Nope, not a misprint. They talk quite extensively about it. They were able to repeatedly stop the bike hamfisted at 88, 89, 87, 90 Ft. They go on to mention that some of the more skilled riders like Mark Tuttle and Lance Holst could probably do better without ABS, but Grodsky's repeated attempts could not produce the results and neither did they expect the average rider to. I understand what you're saying and have typically agreed with your opinion, but in this exercise it didn't happen. I don't believe that most riders spend the time in the parking lot required to find "The Edge" of their bikes braking capabilities in order to out perform ABS in the event of an emergency. You just can't make an immediate determination of the asphalts condition, tire temperatures and impact of adrenaline in your system.....not to mention the load in your pants that you just produced. : ^) I love having the ABS safety net. That being said I can't remember that last time I had to use it! :^)
Kevin Hawkins // Greensboro, NC [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.freecfm.com/r/raddboy Y2K Kawasaki ZRX1100 //'93 Yamaha GTS1000 //'85 FZ750 In a message dated 10/26/01 9:32:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Rider Magazine in July, 1993 listed the GTS at 87 Ft. with ABS engaged. The best they could do without the ABS engaged was 89 Ft. How's that first reversing a long held theory? >> Sorry, I do not believe it, and neither should you. Consider it a misprint. How could one achieve a shorter stopping distance when the braking pressure is released, if you are braking on optimum braking surface conditions. Go out and try it for yourself. Get up to a certain speed, say 50, and choose a point to jam on the brakes. Try it one time locking the brakes and the next time holding it just short of ABS. You will find max braking, i e minimum braking distance is without getting into ABS. ABS is designed to assist in adverse braking conditions, not optimal. RSRBOB
