GL1800Riders Forums banner

61 - 71 of 71 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
I am all for it and think bmw will do a good job with it. If they do it then others might follow. Besides, who would not like tech on their next bike that makes it a safer ride...say something that helps prevent you from losing traction and laying a bike down in a tight turn? Thinking the new indIan motorcycle, Challenger, has that feature and maybe the newest big harley touring bikes. Now that is sweet. And harley designed something to help keep there ‘lite touring’ models upright at low speed, that fits in the trunk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
451 Posts
I'm expecting the (currently being released) new gen Yukon will have the ability to change to regular cruise.
That's one thing i don't like about Mercedes implementation, is the adaptive cruise cannot be defeated. There is no regular cruise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
Automatic braking will be next.
I agree. I understood the integration of the Adaptive Cruise Control with the ABS results in Automatic Braking which of course is already on some cars. However, anything that helps the safety is welcome in my book.
 

·
SuperModerator
Joined
·
3,426 Posts
That's one thing i don't like about Mercedes implementation, is the adaptive cruise cannot be defeated. There is no regular cruise.
I would welcome adaptive cruise as an option along with regular cruise. I would not want strictly adaptive cruise.

Glen
 
  • Like
Reactions: William Anzik

·
Registered
Joined
·
451 Posts
I would welcome adaptive cruise as an option along with regular cruise. I would not want strictly adaptive cruise.
Out here it's not unusal to have wet roads and 31* air, but the sun is out and roads are very warm. The radar on the front ices over and the adaptive cruise shuts off. So no cruise at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,408 Posts
Out here it's not unusal to have wet roads and 31* air, but the sun is out and roads are very warm. The radar on the front ices over and the adaptive cruise shuts off. So no cruise at all.
On the vehicle we have, regular cruise can still be selected -- and the manual warns about the limitation of the adaptive system under icy/foggy/low visibility conditions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,744 Posts
Isn't those the conditions that someone should not be using cruise control anyway?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,652 Posts
I am one who would probably think twice about a bike without basic cruise control. On long trips, there are always the fun parts where cruise isn't necessary, but also a lot of long stretches of nothing in between. In fact, when I bought my KTM 990 Adventure to ride through South America, I adapted and installed an automotive cruise control (Audiovox), since the 990 didn't have cruise. It was one of the functions I used most that trip. The Atacama desert is about a 1,000 miles of straight, boring, nothing. Riding like that, can become very tiring and even painful without cruise control.

If done properly, adaptive cruise, even adaptive braking can be a real benefit. Years ago I hit a car while in a rental car. He was in front of me, I watch as he pulled out from the gas station onto the frontage road. I then checked left for traffic, when I looked back, he had stopped for no apparent reason. Bang! I realize I should have waited until he actually pulled out, before looking left. If the rental had adaptive braking, this would have never happened. Fortunately, after I told the rental car company about it, they never charged me! Win!

Poorly implemented, adaptive cruise control could be dicey and even unsafe. Hard braking, instead of logically slowing down, could lead to overreaction, over steering and accidents. Drivers following to close may also rear end a hard braking cruise reaction. Sort of like an automatic brake check. Which means, it could also tick off folks following. Not allowing use of non-adaptive use of cruise would also be a mistake.

In the best case scenario, those who wanted adaptive cruise would have it. Those who only wanted cruise could disable adaptive. And those who didn't want cruise at all wouldn't have to set it. Seems to me everyone wins.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,744 Posts
I am one who would probably think twice about a bike without basic cruise control. On long trips, there are always the fun parts where cruise isn't necessary, but also a lot of long stretches of nothing in between. In fact, when I bought my KTM 990 Adventure to ride through South America, I adapted and installed an automotive cruise control (Audiovox), since the 990 didn't have cruise. It was one of the functions I used most that trip. The Atacama desert is about a 1,000 miles of straight, boring, nothing. Riding like that, can become very tiring and even painful without cruise control.

If done properly, adaptive cruise, even adaptive braking can be a real benefit. Years ago I hit a car while in a rental car. He was in front of me, I watch as he pulled out from the gas station onto the frontage road. I then checked left for traffic, when I looked back, he had stopped for no apparent reason. Bang! I realize I should have waited until he actually pulled out, before looking left. If the rental had adaptive braking, this would have never happened. Fortunately, after I told the rental car company about it, they never charged me! Win!

Poorly implemented, adaptive cruise control could be dicey and even unsafe. Hard braking, instead of logically slowing down, could lead to overreaction, over steering and accidents. Drivers following to close may also rear end a hard braking cruise reaction. Sort of like an automatic brake check. Which means, it could also tick off folks following. Not allowing use of non-adaptive use of cruise would also be a mistake.

In the best case scenario, those who wanted adaptive cruise would have it. Those who only wanted cruise could disable adaptive. And those who didn't want cruise at all wouldn't have to set it. Seems to me everyone wins.
I think you have brought up some great points, and illustrates the difference of being on a motorcycle or strapped in a car by seat and shoulder belts. The implications would have to be very different. If the motorcycle required a hard deceleration event and the rider wasn't prepared for it, it could be catastrophic. The main purpose of these systems is to take control when the driver wasn't paying attention. Good for a car, bad for a motorcycle.

The only problem I see with making it selectable is that the systems are very expensive. It will only drive up the cost of the motorcycle for those who would never use it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,878 Posts
I am for ACC
 
61 - 71 of 71 Posts
Top