Accident-ABS failed?

John-K_3

supermum38 wrote: »

Thank you all for your input. As usual I am reminded off what happens on here...

So some answers to your comments. I have driven just as many cars with ABS as without. I am aware of the difference and prefer ABS. I have had accidents in both types and know the difference ABS makes. This is only the second time I am at fault.

My research has explained that airbags generally only deploy over 25mph. So if I was doing less than that was I driving too fast?

Yes. Why do you keep asking the same question? What is the point in asking then saying that you know better.

You drive into the back of a car. ABS has nothing to do with it, it will not have much of an effect at all on your stopping distance.

In future, pay attention to what is going on around you.

Joe_Horner

supermum38 wrote: »

My research has explained that airbags generally only deploy over 25mph. So if I was doing less than that was I driving too fast? We had both just left a traffic light and the driver in front went to pull out past parked cars then suddenly braked just behind them. I was paying attention and hit the brakes hard but could not steer the car.

I'd avoided commenting up to now exactly because of the reasons you mention about "how it goes round here", but if that's a serious question about your speed then it deserves a serious answer.

You were either driving too fast or too close. That's really by definition seeing as you "simply couldn't stop in time" when the car ahead stopped suddenly. I don't do the "what if it was a child" emotive stuff but... parked cars, car ahead has to pull out round them, really basic anticipation should tell you that they may have to stop suddenly.

Whether that's for a child, a dog, a door opening, an oncoming car doesn't matter. It's easily predictable and should have left you in a position where you could stop easily without anything like full braking - so ABS would have no effect at all - if it happened.

Almost everyone out there drives too close / too fast - the two are related: the closer you are the slower you should be and v.v. - and rely on things like ABS to get them out of trouble.

With appropriate anticipation you could easily drive a car with no seat belts or airbags, bald tyres and only a handbrake without getting into problems. I don't suggest you try it, but it can be done.

AnotherJoe

Joe_Horner wrote: »

With appropriate anticipation you could easily drive a car with no seat belts or airbags, bald tyres and only a handbrake without getting into problems. I don't suggest you try it, but it can be done.

Indeed. Ralph Nader once jokingly suggested the best safety measure would be a large metal spike pointing towards the driver, placed in the centre of the steering wheel.

Joe_Horner

Jackmydad wrote: »

If people actually were good drivers, paid attention, and learned to drive within their own limits rather than just thinking "I'm a good driver", and relying on ABS or "auto" anything else, then the roads might be safer.

I'd go further.

If people actually were good drivers then ABS, MOTs, speed limits, alcohol limits, mobile phone laws, and most road signs would be redundant And insurance would cost pennies.

parking_question_chap

Joe_Horner wrote: »

I'd go further.

If people actually were good drivers then ABS, MOTs, speed limits, alcohol limits, mobile phone laws, and most road signs would be redundant And insurance would cost pennies.

How does being a good driver reduce the costs of vehicle wear and tear?

Aylesbury_Duck

Mechanical sympathy.

Joe_Horner

parking_question_chap wrote: »

How does being a good driver reduce the costs of vehicle wear and tear?

As Aylesbury Duck says:

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

Mechanical sympathy.

But also, an essential part of being a "good driver" is being aware of, and maintaining, the condition of your vehicle:

If you don't do that, you can't have confidence in how it'll respond - including its limits. If you can't be confident in that then you can't effectively plan and anticipate as you drive. If you can't effectively plan and anticipate then you can't be a good driver.

And if everyone kept their vehicles maintained then the MOT would be redundant.

buglawton

Joe_Horner wrote: »

I'd go further.

If people actually were good drivers then ABS, MOTs, speed limits, alcohol limits, mobile phone laws, and most road signs would be redundant And insurance would cost pennies.

Or it could be 1934, all of the above probably redundant and not even a driving test needed! You just needed to a rich and/or rare car driver.

buglawton

Mercedes did a study when ABS was first developed in the 1980s. They collected statistics from otherwise similar Taxi drivers in Turkey driving ABS and non ABS Mercedes cars. The ABS equipped drives intuitively adapted by closing up their stopping distance. Their average collision stats adjusted to be practically the same as non ABS.
I read about this long before the internet so cant cite the source.

lister

buglawton wrote: »

Mercedes did a study when ABS was first developed in the 1980s.

[...]

I read about this long before the internet so cant cite the source.

As the internet was around before the 1980s, I am impressed that you read about it before the study was done

I guess you mean the web... (and even then, it has been around since 1992 or so - and I guess you might have read about the data after that)