Here's almost the whole paper. Don't be too harsh, I was a freshman in college when I wrote this! If you don't want to read it all, scroll down
Recently, technology has improved ABS systems and made them more affordable for consumers. Despite this fact, some auto manufacturers have stopped placing antilock brakes on their standard equipment lists. Several studies have shown that ABS might not be worth the extra cost simply because they don’t function as initially expected (Phillips 1C).
Although antilock brakes pump the brakes dozens of times a second (Carley), on February 2, 1996 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) voided the federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) requiring all new vehicles to be equipped with ABS due to controversial test results. Jane Harris explains “The manufacturers of the vehicles feel this is a very good safety feature, however there has been some controversy about the braking system, and as to whether they actually work or not” (Soukup 30). As a result of these tests, many insurance companies have also discontinued offering lower rates on vehicles equipped with ABS. An insurance agent with State Farm Insurance explained that “Initially, the automotive world expected ABS to drastically reduce the number and cost of accidents. We have since seen that the number of accidents has not decreased.” Countering the
studies’ findings, NHTSA antilock advocates retort that the studies’ results are inaccurate due to the fact that mostly sports and luxury cars are equipped with ABS. “Increases” in crash results may be the result of certain vehicle and/or driver characteristics (United States, NHTSA, “Light” 2).
First, lets take a look at one way antilock brakes make cars safer. In a standard braking system, when a driver slams on the brakes and puts the vehicle into a skid, the vehicle “has about as much directional stability as a hockey puck on ice” (Carley 1). Harris explains that “When all of a moving vehicle’s wheels lock, the vehicle tends to veer left or right. When only the front wheels lock, the vehicle’s rear moves faster then the front, causing a spinout.” During a test, ABS equipped vehicles had their systems disarmed. When stopped abruptly, every car pivoted forty-five degrees before coming to a halt. When the cars were stopped with the ABS system armed they all traveled in a fairly straight path (Harris).
Although popular belief is that antilock brakes stop vehicles faster than standard systems, having ABS doesn’t necessarily reduce stopping distances. In fact, the only time that ABS drastically reduces stopping distance is on wet pavement. ABS can cut stopping distances by up
to 25% or more on wet surfaces. The New England Journal of Medicine believes “In tests, antilock brakes give drivers superb control, particularly on wet surfaces”. On dry pavement the advantages depend heavily on the quality of the system. At best, ABS stopping distances are only marginally better than standard braking systems, and in some cases slightly worse. A
typical reduction is 10% less than conventional systems, which equals out to six feet less when a vehicle is traveling at forty miles per hour. Furthermore, there are situations where they can lengthen stopping distances. One of these situations is on either gravel or loosely packed snow.
When a wheel is locked up on these surfaces, it forces the material (snow, gravel, etc.) in front of the tire providing resistance and thus slowing the moving vehicle down. Despite the fact that vehicle control is kept, when the vehicle is on two or more different surfaces such as pavement and gravel and a quick stop is required, antilock brakes increase distance from 62% to 74% more than standard brakes. In addition to this, when ABS equipped vehicles are put through hard-cornering maneuvers, they stopped between 19% and 70% farther than conventional braking systems (Harris).
Mostly, ABS systems aid the driver by maintaining a controlled stop, allowing the driver to swerve to avoid an accident during panic stops. Ironically, this is the one of the contributing factors why ABS has not reduced the number or cost of accidents. In theory and testing, antilock brakes perform exceptionally well. Antilock systems are designed to be “fail safe”, that is, if any error occurs in the system’s electronics, the systems shuts down and reverts to a conventional braking system. Additionally, the ABS only functions in hard-braking situations, not affecting normal braking (Carley).
The problem with the tests that are conducted is that they only examine the functionality of the brakes, and not how people react to them. Fatal off-road crashes are up 28% in ABS equipped cars, non-fatal off-road crashes by 19%. Rollovers and side impacts with stationary objects are up 28%, of these the number of fatal crashes rose to 40% more than pre-ABS. On the contrary, rear-end accidents dropped 40%. On-road fatal crashes are down 24%, non-fatal by 14%. Pedistrian and bicycle accidents plunged 27% with ABS equipped cars (United States, NHTSA, “Preliminary” 4). David Willis attributes these contradictory rates to driver skill levels. He explains “When drivers are about to hit something, they often panic, jam on the brakes, and jerk the wheel. If the car has antilock brakes it will respond to the extreme steering and run off the road.” (qtd. in “improper steering”).
In addition to physical driver error, many drivers feel too safe with their antilock systems. Vehicle manuals don’t give detailed or correct instruction on ABS use. ABS propaganda implies that antilock systems provide better stopping power on all surfaces. Most users are not aware that the antilock feature helps only in extreme braking situations when the pedal is completely
depressed. Therefore, consumers drive ABS equipped cars more aggressively than vehicles sporting standard braking systems. They forget to steer in emergency situations, forfeiting the main advantage ABS provides them. The misleading ads cause drivers to think that they can drive at normal speeds on snow, ice, gravel, or rain because the ABS should allow them to stop as quickly as on dry pavement. Don Bernat, owner of Bernat’s Auto Service confirms that “many people who bring in cars after accidents claim that the ABS had to be faulty, that the car should have stopped faster than that.”
Furthermore, antilock brakes can be more expensive if part of the electronics goes bad.
The number of situations where ABS would engage and prevent the crash are very low (Harris). Large trucks and motorcycles benefit greatly from the use of ABS. Trucks have a much lower chance of jack-knifing if the front wheels don’t lock. Motorcycles have much shorter stopping distances, along with reducing the risk of a driver losing control from a skid or slide – both easily occur on a motorcycle.
