Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Graeme wrote in
4.51: And I can imagine Guy's reaction :{) That's meant to be a 'tached smile BTW ;-) |
#42
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
[ ... ] ...actually ABS doesn't really affect stopping distances. It allows you to steer while braking. I think it does - it certainly helps prevent skidding in wet weather, even if that is all it does. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.708 / Virus Database: 464 - Release Date: 18/06/04 |
#43
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
I don't think anyone is immune to risk compensation, although some people have a more realistic view of the merits of various safety aids than others. The comment refers to research done on drivers with and without ABS and seatbelts, which showed that they drove faster and less safely when using those devices. See Risk by John Adams. Interesting piece on Radio 4 Today this morning about "childproof containers". There are 25,000 incidents a year involving children. The person interviewed said the problem was people thought them childproof when in fact they are only child resistant. Consequence is they keep "childproof" bottles of bleach etc in places which are convenient but accessible to children rather than put away. The perception of "childproofness" has therefore increased the risk to children over ordinary containers which most people would put somewhere safe with children around. Tony |
#44
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mark Tranchant wrote:
Velvet wrote: So in my experience (and I do speak from experience) when you avoid a skid in a non-abs car and the one in front does have it, you end up braking slower, with obvious consequences if you're close enough... You mean "too close". Indeed ;-) -- Velvet |
#45
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:37:33 GMT, Velvet wrote in message : On the other hand, they drive less carefully when protected by airbags, abs and seatbelts. Not all of them do, ta :-) I don't think anyone is immune to risk compensation, although some people have a more realistic view of the merits of various safety aids than others. The comment refers to research done on drivers with and without ABS and seatbelts, which showed that they drove faster and less safely when using those devices. See Risk by John Adams. I don't rely on ABS to stop me quicker - I use it to even out the fact that the car in front probably has it and will stop quicker than I can if I don't have it... Er, actually ABS doesn't really affect stopping distances. It allows you to steer while braking. Not convinced by this :-) So it's not quite as clear cut that all the extra safety stuff makes people drive less carefully :-) It is, though. The taxi driver ABS trial was a near-perfect double-blind study and it showed that those driving ABS equipped cars accelerated harder, braked harder, drove faster and followed closer. Guy But I'm not a taxi driver! -- Velvet |
#46
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Velvet wrote:
Er, actually ABS doesn't really affect stopping distances. It allows you to steer while braking. Not convinced by this :-) It is simplistic, of course; the reality is that given perfect braking technique a driver can stop at least as quickly in a non-ABS car; ABS makes no difference to the grip of the tyres or the power of the brakes. A really expert driver can theoretically stop shorter in a non-ABS car, because ABS senses wheel slip, while a really expert driver won't allow that to happen. In practice few drivers have perfect braking technique, but as previously posted, on a dry road it is close to impossible to get the ABS even to cut in on my car - it grips too well. So, ABS prevents some skids due to poor braking technique, and allows steering while braking with less risk of loss of control, but it doesn't really improve the braking performance of the car. It's also a mistake to rely on it in ice or on gravel. If all wheels lock, the ABS thinks you've stopped and cuts out. Don't try this at home! So, it's important not to think (or to allow people to think) "ABS stops you quicker", because (a) technically it doesn't and (b) relying on that for safety margin is a Very Bad Idea. The taxi driver ABS trial was a near-perfect double-blind study and it showed that those driving ABS equipped cars accelerated harder, braked harder, drove faster and followed closer. But I'm not a taxi driver! Similar studies have been done on a wide range of drivers and a wide range of safety devices, the conclusion is always the same. Think: "Nobody believes in risk compensation, that's why it happens." -- Guy -- May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk |
#47
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
Velvet wrote: Er, actually ABS doesn't really affect stopping distances. It allows you to steer while braking. Not convinced by this :-) It is simplistic, of course; the reality is that given perfect braking technique a driver can stop at least as quickly in a non-ABS car; ABS makes no difference to the grip of the tyres or the power of the brakes. A really expert driver can theoretically stop shorter in a non-ABS car, because ABS senses wheel slip, while a really expert driver won't allow that to happen. In practice few drivers have perfect braking technique, but as previously posted, on a dry road it is close to impossible to get the ABS even to cut in on my car - it grips too well. So, ABS prevents some skids due to poor braking technique, and allows steering while braking with less risk of loss of control, but it doesn't really improve the braking performance of the car. It's also a mistake to rely on it in ice or on gravel. If all wheels lock, the ABS thinks you've stopped and cuts out. Don't try this at home! So, it's important not to think (or to allow people to think) "ABS stops you quicker", because (a) technically it doesn't and (b) relying on that for safety margin is a Very Bad Idea. I think we're kindof in agreement here. My point was that people aren't all that likely to be braking as well as ABS would if you apply it properly - people (myself included) either tend to overbrake (and skid if no abs) or underbrake (abs or no, they'll not stop as fast as if they overbraked with abs). I've braked on ice with ABS - it was interesting and I'm glad I did it gently. Stopped car from sliding but took a VERY long time to stop the car. On the other hand, braked once on snow and had to do a very abs-like recovery of it to stop in time (downhill on snow toward T junction). I know if I tromp on my brakes then I'll stop quicker than if I brake with no ABS, because I tend to the underbrake not overbrake to avoid the skid. Ergo, for me, ABS *will* mean I'll stop in a shorter distance. I don't drive any closer (or further away, it has to be said) than pre-ABS. Some of my cars have had it, some haven't. I've only once had to tromp on the brakes and could have done with ABS (I didn't lock the wheels so probably underbraked, with ABS I'm much more willing to tromp very hard since I know it'll help prevent the skid) - but given I've never actually needed to, it's not changed the way I drive - I don't think the ABS will save me, cos actually I've no idea if it would in any given situation or not, and I'm not *really* all that keen on seeking out instances when I'll find out... -- Velvet |
#48
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tony Raven wrote:
Interesting piece on Radio 4 Today this morning about "childproof containers". There are 25,000 incidents a year involving children. I thought it was BeHit who put 25000 children into containers. John B |
#49
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:05:32 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote (more or less): On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:42:13 +0100, "Grant Mason" wrote in message : Er, actually ABS doesn't really affect stopping distances. Yes it does. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/vrtc/ca...99-01-1287.pdf "For most stopping maneuvers, made on most test surfaces, ABS-assisted panic stops were found to be shorter than those made with best effort or full pedal applications with the ABS disabled" Because people don't know how to brake. But the statement was overly simplistic, of course. ABS does not increase the power of the brakes, and does not increase the coefficient of friction. All it does is make it less likely that the driver will lock the wheels. With abs, if one wheel is about to lock, the other three wheels can remain braking. To avoid one wheel locking up with non-abs brakes, all four wheels have to stop braking. -- Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk |
#50
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 19:32:55 +0100, Gawnsoft
wrote in message : With abs, if one wheel is about to lock, the other three wheels can remain braking. To avoid one wheel locking up with non-abs brakes, all four wheels have to stop braking. Indeed. But that's only relevant in specific conditions. I've already said it: ABS does not increase the braking performance of the car. It does compensate in some degree for poor technique, but even then you can fool it. Relying on ABS to "help you stop quicker" is stupid, and allowing people to think that's what it does is Not Smart. Guy -- May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
have the time to do everything you want | London Transport | |||
traffic is better, but livingstone is thinking of more traffic zone? | London Transport | |||
Everything we know about traffic-calming is wrong | London Transport | |||
Traffic Calming in Islington | London Transport | |||
top up wrong Oyster (almost) | London Transport |