They never learn...

jayok

ambro25 wrote:

:rolleyes:

Maybe also it's because so many people don't bother learning what a safe travelling distance and interval is.

Maybe also it's because so many people don't bother paying attention as to whether the car/bike/lorry in front is slowing down unless they see any brake lights.

etc.

When you drive your car, you have a duty of care to the people you are following, because your actions (not breaking) will adversely affect them. You do not have a duty of care to the people who follow you: they have the same duty of care to you, as you have to the car in front of you.

The only exception to this principle is if you are being overtaken.



Never said different. I said : one of the first things (...).



I take it that you have 'sat' Advanced Motoring as dispensed by a certain Insurance group?

That last (emboldened) one must be the Insurers' own addendum. I can fully understand why they'd slot it in, mind

Oh - I'd have thought the 3rd step should read: ACT (before bothering to pass information )

(just to clarify - my advanced driving training was not civilian)

I am not interested in turning this into a p1ssing contest.

From a legal view point you are correct you don't have a responsibility to the person behind you. However, the point of Advanced Driving (as you know) is to avoid collisions. That means you must be aware of all objects around you, including those behind you. As car ploughing into you at 100 km/hr become your problem, even though it's not your fault. Always pass the information along to prevent other accidents also.

Just because it was Military (I assume since it wasnt Civilian) doesn't make it any better. I 'sat' the UK Police coursev and test, and yes I got a dispensation from my Insurance Co.

peasant

I'm with ambro here.

When I drove my camper back from Germany ...motorway all the way ...I used the brakes twice ...when driving into the ferry terminals
(and then through Dublin traffic, of course and in front of my house)

Also, just because someone in front of me brakes doesn't necessarily mean that I will use the brakes myself. Often a lifting of the accelerator is enough.

It's a different story of course if someone is riding right on my back bumper, in that case I will at least blip the brakes to light up.

Mitch Connor

well, i can steer the car with my knees', how advanced is that! OH YEAH!

*i don't actually do it, mind

craichoe

Eh ... ok .. two things here

1. The highers the revs on the engine, the more control of the car you have, this is why the gardai are taught to drive in third gear and have the rev limiters removed from the cars.

2. If you were driving in mountains in norway and didn't use your engine for braking it would not be long before your brakes overheat and fail.

Essentially, if you hit the brakes in 4th gear your not only trying to stop the car but the momentum of the engine too !

Especially in a Diesel ! 4th gear at 20mph slamming on the brakes, the engine will drag you into the ass of another car.

Bottom line, you have most control when braking with both and not pushing with one and pulling with the other.

peasant

1. The highers the revs on the engine, the more control of the car you have,

Who did learn that one from?

All the old grannies that drive around in first gear only with the engine screaming to the heavens?

craichoe

peasant wrote:

Who did learn that one from?

All the old grannies that drive around in first gear only with the engine screaming to the heavens?

Yup, Afraid so ... Hence why the cars on average only last 2 years ..

But screaming and high revs are different, I'd classify screaming as hitting the red line, high rev's would be 60-75% of the Engine rev range.

I've driven a Bike where high revs was 19,500 RPM

Anyways,
Take a sharp turn at 30mpg in 5th gear using just your brakes to control your speed and tell me how you get on.

rockbeer

jayok you really scare me.
You speak with great authority on this subject, yet almost everything you say contradicts not only what most of us have been taught but also common sense.

You simply can't be properly in control of a vehicle unless the engine speed and vehicle speed are reasonably well matched, hence the need for gearing down when slowing. And of course whenever you have the clutch pedal pressed you are also out of control of the vehicle, so if - as it sounds - you're recommending slowing from fourth-gear speed to stationary with the clutch pedal pressed for most of the time then you contradict your own advice to be in control at all times.

I think you might have got the wrong end of the stick somewhere.

Are you sure you didn't turn up at an aggressive driving course by mistake when you were meant to be doing the advanced one?

Stark

craichoe wrote:

Anyways,
Take a sharp turn at 30mpg in 5th gear using just your brakes to control your speed and tell me how you get on.

I don't think anyone is advocating that. You need to be in the correct gear when you pull out of the curve and changing gears while on the bend isn't exactly advisable.

There's nothing wrong with stopping the car though in 4th gear from what I can see. The one disadvantage is that if the "obstruction" (such as a red traffic light) clears, then you need to shift into second gear or whatever to pull away again.

rockbeer wrote:

And of course whenever you have the clutch pedal pressed you are also out of control of the vehicle, so if - as it sounds - you're recommending slowing from fourth-gear speed to stationary with the clutch pedal pressed for most of the time then you contradict your own advice to be in control at all times.

You don't have to coast in order to stop in 4th gear. I've used to do it quite a bit before getting out of the habit before my driving test and I've only ever had to put the clutch in at the last minute. Of course if you're making a long approach to what you have to stop for, then you need to gear down so the car isn't shuddering half way through the approach. Even so, I rarely have to stop in second gear.

craichoe

Stark wrote:

I don't think anyone is advocating that. You need to be in the correct gear when you pull out of the curve and changing gears while on the bend isn't exactly advisable.

There's nothing wrong with stopping the car though in 4th gear from what I can see. The one disadvantage is that if the "obstruction" (such as a red traffic light) clears, then you need to shift into second gear or whatever to pull away again.



You don't have to coast in order to stop in 4th gear. I've used to do it quite a bit before getting out of the habit before my driving test and I've only ever had to put the clutch in at the last minute. Of course if you're making a long approach to what you have to stop for, then you need to gear down so the car isn't shuddering half way through the approach. Even so, I rarely have to stop in second gear.

What speed does your car travel at in 4th gear with no throttle and the clutch out ?

astraboy

@Jayok, where were you told that you should always just use the brakes when stopping? My driving instructor(back when I was learning years ago) was an ex-guard and expalined that when slowing for a junction for instance, a combination of moving down through the gears and braking should be used. I always use this, for instance slowing down for a corner use the brake then drop from 4th to 3rd gear.

Placing "stress" on the drive train sounds like a lod of crap to be honest, if you apply the brakes correctly then move through the gears you save excess brake pad wear, while the engine revs my climb slightly if a gear box cannot take a rise from 3000 to 4000 rpm then there are bigger problems with your car.

If you are doing an emergence stop, obviously its a case of hit the brakes hard. If you are in traffic and stopping from 30mph in 4th gear, by the time you are slowed to 10mph the car will either be jerking from being in too high a gear or you will be depressing the clutch and moving, thus coasting, placing excess wear on your clutch wearing it out faster(my granny is unreal for this and wearing out clutches!). Coasting is also a driving test fail(it was in my day anyway.)

Jayok, just because you drive one way and have been told a certain thing does not make it right. I have completed a form of advanced driving course for insurance and never heard of what you mention.

Marcus.Aurelius

Alright everyone, stop bickering. Jayok is clearly describing the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM)'s Defensive Driving course. All official drivers and members of the Garda Siochana who drive patrol cars are required to do this. Irish people do not understand some basic mechanics and physics of driving. This is simply to be out on the white line so that you can see further and are able to avoid pedestrian accidents more easily. Cornering is performed by leaving off the accelerator into the bend and accelerating (or braking) as you come through to stabilise the car in a new trajectory after the bend. Despite how easy this is, the driving test still teaches you to be afraid and to minimise your chances of being in safe road position.

Pathetic, isn't it?

maoleary, Garda Traffic Corps

peasant

maoleary wrote:

be out on the white line so that you can see further and are able to avoid pedestrian accidents more easily.
maoleary, Garda Traffic Corps

And what is this now?

The one eyed, leading the blind ?

What kind of advice is that, to throw out a generalised statement like that?

People, stay out at (or over?) the white line, to avoid hitting pedestrians. this is defensive driving as advised by me, maoleary, Traffic Corps.

What about (for example) the small matter of the 30 ton truck full of gravel on a narrow road, hurtling along said white line in the opposite direction, just around the next bend?

Good, safe and defensive driving can't be done strictly following set rules.
The driving has to be adapted to the conditions, with safety in mind and not generalised statements.

And if you throw out a howler like that:

Cornering is performed by leaving off the accelerator into the bend and accelerating (or braking) as you come through to stabilise the car in a new trajectory after the bend

You'd be well advised to explain in detail what exactly you mean by "accelerating (or breaking)" before accusing others of not understanding the mechanics and/or physics of driving.
Because with the above advise you're certainly not furthering that understanding.

If you really are a member of the Traffic Corps, as you suggest, and not just some snot nosed kid who's read a book and thinks he/she may have understood something ...then I really fear for the safety of us all.

ambro25

maoleary wrote:

Cornering is performed by leaving off the accelerator into the bend and accelerating (or braking) as you come through to stabilise the car in a new trajectory after the bend.

Driving 101.

Cornering is best performed by leaving off the accelerator and/or braking well before the bend and retrograding (4>3, 3>2 etc.) if required, entering the bend under power, and accelerating (if appropriate) as you come out (you get better traction that way).

It's not a p1ss1ng contest, or a matter of bickering. It's a matter of education (most people do struggle with the concept past a certain age/status-position).

Braking well into the turn is a sure way to under- or oversteer the car, especially if surface is loose/wet/slippy in any way. And beware the RWD car which you accelerate in the middle of the bend - I've spun my MX-5 a fair few times at 25/30 mph at the exit of the turn on a wet day, that way (good tyres etc. - just adverse traction from accelerating moderately too early on).

Engine braking is just as efficient as brakes at sustained speed (50/60 in 4th or 5th), that's why *as pointed out by peasant* there's no need to use brakes on motorways (wherein you are driving at sustained speeds). The higher revs you hit on retrograding, the faster your car slows - within limit and common sense of course (what idiot would retrograde from 4th to 2nd at 50mph?). It doesn't wear your engine, clutch or gearbox anymore than under comparable acceleration (probably very comparable physics, the powertrain is slowing the weight of the car instead of pulling it).

A time-served mechanic once told me the best way to break an engine in (0 miles on clock) is actually to use the entire range of each gear both under acceleration and deceleration. Can't say I've ever tried it (never had a car with 0 miles - that's for idiots ), but the guy has some 20 and 30+ year old cars (and more recent ones of course) which purr just like the day they left the factory, and which I know have never had any new gearbox/engine etc. Make of that what you will.

Stark

astraboy wrote:

Coasting is also a driving test fail(it was in my day anyway.)

It still is.

astraboy wrote:

I always use this, for instance slowing down for a corner use the brake then drop from 4th to 3rd gear.

Well duh. Who said it was okay to take a corner in 4th gear? The topic was stopping in 4th gear.

craichoe wrote:

What speed does your car travel at in 4th gear with no throttle and the clutch out ?

About 15mph I think.

astraboy wrote:

Jayok, just because you drive one way and have been told a certain thing does not make it right. I have completed a form of advanced driving course for insurance and never heard of what you mention.

I haven't done an advanced driving course myself yet but I had an instructor before who also specialised in advanced lessons and he told me to stop the car in the gear I was in. I've also talked to people who've done Hibernian's Ignition and they were told the same thing.

yayamark

i love reading these comments. as i've said before in an earlier thread this is why they are so many silly traffic accidents and insurance companies are making an absoloute mint from us driving without any common sense!

the gardai are thought to drive vehicles to the limit. that is getting to the scene of an emergency be it another accident or person been attacked. these vehicles are driven under control at speed betweem traffic. obivously a low gear with high revs would be appropriate here.

Hibernian do an ignition test which really and truly can be no comparsion to the gardais test

i think people are arguing the same point here with diferent scenarios

Elfish

peasant wrote:

And what is this now?

The one eyed, leading the blind ?

What kind of advice is that, to throw out a generalised statement like that?

People, stay out at (or over?) the white line, to avoid hitting pedestrians. this is defensive driving as advised by me, maoleary, Traffic Corps.

Agree fully with what maoleary said on this. IMO he knows what he is talking about, but might not have explained himself properly. Think he meant stay out on the central dividing line for Left Hand bends, opposite for Right hand bends.

As for your comments about cement trucks colliding with you, think about it and you will realise that you will give yourself a lot more time to see the truck coming towards you in the first place if you are out at the white central line on a Left hand bend, while also making it less likely that you hit pedestrians on your left hand side.

As a biker, this stuff is second nature, get away from your caravan and get on a bike peasant

peasant

Elfish wrote:

Agree fully with what maoleary said on this. IMO he knows what he is talking about, but might not have explained himself properly. Think he meant stay out on the central dividing line for Left Hand bends, opposite for Right hand bends.

So YOU think he meant that ...somebody else might THINK he meant something completely different.

If someone appears here, dishing out "advise" with an air of authority and under the heading of "Garda Traffic Corps" ...well ...they'd better do it right and in a way that is clear and leaves nothing open to interpretation ...or keep stumm.

And just for your info ...I do have a motorbike (including licence) and a truck and trailer licence as well ...

Elfish

peasant wrote:

So YOU think he meant that ...somebody else might THINK he meant something completely different.

I said "think" rather than "know" so that I would not sound as arrogant and heckling as you have come across to me in this thread.

peasant wrote:

And what is this now?

The one eyed, leading the blind ?

What kind of advice is that, to throw out a generalised statement like that?

People, stay out at (or over?) the white line, to avoid hitting pedestrians. this is defensive driving as advised by me, maoleary, Traffic Corps.

What about (for example) the small matter of the 30 ton truck full of gravel on a narrow road, hurtling along said white line in the opposite direction, just around the next bend?

heckle heckle heckle

peasant wrote:

You'd be well advised to explain in detail what exactly you mean by "accelerating (or breaking)" before accusing others of not understanding the mechanics and/or physics of driving.
Because with the above advise you're certainly not furthering that understanding.

Must everything be spelt out in detail in every post so that a poster is spared being heckled? I am sure maoleary could tell you that acceleration is a measure of the rate of change of velocity of a body with respect to time. Therefore, braking is negative acceleration. Wheres the problem with physics?

peasant wrote:

And just for your info ...I do have a motorbike (including licence) and a truck and trailer licence as well ...

I don't believe having a licence makes a person a good driver, nor does ownership of a vehicle/bike. Plenty of people on the road today bought their licences in the 70s with full licences for all categories so ownership of licence is irrelevant.

I am off now, before I'm heckled again. Bye bye now!

peasant

You're missing the point completely ...

The likes of you and me sounding out our relevant "theories" about how to drive properly (or not) is one thing ...

Coming on here, with the air of ultimate authority on how to drive (I mean if the Garda Traffic Corps doesn't know ...who does?) and then letting off a totally unquantified and unexplained generalised statement that's more confusing than enlightening ...that's something else altogether.

That's dangerous and irresponsible.

I don't believe having a licence makes a person a good driver, nor does ownership of a vehicle/bike. Plenty of people on the road today bought their licences in the 70s with full licences for all categories so ownership of licence is irrelevant

I would agree with you on that one, in particular in relation to some Irish licence holders.
I had to work (and pay through the nose) for my licences ...the truck and trailer one even cost me 12 months of my civilian life

blastman

What maoleary said, as elaborated on by Elfish is correct, I've seen this advice given on motoring sites and articles. The idea is that you can see as far as possible around the bend to see any potential hazards as soon as possible and act accordingly. Most bikers do this as a matter of course.

The principle of slow in, accelerate out also applies to bends and has been cited as the best way to take corners in nearly every piece I've ever read about the subject.

So, I'm left with one burning question. How the fcuk did peasant ever get any sort of driving licence?

Stark

Peasant's point wasn't that you don't accelerate out of the bend, it was that maoleary's post was so badly written that you couldn't even tell if he was advising people to accelerate when coming out of the bend or brake when coming out of the bend.

peasant

I never said that maolearys statement was WRONG

But it isn't correct in all cases either, and that's where the problem is.

How is this helpful?

maoleary wrote:

Cornering is performed by leaving off the accelerator into the bend and accelerating (or braking) as you come through to stabilise the car in a new trajectory after the bend

What are you to do? Accelerate? Brake? Both? Neither?
When to brake, when to accelerate?
No explanation is given.

maoleary wrote:

simply to be out on the white line so that you can see further

No ..it's not that simple!
It is a good idea to position yourself so that you can see better. But it is not a good idea to "simply" drive out at the white line at all times.

By signing off these statements with "Garda Traffic Corps", some people may be tempted into thinking that this is real, good advice. It isn't !

maoleary makes no allowances for different condititions, instead he/she stipulates that his/her way is the only correct way to drive.

That's rubbish.

There is only one way to drive correctly, and that is drive safely and defensively according to the prevailing conditions and circumstances

As conditions and circumstances change constantly, it is of course very difficult, to put it all in words and to come up with quantified advice for every possible set of circumstances.

But a glib and off-the-cuff remark such as maoleary's is certainly more confusing and dangerous than helpful and explanatory ...especially when impression of authority is given.