Electronic stability enhancement and maneuverability
Apr 10, 2007 34 Replies
J
John S.
My statement was in response to the earlier poster who was talking about the results of some tests only he has access to which allegedly show ABS causes accidents. I was saying that if one is going to compare the results of ABS and non-ABS cars then driver behaviour, driving conditions, etc., have to be held constant or controlled for the test results to be comparable.
I think we agree it has benefits. The biggest problem I've seen with ABS is the short but steep learning curve when the system is first activated. The chattering pedal may cause some drivers to lift their foot, which is of course the wrong thing to do. Once that reaction is overccome then ABS can be an effective safety feature. Most of the time it does nothing but quietly monitor wheels for lockup. Occaisionally it reacts to wheel lockup by selectively pumping the brake for each wheel to keep the car straight and stopping quickly.
Didn't find your answer? Ask the community — no account required.
D
Don Stauffer in Minnesota
Depends on the implementation, and how many wheels are sensed and independently controlled. Say all wheels are sensed but all brakes are controlled together. Now, lets say one wheel is on ice or slippery spot. Controller will limit braking to that required to keep THAT wheel from locking, so retarding g-force is limited to capability of wheel on most slippery surface.
Only if all wheels are sensed, and all controlled individually, can ABS be better than non-abs as far as max retarding force. Otherwise, you are limiting max braking force.
J
John S.
In comparison to the non ABS braking system which has no independent wheel sensing and control. Furthermore the non ABS brakee system is severely limited by a slow acting controller that relies on the directional slide method of determining when to pump and on a good day might be able to pump the brakes on all wheels once a second.
M
Mike Romain
See
formatting link
Isuspect it will be another goverment>>>> inspired waste of the publics money. NHTSA and IIHS are infamous for>>>> making exaggerated safety claims for changes and then never going back>>>> and verifying that the claims were true. They got causht big time>>>> after trying to ram ABS down the public's throat. Of course requiring>>>> ESC effectively requires ABS as well - so in the end the burecrats get>>>> a two fer screw job.>>> It is literally impossible for the human being to pump the brake as>>> rapidly as an ABS and there are only a few off-road cars that offer>>> the wheel-selectable braking available on ABS. And there are virtually>>> no drivers with the skills to use such a braking system. ABS is one>>> of the biggest improvements in vehicle safety I'm aware of.>> Where are the statistics to back up your opinion? While it is true ABS>> has been associated with the reduction in some type of accidents, it>> has also been associated with an increase in other types of accidents.>
That's easy man.
ABS allows you to steer out of trouble by increasing the stopping distance by pulsing the brakes off so you can still steer. This is a big 'compromise'.
This is all fine and great until there is no place to steer to, then you just hit whatever it is in the way.
It is deadly off road on dirt roads because it won't allow the wheels to lock so the poor suckers with ABS just keep going and going and bang! that tree wins every freaking time.
They then can pull the fuses or relays on the ABS and attempt the same trail at the same speeds and miss that tree 'every' time.
Been there, done that, watched that, on too many occasions.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view! Jan/06
formatting link
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
J
John S.
See
formatting link
Isuspect it will be another goverment> >>>> inspired waste of the publics money. NHTSA and IIHS are infamous for> >>>> making exaggerated safety claims for changes and then never going back> >>>> and verifying that the claims were true. They got causht big time> >>>> after trying to ram ABS down the public's throat. Of course requiring> >>>> ESC effectively requires ABS as well - so in the end the burecrats get> >>>> a two fer screw job.> >>> It is literally impossible for the human being to pump the brake as> >>> rapidly as an ABS and there are only a few off-road cars that offer> >>> the wheel-selectable braking available on ABS. And there are virtually> >>> no drivers with the skills to use such a braking system. ABS is one> >>> of the biggest improvements in vehicle safety I'm aware of.> >> Where are the statistics to back up your opinion? While it is true ABS> >> has been associated with the reduction in some type of accidents, it> >> has also been associated with an increase in other types of accidents.>
ABS increases the stopping distance over non-ABS brakes - hah - old wives tale unless you are driving too fast on gravel!!!
If there is no place to steer to you are in trouble whether with ABS or non-ABS brakes.
Sounds to me like the driver in your one example is driving foolishly to begin with. Way to fast for conditions.
J
jcr
Nope, there are no benefits in real world use according to the IIHS:
formatting link
J
jcr
Huh?
J
jcr
stability systems may reduce
Systems I've seen sketched out relied on a gyroscope positioned between the two front seats to sense when the vehicle was getting our of sorts with itself.
E
Ed White
By forcing the installation of ESC, the Feds have also mandated ABS. They never could prove ABS was worthwhile, so they weren't able to mandate its installation, but by making ESC mandatory, they are finally forcing us all to waste money on ABS. And this time they didn't make the mistake of carefully studying the issue. They just made some half assed claimed and made it mandatory.
BTW, there are numerous tests that show ABS increasing stopping distances on snow.
Ed
R
ray
I live in Canada, where I've been stuck disabling DRLs on my cars for 17 years now.
ABS may increase stopping distances but it also means you can STEER around the other object. It can't change the laws of physics, but I definitely prefer it in Winnipeg in the winter.
Mandatory tire pressure monitoring systems are coming too. Lame. It's no wonder every new car weighs 200 pounds more than last year's model...
Ray
J
John S.
Yes, it is just one grand conspiracy after another isn't it. You don't suppose the head of DOT owns an automotive subcontracting company do you? If the Feds aren't conspiring with OPEC and oil companies to keep gasoline prices high they are colluding with car manufacturers to keep adding pointless safety and emission features to cars. We started with seat belts and crankcase emission controls and it's been downhill ever since. There's just no reason for any of that stuff to be added other than to cause you to pay more for your car, now is there?
S
Steve
Never noticed anything like that with SUVs, but there's absolutely no question that Volvo drivers, as a group, are the WORST drivers on the road.
S
Steve
But that "slow" (organic) controller can threshold brake far better than ABS.
R
Ray
John S. wrote: >
The DOT has blown it before. Look up the Seat Belt interlock system of the early 70's. Good idea in theory, bad idea in practice. If you had a bag of groceries in the front seat, the car wouldn't start unless you had the passenger belt buckled.
(I'm in favor of seatbelts, not stupid mandatory crap.)
All this safety stuff isn't cheap, and it weighs more than nothing. You don't get something for free with ABS, side door beams, safety glass, radial tires, etc. they're all good, but all have downsides.
Ray
D
Don Stauffer in Minnesota
But is the gyro measuring angle or angular rate? Gyros can do either.
Join the Discussion
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Didn't find your answer?
Ask the community — no account required
Report Content
You are reporting this content to the moderators. They will look at it
ASAP.