidence that this Mustang has been rumoured to be shipped to Aus too...

    4. Re:Um, why? by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

      When I was a teenager back in the 70s I knew a kid who put a solenoid controlled bleach dispenser over his rear tires to achieve that truly obnoxious white smoke burnout.

      Why, do you ask? What possible purpose could that serve? Well, when his girlfriend dumped him, he backed up into her parent's driveway and blanketed their house in smoke for ten minutes.

      This pretty much shows the level of mentality involved.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    5. Re:Um, why? by Circlotron · · Score: 1

      That's right. Australia (where I live) is the burnout capital of the world. -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJmrh7mLKc0 and http://youtu.be/d0-e4fGHuas

    6. Re:Um, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I guess I'm underwhelmed. I never realized people were that into destroying tires.

      Mustang Cobras are bought as cars you can bring to the drag strip and maintain a factory warranty.

      That said:
      At a drag strip, generally before your run, you are sitting in line waiting, and waiting, and waiting, allowing enough time for your tires to cool off to ambient temperature. This is terrible for grip off the line. So generally, you'll roll into the burnout box (a small lowered area in the tarmac containing a little water) and perform a burnout. This does 2 things:
      1) Warms up the tires to about 120-170 degrees, an ideal temperature for a powerful grip when the light goes green.
      2) Clears off any debris you may have picked up travelling in the pit lanes or at the end of the track.

      Both of these are for obtaining maximum traction. Traction generally equals safety (unless you're running a twin-turbo or heavily supercharged engine capable of lifting the front wheels off the ground, then you're asking for trouble on a whole new level and will likely never make use of the burnout button.) Considering how many people out there buy a 400+ horsepower Mustang without knowing the slightest thing about drag racing, expecting to show up at the track, put their pedal to the floor and go without so much a thought, this can prevent many trackday injuries caused by people who can't hold a proper burnout.

    7. Re:Um, why? by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      Consider it a Chinese tire torture test.

      If the tire fails after a minute then it's bad, if it lasts 3 minutes it's safe.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    8. Re:Um, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lol'd. Guess I'll start doing this now.

    9. Re:Um, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If lasts it 3 min it was safe, 3 minutes ago.

    10. Re:Um, why? by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

      some dummies I knew way back added window washer bottles/pumps full of diesel into their boots and plumbed through the mudguards with missile switch near the handbrake... not particularly smart considering there is nothing stopping it from siphoning when the flow started. the oil injector into the carburettor was a laugh though, instant smokescreen out of the exhaust

    11. Re:Um, why? by Dynedain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you're driving a factory-stock car at the strip to preserve your factory warranty, then the temperature of your tires is not going to be the deciding factor in your performance.

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    12. Re:Um, why? by MyHair · · Score: 1

      Did you not go to high school?

    13. Re:Um, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they fuck up a burnout... they have no business drag racing. Period. No discussion.

    14. Re:Um, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you aren't going to get the best time ever recorded by anything, but competitors are grouped by class. So you are competing against everyone who's also trying to stay within factory warranty.

    15. Re:Um, why? by netwiz · · Score: 1

      You should never, ever, EVER do this with factory tires, or any tires that have a tread pattern on them. The burnout box is for drag slicks _only_. The tread on your tires will do nothing other than pick up that water and deposit it into the launch area, creating a dangerous situation for not only you but the other racers. In most tracks, you will be instructed to drive around the burnout box if you're sporting anything other than an honest-to-god race car, and kicked out should you do otherwise.

      DO NOT DO THIS

    16. Re:Um, why? by greenzrx · · Score: 1

      Ever hear of bracket racing?

  7. New low by JustNiz · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Wow, this button is a new low both for Ford and for the Mustang.
    Burnouts are for morons in the first place, but If you can't do one without a button you shouldn't even be behind the wheel.

    1. Re:New low by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

      you do realise that when you 'line lock' your road vehicle you're effectively burning out your rear brakes right? a button to disable the rear and only allow the front brakes to lock would cause a lot less wear and tear. So you think that doing burnouts with a system designed to allow that behaviour without over stressing the parts you need to stop safely is a bad thing? some people have cars for fun, doing burnouts doesn't make you a moron, doing them in inappropriate places does.

    2. Re:New low by krovisser · · Score: 1

      When you *don't* use a line lock you wear out the rear brakes.

    3. Re:New low by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      >> doing burnouts doesn't make you a moron

      In my opinion it does. Also if you're doing donuts properly you're not even touching the brakes.

    4. Re:New low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      burnouts dummy not doughnuts or cookies

    5. Re:New low by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

      I'm talking about 'line lock' the verb, not the noun. I'm no professional but I think there is some misunderstanding here, to line lock is to lock your front wheels and spin up the rear without the vehicle moving in any direction.

    6. Re:New low by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

      Thanks to the anonymous white knight below: burnouts() = (dowies, donuts, cookies, circles, line locks, roll backs, drifts, hooks, etc) basically anything involving losing traction and releasing entrapped rubber into a plume of smoke. I agree that brakes are not necessary for donuts although a feather touch will make your circles tighter without so much forward momentum. my location and age meant that common teenagers cars were small 4 bangers (before turbos became mainstream) so losing traction usually involved an 'accidental' diesel spill, semi-dropping the clutch at about 3-4k revs then light heel on the brake while toeing the accelerator to prevent that pesky grip coming back. a couple of times I got my '64 Ford Anglia up to third gear but it wouldn't stay there long before bogging down and gripping. Anglia(mine) = 1300cc ford escort X-flow flathead motor - original was 1L no synchromesh on first.

  8. A skill by MrKaos · · Score: 5, Funny

    Burnouts are a skill acquired when a Bogan (White trash or whatever) is finally able to purchase a vehicle capable of breaking traction on dry ground. After this qualification they are ready for a doughnut (or Dohhy) usually in a carpark where there are plenty of victi^h^h^h^h^honlookers present to qualify you as a full on dickhead.

    Like much automation these days, such a feature would automate the process of becoming a dickhead, allowing many more dickheads because, as you are probably aware, what the world needs is more dickheads.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    1. Re:A skill by Virtucon · · Score: 2

      hey, dickheads keep the economy going by supplying customers and cash to, not in any particular order: bars - dickheads need to buy lots of beer, auto performance shops - hi-performance parts cost money and there's a huge aftermarket for everything to go fast (think SEMA), hospitals because dickheads get injured when their car hits a telephone pole and when they knock up every unwed teenage mother within a 20 mile radius, they buy DVDs of Fast and Furious movies to hear Vin Diesel say something, fast food restaurants - hey dickheads gotta eat and finally funeral homes because the dickhead decided to turbocharge his F body mustang and didn't realize it would go that fast when it was finished.

      We need dickheads in this world, just like we need Oprah and the Kardashians to counteract the opposite end of the retard spectrum.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    2. Re:A skill by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      because, as you are probably aware, what the world needs is more dickheads.

      Is that you, Shaft?

    3. Re:A skill by mdielmann · · Score: 2

      TV Advertizer: "Always wanted to be a dickhead, but were never good enough to do it on your own? Well, have we got a product for you! Just push this big red button and everyone around will know you're a dickhead! It's that simple! Order now and an inflatable floozy will be included at NO CHARGE! (Male floozies not available.)"

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    4. Re:A skill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, we've got enough dickheads in this world that the dickhead-to-non-dickhead ratio is far out in favor of said dickheads.

      I also object to the idea that only dickheads can enjoy the Fast and Furious movies. At this point they're basically action movies with car chases - just like many other actions movies that have existed for years. Fun for all, even if it's the dickheads who ruin things by taking them seriously.

    5. Re:A skill by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      because, as you are probably aware, what the world needs is more dickheads.

      Is that you, Shaft?

      Damn Right!

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    6. Re:A skill by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Is that you, Shaft?

      Damn Right!

      Shut yo' mouth!

    7. Re:A skill by MrKaos · · Score: 2

      You Brits and your language are atrocious. I'm glad we kicked you out of America way back when.

      bzzzzt! Horsetralian!

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    8. Re:A skill by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Is that you, Shaft?

      Damn Right!

      Shut yo' mouth!

      That's no way to talk to the man who protects his brother man.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    9. Re:A skill by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      now you've offended the dickhead gods and they will smite you for blasphemy against the Diesel one. If you watch his movies you must adhere to the dickhead code otherwise you will cast down into a fiery furnace of Zuffenhausen.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    10. Re:A skill by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      hey, dickheads keep the economy going by supplying customers and cash to

      Sure, but I don't think this particular invention is going to help -- the moment a burnout becomes easy for anyone to do, it will cease being useful as a way to impress anyone.

      In fact, this may poison the dickhead well, as now whenever someone does a burnout they will be under suspicion of being the dickhead equivalent of a script kiddie.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    11. Re:A skill by PNutts · · Score: 1

      Is that you, Shaft?

      Damn Right!

      Shut yo' mouth!

      That's no way to talk to the man who protects his brother man.

      Burma-Shave!

  9. Perfect Ticket by stackOVFL · · Score: 1

    I'd call it the "Perfect Ticket button" (tm). If you do that in eyesight of a cop that's what you'll get. Who's kidding who, no one with the minimum testosterone required to buy the car will be saving that button for the track....

  10. Just like SUVs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fucktards who don't have a real set of balls need to cruise up and down the avenue in "muscle" cars and oversized station wagons.
     
    This kind of horseshit keeps a lot of companies afloat making money from the insecure.

    1. Re:Just like SUVs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll take US cars over rice, especially those with fart cans that you can stick a beach ball into, and 6 foot tall aluminum spoilers.

    2. Re:Just like SUVs... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      [Bleeps] who don't have a real set of balls need to cruise up and down the avenue in "muscle" cars...This kind of [bleep] keeps a lot of companies afloat...

      Says the guy with a Darth Vader case mod

    3. Re:Just like SUVs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for that I don't. Care to come up with something relevant? Didn't think so.

    4. Re:Just like SUVs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because your options are muscle cars or rice.... how insightful.

    5. Re:Just like SUVs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wait until you feel launch control one of those with about 600 horsepower and four wheel drive.....

      Then turn while going 80mph dead 90* right without touching the brakes while flooring it mid turn and skipping all four tires as they fight for grip around the corner before a gear-shift and another whiplash back into the seat as the light posts fly by faster and faster until you're casually going 160mph....

      You just confuse the stupid Honda boys who have $16K cars with the Evo owners who have a $40,000 car wearing a $16,000 shell. But it's not a toy nor is it "cheap".

      My last Evo IX ran low 10's on the stock motor spinning all four tires with drag radials. My brand new Evo X stickered at $41,500 and has a nice long warranty. When that's up I'll spend about $1500 and add 150whp over stock that hits hard at 3000rpm.

      You need to reconsider what the junk "rice" is.

    6. Re:Just like SUVs... by dk20 · · Score: 1

      Evidently with US auto bailouts/bankruptcy you are in the minority.
      Agree with you on the "rice burners" with the ridiculous spoilers. Some of these things are so large I think they were designed to keep 747's from taking off.

    7. Re:Just like SUVs... by lgw · · Score: 1

      For all that, you'll still be in a ricer.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    8. Re:Just like SUVs... by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      Ricers will have the last laugh because their cars will last twice as long as the average mustang.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    9. Re:Just like SUVs... by PNutts · · Score: 2

      Then turn while going 80mph dead 90* right without touching the brakes while flooring it mid turn and skipping all four tires as they fight for grip around the corner before a gear-shift and another whiplash back into the seat as the light posts fly by faster and faster until you're casually going 160mph....

      I'm pretty sure you typed that with one hand.

    10. Re:Just like SUVs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the bigwigs from JD Power and Associates said roughly that if you bought a domestic car in the 1990s you were a rube, but today they really shaped up and there isnt a huge difference in quality.

    11. Re:Just like SUVs... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Modern mustangs are quite reliable, and get remarkable gas mileage for the power they make. The downside is the econobox ride and interior, but that's the problem with ricers in the first place. I'll stick with my V8 sport/luxury sedan - it won't win on a race track, but it's plenty fast on the street, and it's a vastly superior car for bumper-to-bumper 30MPH traffic in the rain.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    12. Re:Just like SUVs... by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1

      What about a 80 Mph 180. How well does an Evo handle that? You only have 3 standard lanes to work with (Eastbound, center turning, Westbound). Handle that without touching dirt, and you might be able to hold your own against a stock 90's model Chevrolet Caprice Classic (NOT the 9C1 Police Package).

  11. Meh... by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    You need a button for this? For me it's apply the right foot to the floor at any speed. You can do this while stopped as well to make the tires break loose and smoke. It's all about applying more force than the mechanical traction of the tires will allow on the road surface. It seems nowadays these kids need a button for everything. I'm sure if they could wire it into an iPhone or Android app it would be even better.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:Meh... by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

      back in my day we called it a 'brake bias valve' but it is very easy to forget to switch it back after your line lock, this is just the next evolution.

  12. Burnout Button by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Does it have DJ Atomika on the radio?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  13. Brought to you by Bridgestone by Wintermute__ · · Score: 1

    Wonder how much the tire companies paid Ford to put this in.

    Also, if you need a button to do a burnout...

  14. Turbo Boost by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

    I'd prefer a turbo boost button ala Knight Rider's KITT

    (but can only be used once per episode)

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
    1. Re:Turbo Boost by turp182 · · Score: 1

      The AC button was the Turbo button in my CRV, basically allowing the vehicle to hit 75 on an open highway...

      The proposition to my wife was "speed or comfort", so we lumbered slowly down the road in a nice cool vehicle environment.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    2. Re:Turbo Boost by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      KITT's turbo boost button was my first thought too. You beat me to it. So instead, this link.

    3. Re:Turbo Boost by PNutts · · Score: 1

      KITT's turbo boost button was my first thought too. You beat me to it. So instead, this link.

      Wow, he didn't even spill his hamburger.

  15. HomerMobile by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Does it have a Donut Chip also?

    1. Re:HomerMobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it have a Donut Chip also?

      Donut chip would attract even more cops

  16. What Kind Of Little Bitch Are You? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What kind of little bitch are you that needs a burnout button?

    Launch control I get. But, if you can't drop the hammer without a special button, you need to stay on the curb.

  17. ^^^^------ To The Top! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The above post says it all. There is no need for further comment on this article.

    LOL

  18. Who needs a Button for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Step one But a Real "Muscle Car" I recomend Mid to Late 60s Chevrolet, Plymouth or Dodge
    Step Two Stomp on the Gass peddle
    Step three "Perfict Burnout"
    Step four Recive Citation from the police and make make people who injoy classic automobeils look like Duchebags.
    Step 5 Pay high replacement price for tires as well as Citation fines.

    1. Re:Who needs a Button for this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Step one Buy a Real "Muscle Car" I recomend Mid to Late 60s Chevrolet, Plymouth or Dodge
      Step 1.3 Stomp on ze clutch
      Step 1.7 Select 1st gear
      Step Two Stomp on the Gass peddle
      Step 2.5 Releaze clutch
      Step three "Perfict Burnout"
      Step four Recive Citation from the police and make make people who injoy classic automobeils look like Duchebags.
      Step 5 Pay high replacement price for tires as well as Citation fines.

      FTFY

  19. I would be more impressed by aoeu · · Score: 1

    if it pulls the front wheels off the ground and continues to maintain lane.

    --
    All your database are belong to U.S.
  20. Get with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In my young days, we used to call this 'striping off'.

  21. I have one by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    As a stressed programmer, I press the "Burnout" button all the time. But it just pops a message saying, "Shouldda been a dentist, like your mom told you."

  22. "Snow and Ice" by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    Because there's a legal reason to want to keep your wheels spinning while you drive off, it'll be labeled "Snow and Ice". Try driving away on a slippery surface on a slight inclination with a car with traction control. You'll never get anywhere, unless you can disable it.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:"Snow and Ice" by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure maxxing out the rear wheel spin with the front brakes locked in a RWD on ice/snow is a REALLY BAD idea, unless the car is parked in the middle of a bunch of pillow factories with no walls.

      Since that is what the button does and all. We already have traction buttons...

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    2. Re:"Snow and Ice" by timeOday · · Score: 4, Informative

      Try driving away on a slippery surface on a slight inclination with a car with traction control. You'll never get anywhere, unless you can disable it.

      Where did you get that idea? Watch this video, starting 34 seconds in.

    3. Re:"Snow and Ice" by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Because there's a legal reason to want to keep your wheels spinning while you drive off, it'll be labeled "Snow and Ice".

      What are you talking about?
      This isn't rally Sweden and you don't need to be shooting up rooster tails of snow.
      The absolute last thing you want on snow or ice is wheel spin.

      Anytime you see a traction control system with a "snow" mode, it does any combination of:
      1. desensitizes the gas pedal
      2. starts you in 2nd gear
      3. limits engine power
      4. traction control reacts much more aggressively to prevent wheel spin
      5. up-shifts your transmission at lower rpm to keep wheel spin down

      Sand and mud modes will do the exact opposite, because you want high rpms and varying amounts of wheel spin to keep you moving on those surfaces.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:"Snow and Ice" by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Is stability control the same thing as traction control? They have separate Wikipedia pages, neither of which I can be bothered to read.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    5. Re:"Snow and Ice" by jacknifetoaswan · · Score: 1

      No. Stability control works to reduce yaw under hard cornering or emergency maneuvers, so that the tail of the car doesn't slide. Traction control, on the other hand, uses the ABS system and torque vectoring (if the car is so equipped) to reduce wheelspin on a wheel that is slipping, and increase the traction of the opposite wheel that has traction. It's more to reduce wheelspin while driving over loose road surfaces or wet/snow conditions.

    6. Re:"Snow and Ice" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because there's a legal reason to want to keep your wheels spinning while you drive off, it'll be labeled "Snow and Ice". Try driving away on a slippery surface on a slight inclination with a car with traction control. You'll never get anywhere, unless you can disable it.

      Having lived in the north and the south of the US, I can tell you've never spent a winter in the north. In the south, that's how they drive in winter weather. Wheels spinning like mad and the car moving sideways as much as it is forward. I'm terrified to drive in the snow around such morons.

    7. Re:"Snow and Ice" by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 1

      Because there's a legal reason to want to keep your wheels spinning while you drive off, it'll be labeled "Snow and Ice". Try driving away on a slippery surface on a slight inclination with a car with traction control. You'll never get anywhere, unless you can disable it.

      I agree with you on disabling traction control, but you are mistaken if you think that spinning helps you on slippery snow. I have lots of experience driving both front and rear wheel drive cars on snow. If it's slippery, and you start spinning uphill and don't recover before losing too much speed you're pretty much bound to back down and try again. So you avoid spinning as far as possible. In fact, a sure sign you're a (technically) bad driver is if you push down on the pedal when you start spinning, you'll lose speed and eventually stop. Mind you, there are plenty of drivers who don't get this and just frantically increase the revs when they start slipping, and it's very annoying being behind them when that happens so you have to back down as well.

      The same goes if you get stuck. If you spin you'll just dig yourself down deeper, without getting anywhere. You have to keep from spinning, creep carefully along, and employ a rocking motion by using the clutch in a periodic manner to boost yourself out if you can't advance*.

      You achieve all this by carefully coordinating revs and clutch**, while using "the seats of your pants" (feel) to gauge traction. When I learnt to drive (in a place with lots of gradients, and lots of snow) there was no traction control, and the first one I tried years afterwards really sucked. My favourite example is the 2 km, 12 degrees uphill section of road going to the family cabin, it's really a challenge during winter without dragging out the snow chains [which of course is a cop-out thing to do :)]. It's only very modern traction controls that can even get close to climbing the hills that I can do manually.

      * I've also driven quite a bit in mud when living in South America. Mud is different, in some kinds of mud you can get a boost from a controlled wheelspin at the right moment. Very wet organic mud still behaves pretty much like deep snow, though. That was not what you were talking about, however.

      ** Good luck doing any of this in an automatic. I've driven a newish Mercedes which supposedly had a very advanced automatic transmission / traction control on really slippery snow-covered ice, and it still sucked bowling balls through garden hoses (maybe a bit less than other automatics, but I avoid them as far as possible). I could probably outperform its traction in a stick shift with my eyes quite literally closed.

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    8. Re:"Snow and Ice" by modecx · · Score: 1

      To the GP's credit, they didn't show the car taking off on the ice, which is the particular situation the GP claimed traction control suffers at. Instead, he had a pretty good running start. Also, the host has to be about the most inept driver ever. Hurr...Dip the clutch, proper driving technique... Durr. Let's over-rev the engine to 2-2.5k, dump the clutch and say a conventional car can't go up the ramp. Hurr de durr...

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  23. Better than burnout. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

    Burnouts may be showy. But you get better acceleration from a standing start if you DON'T break traction.

    What I'd find more useful is a "button" for automatic maximum-traction acceleration (to a presetable speed or until you let off the gas). Think "anti-lock brakes" but in acceleration.

    (Though what I'd find FAR more useful is integrating "tow-haul" mode with the speed control.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Better than burnout. by maz2331 · · Score: 3, Informative

      BMW has that. It's called launch control.

    2. Re:Better than burnout. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      BMW has that. It's called launch control.

      Renault developed it in the 80's for F1 but these days even Subaru, Mitsubishi and Nissan have launch control on their rally and track cars.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:Better than burnout. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're correct, but warmer tires grip better and don't break traction as easily giving a better launch. A common way to warm up the tires is to do a burnout prior to your official launch.

    4. Re:Better than burnout. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that ESP?
      At least the one in my car seems to stop the wheels from spinning when I put the pedal to the metal at a stop.

      Not that I'm the kind of guy who drives that way, but it's quite noticeable during winter, when the roads are frozen.

    5. Re:Better than burnout. by gsslay · · Score: 1

      How to get modded informative; repeat what the OP says.

      Well done.

    6. Re:Better than burnout. by gsslay · · Score: 1

      If only the OP had mentioned this useful and relevant function, you could have read it there.

  24. Ford Mustang? by betterprimate · · Score: 1

    Oh, I thought it was the new Ford Taurus.

  25. What's the point? by jfengel · · Score: 1

    Reading the comments I eventually got enough context to track down the Wikipedia entry, which says: "drag racing tires perform better at higher temperatures, and a burnout is the quickest way to raise tire temperature immediately prior to a race. They also clean the tire of any debris and lay down a layer of rubber by the starting line for better traction."

    So... is this just for drag racing? Or is there some other point to this?

    1. Re:What's the point? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Or is there some other point to this?

      Compensating.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  26. And now the mustang looses cred by upuv · · Score: 1

    There is nothing cool about a factory button that shows off for you.

    What "skill" and motor head credibility does a big black button give you?

    The button should just cause a speaker to blare out "WANKER!" it would have the same effect.

    1. Re:And now the mustang looses cred by Grog6 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. :)

      --
      Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
    2. Re:And now the mustang looses cred by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "loses", you illiterate fuckbag. Given that you're using the word "wanker" I'll assume you're the worst kind of illiterate fuckbag - the British illiterate fuckbag. Ironically, English was birthed in that shithole of a country you came from and you people still can't speak it properly.

      Further, you can't lose something you haven't had for 50 years. Now get back in that hunk of shit fiat you drive and park it on a railroad track.

    3. Re:And now the mustang looses cred by mjwx · · Score: 1

      There is nothing cool about a factory button that shows off for you.

      What "skill" and motor head credibility does a big black button give you?

      The button should just cause a speaker to blare out "WANKER!" it would have the same effect.

      Lets face it,

      People these days cant drive a manual, need electronic sensors to tell them if there's a car next to them or if they dont have their seatbelt on and assistance to brake or even stay in their lane.

      Pressing a button is a big ask given the skill level of the average motorist these days.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:And now the mustang looses cred by upuv · · Score: 1

      So got some pent up issues mate?

      One letter in a post and you go off like a Roman candle. You must be Mr. Fun bags at home. The girls must be dying to crawl all over your overly critical ass.

      Cheers mate enjoy that piss you call a beer.

      And why are you trying to defend a Wanker button? Ah of course you don't have a girlfriend. :)

      ( If you are going to toss out the smack be ready to take it. )

  27. Anyone looking to hire? by drakesword · · Score: 1

    I will create a big green drift button

  28. Is Ford insane? by technical_maven · · Score: 1

    An incredibly stupid idea that is not only illegal in most states but also an invitation for liability lawsuits and potential accidents... Hoepfully saner heads will prevail and this "feature" will never see the light of day!

    1. Re:Is Ford insane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the Jalopnik article starts with the question, "Does The 2015 Mustang Have Electronics That Help Do Burnouts?" and then links to another auto blog which is nothing but "our secret source said this" and other speculative crap, With Ford being silent on the issue, I wouldn't hold any hope of this being more than vaporware.

  29. They already come this way. by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    I've made some decent bets about whether or not someone can do a donut as well as my 96 Cougar...

    Cars with always-on traction control can't do a donut or burnout, no matter how much horsepower they have.

    It really pisses them off when you can do a kille,r around-the-front-wheels donut; and they can't even break it loose. :)

    One of my coworkers has a newish Mustang with a blower, and it won't but barely squeak the tires. It won't do anything showy, unless you want to go 100mph in a parking lot. :facepalm:

    I'm sure that can be fixed with a tune, but it sure is funny to see someone pay that much and be that ripped off, experience-wise. :)

    Dude with the Audi was able to do a 4 wheel drive donut; not something I'd seen, but wtf, it's all good. :)
    .

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
    1. Re:They already come this way. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't most modern cars come fitted with a button to disable ESP?
      I've always wondered why they even allow you to disable it, since it's such a nice safety feature. Turns out it's to appease asshole drivers like you and your friends.

      Anyway, your friends could just disable ESP, participate in your little dick measuring competition and then go about their lives with ESP enabled, benefiting from the massive safety benefit it brings. You on the other hand are one surprise in bad conditions from ending up in a ditch with your dickmobile. Hopefully it gets destroyed enough that other assholes after you can't use it and are forced to get a safer car.

      Then again, anyone who has the ESP button and doesn't know his car well enough to use it, isn't fit to disable it, so I guess all's good.

  30. Stupid but awesome by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    Completely dumb feature... but who wouldn't actually want it? You might not ever press it. But its there...calling to you... and one drunken night... magic will happen... and automotive landscaping.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  31. Anything to dumb it down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doing a good burnout requires good driving skill.

    Now, all burnouts will be the same, and any idiot will be able to do them.

    Thanks for ruining an art, Ford.

    By the way, your Fusion is a piece of shit, and I'm really fucking happy we were able to get rid of it before the fucking piece of shit 6F35 transmission fell out of it.

  32. Stuipd.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can't do a burn out with a Ford Mustang, you should probably go buy yourself a Prius or a Miata instead.

    1. Re:Stuipd.. by wasted · · Score: 1

      If you can't do a burn out with a Ford Mustang, you should probably go buy yourself a Prius or a Miata instead.

      I'm thinking that it is pretty difficult to do a burn out in a Prius, but it is pretty easy in a Miata. It varies, depending upon the year, but for older ones, they should be near 140hp in an about 2300lb car with rear wheel drive and a 4.++:1 drive ratio. At these numbers burn-outs are easy to achieve with little problem, even when unwanted. As they say on automotive boards, "ask me how I know" or "don't ask me how I know," depending upon outcome.

      Thus, your advice to get a Miata to do burn-outs if one can't do them in a Mustang is probably good advice. I don't think it holds up well for the Prius, though.

    2. Re:Stuipd.. by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      With all of the electronic system between the driver and the actual operation of the car, you pushing down the pedal will be mitigated by a series of computer algorithms including traction control, energy regeneration and dynamic stability control. Meaning you'll accelerate as fast as the car will allow you to accelerate.

      As for a Miata, yeah you can set one up so it'll be more fun...

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  33. Burnout? Needs a second button... by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    So I can do a "showtime" down the main street during rush hour. I'd like to hit that 25X multiplier and chalk up 30 or 40 million points.

  34. FORD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    still Fucked On Race Day...

    By a Honda and forget about it!

  35. Exactly.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason for doing a burnout is to heat up the tires to make them stickier immediately before a drag race, to reduce the chance of wheelspin when the light goes green.

    If the car needs a special electronic feature in order to achieve a burnout, then it doesn't need to perform one in the first place, as the tires won't break loose anyway.

  36. Lawyers delight by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Ford is not simple mined enough to do that. Their lawyers would strangle them. Unsafe acceleration violated traffic laws and God forbid a crash takes place Ford would be wide open to liability.

  37. Option on Google's driverless car? by mathew42 · · Score: 1

    The question I want to know is will this be an option on my first driverless car? It would be helpful if a button for circle work was also provided.

    1. Re:Option on Google's driverless car? by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      Maybe but other drivers will have a cancel your burnout button or you'll have to take a vote among cars in your immediate vicinity to allow you to use it. Also every time you hit it Google will track the event and send you an e-mail targeting you with tire commercials.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  38. Hmmm .... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    If you can afford a Mustang GT, and need a button to do a burnout, you're probably a complete wanker who can't actually drive it.

    Just sayin'. This is technology to compensate for lack of skill in middle-aged men.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  39. Re:you remind me of team america... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pussies don't like dicks because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes. Assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck a asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is they fuck too much or fuck when it isn't appropriate. And it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves. Because pussies are a inch and half away from assholes. I don't know much about this crazy crazy world, but I do know this. If you don't let us fuck this asshole we're going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit.

  40. Why not? by PPH · · Score: 1

    Tesla already has one.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  41. legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't things like burnouts illegal? I find it hard to believe it won't be a matter of "Press button, receive ticket"

  42. How will this work with emissions? by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

    EPA emissions on cars regarding greenhouse gas emissions have to cover all amounts emitted including gasses released from paint, used in the making of plastics and tires. By adding this button they facilitate a way to release smoke and other gasses from the tires into the air.

  43. Real Men Use Manual Transmissions by Khyber · · Score: 1

    Ford's shitty Mustang has so little power it needs electronic help with doing a burnout? That's pretty sad considering real men only need a good manual transmission to do real burnouts, and I was doing burnouts in an 87 Tercel hatchback equipped with a shitty 4 cylinder engine, and killing the tires or rims every time. Once I killed the pressure pate, that was fun to replace.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  44. Line lock by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

    It probably works exactly like a line lock - locks up the front brakes without applying any pressure to the rears. It can be found in pretty much every car built for drag racing in the last 60 years (aftermarket). The only thing that would be innovative is the fact it's done from the factory in a car intended for the street.

  45. My Dad's '65 GTO had an OverThruster on the Carb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course at a dead stop, stomp the gas peddle and va va vooom you go.

    At 45 to 60 mph, stomp the gas peddle and go "GIVE ME WARP SPEED SCOTTIE". It was an amazing feeling to be slammed down into the seat when this thing came to life and we (the whole family) rocket down the freeway at 120 mph in a few seconds.

  46. Innovation Bankrupt by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

    If true, and I suspect product liability would make it somewhat dubious, this shows just how bereft of ideas and 'innovation bankrupt' the car industry in the USA (and elsewhere) has become.

    Never mind trying to make cars that are lighter, take far less energy and reduce emissions, that's all too hard - "Look here, tyre smoke! Heh-heh-heh-heh". It's the epitome of a use-it-up and wear-it-out mentality.

    At least Tesla are pushing in the right direction, albeit still wedded to the idea that a car has to be a giant behemoth to succeed (and that's because Detroit has written the rule book for most of the last century). NO wownder some in the industry are shitting themselves. Look out dinosaurs, the asteroid approaches.

  47. Oh, I don't know about that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  48. Since when is a V8 needed for burnouts ? by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

    I did pretty amazing burnouts with a '79 Celica GT (and it was only a 96HP 4-banger), but it had a limited slip diff and none of that safety stuff (TCS,ABS,Airbags and such). People needed to know how to drive in those years...

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  49. USA sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time I think the USA cannot reach a lower point the even dive right THROUGH the floor.
    You cannot drive, now you cannot even do a proper burnout by yourself. That's goddam awful.

  50. Re:you remind me of team america... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about us cunts?

  51. Will probably void your warranty... by bjdevil66 · · Score: 1

    According to a Nissan salesman I spoke to, they had a launch button a few years back in its top end car, and as soon as you pushed the button certain warranties were voided. It seemed like a really stupid idea to have a button that could potentially cost you thousands in future repairs, but I'm pretty sure that Nissan didn't mind not covering the car.

  52. Is the burnout managed by the "sync" system? by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    It would be interesting to see what MS does with it. Maybe you could use voice control to start it (which wouldn't work until you start swearing at it- a safety feature!), or push 4 or 5 on-screen buttons and then wait until it decides to do it.

  53. Makes me think of WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dumbing down everything seems to be the trend these days. Maybe part of the fun of "burnout" is knowing how to do it and do it well.... But today it needs to be "everyone plays", even if you don't know how.

  54. Douche Button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just what a mustang needed .. a douche button.

  55. Oh just shut the fuck up by YoureGoingToHell · · Score: 0

    Burnouts are illegal? Really? Then can you explain to me why a friend got an "improper start" ticket thrown out--issued for doing a burnout--when he DID NOT do it from a standing start? This was in Attalla, AL. Bet you didn't know that did you asshole.