BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
On 12 Dec 2003 08:22 AM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> It is you that don't understand! Maybe, you could understand a
> tire accelerating a vehicle, of course if you light them up and melt
> the rubber there will no traction, but if you accurate hard,
> transferring the weight on the tires, the tire will make a roar as
> they just barley slipping then the rubber isn't melting but at
> ultimate traction, same while stop, with same roar you hear on slalom
> type sports car racing. Understand now? Then there's Jeep's idea of
> ABS, which you waltzed around the correct answer, the last time I
> asked you, when you have to have known it will completely release both
> rear tires when only one locks.
What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
while driving, as the ABS system can.
Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
bias.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> It is you that don't understand! Maybe, you could understand a
> tire accelerating a vehicle, of course if you light them up and melt
> the rubber there will no traction, but if you accurate hard,
> transferring the weight on the tires, the tire will make a roar as
> they just barley slipping then the rubber isn't melting but at
> ultimate traction, same while stop, with same roar you hear on slalom
> type sports car racing. Understand now? Then there's Jeep's idea of
> ABS, which you waltzed around the correct answer, the last time I
> asked you, when you have to have known it will completely release both
> rear tires when only one locks.
What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
while driving, as the ABS system can.
Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
bias.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
On 12 Dec 2003 08:22 AM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> It is you that don't understand! Maybe, you could understand a
> tire accelerating a vehicle, of course if you light them up and melt
> the rubber there will no traction, but if you accurate hard,
> transferring the weight on the tires, the tire will make a roar as
> they just barley slipping then the rubber isn't melting but at
> ultimate traction, same while stop, with same roar you hear on slalom
> type sports car racing. Understand now? Then there's Jeep's idea of
> ABS, which you waltzed around the correct answer, the last time I
> asked you, when you have to have known it will completely release both
> rear tires when only one locks.
What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
while driving, as the ABS system can.
Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
bias.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> It is you that don't understand! Maybe, you could understand a
> tire accelerating a vehicle, of course if you light them up and melt
> the rubber there will no traction, but if you accurate hard,
> transferring the weight on the tires, the tire will make a roar as
> they just barley slipping then the rubber isn't melting but at
> ultimate traction, same while stop, with same roar you hear on slalom
> type sports car racing. Understand now? Then there's Jeep's idea of
> ABS, which you waltzed around the correct answer, the last time I
> asked you, when you have to have known it will completely release both
> rear tires when only one locks.
What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
while driving, as the ABS system can.
Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
bias.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
It is the statistics compile by our United States Department of
Transportation that blame the mechanism:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
> will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
> consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
> any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
> the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
> REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
> sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
> the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
> can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
> how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
> rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
> rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
> also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
> while driving, as the ABS system can.
>
> Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
> willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
> or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
> is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
> bias.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Transportation that blame the mechanism:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
> will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
> consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
> any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
> the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
> REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
> sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
> the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
> can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
> how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
> rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
> rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
> also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
> while driving, as the ABS system can.
>
> Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
> willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
> or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
> is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
> bias.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
It is the statistics compile by our United States Department of
Transportation that blame the mechanism:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
> will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
> consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
> any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
> the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
> REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
> sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
> the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
> can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
> how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
> rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
> rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
> also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
> while driving, as the ABS system can.
>
> Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
> willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
> or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
> is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
> bias.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Transportation that blame the mechanism:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
> will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
> consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
> any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
> the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
> REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
> sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
> the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
> can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
> how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
> rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
> rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
> also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
> while driving, as the ABS system can.
>
> Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
> willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
> or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
> is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
> bias.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
It is the statistics compile by our United States Department of
Transportation that blame the mechanism:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
> will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
> consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
> any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
> the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
> REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
> sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
> the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
> can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
> how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
> rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
> rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
> also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
> while driving, as the ABS system can.
>
> Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
> willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
> or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
> is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
> bias.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Transportation that blame the mechanism:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> What you don't understand, is that the whole point of ABS is that it
> will hold the tires at that point of ultimate traction with better
> consistency than any but a few highly skilled drivers. Jeep's ABS, like
> any other correctly set up 4 wheel ABS system, will NOT totally release
> the pressure to the rear wheels when one starts to lock, it will
> REGULATE (or modulate, pick whichever word you like) the fluid pressure
> sent to the rear wheels to keep them them from locking up. The ABS does
> the same thing that a good driver can do, except that as a driver you
> can only control the overall system pressure, and not pick and choose
> how much pressure goes to the left front vs. the right front or to the
> rear axle. So what if Jeep's particular style of ABS can't modulate the
> rear wheels independently? You as a driver can't do that either and you
> also can't change the bias front to rear or side to side on the fronts
> while driving, as the ABS system can.
>
> Bottom line, the system works for those of us who understand it and are
> willing to turn over the control to the machine. Those of you who can't
> or won't do that, shouldn't drive vehicles equipped with ABS, but that
> is no justification for incorrectly blaming the mechanism for your own
> bias.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
Roughly 12/12/03 09:22, L.W.(ßill) ------ III's monkeys randomly typed:
> It is you that don't understand!
That's one opinion, pretty much totally unbacked by factual content,
but nontheless amusing.
>
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> A rolling object has better traction than a sliding object, and can
>> therefore stop in a shorter distance. Why is this so difficult to
>> understand?
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
>> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
>> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
>> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
> It is you that don't understand!
That's one opinion, pretty much totally unbacked by factual content,
but nontheless amusing.
>
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> A rolling object has better traction than a sliding object, and can
>> therefore stop in a shorter distance. Why is this so difficult to
>> understand?
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
>> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
>> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
>> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
Roughly 12/12/03 09:22, L.W.(ßill) ------ III's monkeys randomly typed:
> It is you that don't understand!
That's one opinion, pretty much totally unbacked by factual content,
but nontheless amusing.
>
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> A rolling object has better traction than a sliding object, and can
>> therefore stop in a shorter distance. Why is this so difficult to
>> understand?
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
>> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
>> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
>> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
> It is you that don't understand!
That's one opinion, pretty much totally unbacked by factual content,
but nontheless amusing.
>
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> A rolling object has better traction than a sliding object, and can
>> therefore stop in a shorter distance. Why is this so difficult to
>> understand?
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
>> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
>> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
>> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
Roughly 12/12/03 09:22, L.W.(ßill) ------ III's monkeys randomly typed:
> It is you that don't understand!
That's one opinion, pretty much totally unbacked by factual content,
but nontheless amusing.
>
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> A rolling object has better traction than a sliding object, and can
>> therefore stop in a shorter distance. Why is this so difficult to
>> understand?
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
>> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
>> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
>> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
> It is you that don't understand!
That's one opinion, pretty much totally unbacked by factual content,
but nontheless amusing.
>
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> A rolling object has better traction than a sliding object, and can
>> therefore stop in a shorter distance. Why is this so difficult to
>> understand?
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
>> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
>> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
>> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
On 12 Dec 2003 11:38 AM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> It is the statistics compile by our United States Department of
> Transportation that blame the mechanism:
> http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
Correlation does not imply causality.
> I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
> your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
It is obvious that you are an idiot without a clue about the physics
involved, or statistical analysis for that matter. There isn't much
point to continuing this discussion.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> It is the statistics compile by our United States Department of
> Transportation that blame the mechanism:
> http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
Correlation does not imply causality.
> I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
> your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
It is obvious that you are an idiot without a clue about the physics
involved, or statistical analysis for that matter. There isn't much
point to continuing this discussion.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BIG 4 SUED FOR ABS STOPPING DISTANCES!
On 12 Dec 2003 11:38 AM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> It is the statistics compile by our United States Department of
> Transportation that blame the mechanism:
> http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
Correlation does not imply causality.
> I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
> your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
It is obvious that you are an idiot without a clue about the physics
involved, or statistical analysis for that matter. There isn't much
point to continuing this discussion.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> It is the statistics compile by our United States Department of
> Transportation that blame the mechanism:
> http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/...te/808206.html
Correlation does not imply causality.
> I know how mechanical things work, it is pure physics, judging by
> your ABS explanations you obviously don't!
It is obvious that you are an idiot without a clue about the physics
involved, or statistical analysis for that matter. There isn't much
point to continuing this discussion.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/