Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

ABS helps a lot, training... not so much?

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by RacingTurtles, Apr 2, 2010.

  1. Results from a study conducted by Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (in the US) make a good case for ABS: they found that where a model was available with and without ABS, ABS equipped one was 37% less likely to be involved in a FATAL crash and 22% less likely to be a subject of damage claim.

    .. of course, one could possibly argue it might be largely due to the risk profile of the rider likely to chose ABS option in the first place... All the same, I personally would very much like to have ABS on my bike.

    The other, more controversial finding from that study was that states that require compulsory rider training actually recorded higher rate of insurance claims from young riders than the states that do not require any training at all - remember, they are taking about USA. Intuitively it doesn't seem to make sense and it could well be wrong or explained somehow. Just remember: it is unscientific to reject findings just because they don't agree with your world view...

    source: http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr033110.html

  2. Anything that can help you get out of trouble if you get yourself into trouble is worthwhile. I put ABS into that basket.
  3. ABS is a great plus for bikes. I imagine it would be espically good for learners who like to accidently lock up the wheels under emergency braking and then go down. Happens too often.
  4. Somebody please think about the skids!
  5. LOL yes, rider should be able to switch it off if they wish. But it should be there!
  6. Vicroads have a policy not to train motorcyclits as they believe that if you train drivers/riders, they will be more confident, and therefore take more risks and therefore have more crashes. They base this on studies done with young car drivers.

    Personally, I think those studies must have been flawed, and measured the wrong thing, or failed to take into account critical factors. Such as, who agrees to be involved in a driver training study in the first place? Well, people who enjoy driving, and want to take it to the limit, of course.

    I call bullshit on any study that says training results in higher fatalities, or even serious injuries. A higher rate of insurance claims does not mean more deaths or serious injuries. In fact, usually only survivors make insurance claims. I agree, however, that training may result in faster speeds and more crashes. Just not serious ones. Trained people learn their limits, and learn to pick the time and place to test them.
  7. That's why I bought my bike with it. You really have to squeeze the brakes hard to engage abs. It's a safety feature so can only be a good thing.

    So far the only bikes that have abs wich can be disengaged when wanted is BMW.
  8. But nobody says that it does - they just note that there were more claims. In other words, more accidents. Not more deaths or more injuries, just more accidents.
  9. With those study results just be aware that correlation does not equal causality.

    For example, when ice-cream sales go up so do shark attacks. Correlated? Yes! Causal? No! It is obvious that the consumption of ice-cream has no causal relationship to shark attacks, but as ice-cream sales increase in summer, so do the number of people in the sea...

    So it would seem that there is an obvious causal relationship that can drawn between a reduction in fatalities and ABS. But you would need to be very careful trying to say that is the case unless you were to do a specific study that put riders of various skills into a specific life-threatening situation on bikes with ABS switched on or off randomly, with all other variables that might affect the result eliminated. And that would never happen due to this thing called ethics :D Not to mention that it would be impossible to set up with any degree of certainty.

    As for the corrrelation between more rider training and higher insurance claims, well if the correlation exists I'm calling ice-cream and shark on that one as far as causality goes ;) The relationship between riders training and making claims might be easily explained if in states that do rider training you were also required to have insurance. Or in states where training is not required, insurance is not required for bikes either. Or.. or... or... etc...

    My next bike will almost certainly have ABS.

    Fun Ha!
  10. Vicroads says that driver/rider training results in more fatalities and serious injuries. A senior Vicroads executive told me so, and was not happy at all when I questioned his source and the conclusions drawn. Not happy at all.
  11. Please tell! That would have sounded like a fun conversation. I can't wait for the next time that Lay or some MUARC professor goes on the radio and someone actually asks them to prove their assertion that 'for every 5kmh' kittens are slaughtered.
  12. When I finally go out and buy a bike, ABS is on the must have list, which is a bit of pain because it rules out so many bikes...

    Reason: I've done some training and had a bit of practice with braking (still very much a newbie), but the one time I've really needed to use the skills, I locked the front wheel up. Thankfully, the only two things to come out of that incident was the urgent need for a change of pants, and a couple of important (IMO) lessons.
  13. Not much to tell cejay. It was at the motorcycling (Powered Two Wheels) forum last November (or whenever it was). We got a Vicroads executive as facilitator on our table. I suggested that more training was absolutely mandatory if they wished to see a reduction in motocycle crashes. He rolled out his reference to the car study, I said I disagreed with its conclusion, and that there must have been other factors not included.

    He wouldn't back down, I wouldn't back down. We agreed to disagree, he wrote it down, and then we moved on to other topics. I guess I did make a few people uncomfortable on the table because I aggressively pursued the question, and nearly got cheers from others. :D

    My conclusion was that Vicroads had no understanding of the different skill level required to ride a motorcycle safely. They just apply the four wheeled mentality to it. That is, sit in the car, push the peddles, and steer. I don't think the idea of falling over occurred to them. But I may be doing Vicroads an injustice. Even they admitted they had a long way to go in understanding motorcycling issues.
  14. I don't know... I'm fully prepared to believe their study was itself flawed. But if it's true that young people, having received training, take more risks and are more reckless then I'd think this would be transferable to all kinds of vehicles because this is more about the human nature, not about what vehicle they use.
  15. And herein lies the issue - just as people take more risks because ABS, ESC & Airbags will save me... I have done some training in cars, trucks and on bikes but I think the smartest decision I ever made was waiting until my mid 30's to buy a big road bike - most of my excess testosterone has been expended and I view the road a lot differently these days...
  16. Heh, reminds me of that story where some taxi driver was asked if, in his opinion, installing airbags in the steering wheel would improve road safety. His reply was that if you wanted to improve road safety you should put a foot-long steel spike there instead! Watching drivers' behaviour I often think he might've been onto something...
  17. I think young people take more risks <fullstop>. Having training can teach them the limits of their machine and skills, and some of the consequences of errors.

    When I got my licence back after a break from riding, I did two courses. One to assess my skills, and one the licence test course. There were two people in the first course who decided riding wasn't for them, and one in the second course. (At least on the day.) Better to find that out in a training course, rather than on the road in front of a car. In their case, training helped them make the right decision, rather than encourage them to take more risks. Personally I think it is a select group who use training to skill up and take more risks.

    Mind you, a little training, like a little knowledge, can be a dangeroous thing, and maybe that is what those studies found.
  18. I think there is a hell of a difference between the types of training that people do. For instance, a person doing Level10 at Hart isn't going to go up the Spur at 150 and think they've actually learned something to help them go around corners better. It's a road skills course, aimed to at developing the skills needed to survive on the average road, at the posted limits. Superbike School tells you nothing other than how to go quickly, in relative safety (and even then, it assumes it's track based).

    So when we're talking about this mythical nirvana of Europe and their (supposed) better training regimes, at best it's teaching practical skills (in the Nordic countries, skid pan training) and at worst it's no different to that which we have here.

    I can't believe that a Vicroads representative would really believe that a Hart 9/10 course would increase risk, as all it does is build on the skills required to pass the (their) test. (Rod, I'm not disagreeing with you, just thinking that perhaps they are talking about track based courses and not skills based).
  19. I hear what you are saying Cejay, but the guy was talking generic training. He didn't differentiate between types, though I didn't specifically ask, as far as I can recall.

    The car training he was talking about included as a highlight skid pan training, and he specifically mentioned that people trained to handle skids and recover were likely to go out and do it on the road. In fact I raised that issue, as the example I used was that if young people were trained on skid pans, they would understand the risks and how easy it is to get into a slide, and how hard it is to get out of it. He jumped on that and said the exact opposite was true, according to studies.

    The skills taught to get a licence at HART are extremely basic. All they really cover is how to get a bike moving, ride slow, steer and emergency steer, get around a corner slow, and stop, including emergency stops up to 25 Km/h, without falling off. At least that is what they were when I did them in 2006. I definitely got the impression that Vicroads didn't want riders to have any more training than that.

    I suggested that he got more motorcyclists on his team. He said he had one long term rider (Chairman, who has now left them), one rider who qualified recently, and three that were getting their licences. He looked a little horrified when I suggested that he should get his licence and ride a bit also! Like I said earlier, at least they seem to understand that they have a knowledge gap, and are looking for ways to fill it.
  20. ABS is the reason I chose a K1300R over something like a Monster1100/Streetfighter or Street/Speed Triple or a Superduke.