Pro racers can brake better than conventional ABS systems, but they also usually have a LOT more traction to work with as well on racing tires.
Exactly can't compare the two. It's like comparing an F-150 to an 18-wheeler.
I've posted this before. I crewed on a team that started racing locally and when I left was racing in the Speedvision World Challenge GT series. It was a three car team of Corvettes. The cars all had ABS. The reasoning was that is was a failsafe if the car got in trouble either through the fault of the driver or otherwise. We had to add weight to the cars for the series, so that was not an issue.
A skilled driver can brake on the edge of lockup. The ABS technology in place at that time was less effective that the braking ability of a skilled driver. In other words a skilled driver could generate more G's when braking than the ABS could.
I'm not well versed in more modern systems and do not know which racing series if any allow ABS.
Essentially yes. If you braked hard enough to engage the ABS, you were braking too hard.So you're saying they had ABS but when braking into the corner didn't brake hard enough to engage it?
ABS is not allowed in F1. And racing drivers do frequently exceed the traction afforded by their tires on the tire with the least load under braking. They can change brake bias front to rear turn to turn...I'm not sure if they can change brake bias side to side though. That might be too much to deal with but maybe not.
In any case, any current F1 driver without ABS and traction control could easily beat all of the armchair racers here with all the driver aids in the world.
ABS is not allowed in F1. And racing drivers do frequently exceed the traction afforded by their tires on the tire with the least load under braking. They can change brake bias front to rear turn to turn...I'm not sure if they can change brake bias side to side though. That might be too much to deal with but maybe not.
In any case, any current F1 driver without ABS and traction control could easily beat all of the armchair racers here with all the driver aids in the world.
The pedal allowed the drivers to operate either of the rear brakes independently of the others. This gave them two additional means of controlling the car and improving the performance by reducing either understeer or wheelspin depending on which wheel was braked and when.
Depends on the rules but an abs like used on street cars are not the same in almost all cases were rules allow . We also have break bias controls for adjusting front and rear brake , I also use bias control for controling right and left braking control . If your a round tracker you would normally use more left side break to pull you around the corner and stop a push .On thr front of car . I also have seen guys use a residual valve of 2 psi on the rear breaks . Not a real smart thing to do . But what ever floats your boat
Essentially yes. If you braked hard enough to engage the ABS, you were braking too hard.
There is a fine distinction here. An assumption that the cars would generate more braking force with ABS engaged than without would be an incorrect assumption.
ABS will momentarily release and allow hydraulic pressure to a wheel that is near locking or locked. By its very nature, that has to be less efficient than a driver braking to the threshold of lockup.
My involvement ended about a dozen years ago. Our ABS controllers did not have stock programming in them at that time. I'm sure that improvements in hardware and software implementation may have changed the situation. Remember that I can only relate to this as it existed during the time frame of my involvement.
What you say is still true. Even with the best programming in the world, ABS still functions by reducing pressure on the brakes in order to allow a wheel to start spinning again. There's no way around that and even the best implementations will not be quite as good as maintaining constant pressure right at the threshold.
ABS has always been a fail-safe, just like traction control. Even outside of a racetrack scenario, one should not be routinely engaging ABS. No matter how bad the weather is, a driver should endeavor not to have ABS, traction control, or stability control come into play. These systems are safety nets, not items designed to be routinely used.
ZV
The ABS on the latest Honda CBR600RR is supposedly very very good. Better than all but the best racers in the world in the dry and much much better in the wet. I really don't understand why riders shun ABS on motorcycles. I'd like to see ABS on all street bikes personally.
It may well be, but ABS only ever engages if the driver (or in this case, rider) goes beyond what the car (or bike) is capable of. In an ideal world, the threshold would never be crossed and ABS would never trigger. I grant that we don't live in an ideal world and that ABS is a good thing to have because even the best drivers screw up, but that doesn't mean it's not still a safety net.
I think that the issue people have with ABS on street bikes is twofold:
1) Many riders remember the older ABS systems that were very obtrusive and overzealous in their engagement, either of which can upset a bike's balance. This causes a prejudice against ABS in general despite improvements.
2) This applies mainly to riders of things other than sportbikes, but one reason that some people really love motorcycles is their simplicity. There is still a contingent of riders who prefer carbed bikes to bikes with EFI. Anything that adds complexity is often looked at with suspicion. I believe that this is also the reason why linked brakes failed to catch on despite Honda's continuous improvement of their linked braking system.
ZV