Motorcycles With Antilock Brakes Have Fewer Fatal Crashes an

[totalmotorcycle]

Motorcycles With Antilock Brakes Have Fewer Fatal Crashes and Lower Insurance Losses Than Bikes Without Antilocks

ARLINGTON, Va., April 5 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Antilock brakes for motorcycles significantly reduce crashes, removing some of the risk that comes with riding on 2 wheels. A new study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety indicates that motorcycles with antilocks versus without are 37 percent less likely to be in fatal crashes per 10,000 registered vehicle years. Bolstering this finding is a separate analysis by the affiliated Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) of insurance claims filed for damage to motorcycles. Bike models with antilocks have 22 percent fewer claims for damage per insured vehicle year (a vehicle year is 1 vehicle insured for 1 year, 2 insured for 6 months, etc.) than the same models without antilocks.



Crash avoidance technology like motorcycle antilocks is especially important because more people are taking up riding and more are dying in crashes. Rider deaths topped 5,000 in 2008 -- more than in any year since the federal government began collecting fatal crash data in 1975. Motorcycle registrations rose to 7.7 million in 2008, up from 4.3 million in 2000, according to R.L. Polk and Company data. The upswing in motorcyclist deaths comes amid record lows for fatalities in car crashes, prompting the Institute and HLDI to look harder at measures to stem motorcyclist deaths.


"It's a troubling trend," says Anne McCartt, Institute senior vice president for research. "No one wants to begrudge motorcyclists the opportunity to ride for fun or to get around town on a bike. As the number of new riders continues to increase, though, it's becoming more important than ever to lower the crash risk."


One answer might be to equip more motorcycles with antilocks. Stopping a motorcycle is trickier than stopping a car. For one thing, the front and rear wheels typically have separate brake controls. In an emergency, a rider faces a split-second choice to either brake hard, which can lock the wheels and cause an overturn, or hold back on braking and risk running into the emergency. This is when antilocks can help by reducing brake pressure when they detect impending lockup and then increasing the pressure again when traction is restored. Brake pressure is evaluated multiple times per second, so riders may brake fully without fear of locking up. Antilocks won't prevent every motorcycle crash. They won't help a rider about to be struck from behind, for example.


Antilocks are gaining traction among manufacturers and riders. More than half of motorcycle owners recently surveyed by the Institute said they would get antilocks on their next bikes. Buyers can find them on at least 60 new models. For more information on the study and other Institute research, go to iihs.org

[totalmotorcycle]

What do you think?

[totalmotorcycle]

"motorcycles with antilocks versus without are 37 percent less likely to be in fatal crashes per 10,000 registered vehicle years"

Impressive.

I've never ridden a motorcycle with ABS (as far as I recall) so I don't know how they work with an experienced rider. I've always wondered it they were worth having on a motorcycle because really you mostly just lock up the rear wheel on a panic stop and almost never the front. I've only locked up my front wheel once (and back) on a panic stop and as long the bike is skidding forward you are ok (although it does make you sweat).

Now, ABS I'm assuming won't let you lock up your front or rear wheel at all. This is good for road riders but bad for dirt riders. (thus why I never understood why the manufacturer is putting ABS on dual-sport bikes like the V-Strom).

But I'm on the fence if the extra costs of ABS, added complexity and weight of ABS equipment on the bike is really worth it...

So I said "No" I wouldn't want ABS on my next bike, unless I had no choice.

Opinions?

[HYPERR]

If it is available as an option on a bike I am considering, I would definitely get it.

Modern day ABSs are phenomenal, especially the ones on the Honda CBR RRs. They are nothing like the primitive ones that came on my 1995 BMW K75A/3.

[jstark47]

What do I think? I think if the conclusion was published by IIHS, it's likely flawed to the point of uselessness by 1) methodological errors (IIHS is the group that announced "supersport" bikes are dangerous in 2007, while utilizing a categorization so unsystematic as to include the Hayabusa and the Buell Blast in the same group. God knows what the accident figures would really show if they were categorized properly), and 2) lack of objectivity (IIHS is not an independent and disinterested public interest group. They are funded by a group of 80 insurance companies.)

IIHS' accident study in 2007 was probably cooked to produce predetermined results. Their reason for existence is to promote the profitability of the companies that fund them by reducing insurance pay outs. They have very low credibility when it comes to motorcycles.

[HYPERR]

I do fully concur with Mr. Starks that a "study" done by IIHS is probably flawed and biased.

Now regarding all the anti-ABS, TCS arguments that I hear from various riders, this is what I think.
History is repeating itself. As Yogi Berra would say, "it's like deja vu all over again". Car drivers argued against ABS back in the 80s. Pointing to magazine reports that showed professional drivers posting better stopping distance without ABS in a controlled environment on a dry pavement after repeated practice sessions. People are doing that now with bikes which is even funnier. If you are that good that you can outperfom modern day ABS & TCS, while in a lean, on a pavement with bits of sand, trying to avoid a dump truck with no room to escape on the side, all while you adrenaline is flowing full blown....well you are better than me and 99.999% of the human species.


I remember what a pro race driver told a group of us before our session at the track as a warning to stay within our ability...
"There are two things that every man feels he does well. One of them is driving... "

[flynrider]

If you are that good that you can outperfom modern day ABS & TCS, while in a lean, on a pavement with bits of sand

I think if you hit the brakes while in a lean on sandy pavement, you're going down no matter what braking system you have.

Personally, I don't have anything against ABS. I've been riding my bikes long enough that I feel I can get maximum braking without locking the wheels (did it yesterday, actually), so I don't know if it's something I'd spend a whole lot of extra money on. Conversely, a majority of the motorcycle accidents I've seen involved a long skid mark left by a bike. Not a good sign.

There are a lot of bikers out there that are not capable of making a panic stop without locking one or both of the wheels. I don't know if it's lack of practice or inexperience, but for those folks, ABS would be invaluable.

[HYPERR]

There are a lot of bikers out there that are not capable of making a panic stop without locking one or both of the wheels. I don't know if it's lack of practice or inexperience, but for those folks, ABS would be invaluable.

A lot of guys can stop perfectly during a practice session but fail to do so during real life situations. Panic is one of the main reasons but adrenaline plays a key too.