Mandatory ABS set for motorcycles
Legislation to come into effect from 2017
ACCORDING to German component suppliers, Bosch, ABS looks set to become mandatory on all machines from 2017.
European Parliament is likely to sanction the legislation before they break for their summer recess at the end of July. The imminent decision follows a long consultation process with industry bodies, manufacturers and trade associations.
It's expected that the law will insist that all new 125cc+ motorcycles manufactured after 2017 will have to be fitted with OE ABS braking systems in a bid to increase rider safety.
Discuss this story
Gary/Mobus - It's a volume issue, isn't it?
The more units sold, the lower the price becomes. We asked the Bosch staff this very question yesterday and their stab-in-the-dark answer was that, produced in bulk, the hardware and ancillaries would only add between 1 and 2 hundred euros to the cost of the bike. What price a life?
In depth report of the latest Bosch ABS system to follow in the very near future (when we've finished editing hundreds of meg of on-board video footage).
Posted: 08/07/2011 at 16:48
Like i said before abs sounds nice, although ive never ridden a bike with it before but is you ask me its just another set of electrical things that can and most likly will go wrong and be a right pain in the arse to fix.
p.s. your right about the price difference becoming almost none existant. I didnt think about that.
Posted: 08/07/2011 at 19:41
Bluebandit, you will probably replace your bike in the next 6-7 years though? And most bikes similar to the Bandit at the moment will probably be sold with ABS.
And your attitude is similar to those when seatbelts were made mandatory.
Posted: 08/07/2011 at 20:03
'What price is a life?'
True enough, but
What price is choice?
Posted: 08/07/2011 at 23:33
I was at the MAG protest in Brum last weekend. Where were the rest of you?
For those of you that want to know more about getting involved, drop me a line.
For those of you that want a little more debate:
From time immemorial, the progress of technology has depended on our ability to
measure accurately.
The EU can accurately measure loss of human life. The consumer can accurately measure cost of purchase, service, and mpg etc. The insurance industry measures the cost of repair and disposal.
What we can't currently measure is the total cradle to grave cost of the development of these technologies, the (needless?) disposal of older vehicles, and the masses of resources used to sell us the new ones. Is all this really worth an extra 0.25mpg and a few less scraped body panels each year?
The more consumerist the market, the more pronounced the distortions.
The bike market includes an unusually high percentage of enthusiasts, people with a passion for maintaining and repairing bikes at a cost far lower than the manufacturers or insurers can contemplate - largely because its our own free time.
By their very nature these people are adaptable and resourceful - as technologies become more common place we get used to them and are less wary of buying bikes that use them - shimmed valves and fuel injection are typical examples. Though with each increment, I suspect the number of non-consumerist bikers shrinks. This may be cause as much as effect however. Is the environmental cost of a few fewer broken wrists or scraped fairing panels each year really worth it? Maybe compulsory ABS will mean the riding season is longer so fewer people will drive cars so less fuel will be used.
So in total, I doubt it will effect any of us very much financially, but what's the thing we're really not measuring?
Wasabi said it - "choice". Did we vote for these jokers? Are they really improving anything?
Posted: 09/07/2011 at 03:32
and what about our friends on Big Trailie bikes eh?
When you're roughing down a shingle slope you NEED to lock that back wheel up!
Posted: 09/07/2011 at 21:06
Ummm, I think you might have a problem with SPAM!!!!!!!
Nup, not into it. I agree, put it on those big car bikes, but I dont need it on mine. I can ride thanks (and no thats not the same as the helmet issue) But Im not getting all worked up about it. Ive never ridden with it, but it doesnt make that much difference really does it?
Posted: 11/07/2011 at 04:52
Total madness. Why can't we have the choice? Sure, bring in a law to make abs the same price as non-abs or something like that for those inexperienced riders who maybe put of by the higher price, but what about those of us who know how to stop a bike?
Personally I'm an experienced rider who uses the simple ingredient of anticipation and suitable speed to ensure I stop way before a potential accident, I certainly don't rely on brakes that could stop me 5% faster. I've ridden bikes with abs and I don't like them, they judder when you brake hard.
Yes, I have lost the front wheel in the past when I was young and inexperienced, but now I know how to stop rapidly if I need to without panicing and locking the front wheel (yes even in those very occasional oh-shit moments).
Personally I like to do the odd stoppie (not the greatest defence, I know) and this would no longer be possible with abs. I guess a abetter reason would be that we should be encouraging better driving, not a better ability to save yourself at the last second because you've been driving badly.
Also, lets face it, nature has many ways of excluding idiots from the gene pool, and abs just helps them live longer than if they (yes, that's me) choose not to have abs :-P
Posted: 11/07/2011 at 10:27
Is it compulsory on cars?
My mate's fiat shitbox (i think thats what they're called) failed its mot due to an ABS light. We always try to fix our own vehicles due mainly to cost but also because between us we usually can and we enjoy it and learn from the experience. Anyway the ABS failed due to a fault in the ECU - uneconomical to replace - car a write-off.
So I guess the cost of abs may be negligable at purchase but later on, after a couple of winters?
That said, it takes time to learn the muscle memory to respond safely to unpredicted situations. If my kids ever want to start riding I will insist they have abs at least until they know what they're doing.
Posted: 11/07/2011 at 13:44
So that means the newcomers to the sport will never have experienced "threshold braking" etc on these abs bikes. They will eventually jump on an older bike, brimming with confidence, and slam it to the tarmac the first time they grab a fistful!
Hey ABS is great, but you have to learn the fundimentals!
Posted: 12/07/2011 at 16:25
ripsaws comment is crap.
The abs hasn't been working on my BMW for 5 years and the lights flash, It has never failed the MOT.
ABS failure is an advisory, not a fail provided the breaks still work, which they will provided they are not linked into something hideously complex like Honda's combined linked braking system.
Posted: 12/07/2011 at 16:44
abs on a bike in the wet, oily, gravel hhmmmmmm no thanks Mr EU you accident statistics will increase but then why should you care you'll just cover it up like you have your end of year accounts for the last god knows how long.
Didnt vote for ya dont want ya and we are perfectly capable of deciding what is and is not.
It is not only this ABS farce the T W A T S in the EU are pushing through is it they are also pushing through anti tampering laws so there goes the home machanic and matey that likes to modify his bike and not to mention the disabled bikers who have to have thier bikes modified.
S O D OFF EU.
www.ukip.org the only political party that are standing up for motorcyclists and the UK
Posted: 12/07/2011 at 19:33
As stated by many here there are pros and cons for ABS on a bike and the debate will, no doubt, rage on for the next half dozen years with each side having good and valid arguments for their case.
To be honest I'm more concerned about the proposed law to force all new car manufacturers to make day running lights compulsory from 2012. Many are already doing so. What chance has the poor biker of being seen when the majority of cars will be lit up like Xmas trees FFS!
"SMIDSY" will become a common phrase again :(
Posted: 12/07/2011 at 20:37
What next -- airbags?
All this will do is get the boy racers to rely on technology to stp and they won't use the little braines they got left.
So it will be swerve, accerelerate hard, brake heavily and skid on gravel or a cowpat--- Abs is not equal to good riding, eyes and care.
Stabilizers anyone?
Oh add a box, we can call it a car!
Wheres the free spirit and care,
Now all car drivers will expect all Bikes(including veterans and vintage ones to stop on a sixpence----Doh? they won't care or know the bikes age, will they?
what's a sixpence , Dad?
Posted: 13/07/2011 at 08:11
Every bike I've ridden with ABS stops slower than a none ABS bike under heavy brakeing, which is exactly when you need it.
Imgaine trying to pull up when that car pulls out of a side road into your path. You think you've survived the the brakes ease off. This will cause problems & cost lives, unless it can be made more intelligent.
If the normal level of grip will allow a bike to perform a stoppy then anything that prevents this from happening on a dry straight road is reducing the brakeing effect massively. If it's designed to reduce the loss of adhesion when cornernig then forget brakeing, it is the lean angle which will cause the crash & any additional slowing will only hasten the accident.
Only training will make riders safer. Electronic gadgets only shift the cause & effect!
Posted: 13/07/2011 at 08:45
How many accidents actually happen on a dry, straight road?
I have been riding for 20 odd years and am trained to ROSPA Gold standard, done CSS and have the Advanced rider Ticket.
One of my bikes has ABS, I got the ABS version more out of curiosity than anyhing else. I have only triggered it once in 10000 miles, that was in France on a dirt track to see what ABS was like when it is activated. I was mortified when the lever over a few meters came back to the grip and I had no brakes whatsoever so I can not see it working on any off road bikes.
However as a rider safety aid on the road I could imagine it will be useful. I was riding around Cadwell park on the bike last week and as per previous trackdays I was not outbraked all day. The brakes did feel a bit wooden but I can confirm that they do work as well as a mortal can brake.
I think that ABS is useful as any front end crashes that I have had have been as a result of panic braking on a wet road when something has pulled out or I have been riding like a nobber.
I suggest that you try ABS equipped bike befire slagging off a useful safety aid.
Posted: 13/07/2011 at 09:25
@simonfoster
me also being a ROSPA gold standered rider, i have to disagree with you on the effectiveness of most ABS systems, the Honda linked brake abs system is atrocious and frankly dangerous if you are going down a steep inclined road and wish to stop quickly, also (wether it is a faulty sensor or not) when going round a corner sometimes, even the best rider, will want to gently touch the back brake, but with the honda system voila it puts the front brake on and causes the bike to "turn in" Which equates to a rather scary bum sucking moment especially when you shouldn't have to be fighting a safety system just to corner.
However the systems on newer bmw's and suzuki's is on the whole very good. but people need to have a choice. I for one will not buy an ABS bike until I am forced to, I believe they are lethal. They can be safe but let people have a switch in which to turn them on or off, or stop them from working at speeds of less than 30mph for example.
Posted: 13/07/2011 at 21:44
I object to "mandatory" ABS.
I think forcing an ABS option would be acceptable. A lot of this so called safety and emissions regulations are jobs for the boys. It gives a reason for existence to a load of bureaucrats and the big manufacturers love it because it's more money with more expensive bikes, more parts to maintain and shorter lifecycle. Emissions are the same. The best way to reduce carbon footprint is a simple machine, with small engine that's simple to maintain and has a long lifecycle not junk in 5 years because the systems are too expensive to fix when they fail out of warranty.
Posted: 17/07/2011 at 09:11
This tinder box will flare up occasionally over the next few years. The helmet law is the the other example of a 'forced up on us' change.
Inexperience
Being presented with an incident that you had not or could not have anticipated or didn't leave yourself time to decide how to deal with.
For the first case, it is the 125's that need the ABS as most of the owners will be less experienced and if they find themselves in a situation where they need to stop in an emergency less likely to manage.
Even if you're experienced you can't anticipate absolutely every move by every other road user, and no-one has infallible and perfect concentration 100% of the time. If you only really need ABS once it could be that time pays back the extra cost; maybe you avoid a skid and the side of the car that didn't spot you as it pulled out of a junction or you went into a bend a bit too hot, reacted because you didn't have time to decide what to do and the ABS saves a skid and a washed out front end.
The systems will no doubt be much improved over the next few years, so the "it's a rubbish solution arguments will be eroded".
Compulsion without evidence is never a comfortable thing to accept, but for this case there are good arguments, though the arguments by trail riders needing to lock-up are obvious in that scenario. I'd also like to see the same applied to four-wheelers, if the arguments are valid for bikes they're valid for them too.
Posted: 17/07/2011 at 16:14
Many of those studies that show the benefit of ABS are **confounded** and **flawed**! They compare the crash stats of the same bikes that have been sold with and without ABS (optional ABS). The results comprehensively show that ABS optioned bikes crash less... seems like a slam dunk for ABS then doesn't it? Wrong!
A conservative and possibly fearful motorcyclist (see comments above with respect to the "one time" you need it etc) pay extra to take up the ABS option... and guess what? Conservative riders ride... wait for it... CONSERVATIVELY. Have they crashed less because of the ABS? Unlikely. Some portion of the difference is due to ABS but the majority is simply due to the difference in rider attitude.
The BOSCH Gen 9 talks about some cornering smarts - surely that's just spin. If it takes HONDA 20lbs additional weight to build ABS with cornering smarts, how does a tiny unit do it?
The BOSCH 9 unit also talks about stopping stoppies... how would you like to be braking hard in down hill twisties, brake hard, the rear goes light and suddenly the front brake effort is reduced to keep the rear wheel on the deck? Hello?? How is this safe?
I'm not sure how the GIDAS indepth study arrived at a judgement that ABS would make a difference, because MAIDS certainly didn't arrive at that conclusion. Some smart folk need to get to the nub of that and make it clear.
Every non thinking rider and car centric politician looks at motorcycle ABS through car centric eyes. This is dangerous. Bikes are dynamically stable single track vehicles... they operate nothing like a car. Many automatic reactions on a bike counter intuitively exacerbate the danger a rider is placed in. For anything not perfectly vertical ABS can introduce dynamic issues that compound motorcycle handling issues.
Any ABS package that anticipates lock can be outbraked in the dry. Canada tests showed braking decellerations around -0.78G. Skilled braking can get -0.9G ...ABS is about saving the lazy rider.
This is no slam dunk. ABS has a place and is gold in the wet... but if you dial back your riding in the wet, don't you dial back the risk?? Is this really then something that should be made mandatory? NO WAY.
Concerned rider from Australia.
Posted: 19/07/2011 at 02:03
|
|
