A problem with curve braking is how applicable is it really? Under normal circumstances you should have 1 second of following distance per 10mph of speed. This gives most cars and drivers enough reaction time to see the problem and get stopped. However in a curve sight lines may not permit enough distance to get stopped. Without big brakes and fat tires a sudden problem 3 seconds away may simply be too much for any eco car to handle. Rather the emphasis might be on control.

ABS and ESC might allow the driver to avoid a rollover and pick his impact. Braking on a curve might be one of those situations not worth testing for. As generally the better you brake in a straight line the better you will brake in a corner normally. Although chassis and suspension stiffness plays a big roll in curves. Grocery getters tend to be pretty soft and subject to a lot of yaw and roll. I don;t think you could set up most sedans/wagons to have both a comfpotable ride and the required stiffness to minimize brake distanc eloss in a curve. Anyone who has rode in a true sports car knows the agility comes with a steep price in ride comfort.

On curve braking and following distance

I'll relate a non ET related story. My other car is a full bolt on 300zx turbo SS. During a z car club fun run the lead car hit a blue tote lid in the road and spun out coming out of a series of sharp S curves. I was in the second z and there were 5 others behind me. With the lead car stopping rather quickly due to assitance from a rock wall the rest of us had to react quickly. I was running Khumo Ecsta ASX 225/50 R16 92W fronts on 280x 18 slotted disc brakes OEM type pads and Khumo Ecsta ASX 245/45 R16 93W rear on 288/18 slotted brakes OEM type pads no ABS, manual transmission. I managed to get stopped just barely and still had to dive to the inside almost taking the wall myself to avoid rear ending the lead z. Every one else managed to get stopped as well noses staggered in different directions. If I had been in my 22 years younger ET (auto tranny)I would have crawled in to the back of the lead car. Bigger rubber mated to bigger brakes and a stiffer suspencion was more effective in that type of a situation than newer technology.

On the flip side the ET's ABS/ESC kept me from spinnign during a blizzard when other cars were out of contorl and kept me from crackign up in Houston durign a rain storm when I hit a low spot with no warning and slammed into several inches of water on the drivers side at 70 mph.

 

Manufacturers probably don't test braking distance while turning for the reasons mentioned.

They do test extensively for stability while braking in a turn, because a clear problem here will lead to lawsuits.

 

Its probably to late now but you could look at the computer and see what was activated during the crash.

 

fare thee well ET, you were a good car and will serve someone else well.

I am no longer an ET owner, with my 14yo son moved in with my wife, 2 step kids and I the ET was maxxed out. With my wife pregnant we needed an extra seat-belt so ET had to go. In its place we now have a 2010 Mazda5.

For people or families that don't have to have 6 seat belts the ET is probably the better value. The 5 rides better, has bigger brakes and the sliding doors are great for tight spaces. However the ET has more ergonomic controls, better interior lighting, better sound system (sat > 6 cd changer), more standard features, more trunk space when all seats are in use, better small item storage, significantly lower price*, better warranty and better fuel economy.

* For the price of a fully optioned Elantra Touring SE you only get a Mazda5 sport with 6cd changer and auto transmission.