PDA

View Full Version : ABS delete?



1stcivicsipilot
08-15-2008, 11:24 PM
I HATE having ABS on my car! I know how to drive and know enough to not slam on the brakes in an emergency. I think it is the dumbest thing to have on a car. For people like me, it makes it harder to stop because pumping the breaks dont slow ya down. Instead were forced to drive like every other tool on the road and slam on the brakes when some jerkoff runs a light.(this happened to me tonight, and I came within an inch of hitting this guy cause I was pumping the breaks) Is there a way to get rid of the ABS? I had to replace an axle on my EJ once(not equiped with ABS) but the axle that I bought had the ABS teeth on the end, the guy in the parts store just snapped it off and it worked fine. Can I do this with the EP axles w/o causing any problems?

MOOGEN
08-15-2008, 11:46 PM
I HATE having ABS on my car! I know how to drive and know enough to not slam on the brakes in an emergency. I think it is the dumbest thing to have on a car. For people like me, it makes it harder to stop because pumping the breaks dont slow ya down. Instead were forced to drive like every other tool on the road and slam on the brakes when some jerkoff runs a light.(this happened to me tonight, and I came within an inch of hitting this guy cause I was pumping the breaks) Is there a way to get rid of the ABS? I had to replace an axle on my EJ once(not equiped with ABS) but the axle that I bought had the ABS teeth on the end, the guy in the parts store just snapped it off and it worked fine. Can I do this with the EP axles w/o causing any problems?

I think abs delete is illegal!?! Someone chime in on this.

Tnhatch03
08-15-2008, 11:49 PM
why is it illegal? some cars did not come stock with ABS.

!@#$%
08-16-2008, 12:35 AM
The odds of you being able to stop quicker in a car without abs compared to one equipped is very slim.

v1c10us
08-16-2008, 01:11 AM
The odds of you being able to stop quicker in a car without abs compared to one equipped is very slim.

ABS increases your braking distance, so its actually very likely.
Of course this is assuming a comparison in a straight line braking test where the non abs car does not pump the brakes.
Locked up brakes stop the car quicker than brakes that turn themselves off and on very rapidly..
In wet or snow this is a different story.

Anyway, to the OP, I just removed the ABS fuse and it doesnt pump for me anymore. Im not sure what else this may be affecting though so if you do it its not because I told you to, its because you thought of it yourself and then went to an empty street or parking lot to make sure everything was still fine on your car without the fuse, regaurdless of my results.

Although I havent noticed any issues.

!@#$%
08-16-2008, 02:15 AM
3. Adequate braking is easy to achieve on dry roads with or without antilock brakes. Even if wheels lock, the coefficient of friction between tires and road surface still is relatively high, so a vehicle stops relatively quickly. It is even possible on some surfaces to stop sooner without antilocks than with them, although such instances are rare. They occur, for example, when loosely packed snow or gravel creates a "dam" effect in front of locked wheels, shortening the stopping distance more than antilocks could.

http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/antilock.html

1stcivicsipilot
08-16-2008, 09:07 AM
Anyway, to the OP, I just removed the ABS fuse and it doesnt pump for me anymore. Im not sure what else this may be affecting though so if you do it its not because I told you to, its because you thought of it yourself and then went to an empty street or parking lot to make sure everything was still fine on your car without the fuse, regaurdless of my results.

Although I havent noticed any issues.[/QUOTE]

Im gonna try that right now....but not cause you told me to!

classiccelica
08-16-2008, 09:14 AM
ABS does not increase your stoping distance nor does it make you stop sooner, all abs does is eliminate the brakes from locking thusly giving you more control to steer the car out of the way.

skep18
08-16-2008, 09:15 AM
And one week from now, we're gonna get the post, "I wrecked my car from not having ABS..." lol, hopefully I'm kidding/wrong though.

1stcivicsipilot
08-16-2008, 09:32 AM
ABS does not increase your stoping distance nor does it make you stop sooner, all abs does is eliminate the brakes from locking thusly giving you more control to steer the car out of the way.

Im not trying to decrease my stopping distance, what im trying to do is get the car to stop the way I was tought to stop a car. ABS was invented cause so many people panic and slam on the breaks when confronted with trouble. ie hydroplaning, sliding on slippery surfaces, having to stop quickly for w/e reasons etc... I know not to panic and to not slam on them,but to pump them no matter what. in a car equiped with ABS if you pump the breaks, you dont slow down. as I wittnessed last night, and once in my granmothers Sienna. (I rearended some girl in that, because it didnt slow down while pumping.)


And one week from now, we're gonna get the post, "I wrecked my car from not having ABS..." lol, hopefully I'm kidding/wrong though.

Damn, thanks. I hope your wrong too! Why would you even wish that on my poor EP? wish all the bad luck you want on me, but leave my car out of it!

Dorachagi
08-16-2008, 10:49 AM
Just pull the fuse for the ABS, but there have been tests done with very skilled drivers trying to brake the same car with and without ABS. Without ABS might feel better (I hate the brake shudder thing too) but every one of the tests with the ABS active had shorter stopping distances.

Btrthnezr3
08-16-2008, 11:01 AM
Why are you yourself pumping the brakes with your ABS? That doesn't make any sense? The ABS is pumping it for you...so you shouldn't have to pump...

v1c10us
08-16-2008, 11:02 AM
Just pull the fuse for the ABS, but there have been tests done with very skilled drivers trying to brake the same car with and without ABS. Without ABS might feel better (I hate the brake shudder thing too) but every one of the tests with the ABS active had shorter stopping distances.

that may be so, but tests have also shown that 2 people slamming on the brakes, one with ABS and one without, the non ABS car will have a shorter braking distance. The sliding tire builds up heat and gets more grip than the abs equipped car and it stops sooner. The difference occurs when someone needs to turn when sliding or something like that.

na14yu
08-16-2008, 02:30 PM
Unless EPHatch is full of Formula 1 drivers, you guys that think ABS sucks or you can stop shorter without modern ABS are all crazy I think.

There's plenty of testing evidence out there on the web that discuss how difficult it is to coax non-ABS equipped cars into braking effectively against ABS equipped cars, including this article:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/112_9705_track_testing_event_part3/60_to_0_braking.html

v1c10us
08-16-2008, 06:55 PM
show me testing that proves an ABS equipped car stops sooner than a non abs car and I will tip my hat to you
Car companys testing and companys payed by car companys to prove this regaurdless of the truth dont count.

na14yu
08-16-2008, 07:49 PM
show me testing that proves an ABS equipped car stops sooner than a non abs car and I will tip my hat to you
Car companys testing and companys payed by car companys to prove this regaurdless of the truth dont count.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-lock_braking_system

Look under the section titled "Effectiveness"

Can non-ABS equipped cars stop shorter than ABS equipped cars? Yes in the right circumstances it most definitely can. But generally speaking, if you have a non-ABS equipped car you would have to be spot-on with your threshold braking technique to stop shorter than the same car equipped with ABS.

I don't know about you guys, but the chance of me employing perfect threshold braking at 7am in the morning when I'm driving to work is slim to none, so ABS it is.

dobbs02si
08-16-2008, 08:56 PM
I HATE having ABS on my car! I know how to drive and know enough to not slam on the brakes in an emergency. I think it is the dumbest thing to have on a car. For people like me, it makes it harder to stop because pumping the breaks dont slow ya down. Instead were forced to drive like every other tool on the road and slam on the brakes when some jerkoff runs a light.(this happened to me tonight, and I came within an inch of hitting this guy cause I was pumping the breaks) Is there a way to get rid of the ABS? I had to replace an axle on my EJ once(not equiped with ABS) but the axle that I bought had the ABS teeth on the end, the guy in the parts store just snapped it off and it worked fine. Can I do this with the EP axles w/o causing any problems?

If thats the case then YOU had already went beyond the grip of the tires..and abs was helping you because the wheels would have already been locked. So you just contradicted your second sentence. Learn to drive around the abs OR let it help you.

v1c10us
08-16-2008, 09:38 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-lock_braking_system

Look under the section titled "Effectiveness"

Can non-ABS equipped cars stop shorter than ABS equipped cars? Yes in the right circumstances it most definitely can. But generally speaking, if you have a non-ABS equipped car you would have to be spot-on with your threshold braking technique to stop shorter than the same car equipped with ABS.

I don't know about you guys, but the chance of me employing perfect threshold braking at 7am in the morning when I'm driving to work is slim to none, so ABS it is.

the lack of citations and general incorrectness of wikipedia isn't gonna work.
I do agree, abs rules, but in a straight line I'd rather skid and put a flat spot in my tire creating even more grip and have it get hot and melty and sticky.

in cornering, going beyond the grip of the tires is a good reference point because its the limit you can take the corner and stay where you want.
But when it in reference to braking its a different story

abs is something we're stuck with because average drivers freak out when the car starts sliding and because it makes your tires last long, bald spots arent good for the tires.
Combine that with the increased heat and your tires dont last as long.
This coorelates to the same reason used slicks dont grip as good as new ones.
The thin tread deforms less and generates less heat, so it cant grip as well as a thick treaded tire deforming, generating heat.
edit: some content removed for incorrectness

drjd888
08-16-2008, 10:47 PM
ABS is there to make it safer when braking, so you have more control. It doesn't really hinder braking distance so why get rid of it? If you were taught to pump your brakes and your name doesn't come up on the SPEED channel then I think its time to learn to drive with ABS. Just my $0.02

!@#$%
08-17-2008, 12:54 AM
the lack of citations and general incorrectness of wikipedia isn't gonna work.
I do agree, abs rules, but in a straight line I'd rather skid and put a flat spot in my tire creating even more grip and have it get hot and melty and sticky.

in cornering, going beyond the grip of the tires is a good reference point because its the limit you can take the corner and stay where you want.
But when it in reference to braking its a different story

abs is something we're stuck with because average drivers freak out when the car starts sliding and because it makes your tires last long, bald spots arent good for the tires.
Combine that with the increased heat and your tires dont last as long.
This coorelates to the same reason used slicks dont grip as good as new ones.
The thin tread deforms less and generates less heat, so it cant grip as well as a thick treaded tire deforming, generating heat.
edit: some content removed for incorrectness

How about you show us a source where it says non abs cars will always stop faster than abs equipped vehicles? I guess my source wasn't good enough.

civictype_r04
08-17-2008, 09:28 AM
Hope you don't lan on getting in a accident man. If you do and your insuranse or the other persons insurance dose you'll be F@#K'ed man. They consider it your fault for tampering with the way the car came. Don't do it IMO!

musashi1219
08-17-2008, 10:22 AM
Time for a speech

what is good about ABS

well lets brake it down. A (allows) B (Braking) and S (steering)
No matter how hard you push the brake pedal you will be able to steer the car. That is a good thing

If the car is experiencing two or more different levels of traction you will still be able to stop safely. ie loose gravel or debris on one side of car and clean pavement on other side

It is idiot proof, you squeeze the pedal and do not have to worry about lock up.


So lets say you are driving down the road and you need to make an emergency stop. No big deal. you slam on the brakes hope that your morning coffee does not spill. You safely stopped and did not hit the deer or kid in the road. You take a deep breath hit your wipers because the puddle on the side of the road splashed water on your windshield. Damn, you jsut washed your car too. Oh well you can wipe the water off of the passenger side after work.

Let's explorer the same situation without ABS

You slam on the brakes, the water splashes up on the passenger side. Oh shit you never even noticed the puddle along the right side of the lane. The car goes into a violent spin because of the effects of split coefficient. Now you do one of two things. The car has made a 45 degree rotation in less than 2 tenths of a second.


1. You get off of the brakes and attempt to steer out of it. The car is already rotated 45 degrees too late for you jack. I don't care how good of a driver you think you are. You WILL NOT get the car under control in time to avoid whatever it was you were maneuvering around.

or 2. You stay locked on the brakes and depending on speed you stop after the car does a few more spins or you are stopped by an outside force. Ie another car, guard rail, or the like.




Does ABS stop you sooner? For most people in most situations in most cars yes it does.

Does abs stop you shorter in a 96 impala with police package? I can attest to the fact that if you have totally mastered threshold braking it will not. There are several canadian police officers that can attest to this. They are a few dollars light in their pockets thanks to some detroit cops.

ABS has come a long way from its inception. I cannot speak for the EP-3 as I have never done any testing. i have run the car with and without ABS and have had no issues either way. I have also not had a serious panic incident either. In rain or snow I would like to have the ABS just in case. On dry ground and a CLEAN road, I can live without it. I say this because for the better part of the year I teach how to deal with ABS failures in corvettes and other high performance vehicles. I have more seat time going fast and stopping fast without ABS than probably anyone here. On ANYTHING less than ideal road conditions it is ALMOST always better to have ABS. If you are not a TRAINED professional, I would not count on your driving ability to save you.


Unless you have done 30 or more non abs braking collision avoidance maneuvers I would not drive without ABS and even then, I would not trust you to drive my kids in a non-abs car.



Let's be honest, we all think we are better drivers than we really are. We cannot account for other drivers, unknown road conditions and the weather. Equipment failure, the gf screaming and the kids throwing their dirty diaper at you when the shit hits the fan.



Ok I am shutting up no until someone inevitably says something stupid... so that means I will be posting again in less than five minutes

musashi1219
08-17-2008, 10:38 AM
The odds of you being able to stop quicker in a car without abs compared to one equipped is very slim.
QFT

ABS increases your braking distance, so its actually very likely.
Of course this is assuming a comparison in a straight line braking test where the non abs car does not pump the brakes.
how are you going to keep the car going straight if the vehicle starts to rotate? this can be caused by uneven road surface. One wheel locking up before the other, wet pavement, poor tire(s) bad alignment... the list of things goes on and on. Unless you drive a brand new problem free car every single time you cannot be certain. Plus what about the guy tailgating you. You will not be able to turn and avoid getting hit by him because now that you have lost rolling friction you will NOT be able to steer the car AT ALL. Testing is CUTE but it is not real world.



3. Adequate braking is easy to achieve on dry roads with or without antilock brakes. Even if wheels lock, the coefficient of friction between tires and road surface still is relatively high, so a vehicle stops relatively quickly. It is even possible on some surfaces to stop sooner without antilocks than with them, although such instances are rare. They occur, for example, when loosely packed snow or gravel creates a "dam" effect in front of locked wheels, shortening the stopping distance more than antilocks could.

http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/antilock.html
Yes but again you cannot steer! Also, do you have enough time to get out and check to see if the snow or gravel is loosely packed? Can you go 300 feet ahead and see if there is ice on the road? Oh wait, you are in a moving car!

ABS does not increase your stoping distance nor does it make you stop sooner, all abs does is eliminate the brakes from locking thusly giving you more control to steer the car out of the way.
Yes and no. Does it increase you stopping distance when compared to a perfect driver on a perfect road? yes a little bit. Is there a perfect driver? No.

Why are you yourself pumping the brakes with your ABS? That doesn't make any sense? The ABS is pumping it for you...so you shouldn't have to pump...
Improper application of any braking system ABS or non has always been an issue for drivers/ car manufacturers hence the development of modern braking systems and stability control.

that may be so, but tests have also shown that 2 people slamming on the brakes, one with ABS and one without, the non ABS car will have a shorter braking distance. The sliding tire builds up heat and gets more grip than the abs equipped car and it stops sooner. The difference occurs when someone needs to turn when sliding or something like that.
And we all know that we have plenty of time to stop and we never need to turn to avoid anything in an emergency. And again the test drivers were TRAINED professionals.

show me testing that proves an ABS equipped car stops sooner than a non abs car and I will tip my hat to you
Car companys testing and companys payed by car companys to prove this regaurdless of the truth dont count.
Get me two similar cars and an average driver it will work every time!



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-lock_braking_system

Look under the section titled "Effectiveness"

Can non-ABS equipped cars stop shorter than ABS equipped cars? Yes in the right circumstances it most definitely can. But generally speaking, if you have a non-ABS equipped car you would have to be spot-on with your threshold braking technique to stop shorter than the same car equipped with ABS.

I don't know about you guys, but the chance of me employing perfect threshold braking at 7am in the morning when I'm driving to work is slim to none, so ABS it is.
QFT

ABS is there to make it safer when braking, so you have more control. It doesn't really hinder braking distance so why get rid of it? If you were taught to pump your brakes and your name doesn't come up on the SPEED channel then I think its time to learn to drive with ABS. Just my $0.02
QFT

classiccelica
08-17-2008, 12:11 PM
I am sorry but pumping the brakes the way you were taught does not increase you stopping distances either. Pumping the brakes was according to dmv hand book back in the day was to prepare the drivers behind you that you are trying to stop. I have a 1973 Toyota celica that if you pump the brakes does absolutly nothing to stop you sooner or even better than hitting the brakes without locking them. If I could put abs on that car without costing an arm and a leg then I would. I would rather save my classic by being in control while in a panic stop then slamming her into the back of some other person.

musashi1219
08-17-2008, 01:02 PM
I am sorry but pumping the brakes the way you were taught does not increase you stopping distances either. Pumping the brakes was according to dmv hand book back in the day was to prepare the drivers behind you that you are trying to stop. I have a 1973 Toyota celica that if you pump the brakes does absolutly nothing to stop you sooner or even better than hitting the brakes without locking them. If I could put abs on that car without costing an arm and a leg then I would. I would rather save my classic by being in control while in a panic stop then slamming her into the back of some other person.

I am not sure who you are talking to when you said this but can you please think about what you said.

pumping your brakes does not increase your stopping distance? SO once you put your foot on the pedal and then take it off the rate of deceleration does not change? Seriously re-read what you said.

There are a lot of reasons given for pumping brakes. Originally it was to pressurize the system other reasons... to warn the driver behind you, to keep the car from hydroplaning, and to keep the wheels from locking up.

If you decide to pump your brakes and I am driving behind you, I am going to be very sad when you decide to warn me by pumping your brakes and you end up in the back seat of the vehicle in front of you... but wait i forgot, pumping the brakes does not increase your stopping distance.


I also am not sure if we are all on the same page when we are saying pumping the brakes. I am sure everyone means cadence braking which is a series of fast and short wheel lock ups.

v1c10us
08-17-2008, 02:01 PM
QFT

how are you going to keep the car going straight if the vehicle starts to rotate? this can be caused by uneven road surface. One wheel locking up before the other, wet pavement, poor tire(s) bad alignment... the list of things goes on and on. Unless you drive a brand new problem free car every single time you cannot be certain. Plus what about the guy tailgating you. You will not be able to turn and avoid getting hit by him because now that you have lost rolling friction you will NOT be able to steer the car AT ALL. Testing is CUTE but it is not real world.



Yes but again you cannot steer! Also, do you have enough time to get out and check to see if the snow or gravel is loosely packed? Can you go 300 feet ahead and see if there is ice on the road? Oh wait, you are in a moving car!

Yes and no. Does it increase you stopping distance when compared to a perfect driver on a perfect road? yes a little bit. Is there a perfect driver? No.

Improper application of any braking system ABS or non has always been an issue for drivers/ car manufacturers hence the development of modern braking systems and stability control.

And we all know that we have plenty of time to stop and we never need to turn to avoid anything in an emergency. And again the test drivers were TRAINED professionals.

Get me two similar cars and an average driver it will work every time!



QFT

QFT

you guys are obviously taking what im saying way too far
average driver trained driver whatever, any numbskull can lock up the brakes in an identical car without abs and stop sooner than another numbskull in the identical car with ABS.
The reason i said ABS is good is because of all those little things you mentioned. My point and the point i've been argueing this entire time is that in a straightline in a test or whatever scenario you want that doesnt involve any other complications the abs increases your stopping distance.
ABS is great, dont get me wrong, im not arguing with that.
I'm just saying it increases braking distance.

drivers have nothing to do with it, get me 2 similiar cars and 2 idiots and a smooth straight road and every time the ABS equipped car stops 20+ feet later. I'm not talking about one guy pumping the brakes or balancing right at the threshold, I'm talking about smokey ass locking up your brakes

musashi1219
08-17-2008, 05:41 PM
drivers have nothing to do with it, get me 2 similiar cars and 2 idiots and a smooth straight road and every time the ABS equipped car stops 20+ feet later. I'm not talking about one guy pumping the brakes or balancing right at the threshold, I'm talking about smokey ass locking up your brakes

what road surface? Every surface has a different reaction to outside stimuli. To make that overly generalized statement is not a good idea. I am almost certain you have not tested your theory on every single road surface nor are you equipped with the proper instruments to do truly comparative testing. When you brake like you are saying you are putting all of the weight of the car to the front and the front brakes are taking up all of the work. Two wheels doing all of the braking no matter how you do it is going to take more distance than 4 wheels braking.

And to argue your point is futile. It is not real world as there is no time you are going to be involved in a perfect accident, because if it was perfect there would be no accident.

v1c10us
08-17-2008, 09:18 PM
what road surface? Every surface has a different reaction to outside stimuli. To make that overly generalized statement is not a good idea. I am almost certain you have not tested your theory on every single road surface nor are you equipped with the proper instruments to do truly comparative testing. When you brake like you are saying you are putting all of the weight of the car to the front and the front brakes are taking up all of the work. Two wheels doing all of the braking no matter how you do it is going to take more distance than 4 wheels braking.

And to argue your point is futile. It is not real world as there is no time you are going to be involved in a perfect accident, because if it was perfect there would be no accident.

you are arguing over the details.
1st off, abs has zero affect on brake bias, and to say that ABS prevents all of the weight to go to the front wheels is also saying that they arent working.
second I'm not talking about the road, sure, gravel, rain, weird bumps, pot holes, etc etc, can make a difference but I'm talking about just a fucking road without any of these contingencies you keep throwing into the mix.
Also this is not my "theory" its an obvious fact.
In order for your tires to not slide less pressure must be applied to them, and since you cant do that via removing momentum from the car, you have to do it by relieving brake pressure which means there are less things at work trying to slow down the car.

I am in no way trying to disprove what you are saying about ABS in certain situations but its irrefutable that locking up your tires on a road lacking all the shit that can fuck it up that you keep dwelling on will stop the car sooner.
I'm done with this thread and if you want to continue harping on the exact same shit you've said in the last 3 posts be my guest, but I'm tired of hearing you say the same thing.

powdbyrice
08-17-2008, 10:29 PM
so a tire skidding down the road, will have more stopping power than an abs equiped tire that keeps its contact patch on the ground the whole time?

k20si02
08-17-2008, 10:41 PM
im not trying to sound rude or anything, but why would you pump the brakes with a car equiped with ABS? wouldn't that defeat the purpose? i was taught that if you do have abs then not to pump the brakes just let them do their job. so if i was taught right then it was no wonder you couldn't stop in time you were fighting the ABS. correct me if im wrong but i have never had a problem stopping

v1c10us
08-17-2008, 11:00 PM
so a tire skidding down the road, will have more stopping power than an abs equiped tire that keeps its contact patch on the ground the whole time?
Well, the tires never leave the ground so i dont understand how the contact patch is ever leaving the ground.
but;
A sliding tire is resisting the car more than a rolling one. So to answer your question, yes it will.
Antilock brakes lock up intermittently to stop the car, they let go of the brakes intermittently so that if you are turning the tire will turn instead of continuing to slide straight. In wet conditions a sliding tire endures very little friction, so attempting to slow it without sliding it is more effective.
I'm still failing to see where all of the dispute is in this.
If reducing braking pressure to allow the tires to keep rolling is good for braking, next time you need to stop you should just not press the brakes.

!@#$%
08-18-2008, 01:43 AM
Well, the tires never leave the ground so i dont understand how the contact patch is ever leaving the ground.
but;
A sliding tire is resisting the car more than a rolling one. So to answer your question, yes it will.
Antilock brakes lock up intermittently to stop the car, they let go of the brakes intermittently so that if you are turning the tire will turn instead of continuing to slide straight. In wet conditions a sliding tire endures very little friction, so attempting to slow it without sliding it is more effective.
I'm still failing to see where all of the dispute is in this.
If reducing braking pressure to allow the tires to keep rolling is good for braking, next time you need to stop you should just not press the brakes.

The problem is that everyday cars don't drive around with circuit slicks. The all season cheapo tires on almost every car won't grip at all when locked up.

When normal tires heat up they don't get sticky. They get greasy.

musashi1219
08-18-2008, 04:37 AM
you are arguing over the details.
1st off, abs has zero affect on brake bias, and to say that ABS prevents all of the weight to go to the front wheels is also saying that they arent working.
In order for your tires to not slide less pressure must be applied to them, and since you cant do that via removing momentum from the car, you have to do it by relieving brake pressure which means there are less things at work trying to slow down the car.

I am in no way trying to disprove what you are saying about ABS in certain situations but its irrefutable that locking up your tires on a road lacking all the shit that can fuck it up that you keep dwelling on will stop the car sooner.
I'm done with this thread and if you want to continue harping on the exact same shit you've said in the last 3 posts be my guest, but I'm tired of hearing you say the same thing.
Well if you would wake up instead of being blinded by some shit an old man once told you....
Everything I said has a valid point lets go back to basics

what stops a car?
brakes and tires. Clamping force has nothing to do (within reason) of stopping the car. It is all about how the tire and the road surface react with one another. In most cases most tires are going to glaze over when they are skidded for a longer than normal time. This creates less stopping power and will give you a longer distance. Full wheel lock up at 35 mph yeah it might stop a few feet shorter but when you take it up to 45 and 50 you have a totally different story


so a tire skidding down the road, will have more stopping power than an abs equiped tire that keeps its contact patch on the ground the whole time?
it is not about the contact patch it is about how the tires material acts when heated up. The tire never leaves the ground.

I was not talking about brake bias at all. I was talking about the natural movement of a car when you try to brake to hard. THe nose of the car digs towards the ground that would tell any idiot that all of the weight is at the front of the car. Little weight residing over the rear wheels means that while the brakes are clamping on the rotors the tires have little weight on them and are not helping slow the car down.


This is not the first time you have been in an argument on a subject that you are not equipped to handle. Please lose that attitude and learn something. I hate when this shit happens because all it does is get people pissed off and people have to sift through the bickering to get real information.

fdasfd
08-18-2008, 05:32 AM
Just trying to get a clarification on what happens in a skid with non-abs,

with abs, your tires are actually using static/rolling friction to stop as there is no skid.

without abs, in a skid, your tires are using sliding friction, where there is less friction available to stop with.

isn't that another valid argument for the shorter stopping distance with Abs and slamming the brakes?

many other factors included, i know, but a general argument about different types of friction no less.

4angrybadgers
08-18-2008, 05:37 AM
Just trying to get a clarification on what happens in a skid with non-abs,

with abs, your tires are actually using static/rolling friction to stop as there is no skid.

without abs, in a skid, your tires are using sliding friction, where there is less friction available to stop with.

isn't that another valid argument for the shorter stopping distance with Abs and slamming the brakes?

many other factors included, i know, but a general argument about different types of friction no less.

You are correct.

Manually pumping the brakes will keep the tires from locking up, but the ABS will do it multiple times per second - MUCH faster than any human. Hence why it stops a car quicker.

k20si02
08-18-2008, 11:10 AM
You are correct.

Manually pumping the brakes will keep the tires from locking up, but the ABS will do it multiple times per second - MUCH faster than any human. Hence why it stops a car quicker.

thats what i thought too. and if someone is pumping the brakes with abs they aren't letting the abs do its job

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 11:33 AM
Well if you would wake up instead of being blinded by some shit an old man once told you....
Everything I said has a valid point lets go back to basics

what stops a car?
brakes and tires. Clamping force has nothing to do (within reason) of stopping the car. It is all about how the tire and the road surface react with one another. In most cases most tires are going to glaze over when they are skidded for a longer than normal time. This creates less stopping power and will give you a longer distance. Full wheel lock up at 35 mph yeah it might stop a few feet shorter but when you take it up to 45 and 50 you have a totally different story


it is not about the contact patch it is about how the tires material acts when heated up. The tire never leaves the ground.

I was not talking about brake bias at all. I was talking about the natural movement of a car when you try to brake to hard. THe nose of the car digs towards the ground that would tell any idiot that all of the weight is at the front of the car. Little weight residing over the rear wheels means that while the brakes are clamping on the rotors the tires have little weight on them and are not helping slow the car down.


This is not the first time you have been in an argument on a subject that you are not equipped to handle. Please lose that attitude and learn something. I hate when this shit happens because all it does is get people pissed off and people have to sift through the bickering to get real information.

Now you're changing your story.
The weight transfer and nose dive during braking is something that WILL happen if you are hard on the brakes. According to your last post not having abs somehow increases the amount of brake dive.
So 1st, if ABS decreases brake dive, they're obviously not working very well
2nd, if not having abs increases brake dive, thats proof that there is more resistance in the tires, or else there would be less brake dive over ABS.

I'm sorry but clamping force has everything to do with it. If there is no force applied to the rotors there is no resistance and the tires will continue to roll.
Now excuse me, but how about you forget some shit an old man once told you. Any modern tire that is "glazing over" on you is clearly in your imagination.
The only component in tires that could do anything like this is the Silica, but with modern compounds even in all weather tires this isn't going to happen, you're gonna get flat spots, not glazed slippy spots.

I believe you were mistakenly talking about abrasion and graining patterns on tires. This occurs when tires are overworked while still cold, such as in suddenly locking up the brakes.
The rubber develops an array of parallel ridges over time from acceleration and cornering, then when the tire is cold and you slam on the brakes these ridges fold over creating what i suppose someone could call a smooth "glaze"
Yes this does create a lack of traction but due to the thinness of these ridges they quickly heat up its no longer a problem, especially if only one part of the tire was skidding and building up friction inducing heat.
I'm sorry but you're just plain wrong. This isnt about theory's or what someone told you its about the physical nature of the systems at work. =\
<--- I'm really really done this time, promise. I'll be blocking this page from myself in noscript for firefox.

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 11:34 AM
You are correct.

Manually pumping the brakes will keep the tires from locking up, but the ABS will do it multiple times per second - MUCH faster than any human. Hence why it stops a car quicker.

last thing.
Hence why it stops a car quicker- than manually pumping the brakes.

skep18
08-18-2008, 11:53 AM
Damn, thanks. I hope your wrong too! Why would you even wish that on my poor EP? wish all the bad luck you want on me, but leave my car out of it!

Haha, sorry. I didn't mean to wish bad luck. I hope you ABS deleting goes as well as you hope! But curious, can't you retrain yourself to just slam the brakes and let the car do the pumping? :mbiggrin:

skep18
08-18-2008, 11:59 AM
well lets brake it down. A (allows) B (Braking) and S (steering)

I guess I'm stupid or something, so just humor me, but doesn't ABS stand for Anti-lock Braking System? Again, I'm probably wrong, but just wanna know.

4angrybadgers
08-18-2008, 12:24 PM
last thing.
Hence why it stops a car quicker- than manually pumping the brakes.

Huh? That's exactly what I said... ABS will stop a car faster than just slamming on the brakes or pumping them yourself (except for a very tiny set of circumstances, probably already mentioned before). :mrolleyes:

Drew1d
08-18-2008, 01:18 PM
I think if you take a brake distribution block (rectangle metal block with all the lines in it.) from an old integra, then you can delete the ABS controller. Then Again, I'm sure thats hooked up to something else. (ECU?) So I don't know if it would affect anything else. It probably throws a code for you to fail inspection.

I guess that also means you could remove the speed sensors and wires from the wheel. Not that I know that's possible or anything.

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 01:32 PM
Huh? That's exactly what I said... ABS will stop a car faster than just slamming on the brakes or pumping them yourself (except for a very tiny set of circumstances, probably already mentioned before). :mrolleyes:
its only in manually pumping the brakes versus electronic pumping that the abs helps you with the exception of odd circumstances such as rain and very dusty roads.
It boils down to this, If the rolling resistance including the brakes is greater than the resistance of the sliding tire then ABS will help you.
But since this is only true when there is something interfering with the tires contact with the ground such as fine dust or gravel or wetness or ice or some very very very cracked up roads with little contact to the wheel to begin with, for the most part the abs increases braking distance in a straight line.

AzNCrAzYcOoLeR
08-18-2008, 01:57 PM
As far as I learned,

ABS does not decrease stopping distance, but it does allows the car to stop strait vs no ABS

adrian1281
08-18-2008, 03:34 PM
Jesus Christ this thread is a disaster.

Although I am far from being a braking expert, I teach Evasive and Defensive Driving Courses for Senior Executives, Executive Protection drivers, etc. I will therefore put my .02 in...

The fastest way to stop a car is to brake at the limit of the tires, if you pass this limit, the tires will lock up and you'll start sliding.

ABS works by decreasing line pressure to the tire that locked up allowing it to roll. Once it senses this, it allows the line pressure back to the caliper at whatever force you're applying.

If the tire locked up, ABS released pressure, yet your foot is still to the ground, guess what, the tire is gonna lock up again when the ABS sends the line pressure to the caliper again. ABS does this many times a second, faster than what 99.9% of people can possibly do.

Whether or not ABS is a good thing depends on how good of a driver you are and what the goals for the car are. But I will say this, a sliding car will never stop faster than a car who's driver is pumping the brakes at a rapid rate.

This whole talk about sliding tires melting and creating friction is all BS.

To the OP, if your car has ABS and you are pumping your brakes then you are doing it wrong.

You guys might want to do a little reading on ABS and how it works before you start pulling your ABS fuses...

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 04:25 PM
Jesus Christ this thread is a disaster.

Although I am far from being a braking expert, I teach Evasive and Defensive Driving Courses for Senior Executives, Executive Protection drivers, etc. I will therefore put my .02 in...

The fastest way to stop a car is to brake at the limit of the tires, if you pass this limit, the tires will lock up and you'll start sliding.

ABS works by decreasing line pressure to the tire that locked up allowing it to roll. Once it senses this, it allows the line pressure back to the caliper at whatever force you're applying.

If the tire locked up, ABS released pressure, yet your foot is still to the ground, guess what, the tire is gonna lock up again when the ABS sends the line pressure to the caliper again. ABS does this many times a second, faster than what 99.9% of people can possibly do.

Whether or not ABS is a good thing depends on how good of a driver you are and what the goals for the car are. But I will say this, a sliding car will never stop faster than a car who's driver is pumping the brakes at a rapid rate.

This whole talk about sliding tires melting and creating friction is all BS.

To the OP, if your car has ABS and you are pumping your brakes then you are doing it wrong.

You guys might want to do a little reading on ABS and how it works before you start pulling your ABS fuses...

You may want to look into the actual physics of it.
Unless you have tires capable of with holding massive amounts of grip the rolling resistance of a tire at its threshold is almost always less than the sliding resistance of the tire; fact.
edit: as for using the abs, it pushes against your feet because it wants you to brake at the threshold, not slide uncontrollably and cause an accident, its all for controllability's sake.
Modern braking systems in high end cars allow the tires to slide in a controllable fashion using shit tons of computers. the new evo for instance when in a straight line will lock up the brakes and when one of its yaw sensors detects something awry it will reduce braking force to correct your direction and then allow the tire to lock up again.

Zzyzx
08-18-2008, 04:45 PM
You may want to look into the actual physics of it.
Unless you have tires capable of with holding massive amounts of grip the rolling resistance of a tire at its threshold is almost always less than the sliding resistance of the tire; fact.



Tires rolling = Static Friction
Tires Sliding = kinetic friction

To quote Wiki on Static Vs kinetic friction

Friction forces are categorized as either static or kinetic. The coefficient of static friction μs, characterizes friction when no movement exists between the two surfaces in question, and the kinetic coefficient μk, characterizes friction where motion occurs. While static and kinetic friction differ in value (the coefficient of static friction typically being greater than that of kinetic friction), both result from the electric force acting on microscopic irregularities in two adjacent surfaces

So Physics states that a rolling tire should have a greater coefficient of friction with the ground then a sliding tire. which contradicts your statement of "fact".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_friction

4angrybadgers
08-18-2008, 04:51 PM
its only in manually pumping the brakes versus electronic pumping that the abs helps you with the exception of odd circumstances such as rain and very dusty roads.
It boils down to this, If the rolling resistance including the brakes is greater than the resistance of the sliding tire then ABS will help you.
But since this is only true when there is something interfering with the tires contact with the ground such as fine dust or gravel or wetness or ice or some very very very cracked up roads with little contact to the wheel to begin with, for the most part the abs increases braking distance in a straight line.

That is the critical flaw in your argument. As Zzyzx pointed out, the static coefficient of friction is greater than the kinetic coefficient of friction. A tire with a contact patch static relative to the road (a rolling tire) will always have more grip than one sliding merrily along. It's been proven by decades (centuries?) of scientific research.

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 05:01 PM
See, Rolling resistance in wikipedia.

Zzyzx
08-18-2008, 05:12 PM
See, Rolling resistance in wikipedia.

We're not dealing with rolling resistance here. We are dealing with Kinetic Friction (the tire sliding) Vs Static friction (the tire rolling)

now if we were trying to figure out how quickly the car would slow on its own based on tire size or how much energy is expended in keeping a rolling tire moving... then Rolling resistance would apply. But we aren't.

Were talking about how much friction there is between rubber & road depending on if that rubber is sliding across that road or Not. and physics states that there is more friction when the rubber is not sliding Vs is.


it takes more force to make surfaces start sliding over each other than it does to keep them sliding once started.

classiccelica
08-18-2008, 05:18 PM
I am not sure who you are talking to when you said this but can you please think about what you said.

pumping your brakes does not increase your stopping distance? SO once you put your foot on the pedal and then take it off the rate of deceleration does not change? Seriously re-read what you said.

There are a lot of reasons given for pumping brakes. Originally it was to pressurize the system other reasons... to warn the driver behind you, to keep the car from hydroplaning, and to keep the wheels from locking up.

If you decide to pump your brakes and I am driving behind you, I am going to be very sad when you decide to warn me by pumping your brakes and you end up in the back seat of the vehicle in front of you... but wait i forgot, pumping the brakes does not increase your stopping distance.


I also am not sure if we are all on the same page when we are saying pumping the brakes. I am sure everyone means cadence braking which is a series of fast and short wheel lock ups.


I never once said that pumping the brakes makes you stop quicker

abstract
08-18-2008, 05:28 PM
what about the weight loss..???..??

think about losing weight on these heavy ep3's!!!

id get a abs delete kit in a second if they had 1

musashi1219
08-18-2008, 05:48 PM
Now you're changing your story.
.
Not at all, I jsut clarified myself.

I guess I'm stupid or something, so just humor me, but doesn't ABS stand for Anti-lock Braking System? Again, I'm probably wrong, but just wanna know.
You are correct, but when asked why abs is so nice that is the reply you get from a lot of people. like an alternate acronym.

Jesus Christ this thread is a disaster.


I agree, and thank you for speaking up in the thread

I never once said that pumping the brakes makes you stop quicker
I do not believe I said you did sir, but given the amount of crap that has been slung in the thread you may have been caught in the crossfire.


Zyxx thanks for bringing some knowledge into the thread.


Adrian and Zyxx why do people insist on thinking the brakes are the most important part of stopping a car?

abstract
08-18-2008, 05:52 PM
what about the weight loss..???..??

think about losing weight on these heavy ep3's!!!

id get a abs delete kit in a second if they had 1



weight loss potential????????????????

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 05:54 PM
We're not dealing with rolling resistance here. We are dealing with Kinetic Friction (the tire sliding) Vs Static friction (the tire rolling)

now if we were trying to figure out how quickly the car would slow on its own based on tire size or how much energy is expended in keeping a rolling tire moving... then Rolling resistance would apply. But we aren't.

Were talking about how much friction there is between rubber & road depending on if that rubber is sliding across that road or Not. and physics states that there is more friction when the rubber is not sliding Vs is.
Okay, if this doesn't shut you guys Up i'll have to get really technical.

"Occasionally it is maintained that µ is always < 1. While in most relevant applications this is true, having a µ > 1 merely implies that the force required to slide an object along the surface is greater than the normal force of the surface on the object. For example, silicone rubber or acrylic rubber coated surfaces have a coefficient of friction that can be substantially larger than 1."
This includes tires, which means if tires were made of wood what you are saying is correct, but since they are not, it is incorrect because µ is greater than 1 not less than 1

Also you have to take into account that the normal force is being varied by the brakes, its not constant because the brakes are not an ON OFF machine;
Since the friction force is a product of the kinetic friction and the normal force. Since the FULL normal force is being applied when the brakes are locked up the frictional force is greater than when the normal force is not being fully applied in order to keep the tires rolling, this reduction reduces the elements in the equation and results in a lower product, or in this case a lower frictional force.
edit: it would be different if the brakes were always fully applied, you would have equal forces at work, but due to the increased force and the decreased sliding friction it equates to the sliding friction of the tire being slightly greater than the rolling friction.
You also have to take into account the maximum static friction the 2 materials can attain, but thats not really relevent because its not very much.

oldskoofame
08-18-2008, 05:57 PM
ABS does not increase your stoping distance nor does it make you stop sooner, all abs does is eliminate the brakes from locking thusly giving you more control to steer the car out of the way.

wrong.

abstract
08-18-2008, 06:00 PM
weight loss potential????????????????

anyone??

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 06:01 PM
Adrian and Zyxx why do people insist on thinking the brakes are the most important part of stopping a car?
Because without them it doesnt matter how much grip your tires have, if you remove the brakes the car wont stop. I agree that even if you have the best braking system in the world but crappy tires its all for naught.

musashi1219
08-18-2008, 06:09 PM
The point being that brakes are not the most important part of the equation. Most brake upgrades do nothing to stop the car better. The upgraded tires do that. Now please instead of making uneducated statements go back and read some of the posts in this thread. You have a bad habit of getting into a thread and spouting off incorrect information and then getting argumentative when everyone does not believe you.

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 07:55 PM
Sorry but i've read every post in here and its all correct in theory(for the most part) but wrong in practice.
I've posted all the information I can supply and have no intention to argue further, if someone really wants I'll do a video confirmation with time to allow for brake cool down.
One with my ABS fuse removed threshold braking, one with it in, and one with it removed and letting the tires slide, I'll use whatever format for display you guys think is fair.
There wont be any doubt that I'm cheating on the braking method because my tires will be. sliding, not sliding, and displaying the obvious characteristics of ABS. I'll do the braking from the top of second gear once I hit the rev limiter with a constant camera with no cuts, etc.

classiccelica
08-18-2008, 08:21 PM
actually this would be kinda cool to see.

v1c10us
08-18-2008, 08:49 PM
I'm moving into my new apartment on friday but expect to see this in a few weeks.

ep3civic2nr
08-18-2008, 09:25 PM
my abs hasnt worked since 06 lol. i need to get around to taking it out.

abstract
08-18-2008, 10:02 PM
my abs hasnt worked since 06 lol. i need to get around to taking it out.

feel a differance in stopping?

kenscivic
08-18-2008, 10:32 PM
I read like two pages so please forgive me but, v1c10us you ask for sources but you dont provide your own?

This is ridiculous.. on 98% of surfaces there is a certain percentage of lock up you want * i dont remember off the top of my head, maybe around 75%* there is no way any human being could perfectly do that.. hence abs.. this is the dumbest argument EVER , abs was created for a reason.. the only scenario abs is not good with is like gravel or loosly packed snow..

abs helps you control your vehicle 100000 x's more than non equipped vehicles in a slam on your brakes situation.. one person (non abs) will slide sideways or any other way where as the abs equiped will still have a little bit of control

there is no argument here for the simple fact if you think abs is a bad idea you have to be a flipping moron..

kenscivic
08-18-2008, 10:36 PM
http://www.jdpower.com/autos/articles/ABS-Driving-Techniques

powdbyrice
08-18-2008, 11:50 PM
That is the critical flaw in your argument. As Zzyzx pointed out, the static coefficient of friction is greater than the kinetic coefficient of friction. A tire with a contact patch static relative to the road (a rolling tire) will always have more grip than one sliding merrily along. It's been proven by decades (centuries?) of scientific research.

i asked about that and i got laughed at. :mcry:

Zzyzx
08-19-2008, 12:13 AM
v1c10us, to keep the Wiki thing going I'll just post Citation needed

Because everything I've been finding says is contrary to what youv'e been posting


First, friction between road and tires is far less when the wheels are locked and the tires are sliding. So, you’re not getting as much stopping power when you’re in a skid. That can mean longer stopping distances. (http://www.bridgestonetrucktires.com/us_eng/real/magazines/98V3Issue1/v3i1Tech.asp)

(yes thats from Bridgstone's commercial tire site..)

Comments from the skip barber Driving school (http://www.bigbigcar.com/FeatureArticle.aspx?id=5)

A locked tire is utterly undesirable: the tire is stopped but is sliding on the road as it is no longer gripping the surface, and is thus in no way slowing the car down.


Comments form "Ask A Scientist" & the department of Energy (http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00389.htm)


So, it would appear that 3rd party sources disagree with your assessment.

v1c10us
08-19-2008, 12:14 AM
I read like two pages so please forgive me but, v1c10us you ask for sources but you dont provide your own?

This is ridiculous.. on 98% of surfaces there is a certain percentage of lock up you want * i dont remember off the top of my head, maybe around 75%* there is no way any human being could perfectly do that.. hence abs.. this is the dumbest argument EVER , abs was created for a reason.. the only scenario abs is not good with is like gravel or loosly packed snow..

abs helps you control your vehicle 100000 x's more than non equipped vehicles in a slam on your brakes situation.. one person (non abs) will slide sideways or any other way where as the abs equiped will still have a little bit of control

there is no argument here for the simple fact if you think abs is a bad idea you have to be a flipping moron..

I'm not saying ABS is bad, its a good idea and its a good thing to have, my argument is simply that it increases your stopping distance.

v1c10us
08-19-2008, 12:18 AM
v1c10us, to keep the Wiki thing going I'll just post Citation needed

Because everything I've been finding says is contrary to what youv'e been posting


First, friction between road and tires is far less when the wheels are locked and the tires are sliding. So, you’re not getting as much stopping power when you’re in a skid. That can mean longer stopping distances. (http://www.bridgestonetrucktires.com/us_eng/real/magazines/98V3Issue1/v3i1Tech.asp)

(yes thats from Bridgstone's commercial tire site..)

Comments from the skip barber Driving school (http://www.bigbigcar.com/FeatureArticle.aspx?id=5)



Comments form "Ask A Scientist" & the department of Energy (http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00389.htm)


So, it would appear that 3rd party sources disagree with your assessment.

I have nothing left to say to back up what I'm saying, but I promise, go out and try it, take out your fuse in an empty parking lot and measure your stopping distance. With modern tires it will be shorter.
If you are running tires from 1965 there might be something I'm missing out on.

Zzyzx
08-19-2008, 08:37 AM
There probably wont ever be enough evidence to sway you, but hopefully this video will keep others from thinking that locking their tires will stop their car faster...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4SFzhFC0Eo

adrian1281
08-19-2008, 08:57 AM
You may want to look into the actual physics of it.
Unless you have tires capable of with holding massive amounts of grip the rolling resistance of a tire at its threshold is almost always less than the sliding resistance of the tire; fact.

This my friend is simply untrue. Everybody in this thread is telling you otherwise, the internet is telling you otherwise, yet you don't budge with your assumption. Ignorance can be bliss...



edit: as for using the abs, it pushes against your feet because it wants you to brake at the threshold, not slide uncontrollably and cause an accident, its all for controllability's sake.

This is completely untrue. The ABS is not "pushing" against your foot because it "wants" you to brake at the threshold. When the ABS is doing its job (aka intermittently releasing and engaging brake line pressure to the locked tire) what you feel in your foot is just that, the solenoids in the ABS module clicking on and off. The CORRECT procedure to do when this happens is maintain your foot pressed down.



Modern braking systems in high end cars allow the tires to slide in a controllable fashion using shit tons of computers. the new evo for instance when in a straight line will lock up the brakes and when one of its yaw sensors detects something awry it will reduce braking force to correct your direction and then allow the tire to lock up again.

I guess you work for Mitsubishi and actually programmed their ABS system for the new EVO? Give me a break dude. Where the hell do you get your information. Please show me one "modern" car that has ABS which is programmed to let the tire lock up and keep it that way. The answer is there is none. What you are saying completely contradicts the whole point of having ABS in the first place.

adrian1281
08-19-2008, 09:00 AM
I have nothing left to say to back up what I'm saying, but I promise, go out and try it, take out your fuse in an empty parking lot and measure your stopping distance. With modern tires it will be shorter.
If you are running tires from 1965 there might be something I'm missing out on.

I have gone out and tried it. In over 20 different cars. The results are the same as what you see in the above video posted by "Zzyzx". The car which locks up its tires will always stop farther than the car which either has ABS or its driver is pumping the breaks.

THIS IS A FACT

(except on loose gravel, snow, etc. where the "plow" effect comes into play)

kenscivic
08-19-2008, 09:00 AM
I'm not saying ABS is bad, its a good idea and its a good thing to have, my argument is simply that it increases your stopping distance.

that defeats the point of abs then does it not?

powdbyrice
08-19-2008, 10:42 AM
where did the OP go? i'm curious to see his thoughts...

kenscivic
08-19-2008, 11:35 AM
where did the OP go? i'm curious to see his thoughts...

who is the OP?! there are no thoughts to be determined.. On a rwd car i guess i see the point of no abs if you autox or road course it ALL the time but on a fwd car i see no point what so ever in deleting the abs except to lose like 20 lbs on a car (little to NO gain except if you are going ALL out)

v1c10us
08-19-2008, 12:19 PM
This my friend is simply untrue. Everybody in this thread is telling you otherwise, the internet is telling you otherwise, yet you don't budge with your assumption. Ignorance can be bliss...



This is completely untrue. The ABS is not "pushing" against your foot because it "wants" you to brake at the threshold. When the ABS is doing its job (aka intermittently releasing and engaging brake line pressure to the locked tire) what you feel in your foot is just that, the solenoids in the ABS module clicking on and off. The CORRECT procedure to do when this happens is maintain your foot pressed down.



I guess you work for Mitsubishi and actually programmed their ABS system for the new EVO? Give me a break dude. Where the hell do you get your information. Please show me one "modern" car that has ABS which is programmed to let the tire lock up and keep it that way. The answer is there is none. What you are saying completely contradicts the whole point of having ABS in the first place.

Not their ABS systems, I dont even think the new evo has an ABS system, it uses much more intelligen systems.

I don't know if you have ever been in a car with abs on slick snow, but it will push your foot back to the point that you aren't even really on the brakes if thats what it takes to stop the wheels sliding.

That car in the video appeard to have pulled its e-brake if you ask me, but I'm really done with this argument so I'm not going to say it was.

v1c10us
08-19-2008, 12:24 PM
one last thing.
Every single one of you seems to thing the whole fucking point of abs is to stop the car sooner.
ITS CALLED ANTI LOCK BRAKES
the purpose is to keep the brakes from locking up so that you can control the fucking vehicle.
There was zero intent on making the car stop SOONER.
some freakin german know it alls were like hey lets make it so people can stop crashing into trees and guard rails when they slam on their brakes!
they didn't say, lets make the car stop sooner by varying brake pressure.
I have read like 40 posts on here saying "well that defeats the whole purpose"
"well why would they bother then"
"but the whole point is to stop you sooner" blah blah blah.

powdbyrice
08-19-2008, 12:58 PM
one last thing.
Every single one of you seems to thing the whole fucking point of abs is to stop the car sooner.
ITS CALLED ANTI LOCK BRAKES
the purpose is to keep the brakes from locking up so that you can control the fucking vehicle.
There was zero intent on making the car stop SOONER.
some freakin german know it alls were like hey lets make it so people can stop crashing into trees and guard rails when they slam on their brakes!
they didn't say, lets make the car stop sooner by varying brake pressure.


really? you were there?

seems to me that by preventing the wheels from locking up, the tires are allowed to maintain better contact with the road, thereby allowing the car to stop sooner.

while the sole purpose of ABS isn't to shorten stopping distances, it is ONE of the purposes. would you agree or disagree?

powdbyrice
08-19-2008, 01:00 PM
Not their ABS systems, I dont even think the new evo has an ABS system, it uses much more intelligen systems.


now you're just talking out of your ass. :mconfused:



2008 Lancer Evolution
When you've won as many World Rally Championships as Mitsubishi has, and put world-class vehicles through what we've put them through, you know what is needed for a winning platform. And once you've got the right platform, there's still the matter of outfitting it to optimize active safety. Then, of course, there's added passive safety systems that complement the overall package and make Lancer Evolution safer for high-performance driving.

Anti-Lock Brakes (ABS) with Electronic Brakeforce Distribution (EBD)
The ABS technology used by the Lancer helps to eliminate wheel lock-up duringpanic or emergency braking. Wheel speed is monitored and braking pressure is optimized when impending wheel lock-up is sensed. The system “pulses” the brakes up to 10 times per second, modulating wheel rotation to help eliminate lock-up and maximize driver control.

kenscivic
08-19-2008, 01:31 PM
:rofl: well, i guess the correct side does have facts and links but of course mitsubishi, jd power, and every mechanic in the world does not know shit compared to super autox'r ..

next thing he is going to say is "well if you disconnect your clutch cable you will go faster"

then of course we will argue that it is a hydraulic clutch but we will be wrong again.

squeak04si
08-19-2008, 01:56 PM
well i can tell you that you can still drive your car with no problems. i accidentally pulled the wires out of my abs sensor when changing a axle. my car drives the same so im not in a hurry to fix it.

adrian1281
08-19-2008, 02:42 PM
one last thing.
Every single one of you seems to thing the whole fucking point of abs is to stop the car sooner.
ITS CALLED ANTI LOCK BRAKES
the purpose is to keep the brakes from locking up so that you can control the fucking vehicle.
There was zero intent on making the car stop SOONER.
some freakin german know it alls were like hey lets make it so people can stop crashing into trees and guard rails when they slam on their brakes!
they didn't say, lets make the car stop sooner by varying brake pressure.
I have read like 40 posts on here saying "well that defeats the whole purpose"
"well why would they bother then"
"but the whole point is to stop you sooner" blah blah blah.

Let me ask you something, do you even know what ABS is? Do you truly understand how it works? Because my suggestion to you is stop spending money on "improving" your car and invest in some "General Automotive" style books cause you obviously don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Everyone here that has contradicted your statements have submitted facts and even a video to prove their cases, you have provided nothing but your dillusional thoughts.

And then when things don't go your way, you just simply make up shit like, "I dont even think the new evo has an ABS system."

Come on dude, just admit that you're wrong so we can keep going on with life.

BTW, I don't remember anyone stating that ABS will make your car stop sooner, at least I didn't. What I said was (and which is FACT) is that an ABS equipped vehicle will stop sooner THAN a car which does not have ABS and has locked up one or more tires. That is it. We all understand that the fastest way to stop a vehicle is to achieve threshold braking on all four corners.

I'd like to see you try that, unless your dad is Mario Andretti...

adrian1281
08-19-2008, 02:44 PM
well i can tell you that you can still drive your car with no problems. i accidentally pulled the wires out of my abs sensor when changing a axle. my car drives the same so im not in a hurry to fix it.

I'm gonna take a guess and say that you might want to get that fixed because in a panic stop, your ABS might not work for you.

Whether or not you want that to happen, is your own choice, but you might want to read through this thread and look at the FACTS...

musashi1219
08-19-2008, 04:07 PM
looks like all the bases have been covered. I am just glad we got this mess sorted out.

Oh and squeak, I agree with adrian on getting the ABS fixed

v1c10us
08-19-2008, 04:23 PM
edit:
Done with this thread, and my ABS fuse is still out, so whatever. =]

adrian1281
08-19-2008, 04:45 PM
edit:
Done with this thread, and my ABS fuse is still out, so whatever. =]

Thank God I don't live in Nashville...

Have a nice life. :bye:

skep18
08-19-2008, 05:05 PM
Thank God I don't live in Nashville...

Have a nice life. :bye:

BAHHH!!! I live in Memphis, TN!!!! PLEASE stay up there? No accidents around me would be great. :mbiggrin:

Heitzke
08-19-2008, 05:08 PM
Let me ask you something, do you even know what ABS is? Do you truly understand how it works? Because my suggestion to you is stop spending money on "improving" your car and invest in some "General Automotive" style books cause you obviously don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Everyone here that has contradicted your statements have submitted facts and even a video to prove their cases, you have provided nothing but your dillusional thoughts.

And then when things don't go your way, you just simply make up shit like, "I dont even think the new evo has an ABS system."

Come on dude, just admit that you're wrong so we can keep going on with life.

BTW, I don't remember anyone stating that ABS will make your car stop sooner, at least I didn't. What I said was (and which is FACT) is that an ABS equipped vehicle will stop sooner THAN a car which does not have ABS and has locked up one or more tires. That is it. We all understand that the fastest way to stop a vehicle is to achieve threshold braking on all four corners.

I'd like to see you try that, unless your dad is Mario Andretti...

Truth. Glad some people got to this thread and set the record straight. There was some serious bullllllllshitttt posted in this thread.



Thank God I don't live in Nashville...

Have a nice life. :bye:

+1

musashi1219
08-19-2008, 06:24 PM
I guess it is time for me to apologize to the thread starter. All he wanted to know was how to delete the abs and I had to preach about ABS myths. I just hate when people give misleading or incorrect information. The shit is like AIDS.

oldskoofame
08-20-2008, 02:41 AM
this thread = stupidest sh1t ever.


Okay, if this doesn't shut you guys Up i'll have to get really technical.

"Occasionally it is maintained that µ is always < 1. While in most relevant applications this is true, having a µ > 1 merely implies that the force required to slide an object along the surface is greater than the normal force of the surface on the object. For example, silicone rubber or acrylic rubber coated surfaces have a coefficient of friction that can be substantially larger than 1."
This includes tires, which means if tires were made of wood what you are saying is correct, but since they are not, it is incorrect because µ is greater than 1 not less than 1

Also you have to take into account that the normal force is being varied by the brakes, its not constant because the brakes are not an ON OFF machine;
Since the friction force is a product of the kinetic friction and the normal force. Since the FULL normal force is being applied when the brakes are locked up the frictional force is greater than when the normal force is not being fully applied in order to keep the tires rolling, this reduction reduces the elements in the equation and results in a lower product, or in this case a lower frictional force.
edit: it would be different if the brakes were always fully applied, you would have equal forces at work, but due to the increased force and the decreased sliding friction it equates to the sliding friction of the tire being slightly greater than the rolling friction.
You also have to take into account the maximum static friction the 2 materials can attain, but thats not really relevent because its not very much.

u know how i know u are st00pid?
cuz u forgot time in the equation. and i know that equation.
it's barely used btw. if ur gonna argue about something that moves, ur gonna need time.
also ur argument doesn't make sense because u aren't taking the mass into account.

you say: "friction force is a product of the kinetic friction and the normal force"
friction force = kinetic friction x normal force

"Since the FULL normal force is being applied when the brakes are locked up the frictional force is greater than when the normal force is not being fully applied in order to keep the tires rolling, this reduction reduces the elements in the equation and results in a lower product, or in this case a lower frictional force."

assuming that ur equation is correct somehow, you are still wrong.
u said "normal force is not being fully applied in order to keep the tires rolling, this reduction reduces the elements in the equation and results in a lower product"

there is no reduction. if there is a reduction, then u would be changing your equation to:
[friction force = kinetic friction x (final force - initial force)]
unfortunately, in this topic, we have no final force. we only have initial. so that sums up how there is no reduction.

second,your equation is wrong because there is no constant.
you are dealing with 3 variables in your explanation. that's like fingering 3 pussies when you only have 2 arms with hands. there has to be atleast 1 given number at a certain measurement if we want to deal with the basic application of friction, momentum, mass, change in friction due to heat, etc.
you say: "friction force is a product of the kinetic friction and the normal force"
friction force = kinetic friction x normal force

yes, if one side of a product equation goes down, the other side will as well.
however, following your equation and explanation,
if you say the normal force decreases, so the friction force decreases, then where have the kinetic force gone?

fix your equation. or fix your explanation. or fix both.

oldskoofame
08-20-2008, 03:16 AM
the new evo for instance when in a straight linewill lock up the brakes and when one of its yaw sensors detects something awry it will reduce braking force to correct your direction and then allow the tire to lock up again.

wow...
straight line and yaw.
those are 2 TOTALLY different worlds.
please explain to me how you got those 2 words in the same sentence....

it has to be: i drove in a straight line, and then cornered and my yaw degree was "x"
or.. my slip angle was "x"

yaw sensors?
i guess the new evo even has things i would take out. :hay:

oldskoofame
08-20-2008, 03:28 AM
some of you guys need to f-cking goto school or the army and learn physics.
atleast use ur brain for something.

if ur offended by what i just said.. just letting u know i haven't targetted my statement towards anyone. you label yourself.

oldskoofame
08-20-2008, 03:33 AM
I came within an inch of hitting this guy cause I was pumping the breaks) Is there a way to get rid of the ABS?

yes there is a way to get rid of the ABS.
however, ask yourself, how good are you in modulating your brakes? it's alot more than just understanding the amount of pressure on the brake pad exerting a certain amount of pressure on the rotors.

how do you think you will do in the rain?
how about a camping trip up on those gravels?
how about when you see a deer?
how about when you see a grandma crossing the street?

these are daily drive cars. we share the road with many others. these cars are made for normal people who have to goto work, see their families, take their pets to the park, get some coffee, go camping, etc...

these normal people have a natural reaction to stomp on the brakes when they see something last second. that's what the abs is for.

the following is a VERY generalized scenarios
YOU ARE DRIVING AND YOU SEE A DEER ON THE ROAD VERY CLOSE AND U ARE GOING AT A QUICK SPEED (IT'S HARD TO DETERMINE THE EXACT SPEED. THIS IS JUST A GENERAL EXAMPLE).
- NO ABS, BRAKES LOCKED BECAUSE U PUSHED DOWN A BIT TOO HARD!!! => 10 ft slide (slides even more now cuz every feet it slides the more heat generated on your tire's flat spot)
- ABS AVAILABLE, U PUSHED DOWN A BIT TOO HARD!!! => 6ft roll (whew thanks abs!)
- ABS taken out and brakes modulated => 4ft roll
- ABS AVAILABLE and brakes modulated => 4ft~5ft roll

Zzyzx
08-20-2008, 08:02 AM
some of you guys need to f-cking goto school or the army and learn physics.
atleast use ur brain for something.

if ur offended by what i just said.. just letting u know i haven't targetted my statement towards anyone. you label yourself.

Stating facts is never offensive. As long as you can support them.

Windchaser
08-20-2008, 08:53 AM
oldskoofame, the moment i read the first page of this thread, i knew to stay out of it. apparently, you couldn't help it any longer? LOL.

MugenReplica
08-20-2008, 09:01 AM
Okay, the thread is DONE. Too many people arguing now. Both sides made their points. I know where I stand and I'm going to say it......ABS is standard on the car. LEAVE IT ALONE!:mmad:

CLOSED!