First off, I have nothing against the word able-bodied. It communicates what it needs to, which is that someone is not disabled. But, I prefer nondisabled in most contexts.
There’s some debate about this, but I like to differentiate between medical conditions and identity. I have disabling medical conditions like anxiety, chronic injury, and arthritis. If someone doesn’t have these or any other disabling medical condition, they’re able-bodied. But, the thing is, the disability identity is far broader than any one medical condition. When I talk about being disabled, I’m talking about it’s culture and identity (as well as the obstacles that identity faces). The thing is, able-bodied isn’t an identity. It isn’t defined by a set of shared characteristics, but, rather the absence of disabled characteristics. Hence, the term “nondisabled”, which I use when I want to impart a set of shared characteristics on able-bodied people. If I say that nondisabled people act a certain way, I’m acknowledging that they’re not acting that way because they’re able-bodied, but because their nondisabled.