Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
#141
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
Del, the makers even state ABS has a longer braking distance.
There isn't any debate on that issue, do a google search.
It is not operator error, it is a defective attempt to compensate for
drivers that were never trained how to drive.
Same for air bags. Ever wonder why they are designed to stop an adult
with no seat belt on? To compensate for fools on the roads.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> On 09 Dec 2003 03:00 PM, Paul Brogren posted the following:
> > Just curious, was it a Grand Caravan? Because the '99 that we use at
> > work has ABS and there's definitely too much braking distance during
> > hard braking.
>
> If you don't know how to operate an ABS equipped vehicle, then yeah, the
> stopping distance will be longer. It is difficult for somebody used to
> driving non ABS rigs to just mash the pedal down and hold it while the
> system does its work. The natural reaction is to let up, since that is
> what you do with conventional brakes, but it is exactly the wrong thing
> to do, and WILL lead to longer stopping distances.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
There isn't any debate on that issue, do a google search.
It is not operator error, it is a defective attempt to compensate for
drivers that were never trained how to drive.
Same for air bags. Ever wonder why they are designed to stop an adult
with no seat belt on? To compensate for fools on the roads.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> On 09 Dec 2003 03:00 PM, Paul Brogren posted the following:
> > Just curious, was it a Grand Caravan? Because the '99 that we use at
> > work has ABS and there's definitely too much braking distance during
> > hard braking.
>
> If you don't know how to operate an ABS equipped vehicle, then yeah, the
> stopping distance will be longer. It is difficult for somebody used to
> driving non ABS rigs to just mash the pedal down and hold it while the
> system does its work. The natural reaction is to let up, since that is
> what you do with conventional brakes, but it is exactly the wrong thing
> to do, and WILL lead to longer stopping distances.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
#142
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
Del, the makers even state ABS has a longer braking distance.
There isn't any debate on that issue, do a google search.
It is not operator error, it is a defective attempt to compensate for
drivers that were never trained how to drive.
Same for air bags. Ever wonder why they are designed to stop an adult
with no seat belt on? To compensate for fools on the roads.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> On 09 Dec 2003 03:00 PM, Paul Brogren posted the following:
> > Just curious, was it a Grand Caravan? Because the '99 that we use at
> > work has ABS and there's definitely too much braking distance during
> > hard braking.
>
> If you don't know how to operate an ABS equipped vehicle, then yeah, the
> stopping distance will be longer. It is difficult for somebody used to
> driving non ABS rigs to just mash the pedal down and hold it while the
> system does its work. The natural reaction is to let up, since that is
> what you do with conventional brakes, but it is exactly the wrong thing
> to do, and WILL lead to longer stopping distances.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
There isn't any debate on that issue, do a google search.
It is not operator error, it is a defective attempt to compensate for
drivers that were never trained how to drive.
Same for air bags. Ever wonder why they are designed to stop an adult
with no seat belt on? To compensate for fools on the roads.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Del Rawlins wrote:
>
> On 09 Dec 2003 03:00 PM, Paul Brogren posted the following:
> > Just curious, was it a Grand Caravan? Because the '99 that we use at
> > work has ABS and there's definitely too much braking distance during
> > hard braking.
>
> If you don't know how to operate an ABS equipped vehicle, then yeah, the
> stopping distance will be longer. It is difficult for somebody used to
> driving non ABS rigs to just mash the pedal down and hold it while the
> system does its work. The natural reaction is to let up, since that is
> what you do with conventional brakes, but it is exactly the wrong thing
> to do, and WILL lead to longer stopping distances.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
#143
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
On 09 Dec 2003 05:19 PM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> I believe the reason ABS is not an option on the Dana 44 is their
> owners are more mechanical inclined, therefore smart enough to release
> the brakes if they lock enough to melt the rubber. Just a sliding tire
> does not mean total lose of traction
If road conditions are such that you can melt rubber, then you are right,
there isn't much point to ABS. It is when the roads are nasty, icy,
sloppy, and wet that ABS comes into play. I'm sure you see those
conditions frequently down there in California. What ABS can do, that
no human being is capable of, is simultaneously keeping all 4 wheels at
the point of maximum braking. The best you and I can manage, is to keep
the wheel with the least grip from locking up, which means that the
other 3 are not braking to their greatest potential.
> I suggest you were not going fast enough to worry about not
> having brakes as the thirty percent more fatal off road crashes found
> out when inertial threw them from the road when the ABS released.
I'm not really sure what it is you are trying to say here. It sounds as
if you have found a statistic and are then making up your own
assumptions about the cause. Even accepting at face value that ABS
equipped rigs are involved in 30% more fatal crashes, it could easily be
explained by the inability of the driver to corrrectly operate ABS
equipped brakes. It could also mean that the drivers felt that they
could drive too fast for conditions because they had ABS. I personally
believe that these two explanations are far more plausible than what you
are describing, based on my experience with ABS.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> I believe the reason ABS is not an option on the Dana 44 is their
> owners are more mechanical inclined, therefore smart enough to release
> the brakes if they lock enough to melt the rubber. Just a sliding tire
> does not mean total lose of traction
If road conditions are such that you can melt rubber, then you are right,
there isn't much point to ABS. It is when the roads are nasty, icy,
sloppy, and wet that ABS comes into play. I'm sure you see those
conditions frequently down there in California. What ABS can do, that
no human being is capable of, is simultaneously keeping all 4 wheels at
the point of maximum braking. The best you and I can manage, is to keep
the wheel with the least grip from locking up, which means that the
other 3 are not braking to their greatest potential.
> I suggest you were not going fast enough to worry about not
> having brakes as the thirty percent more fatal off road crashes found
> out when inertial threw them from the road when the ABS released.
I'm not really sure what it is you are trying to say here. It sounds as
if you have found a statistic and are then making up your own
assumptions about the cause. Even accepting at face value that ABS
equipped rigs are involved in 30% more fatal crashes, it could easily be
explained by the inability of the driver to corrrectly operate ABS
equipped brakes. It could also mean that the drivers felt that they
could drive too fast for conditions because they had ABS. I personally
believe that these two explanations are far more plausible than what you
are describing, based on my experience with ABS.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
#144
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
On 09 Dec 2003 05:19 PM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> I believe the reason ABS is not an option on the Dana 44 is their
> owners are more mechanical inclined, therefore smart enough to release
> the brakes if they lock enough to melt the rubber. Just a sliding tire
> does not mean total lose of traction
If road conditions are such that you can melt rubber, then you are right,
there isn't much point to ABS. It is when the roads are nasty, icy,
sloppy, and wet that ABS comes into play. I'm sure you see those
conditions frequently down there in California. What ABS can do, that
no human being is capable of, is simultaneously keeping all 4 wheels at
the point of maximum braking. The best you and I can manage, is to keep
the wheel with the least grip from locking up, which means that the
other 3 are not braking to their greatest potential.
> I suggest you were not going fast enough to worry about not
> having brakes as the thirty percent more fatal off road crashes found
> out when inertial threw them from the road when the ABS released.
I'm not really sure what it is you are trying to say here. It sounds as
if you have found a statistic and are then making up your own
assumptions about the cause. Even accepting at face value that ABS
equipped rigs are involved in 30% more fatal crashes, it could easily be
explained by the inability of the driver to corrrectly operate ABS
equipped brakes. It could also mean that the drivers felt that they
could drive too fast for conditions because they had ABS. I personally
believe that these two explanations are far more plausible than what you
are describing, based on my experience with ABS.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> I believe the reason ABS is not an option on the Dana 44 is their
> owners are more mechanical inclined, therefore smart enough to release
> the brakes if they lock enough to melt the rubber. Just a sliding tire
> does not mean total lose of traction
If road conditions are such that you can melt rubber, then you are right,
there isn't much point to ABS. It is when the roads are nasty, icy,
sloppy, and wet that ABS comes into play. I'm sure you see those
conditions frequently down there in California. What ABS can do, that
no human being is capable of, is simultaneously keeping all 4 wheels at
the point of maximum braking. The best you and I can manage, is to keep
the wheel with the least grip from locking up, which means that the
other 3 are not braking to their greatest potential.
> I suggest you were not going fast enough to worry about not
> having brakes as the thirty percent more fatal off road crashes found
> out when inertial threw them from the road when the ABS released.
I'm not really sure what it is you are trying to say here. It sounds as
if you have found a statistic and are then making up your own
assumptions about the cause. Even accepting at face value that ABS
equipped rigs are involved in 30% more fatal crashes, it could easily be
explained by the inability of the driver to corrrectly operate ABS
equipped brakes. It could also mean that the drivers felt that they
could drive too fast for conditions because they had ABS. I personally
believe that these two explanations are far more plausible than what you
are describing, based on my experience with ABS.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
#145
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
On 09 Dec 2003 05:19 PM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> I believe the reason ABS is not an option on the Dana 44 is their
> owners are more mechanical inclined, therefore smart enough to release
> the brakes if they lock enough to melt the rubber. Just a sliding tire
> does not mean total lose of traction
If road conditions are such that you can melt rubber, then you are right,
there isn't much point to ABS. It is when the roads are nasty, icy,
sloppy, and wet that ABS comes into play. I'm sure you see those
conditions frequently down there in California. What ABS can do, that
no human being is capable of, is simultaneously keeping all 4 wheels at
the point of maximum braking. The best you and I can manage, is to keep
the wheel with the least grip from locking up, which means that the
other 3 are not braking to their greatest potential.
> I suggest you were not going fast enough to worry about not
> having brakes as the thirty percent more fatal off road crashes found
> out when inertial threw them from the road when the ABS released.
I'm not really sure what it is you are trying to say here. It sounds as
if you have found a statistic and are then making up your own
assumptions about the cause. Even accepting at face value that ABS
equipped rigs are involved in 30% more fatal crashes, it could easily be
explained by the inability of the driver to corrrectly operate ABS
equipped brakes. It could also mean that the drivers felt that they
could drive too fast for conditions because they had ABS. I personally
believe that these two explanations are far more plausible than what you
are describing, based on my experience with ABS.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> I believe the reason ABS is not an option on the Dana 44 is their
> owners are more mechanical inclined, therefore smart enough to release
> the brakes if they lock enough to melt the rubber. Just a sliding tire
> does not mean total lose of traction
If road conditions are such that you can melt rubber, then you are right,
there isn't much point to ABS. It is when the roads are nasty, icy,
sloppy, and wet that ABS comes into play. I'm sure you see those
conditions frequently down there in California. What ABS can do, that
no human being is capable of, is simultaneously keeping all 4 wheels at
the point of maximum braking. The best you and I can manage, is to keep
the wheel with the least grip from locking up, which means that the
other 3 are not braking to their greatest potential.
> I suggest you were not going fast enough to worry about not
> having brakes as the thirty percent more fatal off road crashes found
> out when inertial threw them from the road when the ABS released.
I'm not really sure what it is you are trying to say here. It sounds as
if you have found a statistic and are then making up your own
assumptions about the cause. Even accepting at face value that ABS
equipped rigs are involved in 30% more fatal crashes, it could easily be
explained by the inability of the driver to corrrectly operate ABS
equipped brakes. It could also mean that the drivers felt that they
could drive too fast for conditions because they had ABS. I personally
believe that these two explanations are far more plausible than what you
are describing, based on my experience with ABS.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
#146
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
"Paul Brogren" <pibrogren@msn.com> wrote in message
news:br5nkd$297loc$1@ID-190695.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Just curious, was it a Grand Caravan? Because the '99 that we use at work
> has ABS and there's definitely too much braking distance during hard
> braking.
>
> Paul
>
No, I have a Mazda MPV. I ate lunch waiting for it to stop.
#147
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
"Paul Brogren" <pibrogren@msn.com> wrote in message
news:br5nkd$297loc$1@ID-190695.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Just curious, was it a Grand Caravan? Because the '99 that we use at work
> has ABS and there's definitely too much braking distance during hard
> braking.
>
> Paul
>
No, I have a Mazda MPV. I ate lunch waiting for it to stop.
#148
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
"Paul Brogren" <pibrogren@msn.com> wrote in message
news:br5nkd$297loc$1@ID-190695.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Just curious, was it a Grand Caravan? Because the '99 that we use at work
> has ABS and there's definitely too much braking distance during hard
> braking.
>
> Paul
>
No, I have a Mazda MPV. I ate lunch waiting for it to stop.
#149
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
Roughly 12/9/03 18:33, Mike Romain's monkeys randomly typed:
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> On 09 Dec 2003 10:31 AM, Mike Romain posted the following:
>> > Yup, they are just another 'failed' attempt to compensate for lack of
>> > driver training.
>>
>> The increased stopping distances are a reflection of a lack of driver
>> training with the new equipment, not of any problem with the ABS systems.
>> You and I are not physically capable of outbraking a properly set up
>> computer.
>>
>
> LOL!
>
> Sure..... and Microsoft has the market cornered....
Don't be so optimistic. Microsoft Windows Automotive 4.2
operating system is yet another onslaught now that Windows
CE Automotive has managed a few applications.
And if you love the direction DC is taking Jeep,
>
> A total lock of the wheels is the fastest stop, period.
For pretty much all drivers, probably as true as it gets. For
folks and vehicles with decent feedback, not that true, as next
sentence implies.
>
> Threshold braking allows some control if needed. People aren't taught
> this.
People *are* taught this. However the only place I've ever been
taught this was in racing schools. And even some race drivers
will admit that on public roads, they themselves may just lock em
up in high puckerfactor situations...as long as the vehicle keeps
in a straight line. Which most vehicles will do when all 4
tires are sliding free due to lockage *if* it was started at a high
enough speed and brought on quickly enough so none of the
wheels grab. And then let go as speed drops to where differences
in tires or road surface begin to move the vehicle off a straight
line path. ABS can help with this phase as it can detect a
skidding wheel long before a human can and can release that wheel
far faster than any human can, and then reapply max braking long
before any human can. *IF* the human knows how to use ABS systems,
which most don't.
>
> ABS refuses to lock the wheels period. If you are on a real steep dirt
> or snow down hill, you will not be able to stop period.
Only if you manage to keep the vehicle above the threshhold speed
at which the ABS automatically disengages.
>
> Just go read the real stats on ABS from the national transportation
> safety council that Bill posted.
May be worth while reading some of the backing data as to why
ABS is useless on most vehicles... the driver never engages it
or is overly optimistic in what it can and can't do.
>
> The insurance companies also have similar studies and stats out.
And backing data as to the causes, which have more to do with
poor driver training than ABS itself.
>
> ABS is crap in emergency situations where you need a fast stop.
False. If the driver isn't a doofus, it will stop faster
than anything but a very very skilled race driver....except
where wedging of the surface material is available.
> It works well if you have the room or time to react.
False and falser. If you have limited time to react, simply
stomping on the brakes hard enough to engage the ABS and
keeping your foot there will stop any vehicle faster than
a skidding tire will... on most surfaces. Unfortunately
few people ever engage it, and most of the ones that do
tend to panic and take their foot off at the worst time.
> It is plain dangerous off road.
A bit strongly worded, but close enough to true.
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> On 09 Dec 2003 10:31 AM, Mike Romain posted the following:
>> > Yup, they are just another 'failed' attempt to compensate for lack of
>> > driver training.
>>
>> The increased stopping distances are a reflection of a lack of driver
>> training with the new equipment, not of any problem with the ABS systems.
>> You and I are not physically capable of outbraking a properly set up
>> computer.
>>
>
> LOL!
>
> Sure..... and Microsoft has the market cornered....
Don't be so optimistic. Microsoft Windows Automotive 4.2
operating system is yet another onslaught now that Windows
CE Automotive has managed a few applications.
And if you love the direction DC is taking Jeep,
>
> A total lock of the wheels is the fastest stop, period.
For pretty much all drivers, probably as true as it gets. For
folks and vehicles with decent feedback, not that true, as next
sentence implies.
>
> Threshold braking allows some control if needed. People aren't taught
> this.
People *are* taught this. However the only place I've ever been
taught this was in racing schools. And even some race drivers
will admit that on public roads, they themselves may just lock em
up in high puckerfactor situations...as long as the vehicle keeps
in a straight line. Which most vehicles will do when all 4
tires are sliding free due to lockage *if* it was started at a high
enough speed and brought on quickly enough so none of the
wheels grab. And then let go as speed drops to where differences
in tires or road surface begin to move the vehicle off a straight
line path. ABS can help with this phase as it can detect a
skidding wheel long before a human can and can release that wheel
far faster than any human can, and then reapply max braking long
before any human can. *IF* the human knows how to use ABS systems,
which most don't.
>
> ABS refuses to lock the wheels period. If you are on a real steep dirt
> or snow down hill, you will not be able to stop period.
Only if you manage to keep the vehicle above the threshhold speed
at which the ABS automatically disengages.
>
> Just go read the real stats on ABS from the national transportation
> safety council that Bill posted.
May be worth while reading some of the backing data as to why
ABS is useless on most vehicles... the driver never engages it
or is overly optimistic in what it can and can't do.
>
> The insurance companies also have similar studies and stats out.
And backing data as to the causes, which have more to do with
poor driver training than ABS itself.
>
> ABS is crap in emergency situations where you need a fast stop.
False. If the driver isn't a doofus, it will stop faster
than anything but a very very skilled race driver....except
where wedging of the surface material is available.
> It works well if you have the room or time to react.
False and falser. If you have limited time to react, simply
stomping on the brakes hard enough to engage the ABS and
keeping your foot there will stop any vehicle faster than
a skidding tire will... on most surfaces. Unfortunately
few people ever engage it, and most of the ones that do
tend to panic and take their foot off at the worst time.
> It is plain dangerous off road.
A bit strongly worded, but close enough to true.
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
#150
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Order Jeep -> Lose Rebate??
Roughly 12/9/03 18:33, Mike Romain's monkeys randomly typed:
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> On 09 Dec 2003 10:31 AM, Mike Romain posted the following:
>> > Yup, they are just another 'failed' attempt to compensate for lack of
>> > driver training.
>>
>> The increased stopping distances are a reflection of a lack of driver
>> training with the new equipment, not of any problem with the ABS systems.
>> You and I are not physically capable of outbraking a properly set up
>> computer.
>>
>
> LOL!
>
> Sure..... and Microsoft has the market cornered....
Don't be so optimistic. Microsoft Windows Automotive 4.2
operating system is yet another onslaught now that Windows
CE Automotive has managed a few applications.
And if you love the direction DC is taking Jeep,
>
> A total lock of the wheels is the fastest stop, period.
For pretty much all drivers, probably as true as it gets. For
folks and vehicles with decent feedback, not that true, as next
sentence implies.
>
> Threshold braking allows some control if needed. People aren't taught
> this.
People *are* taught this. However the only place I've ever been
taught this was in racing schools. And even some race drivers
will admit that on public roads, they themselves may just lock em
up in high puckerfactor situations...as long as the vehicle keeps
in a straight line. Which most vehicles will do when all 4
tires are sliding free due to lockage *if* it was started at a high
enough speed and brought on quickly enough so none of the
wheels grab. And then let go as speed drops to where differences
in tires or road surface begin to move the vehicle off a straight
line path. ABS can help with this phase as it can detect a
skidding wheel long before a human can and can release that wheel
far faster than any human can, and then reapply max braking long
before any human can. *IF* the human knows how to use ABS systems,
which most don't.
>
> ABS refuses to lock the wheels period. If you are on a real steep dirt
> or snow down hill, you will not be able to stop period.
Only if you manage to keep the vehicle above the threshhold speed
at which the ABS automatically disengages.
>
> Just go read the real stats on ABS from the national transportation
> safety council that Bill posted.
May be worth while reading some of the backing data as to why
ABS is useless on most vehicles... the driver never engages it
or is overly optimistic in what it can and can't do.
>
> The insurance companies also have similar studies and stats out.
And backing data as to the causes, which have more to do with
poor driver training than ABS itself.
>
> ABS is crap in emergency situations where you need a fast stop.
False. If the driver isn't a doofus, it will stop faster
than anything but a very very skilled race driver....except
where wedging of the surface material is available.
> It works well if you have the room or time to react.
False and falser. If you have limited time to react, simply
stomping on the brakes hard enough to engage the ABS and
keeping your foot there will stop any vehicle faster than
a skidding tire will... on most surfaces. Unfortunately
few people ever engage it, and most of the ones that do
tend to panic and take their foot off at the worst time.
> It is plain dangerous off road.
A bit strongly worded, but close enough to true.
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>>
>> On 09 Dec 2003 10:31 AM, Mike Romain posted the following:
>> > Yup, they are just another 'failed' attempt to compensate for lack of
>> > driver training.
>>
>> The increased stopping distances are a reflection of a lack of driver
>> training with the new equipment, not of any problem with the ABS systems.
>> You and I are not physically capable of outbraking a properly set up
>> computer.
>>
>
> LOL!
>
> Sure..... and Microsoft has the market cornered....
Don't be so optimistic. Microsoft Windows Automotive 4.2
operating system is yet another onslaught now that Windows
CE Automotive has managed a few applications.
And if you love the direction DC is taking Jeep,
>
> A total lock of the wheels is the fastest stop, period.
For pretty much all drivers, probably as true as it gets. For
folks and vehicles with decent feedback, not that true, as next
sentence implies.
>
> Threshold braking allows some control if needed. People aren't taught
> this.
People *are* taught this. However the only place I've ever been
taught this was in racing schools. And even some race drivers
will admit that on public roads, they themselves may just lock em
up in high puckerfactor situations...as long as the vehicle keeps
in a straight line. Which most vehicles will do when all 4
tires are sliding free due to lockage *if* it was started at a high
enough speed and brought on quickly enough so none of the
wheels grab. And then let go as speed drops to where differences
in tires or road surface begin to move the vehicle off a straight
line path. ABS can help with this phase as it can detect a
skidding wheel long before a human can and can release that wheel
far faster than any human can, and then reapply max braking long
before any human can. *IF* the human knows how to use ABS systems,
which most don't.
>
> ABS refuses to lock the wheels period. If you are on a real steep dirt
> or snow down hill, you will not be able to stop period.
Only if you manage to keep the vehicle above the threshhold speed
at which the ABS automatically disengages.
>
> Just go read the real stats on ABS from the national transportation
> safety council that Bill posted.
May be worth while reading some of the backing data as to why
ABS is useless on most vehicles... the driver never engages it
or is overly optimistic in what it can and can't do.
>
> The insurance companies also have similar studies and stats out.
And backing data as to the causes, which have more to do with
poor driver training than ABS itself.
>
> ABS is crap in emergency situations where you need a fast stop.
False. If the driver isn't a doofus, it will stop faster
than anything but a very very skilled race driver....except
where wedging of the surface material is available.
> It works well if you have the room or time to react.
False and falser. If you have limited time to react, simply
stomping on the brakes hard enough to engage the ABS and
keeping your foot there will stop any vehicle faster than
a skidding tire will... on most surfaces. Unfortunately
few people ever engage it, and most of the ones that do
tend to panic and take their foot off at the worst time.
> It is plain dangerous off road.
A bit strongly worded, but close enough to true.
--
Fan of the dumbest team in America.