ABS? Grab a Handful!

[Scythian]

I'd go with option 4.

Now, in a panic stop: if you trust your ABS to stop you once they activate, why did you waste all that time squeezing instead of just activating and trusting them to begin with?

What everyone has been trying to say is that "hammering" the brakes in less than ideal, bike fully upright position can cause bad things to happen.

Well of course! But what does that have to do with activating the ABS first thing in a straight-line upright panic stop like in the study I posted?

Hammering=front brake and foot pedal as hard as you can to activate the ABS first thing in a straight-line panic stop (like in the study).

Are you going to argue that because ABS doesn't work in every case that you shouldn't trust it in any case?

 

[JimLor]

Ok folks, for you watching this interesting human interaction we began with stage I - you're f...ed up, no you're f...ed up. Then we went to stage II of defending each position. Then Stage III where we saw the protagonists start to see that in fact they were both on the same side, but were speaking to different points. Now we're in Stage IV which is the "graceful agreement." Stage V is where they will swap spit - no just kidding on Stage V. Ok, let's get back to our story - and yes, I'm an ******* (but this has been an interesting thread)!

 

[Scythian]

That's funny (Was it the woodchuck comment?)Seems like we're mixing PANIC stops with normal braking practices here. Sorry to interupt, please continue...

Thanks... I aim to, um, please.I have only ever been talking about straight-line, upright panic stops--like in the study posted.I don't know why anyone would think I was advocating activating ABS as a matter of course everytime you stopped!I guess you could, it would build up your arms and shoulders, but tire and brake pad life would suffer.

Ok folks, for you watching this interesting human interaction we began with stage I - you're f...ed up, no you're f...ed up. Then we went to stage II of defending each position. Then Stage III where we saw the protagonists start to see that in fact they were both on the same side, but were speaking to different points. Now we're in Stage IV which is the "graceful agreement." Stage V is where they will swap spit - no just kidding on Stage V. Ok, let's get back to our story - and yes, I'm an ******* (but this has been an interesting thread)!

It's the usual stages of human interaction--that's why "make-up ***" is always so good.That's why I Go Ugly Early in my arguments, you get to Stage V quicker!

 

[FJRMGM]

I'm going riding now.

 

[exskibum]

Maybe we just have different definitions of the word "hammering"?

I doubt it, since the object of this discussion was activating the ABS and the different experiences of new riders vs experienced riders in the article. Whether we call them panic stops, hammering or whatever, we are talking about activating the ABS, and unless the roadway is slippery, that is going to require a reasonably hard grab of the brakes. If you grab them hard enough to activate the ABS in a leaned over position, you are going to have an additional directional problem to deal with before the ABS has any chance to save you.
I only see the wisdom of braking hard enough to activate ABS in straight line panic stops, but the need for emergency braking is not limited to straight line situations. Murphy makes sure of that. Most of this, and the need to use your whole tool box (including finesse where needed) seems pretty obvious. I practice panic stops periodically, solo and 2 up, always straight. I also practice slowing hard and changing radius in corners on occasion, always solo, and I NEVER get close to activating the ABS then. If I had to choose, I'd rather have the finesse braking control than proper ABS technique -- I've had a LOT more demand for that over the last 42 years on bikes (and not just because I've only owned an ABS bike for 27 months). Not sure what all the flailing and insults are about. I thought there were good points about both ABS activation and finesse, but didn't get the gratuitous slap at MSF instructors.

That's why I Go Ugly Early in my arguments, you get to Stage V quicker!

No argument there. :lol:

 

[JimLor]

Ditto exskibum. But, why can't you have both "...finesse braking control...proper ABS technique?" I work on and practice both as I suspect most of us do. Two tools in the same took kit.

 

[Scythian]

If I had to choose, I'd rather have the finesse braking control than proper ABS technique -- I've had a LOT more demand for that over the last 42 years on bikes (and not just because I've only owned an ABS bike for 27 months).

Even if proper ABS technique could stop you faster, in a panic stop, on your ABS equipped bike? How odd....

Not sure what all the flailing and insults are about. I thought there were good points about both ABS activation and finesse, but didn't get the gratuitous slap at MSF instructors.

M'eh... Largely baggage from a previous thread: the MSF instructors would also rather teach progressive braking in a straightline panic stop even if ABS could stop you faster--it's advice to the lowest common denominator that I object to.

That's why this study was so interesting: it showed that the reluctance of experienced motorcyclists to trust their ABS increased their stopping distances needlessly.

 

[exskibum]

Ditto exskibum. But, why can't you have both "...finesse braking control...proper ABS technique?" I work on and practice both as I suspect most of us do. Two tools in the same took kit.

You can and should have both. I thought the point made by the MSF contingent was that (1) they don't have ABS bikes to teach on, and (2) if you don't teach newbs finesse, a crash is more likely imminent than if they didn't learn ABS activation technique (grab it hard enough to pulse and hold it there). I never saw anyone argue that braking technique should not include how to properly activate ABS if you have it. Maybe I should go back and reread. NAH -- I have the day off, GF is at work, and I'm going to ride down the hill to get some 90 degree valve stems for my XX's aftermarket wheels and probably buy a dual sport bike this afternoon. Screw household chores and grocery shopping!

 

[Scythian]

Not very surprising, but I'm afraid there will always be those that dispute the findings and find a way to rationalize that ABS is either not helpful or, actually detrimental-by eroding skills, etc. etc. ad infinitum.

Karmak is the Thread Winnah!!!!

 

[cougar8000]

Listen BUD, I have asked you before not to misquote me. And would appreciate if you would do this.

People do what they learn. If all you do is practice panic stops by slamming, or what ever you want to call it, then when time comes that is what you will do regardless if you are going in a straight line or not. That is a human nature for your body to do what it learned when your brain shuts down. So, go ahead and practice your body slamming techniques as long as your heart desires.

 

[Cdogman]

I can make my ABS kick in very fast and be very INEFFECIENT. The system will keep me upright. Letting the front tire load with a gentle squeeze then kick in has resulted in what, by my seat of the pants G Meter, almost twice the stopping power.

I know because it almost introduced me to a tree when I was running too hot. Technique for ABS (To me so efff off naysayers) is the same. Let the front tire load first. Then you can nail it..... the ABS knows you got a good bite on the road and lets you use it.

YMMV IMHO EIEIO and Marys lamb

 

[exskibum]

If I had to choose, I'd rather have the finesse braking control than proper ABS technique -- I've had a LOT more demand for that over the last 42 years on bikes (and not just because I've only owned an ABS bike for 27 months).

Even if proper ABS technique could stop you faster, in a panic stop, on your ABS equipped bike? How odd....

Only to those insistent upon reading into it in such a way as to artificially support an argument based upon the straw man you've constructed. I never said that (reread the parts I bolded), and would be the first to say that you have to use every skill you are capable of assimilating -- it's dangerous out there and you need all the advantages you can get.

Not sure what all the flailing and insults are about. I thought there were good points about both ABS activation and finesse, but didn't get the gratuitous slap at MSF instructors.

M'eh... Largely baggage from a previous thread: the MSF instructors would also rather teach progressive braking in a straightline panic stop even if ABS could stop you faster--it's advice to the lowest common denominator that I object to.

I missed the previous thread. If you're talking about teaching that to experienced riders, I agree. But sometimes lowest common denominator is all that has a chance at working, and instruction in advanced techiques is only effective later. (E.g., I could show you how to rip moguls in a way that looks and is smooth and very fast -- a racer's line over the tops. Problem is that unless you've skied a lot of years pretty seriously, all it will do is make you crash (again and again). I'd be happier giving a bump lesson in which I effectively taught proper pole technique to yield good body position and the rudiments of down-unweighting.)

That's why this study was so interesting: it showed that the reluctance of experienced motorcyclists to trust their ABS increased their stopping distances needlessly.

NOW, you're talking! People do the same thing in cars in the mountains, mostly because they don't know how to use ABS and rely on techniques they learned to minimize the skidding of a non-ABS vehicle, even when it IS time to utilize the ABS features you paid for. I'm not really surprised by the study's findings -- those experienced riders were probably relying upon skills they obtained in riding non-ABS bikes.

 

[Scythian]

Listen BUD, I have asked you before not to misquote me. And would appreciate if you would do this.

Do this? Do what?

People do what they learn. If all you do is practice panic stops by slamming, or what ever you want to call it, then when time comes that is what you will do regardless if you are going in a straight line or not. That is a human nature for your body to do what it learned when your brain shuts down. So, go ahead and practice your body slamming techniques as long as your heart desires.

'Cuz if it doesn't work everytime you shouldn't use it anytime?

 

[exskibum]

'Cuz if it doesn't work everytime you shouldn't use it anytime?

There's that straw man again. I'm out -- this is getting to be too much like arguing with a woman you have a relationship with. Knock yourself out with that.

 

[Scythian]

'Cuz if it doesn't work everytime you shouldn't use it anytime?

There's that straw man again. I'm out. Knock yourself out with that.

I don't think you understand the term 'strawman' when it comes to argument.

I paraphrased his argument--his argument, as did yours--brought in all kinds of extraneous variables of 'leaned over'. 'choosing between ABS and finesse', etc. beyond the case of panic stopping in a straight line which the study and my comments were about.

Filling up your argument with those extraneous and false variables are the straw that a strawman is built from; making your argument, of course, the strawman....

Hence my previous 'woodchuck comment'.

 

[exskibum]

'Cuz if it doesn't work everytime you shouldn't use it anytime?

There's that straw man again. I'm out. Knock yourself out with that.

I don't think you understand the term 'strawman' when it comes to argument.

I paraphrased his argument--his argument, as did yours--brought in all kinds of extraneous variables of 'leaned over'. 'choosing between ABS and finesse', etc. beyond the case of panic stopping in a straight line which the study and my comments were about.

Filling up your argument with those extraneous and false variables are the straw that a strawman is built from; making your argument, of course, the strawman....

Hence my previous 'woodchuck comment'.

LMAO. like I said above -- this is like arguing with a woman who has no real argument adn either uses misdirection or a straw man to obfuscate. You've amply demonstrated the limits of your knowledge, reasoning, and language skills. Still thanks for the article, it was interesting. But we've been here before, and as you noted above, you are really just grinding an axe from a previous thread. So go ahead and fool yourself about your superiority while the rest of us point and laugh. Hope you have a good day. I really gotta go now.

 

[Scythian]

So go ahead and fool yourself about your superiority while the rest of us point and laugh. Hope you have a good day.

“The Roots of Violence: Wealth without work, Woodchucks without finesse, Pleasure without conscience, Panic stops without ABS, Knowledge without character, Strawmen without straw, Commerce without morality, Science without humanity, Worship without sacrifice, Politics without principles” -- M.K. Gandhi

 

[wheatonFJR]

So go ahead and fool yourself about your superiority while the rest of us point and laugh. Hope you have a good day.

“The Roots of Violence: Wealth without work, Woodchucks without finesse, Pleasure without conscience, Panic stops without ABS, Knowledge without character, Strawmen without straw, Commerce without morality, Science without humanity, Worship without sacrifice, Politics without principles” -- M.K. Gandhi

Yeah, quote yer Gandhi man...the spirit of all your posts in this thread definitely stand in stark contrast to his reputation.

Regarding straightline panic stops, although I don't have an abs bike, I have tended to agree with you. You may be right - but if you are...you sure have been an *** about it on your posts in this thread.

 

[Indian Scout]

This reads like a good dogpile for tomorrow, Dogpile Friday!

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

 

[Kevin Daly]

"No correlation between type of motorcycle and deceleration parameters could be detected" and some introductory information about the bikes of novices. As someone who has owned several bikes, "no differences between bikes" is a crock! As a peer reviewing scientist I would reject this article on the basis that that the conditions are not comparable as presented; is the bike better at stopping becasue it has ABS or for any of a number of weight, suspension and non-abs brake factors.

As a "peer reviewing scientist", I'm surprised you use a personal anecdote to try to impeach a finding.

I can see where there could be 'no difference between type of motorcycle and deceleration parameters in this study': overall the more experienced bikers commonly ride heavier bikes and have better braking technique--skewing deceleration/bike data....

Besides, you missed the part where they used two control bikes (well, a scooter and a bike) for the study.

Really, did anyone bother to actually read study!?

From the MSF website:

Two technical developments have sought to simplify braking control and provide more effective braking. Linked braking slows both wheels with a single control. Antilock braking systems (ABS) allow the rider to apply maximum braking force without fear of wheel lock-up and the resulting loss of control, providing the bike is not leaned over. Under many pavement conditions, antilock brake systems allow the rider to stop a motorcycle more rapidly while maintaining steering control even during situations of extreme, panic braking.Although incidental and first-hand experience indicates either of these systems can be effective in countering the problems faced by a motor-cyclist in a panic stop, we know of no research that shows how they perform in the field compared with similar bikes fitted with standard brake systems. The added costs (particularly for ABS) andreluctance to accept them by some experienced motorcyclists have limited the adoption of these potentially effective systems.

Maximum braking force does not imply 'progressively sqeezing the brakes'. Progressively squeezing the brakes is wonderful technique and all of that, but based on studies, 'progressive braking' will not stop you as quickly as applying maximum braking force and trusting the ABS on the bike.

Furthermore, as with the Austrian study I posted in this thread, this quote from the MSF website admits that the problem with ABS use and adoption is with the 'experienced riders' not adapting to new technology.

Heck, the MSF website admits: "We really don't know how to teach, or what to do with ABS...."

I stand my my contention

Scythian,

"As a peer reviwing scientist" is not a "personal anecdote" used to "impeach a finding" it just happens to be a fact and by using the training I have as a scientist to review this report critically I come to the conclusion that it is crap. Don't get me wrong I am sure that the conclusion that ABS is better than non-ABS is absolutely correct; their methods are just too poorly thought out to proove anything!

As a matter of fact, this study would simply not survive a real scientific peer review: PERIOD. Any scientist can tell you that if you are going to manipulate a variable such as for example "brake type" or "experience" and you have two groups or levels of each (lets say for example ABS vs. non-ABS) the groups must not vary in any other systematic way. Obviously there is a bit more complexity because they used two different ABS bikes (fyi, yes I did read that and no it not a valid control of any real kind. The fact that they used two different ABS bikes however, has no bearing on the confounds they introduce (thats a bad word in science) between the ABS and non-ABS condition.

Let me ask you (though I know you cant answer this because the study is so poorly described). What were the conditions of the disk rotors, calipers on the non ABS bikes? Were they new? Did they use the same tires across all conditions? Was the weight the same? was the rake of the front forks the same? The answers to these questions is you have no ******* clue! Given the variety of bikes that people ride I am sure there were pplenty od differences on all of these variables and in some cases they will likely add to the dissadvantages that the non ABS bikes have but certianly they will add to the variability of the non-ABS condition; this is evident in their figure 3 where the red bars (onw vehicle) are spread or platykurtic and the green bars are more leptokurtic. Oh thats another bad problem heteroskedasticity of variance. END OF GAME YOU LOOSE! And that's just getting warmed up... Look up the word "covariance" while you're at it and you'll understand why confounds are bad. The fact that they compared a brand new bike and scooter against a bunch of privately owned bikes biases the results. REJECT!

The next fatal flaw: "for these first two runs, the experienced drivers used their own motorcycle, the novices used the motorcycle they had used for training" Let me ask you this? If we asked 100 people to stop on their bikes (60-0 mph) as fast as possible and repeat this 10 times each, do you think that the first stop distance would be longer than the second? How about the third to the fourth and so on? This is what scientists refer to as a "repeated measures effect." What it means is that the there is a systematic bias in the data because the "runs" were not randomized between ABS and non-ABS. So did they stop faster on the ABS because its ABS or because they had two more breaking trials? REJECT!

Their conclusion that their parking lot results establishes that experienced riders cant stop as fast as a car or truck with non-ABS in spite of the fact that their bikes are capable of it is pure speculation and assumes the experienced riders were trying as hard in a parking lot as they would in front of a deer or a Mack truck (*********). Do you think you would try harder if a brick wall suddenly appeared (bet you would)

Now I am not saying YOU did not read every word carefully, I am only saying that you are not reading it critically.

As for the spontaneous progressive breaking comments in your reply to me, I say go for it crunch those front brakes down as hard as you can, you probably wont flip the FJR when the front end dives and you and the back end of the bike resist slowing down. Personally, I am able to get the rear tire off the ground on dry surfaces that is the moment of maximum breaking I dont care if you have ABS (did i mention i dont have ABS). break any harder and you will be buyin a new bike. I think this is an issue of relative differences in the use of the phrase "applying maximum braking force" How do you define that? "instant (0.00 sec) crunch?" or an increase over 0.5sec to 1.0 sec?

No response necessary. :jerry: