Braking Distance

[Johnnylane]

Any thoughts on camparative braking distances? The FZ6 versus a 2 ton car? Half, quarter?

 

[wrightme43]

The old (prior to 07) FZ does 60-0 in 116 feet. The new one has better brakes. I added better pads and stainless lines. I have not measured it, and to be honest I won't. I just know it stops really really quick when I need it to.

 

[dark_isz]

..........

 

[GConn]

I thought that cars brake better than a bike because of the larger contact surface with the ground. If these numbers if correct, I am wrong.

 

[wrightme43]

Corvette does 60-0 in 113 feet.
Porsche 911 60-0 119 feet.
Toyota minivan 60-0 135 feet
Dodge minivan 60-0 131 feet.
Harley 883 sportser 60-0 133 feet.
Ford F-350 60-0 170 feet.
Mazda Miata 60-0 113 feet.

 

[GConn]

Corvette does 60-0 in 113 feet.
Porsche 911 60-0 119 feet.
Toyota minivan 60-0 135 feet
Dodge minivan 60-0 131 feet.
Harley 883 sportser 60-0 133 feet.
Ford F-350 60-0 170 feet.
Mazda Miata 60-0 113 feet.

How does ABS affect braking distance? Is it better control during braking but at more distance or it improves both the stoping distance and control?

 

[wrightme43]

If your really good it increases stopping distance if your avg or less it decreases.

I hope that makes sense.

In bad conditions it helps.

On dry pavement a practiced and trained driver ride can stop faster with out it.

 

[DefyInertia]

60 to 0 is one thing and very relevant on the street.

But if you're looking at real performance, say at a race track where you're never getting to zero or even close, cars will demolish any bike in the braking zones. They will brake later, harder, and be able to carry more corner speed.

On dry pavement a practiced and trained driver ride can stop faster with out it.

Can you go into more detail on this?

 

[Wavex]

But if you're looking at real performance, say at a race track where you're never getting to zero or even close, cars will demolish any bike in the braking zones. They will brake later, harder, and be able to carry more corner speed.

You`re talking about light race cars right... because I don`t think my Ford Explorer would be able to accomplish that

On average, and on the streets, I believe it`ll take about the same braking distance for cars compared to bikes... yes cars have more contact area with the ground, but they also weigh much more than a bike...

 

[wrightme43]

60 to 0 is one thing and very relevant on the street.

But if you're looking at real performance, say at a race track where you're never getting to zero or even close, cars will demolish any bike in the braking zones. They will brake later, harder, and be able to carry more corner speed.



Can you go into more detail on this?

Sure Nate.

If a tire is kept thru skill at the threshold of lock up it will stop quicker than on that is pulsed to lock and released. In a panic ABS is better than locking solid. If you are in controll the roaring tire is stopping faster than abs.

Check this out.

STOPPING DISTANCE WITH ABS
The stopping distance provided by ABS in an emergency will vary with road, weather and vehicle conditions.
Many consumers think that ABS provides the shortest possible stopping distance. In testing at our driver training centres, this is proven to not be the case. If 2 identical vehicles, one with ABS and one without were to perform emergency stops at the same speed on the same sealed road, the car without ABS has the potential to achieve to shorter braking distance.
This however depends on the drivers skill and training to brake to the threshold point just before brake lock-up occurs. In a real accident scenario this also relies (most critically) on the emotions of the driver of the non-ABS car. If they panic they can easily push past the threshold point and lock the brakes, resulting in a much larger braking distance. The car with ABS will regardless of the emotional state of the driver, provide almost the best braking distance everytime (except on loose surfaces - see below). The brakes locking and unlocking repeatedly, average out to a braking pressure close to the threshold pressure which allows the vehicle to stop the best.
Therefore non-ABS can stop better, but also can stop much worse, depending on the driver.
In motorsport, racing cars rarely run with ABS systems, they are deactivated to allow the driver better braking distances and better pedal feel.
However on loose gravel, snow and ice the road surface can move under the vehicle during braking, which in effect confuses the ABS system. The brakes release for too long or by too much resulting in a dramatically increased braking distance. A SUV/4WD owner in remote parts of Australia can learn the hard way that the ABS system which is great for city driving, can be a negative feature for gravel roads.
In fact on some loose gravel surfaces a better braking distance would result by locking the brakes which forces the tyre into the surface, forming a wedge or dirt/stones in front of the tyre. The vehicle without ABS will most likely stop in a shorter distance than the one with ABS, however the downside is you lose steering control and the non-ABS vehicle will follow the camber of the road.
Another braking technique that can be used on these loose surfaces is called CADENCE BRAKING (or pulse-pump). This technique can only be performed in vehicles without ABS. Here the driver locks the brakes to push to tyre through the loose surface but then they ease off the brakes to clear the wedge of rubble and regain steering and then they lock the brakes again and then release. This lock/un-lock sequence is repeated rapidly. It is like ABS but oscillations on/off are slower and the release of the brakes is long enough to be able to make steering corrections.
As such ABS cannot overcome the laws of physics. Drivers of ABS equipped cars should continue to drive in a safe manner, maintaining an appropriate following distance for the road and weather conditions


Ok After more research I may be wrong with outdated info.

Mercedes is able to modulate all four wheels differently.

Let me learn some more.

 

[wrightme43]

The IIHS report, issued December 10, 1996, notes that in single-vehicle accidents, cars with antilock brakes are as much as 44% more likely to produce fatalities than are cars without the antilock system.

Now this is most likely due to drivers letting up off the brakes when they pulsate.

 

[dark_isz]

..........

 

[wrightme43]

Ok

It looks like from more reading that yes you can stop faster without ABS but only in a straight line.

If you try to steer ABS is much better. The articles are saying that ABS is not designed to make you stop faster it is designed so that you can use max brakeing and turn to avoid at the same time.

MY statement may be right in one way, but it is wrong in others.

Sooo

I dont know.

 

[GConn]

I think you were right from the first time. According to the article posted here, ABS provides more consistent high performance and at the same time more control to the operator.

So it depends from the rider and the situation if he will outperform an ABS system or not. This is what I made out of the article and pretty much agrees with your point of view...I think

 

[dako81]

ABS is good to have to slow and stop as fast as you can consistantly without locking the tire (panic stop). The reason why a professsional can stop faster on dry pavement in a straight line is because youre tire actually has its most grip when it is ever so slightly sliding. This means the speed of the tire rotating is slightly slower than the speed traveling. ABS will NOT allow this to happen, it will let off the brakes.

I saw it on some tv thing during some superbike race or something. They were saying how the tires have max grip when they are slightly sliding. This is true for acceleration also as well as turning. The pro's are actually sliding through the turns.

 

[DefyInertia]

I have no clue about ABS vs. non-ABS performance...was just trying to learn something. If the highly skilled rider/driver can keep the bike/car at threshhold without ABS, why can't they do that with ABS? Does ABS kick in BEFORE you've braked too hard??????

You`re talking about light race cars right... because I don`t think my Ford Explorer would be able to accomplish that

On average, and on the streets, I believe it`ll take about the same braking distance for cars compared to bikes... yes cars have more contact area with the ground, but they also weigh much more than a bike...

You're comparing a sportbike to an SUV? How about a FZ6 to a miata or something more on par. Eitherway, my comparison was with regard to high performance machines, whether 2 or 4 wheel. The best cars will stomp the best bikes in just about everything except the slalom.

I bet my fiance's SUV Nissan Murano (w/ 4 wheel disc/ABS and big wheels/tires) can stop faster that most members of this site (on their FZ6)...but I have nothing to base that on...lol...anyone got numbers for the murano?

 

[dako81]

...Does ABS kick in BEFORE you've braked too hard??????...

With my understanding, Yes. But ever so slightly.

 

[hunterfz6]

You got writeme43 started =).

 

[wrightme43]

Murano 122 ft.

 

[wrightme43]

We are all real close untill you get up into the super massive vehicles.

Check this out.

1964 chevelle and cutlass stopping distance. 60-0

277 feet.

Its really more than anything in the driver AND machine working together and practiced together.

To me its just like catching a ball in a glove. Practice enough and you just look at it, and your hand does it with out thought.

Motorcycle Ninjitsu. LOL