To ABS or not to ABS?

Martyn B

Well-known member
UKGSer Subscriber
Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Location
Wilts, England
It adds £750 on the new price or approx £400 on used bikes.

Did you or didn't you go for it and do you regret your decision?

Martyn
 
Martyn,

I think you'll find the majority view comes down on the side of ABS. Putting the safety aspect to one side for a moment, it is certainly a sought after option when selling a bike.

I don't have ABS. My Adv was a cancelled order, so I didn't have the choice of fitting it, but would've chosen not to. This is for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, the result of a road test in one of the Bike/RiDE mags which showed a consistently longer stopping distance when ABS was on when compared with the same bike with ABS off.

The second was a long conversation I had with a GS owner who had, as he was approaching a junction on a good dry day, hit a patch of gravel with his front wheel and lost all his braking. He sailed out into the major road, completely incapable of doing anything about it (thankfully there was nothing coming). He posited that, if he hadn't had ABS, he would've been able to lock the front wheel and stop, by the 'bow-wave' effect of running into the gravel. I met him while he was on his new (non ABS) GS.

I'm not a luddite, I believe that ABS is a major safety device. I also realise the examples I've quoted may be the equivalent of telling an anti-smoking campaigner of your grandad who smoked 200 a day and lived until he was 100 yrs old. I just have questions as to whether the BMW ABS system is advanced enough to deal with all eventualities successfully. The longer stopping distance suggests to me that it's not.

I expect this one will run & run - it did last time......


MikeO:)
 
ABS

I wouldn't be bothered about ABS if I didn't do loads of miles.
But doing 18k miles a year in all conditions means a lot of greasy, salty, oily roads where ABS comes in handy.

Its saved my skin a few times in the wet when I've braked very heavily and the system as handled what would have turned into a locked up front wheel or me rear ending a car.

Doing so many miles there are bound to be times when you can't see the road surface properly/lost concentration etc...

So I reckon its saved me a few quid in the long run. Always turn it off when on snow and offroad though...
 
Re: ABS

gutsi said:
I wouldn't be bothered about ABS if I didn't do loads of miles.
But doing 18k miles a year...

You don't do lots of miles ;)



I just wrote some stuff about ABS getting you out of trouble that you probabaly didn't need to get into in the first place, but it was far too patronising, so I deleted it
 
If ABS is such a wonderful safety feature why do BMW only offer it as an option? A very expensive option too and one which I have never experienced on my previous Japanese bikes. That is why I didn't specify it on my new Adventure, even though you do have the capacity to de-activate it for off road use. Perhaps people like it because it's another toy to play with. The system is complicated and prone to failure (eventually) and weighs quite a bit too.
I also hate the Honda linked brake set up as these things take a degree of control away from you.

Tests have proven that a good rider will always be able to brake more consistantly without ABS, but the inexperienced rider may benefit from these type of safety features. Certainly on cars ABS has proven to assist the majority of people, but a racing driver would never use this system (perhaps more complicated traction control systems though).
It's a bit like the governments approach to road safety - treat everyone as though they are crap. I mean how can you compare someone who has advanced driving, track day experience and drives thousands of miles a year to an old duffer in a Metro who's never passed a test in his life!! :shoot:
That is why we have traffic calming, millions of speed cameras, shite roads and 400 air bags, ABS, TCS and all the other safety features thats exist (mostly on Volvos). Makes people complacent.

Simon

P.S. Make everyone ride a bike for a year before being allowed in a car then they would know about forward planning.
 
When BMW launched ABS on the K series in the 80's they invited lots of journos to a test track to give it a go.

One american journalist thought he could do better than the ABS bike (with a non-ABS bike) and proceeded to deck the bike when he hit the gravel / water / whatever slippery stuff they used.

For the majority, it is better to have ABS rather than not. There are a few situations where you are better off without ABS, but you only need to hit the brakes once and have ABS stop a locked wheel to feel the benefit.

I certainly won't have a car for either myself or my wife without it.

I have it on the R1100R and will make sure my GS has it when I get one.

6X
 
Firstly, if you get it right you'll never use your ABS, but on the odd occasion you don't it's a damn good failsafe. It'll keep you up right and in a position to control events.

Secondly, if it stops you going down once it'll pay for itself in parts not brought.

Thirdly, I'll except that some riders could beat an ABS system under controlled/safe conditions were the cost of failure isn't going to be pooing into a nappy for the rest of your pain filled days. But an average rider on a cold wet motorway ain't going to react the same as a pro rider with outriggers and a cone telling him where the wet patch starts.

Fourthly, the benefits of having ABS out way not having ABS, the only question is by how much. I suppose it's anywhere between £750 and your life.
 
ABS Tests

You may be interested in reading this from ibmwr, it is 10 years old so a bit out of date.

A Real-World Comparison of A Real-World Comparison of ABS Systems - Michael Kneebone published in Motorcycle Consumer News 09/92 ABS Systems - Michael Kneebone published in Motorcycle Consumer News 09/92

I had forgotten how favourable a review it was. It is interesting that the performance on gravel was better for an ABS bike. I remember hearing a similar story to MikeO's, but without testing it is difficult to be sure how a non-ABS would have behaved in those circumstances.
 
abs or not

2 years ago I started commuting to work on the bike all of which before had been sportsbikes. I now ride my abs gs in all weathers all year round and it is definitely worthwhile as I have had it kick in a couple of times when braking hard in winter conditions using the feel from the front end to have the brakes on as hard as possible and the abs has only kicked in when crossing a manhole cover or other real life road surfaces. When I road my bike purely for pleasure ie Sunday runs etc you shouldnt need abs as you generally dont ride in crap conditions but in the real world it is definitely worthwhile. Plus if you ever sell the bike it will be more desireable.
 
"real men don't need abs....."

I pondered this one before buying my GS. I looked through many articles that claimed that expert riders could do better on the brakes than abs would let them (and they were probably right).

However I still decided to go for it as I don't consider myself one of the aforementioned "experts" and am bound to take my eye off the ball one day, need to brake in a hurry and grab a handful in a panic whilst simultaneously cacking myself.

Haven't needed it yet but I'll be mighty relieved when I do and it does what it says on the tin.

BLL
 
ABS still not sure

First bike with ABS, Many cars with it and never had an issue with them.

But bikes I still don't know - at low speed slippy surfaces in winter when the roads are green round here I guess It might of stopped a couple of front wheel slides but it hasn't saved me life or avoided a crash. At high speeds I wish I didn't have it defo, the couple of times I've had to do an emergency anchors away I'm sure I could of stopped it quicker with out, it it sort of took control away when you really need to fry the front tyre.

Perhaps a programable one would be better so you could say no abs over 30 mph wot do you guys think?

Graham
 
Thanks

Thanks everyone. Seems that you're pretty evenly split.

Well spotted Keith; yes it is an EV (do you do trains as well?) and one of the reasons I'm going to pass on the ABS is that I'll keep running it alongside the GS. I've decided I'm not going to unlearn 25 years of braking technique for ABS usage and then trash the Guzzi as a result. This was something I hadn't considered until I posted this thread!

So now I have to make a decision as to what to offer for a Private Sale GS - 2001 on a Y Plate, non ABS but pretty much mint except for a scratched pannier. Advertised at £6995. What'd yer think, £6k?
 
I'd have had it if it were free (or cheap), on the basis of "might as well"

Been a LONG time since I lost a bike under front end braking tho', so dunno of what value it would be

As a £750 option, it was a no-brainer not to go for it for me. Way too expensive

BTW, 18K a year is not loads of miles ;)
 
ABS systems are not designed to give you the shortest possible braking distance, they are designed to give you steering control under hard braking conditions, i.e allow you to swerve around an obstruction rather than plough straight into it.
Cadence braking simulates the effect of ABS but not at the speed (many applications per second) of the system, ABS also takes the human element (variable !) out of the equation
 
Sure, ABS is an expensive option. But let's face it, biking is a relatively dangerous activity. More than 1 rider gets killed each week in London alone, so my philosophy is to have and use the safest equipment that I can afford - not because it will stop me from being killed or injured, but because it will reduce the risk.

If the event never happens, will I have wasted my money? The answer has to be 'yes', but, of course, the only way I can be certain that the event won't happen, is to leave the bike parked up and travel some other way. But because the event could happen, I'm prepared to pay a risk premium. That's why I bought ABS; that's why I comprehensively insure my bike; that's why I wear the best helmet I can afford etc etc.

The absolute risk of an event is largely proportional to miles travelled (varying by type of road, seasonal use etc), so higher mileages would tend to reduce the risk premium/mileage ratio.

But does ABS work? goose already flagged up the test (here) which shows that in the dry, there's not too much to choose between ABS and non-ABS. But look at the difference when it's wet - a massive 68 feet difference in braking distance from 60mph between the novice with ABS and the very best without ABS. The report does not say what speed the non-ABS rider was doing 68 feet before he finally stopped, but I'l guess that it was fast enough to have a big accident. For three of the testers, their non-ABS stopping distance (350+ft) was nearly twice as long as the best with ABS (193ft).

websGSA suggests that a racing driver would never use ABS. He's right, but only because the FIA banned ABS in F1 several years ago because the systems had been honed to such an art, there was no way of differentiating between the drivers!

So, yes, the evidence does seem to support the positive argument.

You might say that I'm biased because I have ABS. I'd say that I have ABS because I think that it's £750 well spent - even if I never use it!

Greg
 
No way I would pay £750 extra to have ABS on a new bike. They are way too expensive to start with.

On the other hand I wouldn't consider buying a S/H bike without ABS.

Contradictory?

Maybe. It all depends on your disposable income. Let them that can afford it kit the new bikes out with all the extras. Let them that can't buy S/H. I'm not being derogatory towards anyone. I had a new 1150 on order. The new bike had no extras cos I couldn't afford any. When the new bike fell through, I found a S/H 1100 with everything fitted and I'm delighted with all the extras.

I've never even come close to locking the brakes on any bike. Maybe I don't ride fast enough (although others may beg to differ), maybe I've just been lucky. I certainly don't ride if it's pissing down/snowing/icy/foggy. But then I don't have to. My bike is a toy for fun on sunny days.

Ah sod it, I can't remember what point I'm trying to make.

I spend most of my disposable income on alcohol, the rest I waste.
 
black20vt said:
ABS systems are not designed to give you the shortest possible braking distance, they are designed to give you steering control under hard braking conditions, i.e allow you to swerve around an obstruction rather than plough straight into it.
Cadence braking simulates the effect of ABS but not at the speed (many applications per second) of the system, ABS also takes the human element (variable !) out of the equation

Black, (is that your first name?:D), what you say is absolutely correct, but for 4 wheeled vehicles, not two. You cannot successfully steer whilst your brakes are applied hard on a bike, whether you have ABS or not. You will fall off.

MikeO:)
 
Greg Masters said:
You might say that I'm biased because I have ABS. I'd say that I have ABS because I think that it's £750 well spent - even if I never use it!

I would have thought it would have to be used at least once to be £750 well spent!

There's no definitive answer to this question. Some riders don't want ABS at any time under any circumstances. Most riders want ABS some of the time under certain circumstances. The question of whether it's worth £750 isn't really calculable - hence Greg's paradoxical statement. Riding a two-wheeled vehicle and braking under certain conditions is inherently dangerous. Acceptance of that danger is rarely a matter of financial consideration. ABS is one means of attempting to ameliorate a risk that is otherwise dependent on rider skill and conditions beyond rider control. There are many other possibilities. On a bike (compared to a car) ABS is a fairly crude mechanism and its use more limited than one might suppose . . . it doesn't make you invulnerable. I'd prefer to be forced to ride in anticipation of having no ABS to save me.
 


Back
Top Bottom