This is just not correct.
If you don't lock up a wheel, the braking distances are IDENTICAL
If you lock up a wheel, the car with ABS will stop in a shorter distance
If you can threshold brake like an expert (and you can cadence brake in case
you
overdo it), then you can brake in a slightly shorter distance than the ABS.
The catch
is that most drivers CAN'T do this, despite what they think.
I have both attended and taught at advanced driving courses at which all the
above
were unambiguously demonstrated.
The big disadvantage to ABS is on the dirt and perhaps snow or ice (but I
don't
have experience with those). On gravel or dirt, it is IMHO dangerous to have
ABS.
Having owned and driven an ABS car, and travelled many *long* miles in it
(and even
competed in it), I can say that on the whole, it is a very good thing. You
can't always be
at the peak of you concentration and skill and the ABS compensates for those
times admirably.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Max Heim" <mvheim@studiolimage.com>
To: "MG List" <mgs@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, 10 January 2000 11:41
Subject: Re: Speeding in the UK
> Charles D. Sorkin had this to say:
>
>
> >Unrelated question about ABS systems: On normal dry road surfaces, with
> >properly functioning brakes, doesn't an antilock braking system cause the
> >car to require a LONGER stopping distance?
> >
> I believe that is the case, due to the fact that cycling the brake on and
> off means that it is actually applied less than 100% of the time, which
> would, of course, result in the minimum distance.
>
> --
>
> Max Heim
> '66 MGB GHN3L76149
> If you're near Mountain View, CA,
> it's the red one with the silver bootlid.
>
>
|