[rant] Break lights at traffic lights [/rant]

Matt Simis

crosstownk wrote: »

Emergency brake as it's known stateside but is of little use in an emergency. The correct term, afaik, is parking brake but for obvious reasons it is usually referred to as the handbrake.

Personally, I use the handbrake if I'm stopped in traffic on an incline or if I'm in for a relatively long wait at traffic lights, but other than that (roundabouts, stop start traffic, etc) I just use the foot brake.

I only call it an EBrake as mine is not a hand brake at all, its mounted on the floor. But I guess Parking Brake is the correct term.

smemon

Yeah it's annoying and there's absolute no need to keep your foot on the brake if there's 2 or 3 cars stopped behind you.

If all is quiet and you're the only car in the queue, then fine - it shows the driver coming up behind you that your are fully stopped - if you just have handbrake on he might think you're moving.

but for most people, ditch the brake habit - it's annoying as hell at night time, plus it's not safe - it is the wrong thing to do despite what people are saying here.

astraboy

smemon wrote: »

Yeah it's annoying and there's absolute no need to keep your foot on the brake if there's 2 or 3 cars stopped behind you.

If all is quiet and you're the only car in the queue, then fine - it shows the driver coming up behind you that your are fully stopped - if you just have handbrake on he might think you're moving.

but for most people, ditch the brake habit - it's annoying as hell at night time, plus it's not safe - it is the wrong thing to do despite what people are saying here.

Its safer to do so, and far easier then using the handbrake in constant traffic. If you are stopped and rear ended, or the car 3 cars back is rear ended, and you have your brakes applied this will prevent or reduce your impact on the car in front, far better then a handbrake would, as its usually applied to only the rear wheels and these are less powerful then the front brakes.

As for those complaining, don't ye have anything else to worry about?:rolleyes:

bbam

Folks...
Brake lights or not... What annoys me is the dopes in the front of the que not being ready to move off when the lights go green.:mad:

I swear some of them seem shocked when the lights do go green, :eek:. Then they start the usual mental checklist;

" gears, mirror, gears again, oh my god a green light, gears again, should I go now ?, sher there's no rush, mirror again, try to move off, oh the handbrake, gears again to be sure, move off again"... lights go red.

If people would pay attention at the lights a few more cars would get through on each sequence...

I think we should have the amber before the green as they do in the UK

cheers
bam

zilog_jones

!!AWFUL ADVICE ALERT!!

How many of you have (i) been rear-ended, and (ii) managed to keep your foot on the brake pedal while being rear-ended? Because chances are, from the force/shock/unpredictability it's not gonna happen!

This is the worst advice I have ever seen in this forum.

Matt Simis

zilog_jones wrote: »

!!AWFUL ADVICE ALERT!!

How many of you have (i) been rear-ended, and (ii) managed to keep your foot on the brake pedal while being rear-ended? Because chances are, from the force/shock/unpredictability it's not gonna happen!

This is the worst advice I have ever seen in this forum.

We have one guy claiming that braking at the lights is a waste of time, one claiming that everyone should use hand/parking brakes irregardless of the impracticality, someone else pointing out that many people are just too slow to use the handbrake under "lights pressure... then you that condemn the "advise". What dont you actually try to be specific and propose something?

bbam

I did suggest that we should have the amber light before the green so the less prepared drivers would know that dreaded green light is on its way...

I do pity these folks... the pressure of the impending green light is such a well documented problem..:rolleyes:

Cheers
bam

L1011

bbam wrote: »

I think we should have the amber before the green as they do in the UK

I'd second that, although I'm sure some gombeen would corner somewhere, see an amber ahead and start to cane it with "ah sure its green" and not have enough stopping time to get through as it goes red...

colm_mcm

Amber light means:

Drop down a cog and floor it before it goes red.

zilog_jones

Matt Simis wrote: »

We have one guy claiming that braking at the lights is a waste of time, one claiming that everyone should use hand/parking brakes irregardless of the impracticality, someone else pointing out that many people are just too slow to use the handbrake under "lights pressure... then you that condemn the "advise". What dont you actually try to be specific and propose something?

Sorry I didn't see the bbam's reply while writing mine. I was refering to the "wow footbrake is 4 brakes, handbrake only 2 lol" brigade like the post before that.

Sorry i wasn't very clear - handbrake is the way to go, or should I say not go. Driving instructors aren't idiots - they know what they're on about. It is highly unlikely you're going to be able to keep your feet on the pedals in the sudden event of being rear-ended. Sorry I don't have factual evidence of this outside of one person I know who's been such a situation.

Tomas_V

MYOB wrote: »

I'd second that, although I'm sure some gombeen would corner somewhere, see an amber ahead and start to cane it with "ah sure its green" and not have enough stopping time to get through as it goes red...

If memory serves me correctly, the UK sequence is red, then red+amber, then green. No chance if mistaking that for the amber-only that most drivers fail to stop on.

If people are keen on a prompt getaway on green, maybe don't read the newspaper while waiting?

ninty9er

I generally use brakes, with handbrake and drop the brakes when I see the crossing lights go amber, let out the clutch, slightly, let the handbrake hold the car, increase revs and in the 2 second it takes to do this the light are green gone red the other way, then let the handbrake down and I'm moving as soon as the light go green.

Try it it works and you don't have to press 3 pedals at the same time!! as other people suggesting only footbrake at lights would need to do to be driving safely.

Try and find a driving test who doesn't grade 2 fault you if you don't use the handbrake when stopped in heavy traffic or at traffic lights

bbam

No...
The Red remains on with the amber when the sequence is ready to turn green...

Matt Simis

bbam wrote: »

No...
The Red remains on with the amber when the sequence is ready to turn green...

Yeah, this is how it works in the UK and its nice and simple... should be here too. But thats what the other guy said too!

nytraveller

Matt Simis wrote: »

Yeah, this is how it works in the UK and its nice and simple... should be here too. But thats what the other guy said too!

Have the Brits always had it that way or did they change? Seems odd we're not the same as them considering our laws/court system are all basically derived from the British system.

And while we're at it, the old "left turn on red" issue might need to be changed too.

astraboy

zilog_jones wrote: »

Sorry I didn't see the bbam's reply while writing mine. I was refering to the "wow footbrake is 4 brakes, handbrake only 2 lol" brigade like the post before that.

Sorry i wasn't very clear - handbrake is the way to go, or should I say not go. Driving instructors aren't idiots - they know what they're on about. It is highly unlikely you're going to be able to keep your feet on the pedals in the sudden event of being rear-ended. Sorry I don't have factual evidence of this outside of one person I know who's been such a situation.

Well if you don't have factual evidence what are you claiming is bad advice so?!:rolleyes: If I keep the brakes on at the lights, my brakes are applied at ALL FOUR WHEELS. If I use the handbrake its only the rears. Rear brakes only account for 30% of braking effort and thus are much weaker then the front brakes too. If I get a mild shunt to the rear having the brakes on might make the difference in reducing damage to my car or the car in front. I apply the handbrake for hill starts only really, keeping the brakes on also ensures I can move away from the lights quickly.

Again, this issue seems to be blown out of proportion, I'm more worried about people falling half asleep at the lights as someone said and not going when they turn green.

degsie

I just don't get it! Why would you, when stopped for an extended period of time, keep pressure on your right foot while squeezing on the brake pedal.

Why not apply the handbrake, let your right foot relax and observe the traffic in front/behind you.

The roads are like christmas lights here.

I think a LOT of bad advise has been given here.....:(

L1011

Tomas_V wrote: »

If memory serves me correctly, the UK sequence is red, then red+amber, then green. No chance if mistaking that for the amber-only that most drivers fail to stop on.

I've been driving through Belfast as recently as 6 days ago and couldn't remember this, although in my defence I did hit a (intentionally planned or not I'm not sure) green wave on the Westlink!

astraboy

degsie wrote: »

I just don't get it! Why would you, when stopped for an extended period of time, keep pressure on your right foot while squeezing on the brake pedal.

Why not apply the handbrake, let your right foot relax and observe the traffic in front/behind you.

The roads are like christmas lights here.

I think a LOT of bad advise has been given here.....:(

Have you read the thread at all? Its to reduce the damage if you are rear ended. Fair enough if you are number 3 in a line of 10 cars, use the handbrake. But I'll continue to use my brakes in most traffic as I believe its safer. A letter was in the Irish Times motoring section this week regarding the same issue and the writer said keeping his brakes on in traffic reduced the damage in a rear end accident he was involved in.

irishthump

astraboy wrote: »

Have you read the thread at all? Its to reduce the damage if you are rear ended. Fair enough if you are number 3 in a line of 10 cars, use the handbrake. But I'll continue to use my brakes in most traffic as I believe its safer. A letter was in the Irish Times motoring section this week regarding the same issue and the writer said keeping his brakes on in traffic reduced the damage in a rear end accident he was involved in.

No, sorry, total horsesh*t. There's no way you can guarantee your foot will stay on the brake if and when you are rear-ended.
At least when the hand brake is on, it will STAY ON when you are hit! You might move, but you won't move very far. Oh, and you won't have to worry about finding the break again while dealing with a case of whiplash!

irishthump

colm_mcm wrote: »

Amber light means:

Drop down a cog and floor it before it goes red.

Green - Floor it.
Amber - See above.
Red - Stop only when light has been red for at least 5 seconds!

degsie

astraboy wrote: »

Have you read the thread at all? Its to reduce the damage if you are rear ended. Fair enough if you are number 3 in a line of 10 cars, use the handbrake. But I'll continue to use my brakes in most traffic as I believe its safer. A letter was in the Irish Times motoring section this week regarding the same issue and the writer said keeping his brakes on in traffic reduced the damage in a rear end accident he was involved in.

Well yes, I have read through the thread. I think that as a matter of common courtesy to not 'blind' the person sitting behind you while you are sitting in traffic for an extended period of time. If you base your driving habits on newspaper articles then I seriously think you need to question your actions as related to other road users.

cpoh1

irishthump wrote: »

No, sorry, total horsesh*t. There's no way you can guarantee your foot will stay on the brake if and when you are rear-ended.
At least when the hand brake is on, it will STAY ON when you are hit! You might move, but you won't move very far. Oh, and you won't have to worry about finding the break again while dealing with a case of whiplash!

I dont think you quite understand how little braking youre rear disks/drums do on a car. On average in a fwd car the back brakes do as little as 25% of the total braking, now when you consider that the handbrake doesnt even depress the rear brakes fully think about how "safe" it actually is. I know myself that if something hit my car from the rear I instinctively jam my foot to the brake as its happened before.

As for the moronic comment about having your brake light on being discourteous and "blinding" other road users...well its never bothered me or anyone I know, overall its a pity petty and silly think to get worked up over.

degsie

So if i got this right. It is better to have all all brakes on fully in the event of a rear ender therefore letting your car take the FULL force of the impact, rather than having a bit of give by just having the handbrake on, therefore somewhat lessening the effect of the jolt?

Don't think the laws of physics will work on your favour in the first instance.

cpoh1

degsie wrote: »

So if i got this right. It is better to have all all brakes on fully in the event of a rear ender therefore letting your car take the FULL force of the impact, rather than having a bit of give by just having the handbrake on, therefore somewhat lessening the effect of the jolt?

Don't think the laws of physics will work on your favour in the first instance.

That is 100% correct, id rather have my car take the full force of a rear end collision than have a bit of leeway and end up colliding with a pedestrian or cyclist crossing at a set of lights. Id also rather have the damage solely done to my own car rather than me ending up hitting someone else and involving a thrid party complicating insurance issues. Physics has nothing to do with it.

Tabnabs

zilog_jones wrote: »

!!AWFUL ADVICE ALERT!!

How many of you have (i) been rear-ended, and (ii) managed to keep your foot on the brake pedal while being rear-ended? Because chances are, from the force/shock/unpredictability it's not gonna happen!

This is the worst advice I have ever seen in this forum.

+1

Always told that handbrake best in queue for this very reason. Especially first in queue as a shunt from the rear may push you out into junction and result in a very nasty accident. Did get shunted by a ford transit once and car didn't budge with handbrake on (old model Seat Leon).

L1011

degsie wrote: »

So if i got this right. It is better to have all all brakes on fully in the event of a rear ender therefore letting your car take the FULL force of the impact, rather than having a bit of give by just having the handbrake on, therefore somewhat lessening the effect of the jolt?

And preventing you hitting the car in front, preventing the pileup continuing and seriously simplifying the insurance situation :rolleyes:

degsie

Lads/lassies, if ye are all so paraniod about getting rear ended than take that big fippin magnet out of yer boot

I give up....:(

smemon

remarkable how people are turning a blind eye here to the correct/safest methods of driving.

Picture this; you're first in line at traffic lights at a busy junction; pedestrians crossing, heavy traffic. You get hit at 50 km/hr from behind (for whatever reason - lets say someone falls asleep at the wheel).

The chances of you being able to hold the footbrake are slim to none. It's like trying to say you don't need a seatbelt - you'll just push your hands against the steering wheel and you'll be grand :rolleyes:

So you get hit, lose control of the footbrake, mow down pedestrians, car rolls out into a busy junction and you get hit once or twice from other cars.

As unlikely as that may sound, it could happen and although you wouldn't get any of the blame, you probably could have prevented injuries/deaths by simply taking 1 second to apply the handbrake.

zilog_jones

astraboy wrote: »

Well if you don't have factual evidence what are you claiming is bad advice so?!:rolleyes:

I have more evidence than you do, i.e. someone I know who didn't plow into traffic because he used his handbrake.

Rear brakes only account for 30% of braking effort and thus are much weaker then the front brakes too.

They're still better than nothing, which is what will happen if you let go of the pedals.

I'm more worried about people falling half asleep at the lights as someone said and not going when they turn green.

Oh yes, because your life is going to end if you have to wait another couple of minutes at the lights. Double rolleyes for you :rolleyes::rolleyes: