To expand on the topic a bit, can anybody relate a circumstance where they believe that the Electronic Stability System was an aid in assisting keeping their SlingShot under control?
Bill
I believe the ESS light is supposed to come on when it has provided some assist. I've never seen mine come on despite the Slingshot tail hanging out to the point I wasn't sure it would recover. No idea what angle it will allow before it kicks in but it must be pretty wide.
Well speaking as a non-vendor and a non-member (so far, waiting to see what direction SOG goes) my concern for the vendors is that directors' decisions may not accurately reflect the opinion of the membership. There could be bias among the directors (eg. if some are vendors themselves) or they may just not be reading the mood of the membership correctly.
If this is a group by and for the members (will the members be electing directors in future?) then I agree with wokka that you should be fully transparent with your own members and perhaps even allow polling or voting on some decisions if there is controversy. But if the directors of the group are going to remain self-appointed and/or appointed only by the other directors, then that's a different story... it's really the director's group and they can do whatever they please, and then I can understand not leaning toward transparency. In that case the members are really just 'customers' of the directors' outfit.
Hey Mike in Victoria BC - before the Slingshot Owners Group (SOG) started promoting vendors it developed a Vendor Code of Conduct that vendors and SOG must meet and agree to,
In fairness to the vendor who may not be aware of a problem, does a vendor get a chance to rectify any issues after you notify them of a possible problem? If they rectify it, can they remain a SOG vendor? Or perhaps you could use a system of 3 warnings before being condemned?
(
he said 'rectify'... heh heh)
it was a difficult decision for all of us but it was in keeping with the SOG vendor policy.
What is the SOG vendor policy?
This is rumps only chance
Best typo I've seen in awhile! 
Display Units (Standard/Metric)
The display can be changed to display either standard or metric units of measurement.
NOTE: To exit the set-up mode at any time, wait 10 seconds. The display automatically exits and
returns to the odometer display.
1. Turn the key to the OFF position.
2. Press and hold the mode button while turning the key to the ON or ACC position.
3. When the display flashes the distance setting, tap the mode button to advance to the
desired setting.
4. Press and hold the mode button to save the setting and advance to the next display
option.
5. Repeat the procedure to change remaining display settings.
LOL @Bill Martin, I was going to rely on YOU to answer Wolf's question, but here you are posing another tricky legal question yourself.
Can you answer your own question from the legal standpoint?
Receiving stolen property is a crime and if the money was use for their benefit then yes the kids are guilty
Sent from my iPhone using Polaris Slingshot Forum mobile app
You're not guilty if you weren't aware it was stolen.
Whether the parents commit fraud or murder, kids are not considered to be guilty of the parent's crime (or even held responsible to repay their debts). I think that principle should apply to Dreamers. IMHO
In Canada,
10. Having an Inadmissible Family Member
If you are traveling with a family member who is inadmissible for any of the above reasons, you too are inadmissible.
A Canadian example? Nice, but I think this is not such a good analog to the point we are discussing (ie. children already resident in a country).
And I'm not trying to represent Canada on this. My beliefs and ethics are my own and do not mirror anyone else in particular (including Canadian law makers).
lets have some fun with this - just because I can
forget the prison time lets talk about the ill gotten gain
Parents robbed banks 15 years ago, invested stolen money and died leaving great wealth to their children - - should the children get to keep that wealth?
Since we're not answering the question and just posing more questions...
Parents robbed banks 15 years ago and used it to give their kids a better upbringing than the poverty the parents came from. Now the kids are grown and are fully integrated into our society as law-abiding young adults. Should the children be treated as criminals?
So using that logic, here's my story. I robbed banks 15 years ago and have kept the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Being rich is all I know. So I should be allowed to keep all the money and forgo serving prison time? What a country
I have to point out the flaw in your logic.
By your logic, the story actually should be: the parents robbed banks 15 years ago and their kids got some benefit from the money, so now their kids should be serving prison time? What a country. 
Watched the videos and on the 3rd one it sounds like the tranny dropped down a gear and RPMs are up. My very unprofessional guess is tranny downshifted and momentarily locked rear wheel causing the skid. my.02
I think all of them were a result of the transmission suddenly downshifting a couple of gears. Sounds and acts like it. I had a similar experience when I accidentally skipped a gear on my downshift and it locked up the rear wheel until the engine RPM could catch up.
CR just works with the people that give the most stuff to check and compare Who gives the most gets the ratings. IMO or $.02
JUST SAYIN
Product Testing and Research - Consumer Reports
Quote from Consumer Reports...staff shoppers or one of our anonymous “secret shoppers” buy the products we use as test samples — in fact, some products, like house paint and food, can vary by climate or region, and because we need to make sure our tests reflect a national consumer experience, we purchase products from across the country. Our shoppers pay full retail and purchase all the products we test to generate our ratings from the same places consumers do; we accept no sample products for testing. And as a nonprofit organization that accepts no advertising, to pay for all this shopping we rely mostly on our millions of members and the hundreds of thousands of donors who support our work.
Just Sayin.
I strongly believe it is the traction control that caused my (AII) SS to go out of control
I posted a similar theory a few months ago about the ESP (not just traction control), so I tend to agree with you.
Quote from Mike in Victoria BCDisplay MoreI have a theory I haven't tested... that if you're in hydroplaning conditions it would be best to turn OFF the ESP (Electronic Stability Program) by long-pressing the traction control button for 5 seconds.
It seems the Slingshot is prone to spinning when hydroplaning (rather than just continuing in the direction of travel). I wonder if the ESP is getting confused if just one front wheel loses traction in the water and that tire rotation slows compared to the other front wheel. Perhaps ESP is getting fooled into thinking you're spinning and then it's applying the brake to the faster wheel to try to get the wheels back to the same speed (as it would to control a real spin)? Thus actually causing the spin that it is trying to fix?
Just a theory.
Even the manual suggests that it isn't very helpful to have ESP on in hydroplaning conditions, so I think I'll try running with it OFF in the next heavy rainstorm.
"The electronic stability control system does not compensate for or reduce the risks associated with:
• excessive speed
• reduced traction on rough, uneven or loose surfaces
• poor judgment
• improper operation
• hydroplaning
WARNING! Stability control, traction control and anti-lock braking systems rely on grip between the tires and the road to function properly. In a hydroplane situation, tires lose contact with the road and the effectiveness of these features may be diminished."
From Consumer Reports magazine (Nov 2018), I'm attaching their article rating all-season, all-weather, and winter tires.
And from Consumer Reports online, I'm attaching their ratings for summer performance tires (data is based on older test methods).
Quote from Consumer ReportsSummer: Suited for temperatures above 45˚ F.
All-Season: Suited to year-round driving in varying climates with moderate winter driving conditions.
All-Weather: Suited to year-round driving in varying climates with emphasis on winter grip.
Winter/Snow: Designed to provide optimum grip in severe winter conditions with temperatures below 40˚ F.
Seems the DOJ and EPA are cracking down on custom tunes that defeat or assist removal of emissions equipment. They've gone after one manufacturer of tuning equipment and say it's a warning to others.
Aftermarket Defeat Device Maker Defeated by EPA | auto connected car news
Display MoreThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a settlement with Derive Systems (Derive) to address the sale of approximately 363,000 aftermarket products designed to defeat the emissions control systems of cars and trucks in violation of the Clean Air Act.
Over a span of multiple years, Derive sold products, including custom engine tuning software and parts, online and at distributers across the nation under the brand names of “Bully Dog” and “SCT” for use in many types of gasoline and diesel-fueled cars and trucks. Under the terms of the settlement, Derive will spend approximately $6.25 million to ensure future compliance, and pay a civil penalty of $300,000.
“Manufacturers and sellers of automotive emissions control defeat devices should stand up and take notice of this settlement,” said EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Assistant Administrator Susan Bodine. “EPA will protect air quality by vigorously enforcing the Clean Air Act’s prohibition on these devices.”
“For decades, Americans have worked hard to significantly reduce harmful emissions from cars and trucks. Tremendous progress has been made and the air is much cleaner today across the nation. Unfortunately, not everyone is playing by the rules. Today’s settlement will bring Derive Systems and its aftermarket products into compliance with the Clean Air Act, and demonstrates to other manufacturers that products designed to unlawfully thwart vehicle emissions control systems will not be tolerated,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey H. Wood for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “The Department of Justice will continue to work with our partners at EPA to hold companies who violate environmental laws accountable, and to protect clean air for all Americans.”
Derive manufactured and sold custom tuning software designed to access and overwrite the original vehicle manufacturer’s software. Vehicle manufacturers design vehicle software to reduce air pollution, monitor the vehicle’s on-board diagnostics of emissions controls, and otherwise comply with the Clean Air Act. Derive’s software enabled the user to remove emission control components that reduce tailpipe emissions, including catalysts, diesel particulate filters, exhaust gas recirculation systems, elements of on-board diagnostic systems, and other elements of design certified by vehicle manufacturers to comply with the Clean Air Act.
In addition, Derive sold parts or components for motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines that bypass, defeat, or render inoperative elements of design that were installed by the vehicle or engine manufacturer to comply with Clean Air Act emission standards. These handheld products—commonly known as “tuners”—enabled the user to easily turn off emission controls installed and certified by vehicle manufacturers to comply with the Clean Air Act.
Under the terms of the settlement, Derive must stop introducing new noncompliant tuners into commerce and retrofit existing tuners so that they comply with the Clean Air Act. All new and existing tuners offered for sale must have a reasonable basis demonstrating that the use of the products will not adversely affect vehicle emissions. Besides tuners, Derive must limit access to key emission control parameters in their custom tuning software and create a customer verification program for users of the custom tuning software, which includes training about vehicle functions, emission controls, and the Clean Air Act requirements. Derive must stop any marketing that would provide information on how consumers can defeat emission controls in their vehicles, and work with their national distributors to prevent the packaged sale of their products with companion defeat devices. Derive must train their employees to comply with the Clean Air Act. Derive must also pay a penalty of $300,000 based on the company’s demonstrated limited ability to pay a larger amount.
The proposed settlement is subject to a 30-day public comment period and final court approval, and will be lodged in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. To view the consent decree or to submit a comment, visit the department’s website at: Proposed Consent Decrees | ENRD | Department of Justice
I doubt most people could open the hood if they weren't already familiar with opening a Slingshot. The latch handle has to be pushed DOWN, which is completely counter-intuitive for anyone that hasn't done it before. Most cars you lift the latch handle, I've never seen another car with a latch like the Slingshot.
IMHO that makes it unlikely that someone opened your hood when you weren't looking.
Too bad the Can-Am's don't lean into a corner. The idea of sitting perched on top of a trike through a corner just doesn't seem sporty to me at all.
I don't think anyone mentioned helmet choice but that probably affects the wind noise quite a bit. And your windscreen height.
I have a standard height windscreen and I don't use a helmet most of the time. I find my hearing is dulled from the buffeting after a long ride at highway speeds so I've starting using foam earplugs if I plan to drive more than an hour or so at high speed. Cheap, and does the job.
That's cool.
While I was searching for a better picture I ran across an old video that I'd never seen. (jump to 0:40) 
