While I don't think we have lots of bikers here, we probably have enough riders to be interested in the latest hype.

This article appeared in my local newsrag, and so far as I know they have no accessible posting place, so I'll omit searching for a link. It's attributed to the Washington Post, so it may pop up on other news sites, as the WP is fequently plagiarized on the web.

Wichita Eagle 08 May 2010

Safer brakes sought for cycles
By Ashley Halsey III
Washington Post

Citing research showing that fatal motorcycle accidents could be reduced by more than a third, an insurance industry group has asked for a federal mandate to require anti-lock brakes on all new motorcycles.

Until last year, the number of motorcycle fatalities had steadily increased, reaching a record 5,290 two years ago. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, which can draw on accident reports from the insurance companies that support it, asked the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration this week to require that new motorbikes be equipped with the brakes.

"Traveling on two wheels instead of four is always riskier, but our new research shows that anti-lock brake technology can make motorcycle riding a much safer way to get around," Adrian Lund, president of the institute, said.

Concern about the added cost, estimated by motorcycle industry sources at more than $1,000 a bike, and other issues made motorcycle groups reluctant to embrace a mandate. In a statement, the American Motorcyclist Association endorsed making the brakes an available option on more models than manufacturers offer but said they are "not a panacea."

"There are situations when (anti-lock brakes) can increase the risk of a crash, such as when riding an off-highway motorcycle on a trail, or when riding an on-highway or dual-sport motorcycle on a dirt or gravel road," the group said.

Unlike automobile brakes, which respond to a single pedal, a motorcycle has independently controlled front and rear brakes. In some off-road situations, a rider might intentionally clamp down on the rear brake to correct direction if the bike swerves in deep mud or gravel.

With anti-lock brakes, pressure is evaluated several times a second so that the motorcycle avoids stopping so abruptly that the rider loses control.

Insurance institute researchers found that motorcycles with anti-lock brakes were 37 percent less likely to be in fatal crashes. Another study analyzing insurance claims determined that motorcycles with anti-lock brakes had 22 percent fewer claims for crash damage per insured vehicle year than the same models without them.

[End Quote]

So far as I've heard, ABS is available only on "hog" class road-only bikes. Anyone who can afford it is likely to be a "weekend road warrior" who rides fairly conservatively, so lower accident rates (for the rich playtoy riders?) probably are easily found. This doesn't prove that ABS has anything to do with the difference.

To propose this as a requirement for all cycles seems to me like a result of an inbred result of lunacy incestuously breeding with idiocy; but maybe I'm missing something.

Anybody else have any thoughts?

(about this)

John