Brakes

[kewlcol]

Just a quickie .... hopefully.

What are people's views on using their brakes. I often travel a 60 mile NSL journey on the A1, partly dual but mostly not. This is between the town where I live and the city. 9 times out of 10 I can do the entire journey without using my brakes. Of course when I come off the roundabout at each end into the dense traffic I will be using my brakes fairly regularly. But I can normally even manage the roundabouts at each end also without touching the pedal. I move between 4th and 5th gear, and just use gentle 'ease and squeeze acceleration', keeping about a 3 second gap minimum. The traffic is fairly light although heavies are increasing, and ongoing road improvements are often occuring, but I still manage to keep off that brake .... at least that's my intention. It's like a game I guess, how far I can get without braking. I've never ever needed to brake hard, and never needed to use ABS/EBD, although I have tested the ABS occasionally.

[exportmanuk]

Brake pads are far cheaper to replace than clutch plates. If I need to change down to continue slowing I would use the brakes to scrub off the speed and block change gears as necessary

[kewlcol]

Yes I agree brake pads are cheaper. But I don't use my gears to slow. I use deceleration to reduce my speed then match in the appropriate gear. I tend to use the brakes as a 'reserve' and drive with the gas pedal, although my foot often moves above the pedal in case I need it.

[Ancient]

The ability to handle that sort of situation by acceleration sense (which is how I am interpreting your "ease and squeeze acceleration"), the lifting off to allow friction/gravity/air resistance to slow the car and easing back up as appropriate, is certainly a useful way of practicing observation and anticipation: Driving for 'the car in front of the car in front of...' it has benefits too in fuel economy and wear and tear reduction; as long as (as exportmanuk hints) you are not changing down and slipping the clutch instead of braking.
However ...
The ability to carry a safe amount of speed (and understanding what that is) into a situation, knowing from experience that you can safely brake by 'this much' to hit a gap you can anticipate (and still safely stop if the gap disappears etc) is also useful to practice. Which you use on any particular day depends on a variety of factors (conditions, yourself, the purpose of the drive etc.).

[trashbat]

Brake when you have to, whenever it's most appropriate. If you came a cropper through trying to never use the brakes, well that wouldn't be very advanced, would it?

Of course, 'when you have to' may often translate to 'not at all'.

As well as the advantages that Ancient sets out, disadvantages are that you might be regarded as holding up people behind by slowing down early, and that you slow down without the warning of brake signals - although this can also be a positive.

[Astraist]

I have met drivers who attempt to use deceleration sense as to avoid using the brakes at all. Admittingly, I never understood them.

Personally, I slow down first by balancing the car on the throttle at a constant speed, so the car does not transition directly from acceleration to deceleration. Then I ease off the power to use deceleration sense and touch the brakes once to light up the brake lights and "test" them.

However, I use deceleration sense only for as much as the given gear can supply. Before I need to downshift I start braking (considering the brakes' reaction time) gently and sequently go through the gears. If the braking is very prolonged I might halve the braking effort into two parts.

[TripleS]

I have met drivers who attempt to use deceleration sense as to avoid using the brakes at all. Admittingly, I never understood them.

Personally, I slow down first by balancing the car on the throttle at a constant speed, so the car does not transition directly from acceleration to deceleration. Then I ease off the power to use deceleration sense and touch the brakes once to light up the brake lights and "test" them.

However, I use deceleration sense only for as much as the given gear can supply. Before I need to downshift I start braking (considering the brakes' reaction time) gently and sequently go through the gears. If the braking is very prolonged I might halve the braking effort into two parts.

Oi, what happened to correct speed for the hazard, then correct gear for the speed?

Also, you're only 'allowed' one spell of braking,
and it's 'brakes to slow, gears to go.'

Are you sure you're an advanced driver?

[Ancient]

As well as the advantages that Ancient sets out, disadvantages are that you might be regarded as holding up people behind by slowing down early, and that you slow down without the warning of brake signals - although this can also be a positive.

Observation and anticipation are of course not limited to what's in front of you (although I admittedly did imply that in the previous post - sorry) .

[Astraist]

Also, you're only 'allowed' one spell of braking

Yes, but isn't that meant to encorage planning the braking manuever in advance, rather than braking and than having to brake again as a reaction?

My pause in the braking phase is a pre-planned part of the braking manuever in order to reduce heat build-up in the brakes over unusually long (at least twelve seconds) periods of braking.

and it's 'brakes to slow, gears to go.'

Of course, the downshifting is not in order "to slow", unless it's in a heavy lorry! Rather, it is done gently and in low revs, not in order to achieve engine braking but in order to keep the engine in a responsive gear at all times, so that a transition to acceleration can be performed whenever needed.

[revian]

Also, you're only 'allowed' one spell of braking

Yes, but isn't that meant to encorage planning the braking manuever in advance, rather than braking and than having to brake again as a reaction?

I was getting caught by the 'one spell of braking' by trying to sum up all the hazards approaching into one braking action. Don't multilple hazards , in a relatively short distance, sometimes require their individual braking phase? And does it matter if the output is safe...smooth etc.

Kewlcol... Quickie? What on this forum?

[Gareth]

Don't multilple hazards , in a relatively short distance, sometimes require their individual braking phase?

I think neater, tidier, (pick your own adverb), driving is doing the least that is necessary, so would suggest coalescing the way you handle multiple close-together hazards can lower the work-load.

[revian]

Don't multilple hazards , in a relatively short distance, sometimes require their individual braking phase?

I think neater, tidier, (pick your own adverb), driving is doing the least that is necessary, so would suggest coalescing the way you handle multiple close-together hazards can lower the work-load.

Yes.. I agree. My thought is that sometimes things can't be coalesced or are a coalesce too far I'm not sure the odd extra (if it is extra)adds to the workload in a discernible way?

Ian

[akirk]

I was having this discussion last week on a training day... a few points that came up / that occurred to me...

- engine braking e.g. on a rear-wheel car might in effect mean that you are only retarding on one / max two of the wheels (only affects the driven wheels and without a LSD might only slow down one wheel) - meaning that possibly only a quarter of the rubber contact area on the road is being used to slow down the car
- clutch wear v. brake wear as mentioned above
- cars often have sophisticated systems for handling braking e.g. traction control / ABS / etc. which would not be used
- engine-braking in wet / slippery conditions, especially with a 'twitchy' car might be more stable (but should you be in a position where braking causes an issue...)
- engine-braking possibly leaves the car more balanced with less nose-down attitude


but the best logic - noticeable on my Z3 - engine braking gives a fantastic cacophony of pops and crackles from the exhaust overrun - very addictive and quite honestly far more important than any sensible reasons (doesn't quite work so well on the diesel Kuga!)

Alasdair

[Astraist]

I would not agree that brakes destablise the car more the engine braking, since (as you mentioned) engine braking in none-all-wheel-drive cars retardates only one axle.

Braking lightly would not much change the car's attitude (i.e. degree of 'dive') or stability, particularly with modern safety features a-la ABS, EBD and stability control.

There are also wear and tear considerations, beyond the obvious clutch slip-related wear. I have met drivers who stick to deceleration sense as to keep the brakes "fresh" for an event where emergency braking is required.

However, these drivers fail to understand that not using the brakes means that the pads won't be bedded-in properly, heated up to efficient temperature or dried from moisture and it might lead to earlier deterioration of brake fluid. Using the brakes, is testing the brakes...

[akirk]

true - more a stream of consciousness about different factors and stability of the car is a factor of many things - and engine braking and wheel braking will affect it differently...

Alasdair