Total Motorcycle Community Forums

Gummiente wrote:

Skier wrote:Let me repackage things: ABS is an accident avoidance system because it allows for superior braking than a vast majority of riders.

Once again, it is NOT an accident avoidance system and to label it as such gives a false and misleading impression as to its capabilities. ABS helps reduce the chances of an accident happening by allowing the rider to brake hard while maintaining control. It does not prevent or avoid an accident from happening if the rider engages the ABS too late. As I mentioned already, all the ABS and superior braking in the world isn't going to help with a truck sitting 80ft away in a path that requires 100ft to stop.

HYPERR pretty much nailed it with his description. Still, you should Google the term "accident avoidance system"; you'll see that while ABS is an essential part of an Accident Avoidance System on cars, it is by no means the sole or stand alone component defining the system.

Skier wrote:

jstark47 wrote:Gotta disagree there, Skier. Most tests I read in Motorcycle Consumer News, the non-ABS bikes have shorter stopping distances on dry pavement. It's on wet pavement the ABS shines.

I would regard anything IIHS publishes with a great deal of skepticism anyway. They're a puppet of the insurance industry, IMO most of their studies are strongly slanted and lack objectivity. Remember, IIHS are the clowns who classified the Buell Blast as a "supersport" bike and the V-strom and R1150R as "unclad sport bikes" in 2007!

Feel free to cite concrete sources.

If you don't accept the IIHS data, how about the MSF's? What about Promocycle's data?

Hit me with some facts that disprove these three independent sources if you want to prove your point.

(edit: I also gotta say the newer the report, the better the ABS-equipped bike performs. Trotting out something from the early 2000s doesn't pertain to new bikes!)

jstark47 wrote:

Skier wrote:

jstark47 wrote:Gotta disagree there, Skier. Most tests I read in Motorcycle Consumer News, the non-ABS bikes have shorter stopping distances on dry pavement. It's on wet pavement the ABS shines.

I would regard anything IIHS publishes with a great deal of skepticism anyway. They're a puppet of the insurance industry, IMO most of their studies are strongly slanted and lack objectivity. Remember, IIHS are the clowns who classified the Buell Blast as a "supersport" bike and the V-strom and R1150R as "unclad sport bikes" in 2007!

Feel free to cite concrete sources.

If you don't accept the IIHS data, how about the MSF's? What about Promocycle's data?

Hit me with some facts that disprove these three independent sources if you want to prove your point.

(edit: I also gotta say the newer the report, the better the ABS-equipped bike performs. Trotting out something from the early 2000s doesn't pertain to new bikes!)

Finishing up some old business...... I never did get to the back issues, but in the February 2010 issue Motorcycle Consumer News tested the Moto Guzzi Stelvio. Best 60-0 stop with ABS engaged: 129.79 feet. Best stop with ABS turned off: 120.79 feet.

Howzat for a source?

HYPERR wrote:These kind of stats are very misleading.

HYPERR wrote:First of all, these are done by pro riders in a controlled environment.

HYPERR wrote: Not only that, they do many practice stops before recoding this actual published figure.

jstark47 wrote:

HYPERR wrote:These kind of stats are very misleading.

I disagree. I think they're quite enlightening.

HYPERR wrote:

jstark47 wrote:

HYPERR wrote:These kind of stats are very misleading.

I disagree. I think they're quite enlightening.

I respectfully disagree.

I still maintain that these stats are quite misleading in that it will lead the average reader into believing that they will be able to stop quicker w/o ABS. They can't. Even the skilled test riders, under a emergency situation, I believe will stop quicker with the ABS.