Why is it wrong to brake and down-change simultaneously?
Discussion
25NAD90TUL said:
p1esk said:
Well as long as somebody does. 
I know they've recently got sh*t hot on sign ups and have had trouble with spammers. I'm not a spammer and never have spammed! Haha makes me laugh that name Spam!Mind you, I preferred it when Dudley played his piano. Very talented. Sad loss.
25NAD90TUL said:
Craikeybaby said:
Why is it wrong to have learnt H&T before the IPSGA method?
Thanks for asking this, it causes a lot of contention with my forum personality.In this area I have to say that it is complete dogma on my part. My ADI was a former Police AD instructor here and in the USA. I used to H&T all the time (I banger raced before being of age to drive on-road) my instructor basically gave me a big b******ing over this and said I was NEVER to do this on the road. When I'd read the copy of Roadcraft he gave to me I realised why, because it is considered unsafe by roadcraft followers.
This stuck in my brain and I can't get away from it, in this respect I am guilty of being dogmatic. I admit this regarding H&T, I was told NO then I read that it was bad form in Police driving and I took it on board. I also have seen H&T go badly wrong at a F1 midgets meeting in the early 80s, the guy posted and had to be cut free and lost both legs from the knee down, also in these forums I feel it is wrong to encourage novices to try to develop the technique on road, when mastered sure no problem, I can do it very well, also having got good at separation it's in my nature to not overlap two controls, to overlap a third is totally anathema to me. Dogmatic? Yeah OK in that respect yes guilty as charged!
Edited to add, as far as IPSGA or to us older members the system is concerned H&T is a complete no-no, see my quote earlier from an AD manual. People who drive rigidly to the system will consider it 'fussy' and tbqh I feel it is unnecessary f***ing about. Sorry but that's me, also I'm a great crash box driver and don't even feel it necessary in those circumstances, I guess it's case of not f***ing about with too many controls at once which is a premiss of the system. I know I'll get slated for this post and won't be arguing about it, say what you will, it's just me this one, you can do it all you want.
Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Tuesday 7th January 16:27
Having said that, I've just had a look in the How to be a better driver book, and there isn't really anything related to BGOL, the only thing I found is:
How to be a better driver said:
You should always aim to make gear changes after braking and before you turn the steering wheel.
25NAD90TUL said:
Bodge I'm trying to fight the corner of IAM and Roadcraft, isn't that obvious? Perhaps a novice may get switched on to further training as a result of my recommending it
Do you think so?25NAD90TUL said:
...the hundreds of comments like yours that I have to wade through.
Have you ever stopped to wonder what prompts these hundreds of comments from independent and unconnected people?25NAD90TUL said:
I'm not looking for anything but trying to post stuff that may make a novice think 'oh I'm gonna try AD'
I wonder how many people will actually think that as result of what may appear to be ever-so-slightly zealous and obsessive posting about something that really isn't that important in the grand scheme of things? You may well be "a great guy", but your forum persona is somewhat "unusual".The safety argument is a bit of a red herring used to justify a point of pride in something that is not necessary.
Whilst skimming through the content of this thread, I spotted a mention of you 'not separating' because you "weren't concentrating" -well I would suggest that being able to perform a task well shouldn't require conscious thought about each individual aspect. The use of the controls of the vehicle or playing of an instrument or sport should become 'second nature', the actual use of the controls should be incidental to the smooth, seamless and effective driving/playing.
This is sometimes described as "flow".
Having to concentrate on arbitrarily performing each individual element of a task separately, for no other reason than to adhere to (one interpretation of) some rules written for teaching average people to drive to a system is not particularly advanced in my view.
25NAD90TUL said:
Gary C said:
''Braking and changing down at the same time is a control fault. All unwanted road speed should be lost by proper use of the footbrake or deceleration, then the appropriate gear selected. A gear change should not be made in the initial stages of braking. The 'Heel and Toe' method when braking and changing gear at the same time is not good driving while on the public highway and can be dangerous. Therefore it should not be done''
And there it is.
Because it's written down in a book, it must be the only answer (truly a 'bible')
It isn't 'because it's written' my attitude regarding the system is that I know it well, can use it well and imo it is a good way to drive. 'It is written' various alternatives to the highway code in Clarkson's book 'The alternative highway code' but I won't be using any of his suggestions any time soon just because 'it is written'.And there it is.
Because it's written down in a book, it must be the only answer (truly a 'bible')
Do you see how silly the comment you made is now?
Best wishes.
Why quote such tripe that calls braking and changing down 'a control fault' and states h&t 'should not be done'.
25NAD90TUL said:
"Who, aside from the Police should I be looking to for this better method? What driving manual should I be reading instead of Roadcraft"
Maybe you should be more open minded and try to find your own way.Best wishes to you too.
Edited by Gary C on Tuesday 7th January 22:41
Edited by Gary C on Tuesday 7th January 22:42
MC Bodge said:
Whilst skimming through the content of this thread, I spotted a mention of you 'not separating' because you "weren't concentrating" -well I would suggest that being able to perform a task well shouldn't require conscious thought about each individual aspect. The use of the controls of the vehicle or playing of an instrument or sport should become 'second nature', the actual use of the controls should be incidental to the smooth, seamless and effective driving/playing.
This is sometimes described as "flow".
Having to concentrate on arbitrarily performing each individual element of a task separately, for no other reason than to adhere to (one interpretation of) some rules written for teaching average people to drive to a system is not particularly advanced in my view.
Safety should always be key.
The question should simply be 'is that safe'.
Bgol is safe.
Non bgol is safe.
So long as the driver is aware, is thinking ahead, is in control abd is safe then it's all good.
The problem with the bgol fundamentalists is that they don't seem willing to look at other ways. Or to judge them on thier safety.
They just see it as wrong.
If you look at non-bgol from another perspective, for a large speed drop over a moderate distance.
It means your coasting on your brakes for a long time.
When non-bgol driving was created the brakes were drums, the gearboxes only had 4 gears.
With a modern 6 speed box with much tighter ratios an intermediate block change makes a lot more sense than holding the clutch down for ages when slowing.
I would say if you have to have your clutch down for more than the time it takes to change gear then you've not planned ahead.
But that's because my training emphasised that coasting was bad.
And coasting was defined as any time you're out of gear.
The question should simply be 'is that safe'.
Bgol is safe.
Non bgol is safe.
So long as the driver is aware, is thinking ahead, is in control abd is safe then it's all good.
The problem with the bgol fundamentalists is that they don't seem willing to look at other ways. Or to judge them on thier safety.
They just see it as wrong.
If you look at non-bgol from another perspective, for a large speed drop over a moderate distance.
It means your coasting on your brakes for a long time.
When non-bgol driving was created the brakes were drums, the gearboxes only had 4 gears.
With a modern 6 speed box with much tighter ratios an intermediate block change makes a lot more sense than holding the clutch down for ages when slowing.
I would say if you have to have your clutch down for more than the time it takes to change gear then you've not planned ahead.
But that's because my training emphasised that coasting was bad.
And coasting was defined as any time you're out of gear.
Snowboy said:
I would say if you have to have your clutch down for more than the time it takes to change gear then you've not planned ahead.
Pah! You're braking too gently or you're rushing your gear changes. You're doing it all wrong!!!Or alternatively, as a wise man said very recently, so long as the driver is aware, is thinking ahead, is in control and is safe then it's all good.
SK425 said:
Snowboy said:
I would say if you have to have your clutch down for more than the time it takes to change gear then you've not planned ahead.
Pah! You're braking too gently or you're rushing your gear changes. You're doing it all wrong!!!Or alternatively, as a wise man said very recently, so long as the driver is aware, is thinking ahead, is in control and is safe then it's all good.
If braking too gently were to be considered undesirable, in a situation where we are slowing over a considerable distance, possibly for a red traffic light some way off, I would rather go from 6th or 5th gear to an intermediate gear such as 3rd, and lose some of the speed on a closed throttle. Might not even need to brake at all in that case.
I think my point is (which is probably shared by others);
If we were to come up with a scenario involving braking then I expect any of us could come up with several perfectly good strategies with different gear changes, different braking speeds and different clutch control methods.
But, they could all be perfectly safe.
And, if something unexpected happened half way through the manouver any solution may be better or worse than any other.
It would just depend on the simulation.
Chances are, the IAM course book contains simulations that favour non bgol driving.
But, in reality, safe is safe, regardless of bgol.
If we were to come up with a scenario involving braking then I expect any of us could come up with several perfectly good strategies with different gear changes, different braking speeds and different clutch control methods.
But, they could all be perfectly safe.
And, if something unexpected happened half way through the manouver any solution may be better or worse than any other.
It would just depend on the simulation.
Chances are, the IAM course book contains simulations that favour non bgol driving.
But, in reality, safe is safe, regardless of bgol.
From IAM's homepage and many other AD school's description of practicing safe advanced driving:
"Advanced Driving is the ability to control the position and speed of the vehicle safely, systematically and smoothly, using road and traffic conditions to make reasonable progress unobtrusively, with skill and responsibility. This skill requires a positive but courteous attitude and a high standard of driving competence based on concentration, effective all round observation, anticipation and planning. This must be co-ordinated with good handling skills. The vehicle will always be in the right place on the road at the right time, travelling at the right speed with the correct gear engaged and can always be stopped safely in the distance that can be seen to be clear."
Note "travelling at the right speed with the correct gear engaged". Smoothly changing into the correct gear before arriving at the observed road situation requiring a reduced speed complies with their ideal overall safe driving technique than possibly having to spend a second or two with the engine disengaged and foot off the brake while you match revs for a 5th into 2nd gear change at the corner/slowed traffic. To avoid the period of "free wheeling" would require a bit of heel and toe.
You don't need to be banging off the limiter on down changes driving on the limit of adhesion to get benefit from modulating the clutch/brakes/throttle and gearbox simultaneously(it can be fun though on an empty twisty road).
"Advanced Driving is the ability to control the position and speed of the vehicle safely, systematically and smoothly, using road and traffic conditions to make reasonable progress unobtrusively, with skill and responsibility. This skill requires a positive but courteous attitude and a high standard of driving competence based on concentration, effective all round observation, anticipation and planning. This must be co-ordinated with good handling skills. The vehicle will always be in the right place on the road at the right time, travelling at the right speed with the correct gear engaged and can always be stopped safely in the distance that can be seen to be clear."
Note "travelling at the right speed with the correct gear engaged". Smoothly changing into the correct gear before arriving at the observed road situation requiring a reduced speed complies with their ideal overall safe driving technique than possibly having to spend a second or two with the engine disengaged and foot off the brake while you match revs for a 5th into 2nd gear change at the corner/slowed traffic. To avoid the period of "free wheeling" would require a bit of heel and toe.
You don't need to be banging off the limiter on down changes driving on the limit of adhesion to get benefit from modulating the clutch/brakes/throttle and gearbox simultaneously(it can be fun though on an empty twisty road).
So, to summarise. I find myself in an Advanced Driving circle where to recommend a method that is completely satisfactory to me, that I feel safe using and has served me well for 90% of my driving career, not to mention the TrafPol who have been using the same method since the 1930s, is wrong and classed as a form of religious nuttery and not for the first time.
This same circle that seems to recommend ANY method you choose for yourself, as no alternative method is being explained or pointed toward, so long as it ISN'T Roadcraft.
A circle in which most of the people I recognise are themselves either trained in Roadcraft themselves or actually teach it to others, yet want to imply that it is unsound and should be abandoned in favour of these other methods which no one has yet ventured to describe.
A circle in which a safe responsible driver who has gone to the trouble and expense of improving their drive out of a sense of responsibility and conscience regarding other people's safety is considered a nutter on day-release from a mental institution because they simply haven't yet discovered a better method and continue to recommend a tried and tested system.
To me the main reason for advocating the Roadcraft system is the awareness, hazard perception, forward observation, discipline and sense of responsibility it breeds. Other matters such as good vehicle control separation etc are just polish that underline a sense of pride in the drive that I also enjoy.
Therefore I cannot debate these points any longer, I can't pretend to not care what other people think, I'm human and care very much, also there is only so much personal insult etc that I can take, so when I get this reaction from people because I advocate a method that is considered sound by the two main AD training organisations in the country, not to mention the Police, I am frankly baffled.
Best wishes all, and above anything else stay safe on the roads whatever methods you are using.
This same circle that seems to recommend ANY method you choose for yourself, as no alternative method is being explained or pointed toward, so long as it ISN'T Roadcraft.
A circle in which most of the people I recognise are themselves either trained in Roadcraft themselves or actually teach it to others, yet want to imply that it is unsound and should be abandoned in favour of these other methods which no one has yet ventured to describe.
A circle in which a safe responsible driver who has gone to the trouble and expense of improving their drive out of a sense of responsibility and conscience regarding other people's safety is considered a nutter on day-release from a mental institution because they simply haven't yet discovered a better method and continue to recommend a tried and tested system.
To me the main reason for advocating the Roadcraft system is the awareness, hazard perception, forward observation, discipline and sense of responsibility it breeds. Other matters such as good vehicle control separation etc are just polish that underline a sense of pride in the drive that I also enjoy.
Therefore I cannot debate these points any longer, I can't pretend to not care what other people think, I'm human and care very much, also there is only so much personal insult etc that I can take, so when I get this reaction from people because I advocate a method that is considered sound by the two main AD training organisations in the country, not to mention the Police, I am frankly baffled.
Best wishes all, and above anything else stay safe on the roads whatever methods you are using.
25NAD90TUL said:
A circle in which a safe responsible driver who has gone to the trouble and expense of improving their drive out of a sense of responsibility and conscience regarding other people's safety is considered a nutter on day-release from a mental institution because they simply haven't yet discovered a better method and continue to recommend a tried and tested system.
To me the main reason for advocating the Roadcraft system is the awareness, hazard perception, forward observation, discipline and sense of responsibility it breeds. Other matters such as good vehicle control separation etc are just polish that underline a sense of pride in the drive that I also enjoy.
I don't think anyone has (yet) described you as a mentally challenged individual on day-release. The point is that whilst your penultimate sentence describes where a lot of drivers on here would like to be, the insistence of two of the mainstream advanced driving clubs (of which I'm a member of neither) that BGOL and pull-push steering must be in place is merely harkening back to the 1930s when there were sound reasons for their insistence, notwithstanding the requirement for significant driver skill (something that might or might not refer to the candidate at a Police Driving School) in the use of alternatives.To me the main reason for advocating the Roadcraft system is the awareness, hazard perception, forward observation, discipline and sense of responsibility it breeds. Other matters such as good vehicle control separation etc are just polish that underline a sense of pride in the drive that I also enjoy.
Your view that vehicle control separation is just polish, could just as easily be read as 'those drivers I admire do this, therefore it must be the one true way of doing it on road'. I drive with many who do use heel-and-toe on the road and only pull-push at slow speeds in car parks. Some of them are current Police Instructors. Some of them I might even admire...
25NAD90TUL said:
To me the main reason for advocating the Roadcraft system is the awareness, hazard perception, forward observation, discipline and sense of responsibility it breeds.
Those are brilliant things to breed. The only thing I think people would struggle with would be a suggestion that the Roadcraft system is necessary in order to breed them. Disagreeing with such a suggestion would not be the same as saying that the Roadcraft system was rubbish at breeding them.As far as the Roadcraft system is concerned, those things fit into 'I', or just general attitude. You don't necessarily have to organise and effect all the P, S, G and A stuff in the manner that Roadcraft does in order to breed those things.
There is a big difference between someone having strong views about what is right for them and having strong views about what is right for somebody/everybody else. It is the latter that can look rather akin to religious nuttery.
25NAD90TUL said:
To me the main reason for advocating the Roadcraft system is the awareness, hazard perception, forward observation, discipline and sense of responsibility it breeds.
Awareness, hazard perception, forward observation & discipline are not dependent on or exclusive to ( for instance) brake gear separation, holding the wheel at 10 to 2, pull/push steering etc. By forcing people to do those things you are actually robbing them of responsibility. You are taking away their choices & their responsibility for the outcomes resulting from those very choices. If you tell them what to do you are taking responsibility not them. It's your choice not theirs & consequently even if they do it in your presence they won't do it when you're not there (if they don't believe in it themselves). That's why a lot of people will do brake gear separation for the IAM (to please the examiner), but don't afterwards because they don't believe it's necessary or better for them.Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 9th January 18:45
25NAD90TUL said:
So, to summarise. I find myself in an Advanced Driving circle where to recommend a method that is completely satisfactory to me, that I feel safe using and has served me well for 90% of my driving career, not to mention the TrafPol who have been using the same method since the 1930s, is wrong and classed as a form of religious nuttery and not for the first time.
I don't recognise that as a summary of what has been said to you. I don't wish to upset anyone and my comments are aimed at the 'bgol is bad, my road craft method is the only way, all the rest of you are bad drivers and dangerous with your racing tomfoolery' group as a whole. This attitude does seem to come from advocates of, to quote
But I think we can all agree there is more to advanced driving than how you change gear. Wonder if the OP every got what they think of as an answer.
25NAD90TUL said:
the great wisdom that is The system.
Was that meant to be tongue in cheek ? I doubt it but If so, I apologise.But I think we can all agree there is more to advanced driving than how you change gear. Wonder if the OP every got what they think of as an answer.
Edited by Gary C on Thursday 9th January 18:13
A couple of points to bring an end to my input in this thread.
The person who said I hadn't been called a mental case...Read the thread.
The person who said I'm not open to new ideas obviously didn't notice me repeatedly asking where I can find alternative methodology than 'the system'. Again read the thread.
Regarding me 'telling others how to drive' didn't see me state that I'm not an instructor/observer and don't in any way try to tell people what to do in any walk of life. Yet it's fine to tell me how or how not to drive. Read the thread.
For the umpteenth time I answered a question using the resources I had at my disposal. The fact that I actually believe in the method is neither here nor there in that context. To say that AD driving manuals are 'tripe' is well, tripe.
Somebody suggested the entire thread was a trap for certain people to fall into, I agree it was. I don't think the OP has ever responded to the thread to my knowledge no, so probably didn't get or want an answer.
Whatever works for anyone else is fine with me I said the same over and over too. But why do I have to change what works for me because YOU say so? Double standards that is.
Any further input from me would just be repetition. So just enjoy your own driving and be safe and just be aware that I wish you ALL, all the best whatever methods you advocate, shame it's not reciprocated.
The person who said I hadn't been called a mental case...Read the thread.
The person who said I'm not open to new ideas obviously didn't notice me repeatedly asking where I can find alternative methodology than 'the system'. Again read the thread.
Regarding me 'telling others how to drive' didn't see me state that I'm not an instructor/observer and don't in any way try to tell people what to do in any walk of life. Yet it's fine to tell me how or how not to drive. Read the thread.
For the umpteenth time I answered a question using the resources I had at my disposal. The fact that I actually believe in the method is neither here nor there in that context. To say that AD driving manuals are 'tripe' is well, tripe.
Somebody suggested the entire thread was a trap for certain people to fall into, I agree it was. I don't think the OP has ever responded to the thread to my knowledge no, so probably didn't get or want an answer.
Whatever works for anyone else is fine with me I said the same over and over too. But why do I have to change what works for me because YOU say so? Double standards that is.
Any further input from me would just be repetition. So just enjoy your own driving and be safe and just be aware that I wish you ALL, all the best whatever methods you advocate, shame it's not reciprocated.
25NAD90TUL said:
A couple of points to bring an end to my input in this thread.
The person who said I hadn't been called a mental case...Read the thread.
The person who said I'm not open to new ideas obviously didn't notice me repeatedly asking where I can find alternative methodology than 'the system'. Again read the thread.
Regarding me 'telling others how to drive' didn't see me state that I'm not an instructor/observer and don't in any way try to tell people what to do in any walk of life. Yet it's fine to tell me how or how not to drive. Read the thread.
For the umpteenth time I answered a question using the resources I had at my disposal. The fact that I actually believe in the method is neither here nor there in that context. To say that AD driving manuals are 'tripe' is well, tripe.
Somebody suggested the entire thread was a trap for certain people to fall into, I agree it was. I don't think the OP has ever responded to the thread to my knowledge no, so probably didn't get or want an answer.
Whatever works for anyone else is fine with me I said the same over and over too. But why do I have to change what works for me because YOU say so? Double standards that is.
Any further input from me would just be repetition. So just enjoy your own driving and be safe and just be aware that I wish you ALL, all the best whatever methods you advocate, shame it's not reciprocated.
You don't have to change what you do, do what works well for you & gives you the results you are looking for. If you are unhappy about your performance consider what changes might address what you are unhappy with. Having considered all the options, choose, practice, rinse & repeat if necessary.The person who said I hadn't been called a mental case...Read the thread.
The person who said I'm not open to new ideas obviously didn't notice me repeatedly asking where I can find alternative methodology than 'the system'. Again read the thread.
Regarding me 'telling others how to drive' didn't see me state that I'm not an instructor/observer and don't in any way try to tell people what to do in any walk of life. Yet it's fine to tell me how or how not to drive. Read the thread.
For the umpteenth time I answered a question using the resources I had at my disposal. The fact that I actually believe in the method is neither here nor there in that context. To say that AD driving manuals are 'tripe' is well, tripe.
Somebody suggested the entire thread was a trap for certain people to fall into, I agree it was. I don't think the OP has ever responded to the thread to my knowledge no, so probably didn't get or want an answer.
Whatever works for anyone else is fine with me I said the same over and over too. But why do I have to change what works for me because YOU say so? Double standards that is.
Any further input from me would just be repetition. So just enjoy your own driving and be safe and just be aware that I wish you ALL, all the best whatever methods you advocate, shame it's not reciprocated.
Don't take 'you' to mean 'you', but instead advanced driving organisations that prescribe 'one way' that it should be done.
Eulogising is not advocacy.
Braking and changing is not a control fault.
H&T can be taught, and done well can improve smoothness, mechanical sympathy and is not dangerous when learnt
New ideas are on this thread, read it again.
Debating on the internet can be 'lively' but keeping toys in the pram is necessary.
Braking and changing is not a control fault.
H&T can be taught, and done well can improve smoothness, mechanical sympathy and is not dangerous when learnt
New ideas are on this thread, read it again.
Debating on the internet can be 'lively' but keeping toys in the pram is necessary.
Gary C said:
Eulogising is not advocacy.
Braking and changing is not a control fault.
H&T can be taught, and done well can improve smoothness, mechanical sympathy and is not dangerous when learnt
New ideas are on this thread, read it again.
Debating on the internet can be 'lively' but keeping toys in the pram is necessary.
I can H&T well, like all forms of vehicle control, from drifting to off-roading. I am being forced to have a re-think about things, a lot of people whom I have a lot of respect for in these forums have said enough to promote a re-think on these matters.Braking and changing is not a control fault.
H&T can be taught, and done well can improve smoothness, mechanical sympathy and is not dangerous when learnt
New ideas are on this thread, read it again.
Debating on the internet can be 'lively' but keeping toys in the pram is necessary.
When new ideas come through and AD is taken into it's next phase, I'll be there, ready to part with some dosh to get it down, I'm on a quest for knowledge in many areas not just driving, and if stuff like H&T is in there, I'll pass with flying colours as I do with every new challenge. There was a time when I thought I'd never warm to modern vehicle diagnostics but I did and now have a good diagnostic setup in my workshop. In the old days we listened to engines and diagnosed through pure skill and intuition, the old screwdriver to the ear trick etc, this ability is sadly lacking in modern mechanics, today many diagnostic tests in big garages end in the statement 'it might be this or it might be this...' The glory days of the backstreet garage and the junkyard genius may be gone forever.
I'm up for it, as soon as I find a course in the new style, when it emerges, I'll do a course, haven't done one in a while...Although I've been told that I shouldn't be so hung up on tests all the time as well! It's all good fun. I do learn and take ideas from this intercourse.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff