ABS on this truck is dangerous...

Really ? I couldn't find anything on ABS being mandatory on passenger vehicles in Canada beyond what you posted , so you are saying ABS was mandatory in Canada before Europe and the US ?

 

Since ABS doesnt work in snow Ive been turning my truck and sliding into stops sideways. Im getting pretty good at, since its been snowing quite a bit latley.

 

Scroll down to standard 126 to see where I copied from. The link in my previous post is the TSD 126 referred to under standard 126.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._1038/page-17.html

All the archived versions are available online too, for the older standards.

 

like a boss

 

OK

Just wondering where the " adopted in 2006 " thing is from though more specifically

 

My BFG Commercial T/A's won't let me do that......at all.

 

From: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/motorvehiclesafety/tp-tp13082-abs4_e-217.htm#disconnect

Four interesting points on that site that are Transport Canada's official opinion;

1) Does Transport Canada have a safety standard for ABS?

No, not for ABS alone.

Transport Canada does have a standard for effectiveness of a vehicle's intact brake system, which includes braking performance in case of a failure of part of the system.


2) Should I disconnect my ABS?

No. ABS provides the average driver with above average vehicle control in most conditions.


3) Do all ABS-equipped vehicles brake in the same way?

No. Some ABS equipped vehicles perform differently than others, which is why it is important to learn the braking characteristics of your vehicle.


4) Road surfaces and ABS

Road hazards that will cause the ABS to function unexpectedly are gravel, sand, ice, snow, mud, railway tracks, potholes, manhole covers, and even road markings when it is raining.
The ABS cannot make up for road conditions or bad judgment. It is still the driver’s responsibility to drive at reasonable speeds for weather and traffic conditions. Always leave a margin of safety.

 

I'd also be willing to bet a good chunk of change that no auto company pays $2000 for the ABS hardware they install in there cars. For the hundreds of thousands of systems that each manufacturer installs they get a heavy discount. Since the last time I saw ABS as a charge option it was worth $595 (a 2002 Saturn I nearly bought), I'd guess that the system itself is worth less than $300 over a non ABS braking system to the auto company.

They only charge $2000 to the poor smucks that need to fix the system when something goes wrong .

 

I think if you're going faster than the rate of traffic in a storm we all know who the "good driver" isn't .

 

Probably 100 percent true :/

At least it is better than the ABS on the front wheels only of my 1994 or 1992 4runner

 

That's still better than ABS only on the rear wheels of most mid 90's Dodge Rams .

 

Same site :

"Is stopping distance shorter with ABS?


No! From early commercials, it may have looked like you could stop on a dime. That instantaneous stop is not realistic. When braking on dry or wet roads your stopping distance will be about the same as with conventional brakes.

You should allow for a longer stopping distance with ABS than for conventional brakes when driving on gravel, slush, and snow. This is because the rotating tire will stay on top of this low traction road surface covering, and effectively "float" on this boundary layer.

A non ABS braked vehicle can lock its tires and create a snow plow effect in front of the tires which helps slow the vehicle. These locked tires can often find more traction below this boundary layer."

 

I was not aware of that, and I could only imagine how lame that option was!

Back then ABS was click, click, click and sounded like something was breaking. NOW is is MUCH faster and still sounds un-natural but it has made huge advances.

 

Yup, things usually get better over time.

I only know about the rear brake ABS on Ram's because one of my college buddies had a 1996 Regular Cab 4x4 1500 done up bro dozer style (all the chrome he could stick on there and 9" up in the air!) We, and a few other ag students, were fudging around in a parking lot with a new motorbike one of our classmates had recently acquired. We started talking about ABS for some reason. He mentioned his truck only had rear ABS and none of us believed him. He then did a short stomp on the throttle and brake in front of us, and low and behold the front locked up but the rears did the ABS jerk dance. On those 90's trucks I think the point was to keep the rear tires rolling so the rear end would stay straightened out. What a terrible idea, considering I think we can all agree the biggest advantage of an ABS system is that it allows you to steer!

 

Yup, we've been over this before . I don't disagree with you at all that there are circumstances where ABS will result in a longer stopping distance. My first post on this thread mentioned the plowing effect on loose surfaces.

Also, just as an aside, when was the last time you were on a gravel road that had so much loose material that it would pile in front of the tires when stopping? The gravel roads around here have WAY to much Calcium down to be that loose lol.

The only problem with piling snow is that in most areas that snow on the road ends up as hard pack and doesn't pile when you stop. On that icey surface it'll be a toss up between which stops faster, ABS or non ABS. A well programmed ABS that applies as much stopping force as possible while maintaining steerage will only help in that situation.

 

Hard packed snow and ice are two different things

 

I made a few edits above. I agree that there are differences, but both surfaces do not pile. The nice thing about packed snow is that good tires will "rip" the surface if there tire is flexible enough for the sipes to grip. Sounds like a snow tire application no .

 

Exactly , even on packed snow , a skidding tire can break through the surface layer and find traction , that is never happening with ABS

 

I like the snow plow description. Very accurate.

There was a downhill section that I used to travel down when wheeling that the Tacoma would go the entire 200 feet or so distance down the hill without stopping if you used the brakes and ABS, still had some steering control but stopping was not possible with ABS on.

The same hill with my 81, lock up the brakes and the swampers dug in and stopped in a few feet. Of course then there is no steering ability with the brakes locked up.

The preferred method in the 81 for that downhill section was low 4 in 1st or 2nd gear and idle down, brakes to keep it at idle, and engine functions as ABS more or less, then when I wanted to stop I apply more brakes and of course the clutch. Sounds funny typing it, but I use that all the time descending in the 81 when locking up the wheels and loosing control would be bad.

 

I spent a bunch of time digging through archived regulations without success. You can probably disregard my "ABS mandatory on light vehicles in 2006" comments as hearsay at this point, I don't care to dig any further, and as such, I can't back up my earlier statement.