Surely the purpose of *any* anti-lock system is to allow the driver to steer
while 'panic' braking? However it's my contention that in an incident that
has caused the driver to slam on the brakes and make them lock/cause the ABS
to operate they aren't going to be in a fit mental state to think about
steering round the obstruction, most people just freeze. I hated the ABS
systems on two cars from the late 80s early 90s I had, came on far too readily
and severely reduced retardation compared to the MGBs on the same roads and
conditions. My 2004 ZS seems much better, I don't think I have had it operate
in two years, despite trying in the wet when I test-drove the car. I was a
passenger in a car on a cradle used to demonstrate skidding and ABS and the
driver tried to show how much better ABS was than cadence braking. It was,
but his idea of cadence braking was to put the brakes on and off at about half
the speed of turn signals. Personally I've always pumped them pretty-much as
fast as I can, certainly much faster than turn signals. The big problem is
that new drivers aren't taught to recognise when something goes wrong, and
that includes skidding as well as vehicle malfunction, not even what the ABS
feels like, nor what to do when it does, hence the panic and confusion when
something like that happens.
PaulH.
----- Original Message -----
... We used brake tapping to stop much quicker and retain steering, even on
ice. Too bad new drivers don't learn this. They will tend to try to steer away
from an obstacle while hard braking. This just might work with a really good
antilock system...
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Mgs@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/mgs
http://www.team.net/archive
|