![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Robert Henry wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message ... Robert Henry wrote: Gravel AND snow. Snow is quite common for about 5 months of the year here in PA! My only really bad ABS experience was in snow. Well, actually, I have quite the opposite - which is not an argument - just an experience relayed. I learned to drive in New England. Tangentially, I've always wanted a bumper sticker that read "Graduate: Boston School of Driving" I think fewer people would tailgate me...when I cut them off. just kidding I rear-ended someone once (not even any scratches) on a road covered newly by snow over a span of about 10 minutes. The white snow was heated by the warm engines at the intersection in the minutes before I got there. I almost fell when I got out of the car because the white glaze was extremely slick. It was extremely thin white ice (like glaze), not black. Moreover, I couldn't stop and I couldn't steer. If I had ABS, the outcome might have been different, and it could have been worse as I steered around the car and went right through the intersection into crossing traffic. I'll never know, but I do know I couldn't steer and braking was of little effect. I can actually remember looking at the speedometer going back and forth from 12-15 to 0, 10 to 0.... I was already in first gear in the automatic for conditions. I was thinking mainly of snow with some depth to it. Sounds like you are talking about snow that has been packed hard by traffic. That is really more like ice at that point. I don't make any claim that regular brakes are better on ice than ABS. Neither is worth a hoot unless you have chains or studded tires. Trust me, with ABS on ice or hard packed snow, you'll not have any braking either and likely won't be able to steer on top of that. Later, in the mountains of NY at 1am, there was an inch of snow on the road and snowing. A deer was in the middle of the road, there was oncoming traffic, and I was going about 40. As I got closer and the cars converged on the deer, the deer ran in front of me. I was able, somehow, to steer left into oncoming traffic as the deer went to my right, and steer back into my lane to avoid the oncoming traffic. When we finally came to a stop, I stalled the car, and couldn't restart it until I got a grip on what almost just happened. I know without ABS, I would have hit something. Why do you know that? ABS doesn't make you steer any better, unless you've locked your brakes. I agree that average to poor drivers will do better with ABS. Very good drivers will often not do much better and and can do worse with ABS, especially on dry pavement (threshold braking is better than the fast skid-release-skid-release of ABS) and soft surfaces such as sand, gravel and deep snow. On another occasion, I was entering an intersection during a downpour. The intersection was wide and unfamiliar. The two stop signs were four lanes apart; there are two dedicated turning lanes, one for each right and left and two through lanes. I was in the left through lane. As I realized there were cars entering from stops into the crossing intersection, I looked and found the stop signs for me well out of the visibility restricted peripheral vision. It was daylight and the pedestrian crossing lines added the rainwater obscuring the stop line. Honestly, in hindsight, I was driving too fast for conditions. As I slammed the brakes, I estimated the stopping distance would put me well into and maybe through the intersection. It occurred to me also that if I made a right turn into the intersection, I would have the possibility that vehicles crossing from the left would steer left of me if I stayed as far right as possible in the breakdown/parking lane as I turned right onto the crossing street. This also increased the stopping distance available before the intersection. The car stopped about 30 feet from the corner of the intersection after making the right turn. Without ABS, I am sure that I would have skidded straight through the intersection and t-boned the police car (no exaggeration) turning left. Most likely because of conditions, the police officer didn't come back around and issue a ticket for failure to stop. Yes, this is a condition where ABS can be valuable. However, good braking technique without ABS is about equally good. I ride motorcycles and subscribe to several motomags. In their tests of both ABS and non-ABS bikes, the non-ABS bikes have thus far always achieved shorter stopping distances with a skilled rider aboard. Matt |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message ... Dashi wrote: "Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message ... Dan Thompson wrote: "I tend to think this IS a sound argument" This is about the flimsiest "argument" I've ever seen written, that additional safety equipment, on balance, makes people less safe because they become more cavalier about taking risks. It assumes that the people involved are not intelligent enough to understand the scope of safety benefit and risk reduction being provided. You must hang around a dumber group of pilots and airplane owners than I do. Sorry to burst your bubble, but this is a documented fact. If this is a "documented fact" you wouldn't mind providing links to the documents then? These two address mainly the facts, but not the causes, other than rough speculation. There are many more similar statistical studies. I can show you how to use a search engine if you'd like and then you can check it out yourself. Thanks for the info, I do know how to use a search engine but you are one of the few people that I have seen post a statement such as: "this is a documented fact" and be able to back it up. Congratulations, Dashi |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dashi wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message ... Dashi wrote: "Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message ... Dan Thompson wrote: "I tend to think this IS a sound argument" This is about the flimsiest "argument" I've ever seen written, that additional safety equipment, on balance, makes people less safe because they become more cavalier about taking risks. It assumes that the people involved are not intelligent enough to understand the scope of safety benefit and risk reduction being provided. You must hang around a dumber group of pilots and airplane owners than I do. Sorry to burst your bubble, but this is a documented fact. If this is a "documented fact" you wouldn't mind providing links to the documents then? These two address mainly the facts, but not the causes, other than rough speculation. There are many more similar statistical studies. I can show you how to use a search engine if you'd like and then you can check it out yourself. Thanks for the info, I do know how to use a search engine but you are one of the few people that I have seen post a statement such as: "this is a documented fact" and be able to back it up. Well, I'm not perfect either, but I try not to write or say things that I can't back up. Sometimes though the memory isn't completely accurate and I make a statement only to later find that I can't back it up. I hate it when that happens... :-) Matt |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|