Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun May 10, 2026 14:57

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 13:24 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7357
Location: Highlands
NHTSA: ABS Braking Increases “Fatal Run-off-Road Crashes” by 34% - HERE
Robert Farago wrote:
By Robert Farago
October 22, 2009

Killer abs? (courtesy vigilantfire.com)

A National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) study on Antilock Braking Systems (ABS) reveals that they’re not all that. In fact, the technology increases fatalities in certain circumstances. (Not that Frank Williams didn’t warn you back in 2006.) “ABS has close to a zero net effect on fatal crash involvements. Fatal run-off-road crashes of passenger cars increased by a statistically significant 9 percent (90% confidence bounds: 3% to 15% increase), offset by a significant 13-percent reduction in fatal collisions with pedestrians (confidence bounds: 5% to 20%) and a significant 12-percent reduction in collisions with other vehicles on wet roads (confidence bounds: 3% to 20%).,” “The Long-Term Effect of ABS in Passenger Cars and LTVs” reports [download pdf here]. “ABS is quite effective in nonfatal crashes, reducing the overall crash- involvement rate by 6 percent in passenger cars (confidence bounds: 4% to 8%) and by 8 percent in LTVs (confidence bounds: 3% to 11%).” That doesn’t sound . . . confidence inspiring. In fact, that nine percent increase looks even worse close up. A LOT worse.

From page 8:

But previous statistical evaluations of ABS have had ambiguous results. Analyses of data from the early 1990s showed significant increases in fatal run-off-road crashes with ABS, on the order of 28 percent. The increase was baffling, given the success of ABS on the test track. However, at that time, many drivers did not yet know how to use ABS correctly. During the mid-1990s, the safety community worked hard to inform the public about the correct use of ABS (“Don’t let up on the brakes”; “Stomp, stay, and steer”). A second generation of analyses circa 2000 showed much smaller increases in run-off-road crashes that were no longer statistically significant. But they were based on just two or three years of data and left uncertainty about the overall effect of ABS.

A nine percent fatalty increase sounds bad. A twenty-eight percent increase is an epic fail. But we’re not finished here:

On wet, snowy, or icy roads, where ABS is most likely to activate, the increase in fatal run-off-road crashes is a statistically significant 34 percent in passenger cars (confidence bounds: 20% to 50% increase). On these roads, all three types of fatal run-off-road crashes increase significantly for cars and so do fatal rollovers of LTVs.

WTF?
We are still unable to provide a convincing explanation or empirical evidence (other than the crash statistics themselves) for the increase in run-off-road crashes.

The aforementioned Mr. Williams reckons “I still think people don’t understand ABS, and when it starts pulsing and grinding they think something’s wrong and overreact. Maybe instead of spending so much money hyping hybrids, the auto companies need to do some commercials on how the safety systems in their cars work.”
So, is this a whitewash? The report’s emphasis on ABS’ net impact rather and statistical downplaying of ABS’ negative impact certainly should give NHSTA supporters pause. In fact, shouldn’t the NHTSA call for a moratorium on the technology?
But no, the report is suffused with reassurance that the next big thing in safety—federally mandated ESC (Electronic Stability Control)— will sort out the ABS “anomaly.”
Although the preceding analyses show a significant 9-percent increase for ABS on run-off-road crashes of passenger cars, the increase is small relative to the likely benefits of ESC. NHTSA’s 2007 evaluation of ESC, based on statistical analyses through calendar year 2004, found a 36- percent reduction in fatal run-off-road crashes. Thus, the combined effect of ESC and ABS is an estimated 30-percent reduction of fatal crashes.
So that’s alright then? Tell that to the families of drivers and passengers of vehicles where ABS was the difference between life and death, and not in a good way. Either that or just wait for the lawsuit.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 13:46 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
What abs copes with well is differential grip across corners of the car. Normal brakes don't, so you spin. I personally wouldn't brake on a corner. If abs is encouraging people to brake on a corner then maybe this is the reason as if you have got it so wrong you need to scrub off speed you're probably ending up in the hedge anyway.

I don't think it is as simple as they make out. Perhaps it also has something more to do with the nature of steering systems and steering feel in modern cars. There isn't any basically. I think this is working in combination with abs. You really can't feel much in a modern car compared to an older car. I think this remoteness in steering feel and sensation of speed has a lot to do with it.

I think there needs to be some proper testing at MIRA with normal people and slippery conditions to find out what they do and what happens with their car.

Do people really not understand what abs does? I've only ever activated mine once. In snow. Useless!

I don't know how non abs 4wd cars cope with differential grip and whether they spin. If they don't either then perhaps a mass change to 4wd is what is really needed as 4wd is so much more benign than either fwd or rwd.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 15:18 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7357
Location: Highlands
I agree when drivers handle a car with less understanding than the car is capable of, then when something goes wrong, beyond what any 'safety system' is competent to resolve there will (v likely) be a resulting crash.
Driver input is so very important, that when driver either they over-reach their abilities (for all reasons), or fail to appreciate the operation of a safety system, the over reliance of that safety system/s is not only going to not 'save' them but can in fact assist in making the situation worse. (Drivers have a false belief of safety.)
i.e. (if I understand this correctly) When ABS is relied on to come to a full 'stop' more quickly, it in fact doesn't because by it's very nature releases and re-applies brake control, than if one applies full brakes without ABS and full friction is used.
I know the problem with when travelling with momentum, and cornering : - you fully apply brakes (non ABS), inducing a controlled skid, will help you travel in the last direction through momentum, but with ABS any steering input will reactivate to a degree, and the desired travel direction (straight) may not be the result but a less favourable path. This is the classic example when ABS can kill you / one. [Obviously if you want to corner then other actions are required ...]

I wonder how many of these accidents are a result of lift off oversteer.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 18:02 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
I would not totally agree with you. Mine are fare more effective than I can brake in frost and ice. I find them effective on single track roads where you have to dive in the edge for a passing place. Other wise they dont come on.

Dont forget that the drivers failing to negotiate the road may be down to higher powered cars being very available to dummed down drivers. They expect to be able to negotiate the corner at the lollypop speed.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 19:07 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
I prefer to drive a Non ABS car any time. I regularly drive both and have often driven both "backto back" over longish distances, the braking feel is totally different between the two vehicles when you do this and on snow I found ABS to be at best a nuisance. I believe that all new drivers should drive "gadget free" cars for at least the first twenty thousand miles of their driving lives, to learn how to handle a car properly in all conditions.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 19:52 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7357
Location: Highlands
I am not saying that some drivers cannot find them helpful, just that if drivers become, (& as you say dumbed down drivers) to rely on 'gadgets' in this case ABS, they won't recognise potential hazards, and the manner in which they are driving will be beyond the help of that safety system (ABS). The other issue is that they learn to over rely on the system too, and think they can achieve more than is possible, until the day the system either mechanically fails or fails to perform as expected.
I think that learning to drive without gadgets is very sensible, and so that, when 'gadgets' are added / cars 'bought with' - later, they have knowledge and understanding how to drive with and without.
However the fundamental has to be, that it is essential to educate and help improve driver/rider abilities, knowledge and skills for long term driver / rider future career development.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 22:20 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
It is good to see an article with confidence limits on the statistics.

Not to start bashing the Americans, but how sophisticated is the abs fitted to most of their cars? Early implementations only had two channels and were pretty crude, the Americans are known for sticking with older technology in their cars for longer. Can anybody offer an informed opinion on this, Mole or Rush? Would this really make much difference other than the overall stopping distance?

It appears that abs works well in situations where drivers are surprised by someone else but less well where the driver is simply going too fast to stay on the road. As pointed out above it would seem less a problem with the technology and more an issue with changing driver habits. If drivers are becoming less aware of the limits of their vehicles or overconfident in them then the increase in fatalities may have little to do with abs. The article does not make it clear if any comparison had been made against fatalities for vehicles not equipped with abs over the same time periods, this does not mean this was ignored in the original paper of course.

This comment on the linked site was interesting

Mr Carpenter wrote:
The Germans and other Europeans have to actually understand the principles of how cars work, how they drive, and actually have to pass a very stringient driving test to obtain the privilege of driving.


Do Germans have to learn this to pass their test, we do not here.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 23:01 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
I'm hoping Ed_em will be along shortly with some better explanations but in the meantime, my limited understanding is that earlier systems were, indeed, pretty poxy. They had the choice of limiting the braking to the wheel on each axle with the most or the least grip. The former gave better stopping power but (in the case of the rear axle) increased risk of a spin. The latter did the opposite. I haven't read the study - (bit strapped for time just at present) but it would be a VERY hard study to objectively rid of confounding factors. For a start, ABS was originally only available on higher performance cars anyway - themselves a confounding factor!

Modern 4-channel systems can give you the best of both worlds and I think that most of them, most of the time, with most drivers, will stop quicker than a non-ABS car in a panic situation. Certainly I use mine quite often because I am often in a situation where I'm coming downhill on a signle track road and I have occasion to brake AND put two wheels on the grass at the same time. Having grown up without ABS, I must confess to still finding it hard not to start lifting off and cadence braking when the pedal starts pulsing. Obviously it's the worst thing to do because if you just plant your foot down and leave te ABS to do its stuff, you'll get the best braking that each wheel can give - something that even the most gifted driver of a non-ABS car can never do because they car's just not plumbed-up like that! Part of the EC braking test is done on a split-friction surface and I've not managed to get a non-ABS car not to spin under those circumstances, whereas it's a requirement for an ABS car not to spin! (Though I freely admit to NOT being an especially gifted driver)!

Not sure it's a good idea to make people drive gadget-free. That's what I did (just by virtue of my age and financial means!) and that's why I STILL find it hard to "do the right thing" when the ABS pump cuts in! That said, I think the idea of an ADDITIONAL test to let you drive a non-ABS car might be a good idea because the techniques are very different!

Also not sure how they would separate out other features that tend to come bundled with ABS these days - particularly on higher spec. cars. Things like Electronic Stability Control, Electronic brake force distribution and "Panic Assist" all tend to come "bundled" with the high-end ABS systems whether you like it or not.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 23:45 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Monash University carried out a similar study in 2004, PDF here. It references and includes extracts from research by the NHTSA.

The difference between single and multi-vehicle crashes is brought up in section 2.2.1 starting on p3 of the report which is p10 of the file. Reasons for the discrepancy between tested efficiency and real world results for abs in single vehicle accidents and discussed in section 2.3.2 (p8/15) though you may want to start at 2.3.1 (p6/13).

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 09:09 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
I think that learning to drive without gadgets is very sensible, and so that, when 'gadgets' are added / cars 'bought with' - later, they have knowledge and understanding how to drive with and without.


But what is a gadget? Would you want learners to have a car with a non synchro gearbox?: no windscreen washers or demisters?; no heated rear screen?; non halogen headlights?: no indicators?.

I think that to most of us a "gadget" is something that wasn't fitted to our first car :)

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 02:27 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
Better late than never ...
I'll not discuss ABS systems which limited brake force to the wheels, as they are too old for me to care, rarely found here in Amerika, and nearly extinct. The ABS systems I'm familiar with respond to a locked wheel by immediately releasing that wheel's brake for one to two tenths of a second before resuming old fashioned brake function, which would lead to that wheel locking again, which repeats the process until the vehicle either comes to a stop, or the driver releases the brakepedal sufficiently.

I owned a Cadillac Fleetwood with 4 Channel ABS, which was capable of shorter ABS panic braking distances than my present Chevy Caprice Estate with 3 Channel ABS. Since they both weigh within 100 lbs of each other, I assumed, and later determined for a fact, that either rear wheel locking takes that bit longer for 3 Channel ABS to unlock, resulting in longer braking distances for the Estate.
Corporal Ed Sanow, of the Benton County Indiana Sheriff's Dept, wrote:
ABS brakes got off to a bad start with a lot of law enforcement officers when they were first put on police cars in 1991. It was assumed that police officers understood how ABS brakes worked, including the pulsating pedal. While Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and other European cars have had ABS for a long time, it was totally new to most cops. They had to be taught that the ABS brakes would not lock, taught not to pump the brakes during emergency stopping, taught that the pedal would pulsate and even kick back a little when activated, and taught that the pedal would be lower before maximum braking.
This was a lot to teach every police officer in the U.S. Over the next few years, with both Ford and GM active in educating the police on the characteristics and advantages of ABS, cops got up to speed [on ABS brakes].
ABS had a controversial start, but is now a widely understood and accepted safety device.
This is not the case with the general public.

Some people misunderstand [and possibly fear] the kickbacks. Upon feeling the pulsations, they come to believe that their brakes are malfunctioning, and either begin pumping, or partially releasing the brakes to 'calm' the pedal. Either action increases braking distances to potentially dangerous effect.
(I'm nearly convinced this is the biggest reason why Panic Brake Assist was invented; the other reason being that some people simply won't step on any brake pedal hard enough for fear of locking, or fast enough, for pretty much the same reason.)

Some people believe that ABS brakes allow a car to stop in a shorter distance than a non-ABS car. While an ABS panic stop should outperform four locked wheels in any case, that was never their raison d'etre. This assumption, or at least its miscalibration, is also potentially hazardous.

A well calibrated ABS system should perform within 16% of a theoretically perfectly executed panic stop. This isn't always the case. Depending on the quality of the ABS calibration, it may take longer.
I personally rate ABS systems by how close they come to my average threshold braking distance on dry and wet surfaces; all through the nineties, most cars' ABS panic stops gave up more than 20% to my average performance, meaning 'thumbs down'.
I also find fault with ABS systems that overreacted to bumpy roads, measured by deactivating the ABS and changing lanes in the bumpy area.

ABS' purpose was to preserve their ability to continue steering the vehicle [with the steering wheel instead of the brakes], thus to give drivers another way to avoid crashing into stuff. The finding that ABS is ineffective is misleading for one reason:
It is the drivers who were ineffective, because they - unlike the average police officer - STILL haven't been trained in either the use of ABS brakes, or the steering wheel.

[rant]I've said this before, and I'll say it again:
Untrained drivers deserve more training, not more gadgets. If a person spent the money to buy ABS, Traction Control, Stability Control/Roll Control, etc on themselves, THEY'D have equipped themselves, and thus carry the benefits to every car driven, instead of paying over and over again.[/rant]

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 05:04 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
Continuing ...
teabelly wrote:
I think there needs to be some proper testing at MIRA with normal people and slippery conditions to find out what they do and what happens with their car.

Do people really not understand what abs does? I've only ever activated mine once. In snow. Useless!
Suffice to say I don't think enough people know how to use the steering wheel very well generally, much less when combining ABS panic braking and an emergency lanechange. If this were a tested subject on any road test, I suspect more than two out of three would need remedial training here.
anton wrote:
Dont forget that the drivers failing to negotiate the road may be down to higher powered cars being very available to dummed down drivers. They expect to be able to negotiate the corner at the lollypop speed.
Education, training, testing ...
graball wrote:
I regularly drive both and have often driven both "back to back" over longish distances, the braking feel is totally different between the two vehicles when you do this ...
I'm willing to live with it. It lets me know right away whether or not it's there to do what I can't do - compensate for rapidly changing traction conditions.
Quote:
... and on snow I found ABS to be at best a nuisance.
Meaning one of two things:
a) you're pretty good at it
b) the ABS is bad at it
Seeing how much ABS has improved over the past two decades leads me to believe the latter.
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
I think that learning to drive without gadgets is very sensible, and so that, when 'gadgets' are added / cars 'bought with' - later, they have knowledge and understanding how to drive with and without.
It is a little known fact that ABS braking quits in an attempt to avoid or mitigate brake fade, since it adds much more heat to the rotors. If the driver is lucky enough for it to quit before the next major braking event, [s]he may still lack the ability to threshold brake/cadence brake/what-have-you. If the ABS quits DURING the braking event, who knows what might happen?
Mole wrote:
... I use mine quite often because I am often in a situation where I'm coming downhill on a single track road and I have occasion to brake AND put two wheels on the grass at the same time.
I'm willing to bet that if a study specifically noted these types of events, it would be considered more effective by an order of magnitude.
Quote:
Having grown up without ABS, I must confess to still finding it hard not to start lifting off and cadence braking when the pedal starts pulsing. Obviously it's the worst thing to do because if you just plant your foot down and leave the ABS to do its stuff, you'll get the best braking that each wheel can give - something that even the most gifted driver of a non-ABS car can never do because they car's just not plumbed-up like that!
What I underlined is the reason why [expert level 4 Channel] ABS should be standard in every single car as soon as possible, if it isn't already.
Mole wrote:
Also not sure how they would separate out other features that tend to come bundled with ABS these days - particularly on higher spec. cars. Things like Electronic Stability Control, Electronic brake force distribution and "Panic Assist" all tend to come "bundled" with the high-end ABS systems whether you like it or not.
They often come bundled with ABS because most people haven't been taught to use ABS properly in the first place.
dcbwhaley wrote:
Would you want learners to have a car with a non synchro gearbox?: no windscreen washers or demisters?; no heated rear screen?; non halogen headlights?: no indicators?.
Yes, if only because you should know what to do when any of these things fail, even if that is simply to slow or stop the damn car.
As for indicators, has that ever really stopped anyone? In NYC, if you're relying on other people's turnsignals to determine what they're/you're gonna do next, you're gonna need ABS real soon.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 05:19 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
On October 22nd, 2009, Pch101 wrote:
This snippet of the report helps to explain what is happening with the numbers:

The great benefit for ABS, for LTVs just as for passenger cars is prevention of culpable involvements with other vehicles. On all roads, the reduction is a statistically significant 20 percent (t = 4.32; confidence bounds, 12 to 28%). On wet, snowy, or icy roads, where ABS is much more likely to activate, the reduction is a remarkable 36 percent (t = 4.79; confidence bounds, 24 to 46%). Here, ABS evidently enables drivers to stop in time and under control, avoiding vehicles in their own lane while not invading other lanes. The overall reduction of noncontrol group involvements on wet, snowy, or icy roads is a significant 19 percent (t = 3.10; confidence bounds, 8 to 28%) and the reduction of all crashes on these roads is 14 percent (confidence bounds, 6 to 22%)

What appears to be happening here is that accidents that would have involved additional vehicles are being replaced by one-vehicle crashes. Drivers are able to steer out of the path of other vehicles, but sometimes end up off road, instead. Instead of wrecking another car and perhaps injuring or killing others, they limit the damage to themselves.

All told, that’s an improvement from the standpoint of the other motorists. That may not be so great for the driver in the crashed vehicle who may have been personally better off hitting a relatively soft Honda with a family’s worth of kids instead of a rather hard tree or pole.

Ultimately, ABS may do a better job of transferring damage back to the perpetrator, while helping to keep innocent bystanders out of harm’s way. That doesn’t sound like an entirely bad thing for those who don’t drive like nuts.
Underlining by The Rush
The only thing I see wrong here is this:
How many idiots found a conscience as ABS scolded their foot, managed to avoid hurting someone else by steering, yet ultimately failed to save themselves?
How many of those idiots wouldn't be idiots if only they'd been trained in the use of ABS (or at least to avoid using it in the first place?)

I don't want to take away a single Darwin Award from anyone who truly deserves to win it, but many have found themselves on the podium only because they didn't know better. Some could be led to wisdom, if only they were given just a little more knowledge. Put another way, sometimes you can fix stupid.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 15:47 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/drivin ... 785747.ece
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/killer ... isk-by-51/


Just a couple of items I found.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 08:33 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Quote:
Quote:
dcbwhaley wrote:Would you want learners to have a car with a non synchro gearbox?: no windscreen washers or demisters?; no heated rear screen?; non halogen headlights?: no indicators?.


Yes, if only because you should know what to do when any of these things fail, even if that is simply to slow or stop the damn car.



Solid rubber tyres? Starting handles? Magnetos? Manual advance/retard?
Do you think every learner should start on this?

Image

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 07:27 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
dcbwhaley wrote:
Would you want learners to have a car with a non synchro gearbox?: no windscreen washers or demisters?; no heated rear screen?; non halogen headlights?: no indicators?.
I wrote:
Yes, if only because you should know what to do when any of these things fail, even if that is simply to slow or stop the damn car.
dcbwhaley wrote:
Solid rubber tyres? Starting handles? Magnetos? Manual advance/retard?
Do you think every learner should start on this?

Image
It wouldn't be absurd to require the ability to operate 'current' available models, including those statistically common to the area's used car market. That would suggest knowing how to competently operate/drive a vehicle without any electronic nannies - it doesn't matter if they've momentarily cut out, or you borrowed an 'old' car; the effect is pretty much the same.

Learning how to drive [in] something that you'd only find in a museum, not to mention that you'd only be able to learn how to drive it from the curator?
Please.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 210 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.045s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]