The INSURANCE industry endorses ABS brakes and often allows discounted premiums if you have a car so equipped.
Why?
Try this on: ABS has the effect of transferring damage to your car from the front bumper (you rear ended the car ahead of you ... making you "at fault") to the rear bumper (getting rear ended by the non ABS car behind you which makes THEM at fault). See that? Also, an absence of skid marks makes it a little more difficult for forensic investigations.
ABS is an insurance company scam. ABS belongs on aircraft, which is where it originated for the right reasons.
This comes down to a wash, doesn't it? However, up in the land of ice and snow, I KNOW of which I speak...the rest is just philosophical stubbornness on Ed's part.
As if you wore seat belts before it was legally mandated. I wore them YEARS before I legally had to and believe me, back then, b.s. flew about what if you drove in to a lake, whatever, or lost consciousness...yadda yadda yadda. Now, I see the same feeble excuses dissing ABS. Go back into your cave.
Well, I, too, hate insurance companies however without your apparent paranoia. I appreciate your comment about skidmark, though. Many years ago, I had to brake suddenly to avoid a driver turning left right into my path. I couldn't stop in time and nailed him but good. He TRIED to claim that I was speeding, there by contributing to the accident. By luck or design the skid mark analysis indicated that I was NOT speeding. Only the Deities know the truth in that one.
i can only say for sure this happened at lower speeds, becuase if (and it probably did) happen at a fast speed, i do not possess the mathematical or physical knowledge to calculate what would have been. however....
i can remember one specific incident when i was approaching a cross walk. there was people crossing, and i was approaching at say about 10 km/hour. right before the stop line, i pressed the brakes to stop and abs starts 'over-reacting' and pulsating the brakes, taking me past the stop line and almost half way through the crosswalk. the people thought i was trying to run them over! this i *know* i could have stopped if i didn't have the abs.
skid marks can tell when someone was going too fast when they are long, however, when they are short it does not prove that you were NOT speeding. it could just mean that you did not react as quickly and braked later.
What were the road conditions? Loose gravel? Wet asphalt? Snow? Ice? Under most conditions, if that happened as you described it, I 'd suspect something wrong with the system? Do you have the same size and TYPE of tires on all 4 wheels? Is the inflation similar in all 4 tires? Tread ware similar on all 4 tires?
No, YOU have an opinion. YOU believe it is of benefit to YOU. YOU have no idea of my level of driving skill. YOU can't site any studies that prove ABS is saving lives. YOU want to force me to buy something I think is of dubious value. How would YOU like it if I demanded that the govenment mandate that YOU could only drive Hummer H2s and that YOU would have to foot the bill. I don't care if YOU buy anti-lock brakes, just don't try to force me to buy an expensive "safety device" that is not making people safer.
From
formatting link
:
"What has surprised a lot of people is that antilocks are not reducing the frequency or cost of accidents. This is the case despite the obvious benefits of antilock brakes in test situations.
"When Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) researchers compared insurance losses for cars with standard brakes and losses for the same cars without antilock brakes, the results were clear. "We found no reduction in claim frequencies or average amount of insurance payments under either collision or property damage liability coverages," says HLDI Senior Vice President Kim L. Hazelbaker.
"Because of their design, antilock brakes should make a difference on roads where wheel lockup is most likely to occur, on roads that are wet and slippery. So, HLDI researchers studied claims in 29 northern states during the winter months where inclement weather was the norm. They found no difference in the frequency of claims for vehicles with or without antilock brakes.
"Why aren't antilocks making the expected and much projected difference? "We don't know for sure." says HLDI President Brian O'Neill, "but it's probable that the circumstances are quite rare in which antilocks can reduce crashes. We don't know how many crashes are preceded by skidding or loss of control that antilocks could have prevented, but the new HLDI findings suggest the number cannot be very high.""
I like this quote from a State Farm Representative -
Some states have been offering insurance discounts for cars with ABS, but many in the insurance business didn't seem to be surprised by the HLDI results. "We never felt there was any strong evidence ABS reduces the number of accidents," State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance spokesman David Hurst told the New York Times recently. "We offer discounts only because we're supposed to, not because we feel they're justified," he added.
"In spite of disagreements from other researchers, reports from (the industry independent) HLDI and NHTSA have resulted in a widespread and common belief ('authorized' even by Time) that accidents are not reduced with antilock brakes"
(see also "ABS brakes: How to use them" at the bottom of the page)
Why do you keep throwing out the comments about seat belts (Strawman?)? People who did not want to wear seat belts rationalized the choice. However the Insurance Industry or NHTSA never made any of the ridiculous claims you are repeating. Find me one reputable study that claimed seat belts did not save lives. There were none. Now go find me one reputable study that shows that passenger car ABS is on average saving lives in the real world. There aren't any of those either. I believe rear wheel ABS is a good thing for light trucks. It is a waste of money for passenger cars. However, I fully support your right to waste your money on cool gadgets. Quit trying to force me to waste mine. ABS adds anywhere from $00 to $1400 to the price of a passenger car. It introduces additional failure points and related maintenance costs. There are no studys that show all this money is saving lives. You like it - fine, pay for it. I like
300 hp V-8 engines. I beleive all the extra power lets me out run accidents. I think eveyone should be forced to drive 300 hp cars so that we can all be safer. Do you agree?
the point is that i was there, in the car, and i know it would have stopped if the abs hadn't started over-reacting. i was just about to come to a stop, but then this 'safety-feature' pretty much started driving the car. if i had normal brakes, it probably would have slid 1/2 meter (safe stop), but this abs took me approximately 3.5 meters farther. but the good news is i had control the whole time!
all i am say> > i can only say for sure this happened at lower speeds, becuase if
Methinks the State Farm rep are of similar mind. Now... having said that, during my final months driving semi truck, my company started getting some ABS equipped trailers. I saw the in-house training movies on the particulars of hooking up and testing an ABS equipped trailer. The part that was really impressive was the footage on a wet skid pad where attempts were made to induce a trailer jackknife at low speed (less than 35 mph). A trailer jackknife is where the trailer tandem axles lose traction and swing to the outside and catch up to the tractor drive axles. WOW. What a difference with ABS! But then .... the movie also showed how shutting off the tractor steer axle brakes could provide similar results in the hands of a skilled driver. But as you know, engineers are hell bent on heaping devices on vehicles that take the place of skill.
In news: snipped-for-privacy@mindspring.com, C. E. White being of bellicose mind posted:
Your contrived belief in more power allows you to "out run accidents" reveals a LOT about your driving attitude. Certainly you are an impatient driver. Do you like high powered motorcycles? ;^)
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.