Gearchange video
Discussion
vonhosen said:
I don't see that the references to what's written in Roadcraft circa 1960 compared to more recent versions provides.
1960 didn't advocate overlaps IIRC, where as I think we would all mostly be of the opinion that overlaps on the grounds of safety are entirely appropriate.
Also 1960s training had very little input on essential attitude compared to today's training. Again I think we'd mostly agree that it's a hugely important.
I could have much debate about your occupation, on a philosophical level, but, in the main, would not dispute that you and R U are examplars in the art of driving.
Techniques of course, are always fun to debate, but like other professions and occupations, you have to have a defined method to achieve your objectives.
R_U_LOCAL said:
I'm not old enough to remember it myself (honestly), but our driving school used to insist on all the students performing synchronised door closing at the start of the day.
That's how much things have changed.
Not at Hendon.That's how much things have changed.
Synchronised car washing.
Synchronised parking.
Synchronised oil checks.
Synchronised commentry.
Before adding some comments and questions, I must say that I have found Reg's posts on advanced driving absolutely first class - pitched at just the right level, with a noticeable lack of pedantry that makes them appealing to read.
Onto the subject, and first I have a couple of questions for Reg (with some of my own views thrown in for good (or bad; you judge
) measure. Your video shows very clearly (even if some nitpick) the principle of matching revs on both up and down changes.
First question - how do you approach adapting to a new vehicle in terms of changing gear? I think there is a real art to being able to master a new gearbox quickly, and I for one find DDC an extremely useful technique in this regard.
Second question - Your technique with the MX-5 on up changes is to allow the revs to drop to the level required for the next gear. This means you sustain some pressure on the gas. Do you adapt this technique depending on the extent of flywheel effect? For example, I find that with a car that has a very heavy flywheel, I actually want to come off the gas completely, otherwise the change is just too slow. At the other end of the spectrum, with a car with an extremely light flywheel, the difficulty is modulating precisely the right reduction in gas.
One comment, if I may.
I am very much with Willibetz when it comes to considering factors such as approaching vehicles and road condition prior to changing gear. I recall sitting alongside a perfectly reasonable driver in a 911 (993). He went for a 3rd to 4th shift just as the left wheel caught a camber on the nearside. A car was approaching. In typical 911 fashion, the car followed the camber quite acutely. The driver had only one hand on the wheel, because he was shifting gear. He over compensated with his right hand and almost steered us into the path of the oncoming. An extreme example, perhaps, but, as I say, I am with WilliBetz on this one.
Kind regards
Steve
Onto the subject, and first I have a couple of questions for Reg (with some of my own views thrown in for good (or bad; you judge
) measure. Your video shows very clearly (even if some nitpick) the principle of matching revs on both up and down changes. First question - how do you approach adapting to a new vehicle in terms of changing gear? I think there is a real art to being able to master a new gearbox quickly, and I for one find DDC an extremely useful technique in this regard.
Second question - Your technique with the MX-5 on up changes is to allow the revs to drop to the level required for the next gear. This means you sustain some pressure on the gas. Do you adapt this technique depending on the extent of flywheel effect? For example, I find that with a car that has a very heavy flywheel, I actually want to come off the gas completely, otherwise the change is just too slow. At the other end of the spectrum, with a car with an extremely light flywheel, the difficulty is modulating precisely the right reduction in gas.
One comment, if I may.
I am very much with Willibetz when it comes to considering factors such as approaching vehicles and road condition prior to changing gear. I recall sitting alongside a perfectly reasonable driver in a 911 (993). He went for a 3rd to 4th shift just as the left wheel caught a camber on the nearside. A car was approaching. In typical 911 fashion, the car followed the camber quite acutely. The driver had only one hand on the wheel, because he was shifting gear. He over compensated with his right hand and almost steered us into the path of the oncoming. An extreme example, perhaps, but, as I say, I am with WilliBetz on this one.
Kind regards
Steve
Stefan 1,
I actually delayed a gearchange today for a very similar reason, just noticed a nasty lip on a man hole cover so abandoned the shift to avoid lip and not be doing two things at once.
I can see the point of avoiding when vehicles approach for this reason but, on many roads it would mean 1 gearchange every 3 miles!
I actually delayed a gearchange today for a very similar reason, just noticed a nasty lip on a man hole cover so abandoned the shift to avoid lip and not be doing two things at once.
I can see the point of avoiding when vehicles approach for this reason but, on many roads it would mean 1 gearchange every 3 miles!
said:
Stefan 1,
I actually delayed a gearchange today for a very similar reason, just noticed a nasty lip on a man hole cover so abandoned the shift to avoid lip and not be doing two things at once.
I can see the point of avoiding when vehicles approach for this reason but, on many roads it would mean 1 gearchange every 3 miles!
I agree with the sentiment. It's not a rule, just a consideration. Like everything, it is the intelligent application of the system that makes the difference, not blind adherence. I actually delayed a gearchange today for a very similar reason, just noticed a nasty lip on a man hole cover so abandoned the shift to avoid lip and not be doing two things at once.
I can see the point of avoiding when vehicles approach for this reason but, on many roads it would mean 1 gearchange every 3 miles!
Kind regards
Steve
vonhosen said:
I don't see that the references to what's written in Roadcraft circa 1960 compared to more recent versions provides much.
1960 didn't advocate overlaps IIRC, where as I think we would all mostly be of the opinion that overlaps on the grounds of safety are entirely appropriate.
Also 1960s training had very little input on essential attitude compared to today's training. Again I think we'd mostly agree that it's a hugely important input.
On the subject of overlaps and their applicability, you may be interested in the views of RoSPA's chief examiner. This article used to appear on their website, but seems to have been removed for some reason...1960 didn't advocate overlaps IIRC, where as I think we would all mostly be of the opinion that overlaps on the grounds of safety are entirely appropriate.
Also 1960s training had very little input on essential attitude compared to today's training. Again I think we'd mostly agree that it's a hugely important input.
http://beehive.thisishull.co.uk/default.asp?WCI=Si...
WhoseGeneration said:
The OP is displaying admirable restraint in dealing with those who seem to have some internal problem with his freely given help.
For the avoidance of doubt, I very much appreciate RUL and VH's contributions. This forum derives considerable benefit from the contributions of the country's most qualified instructors.My replies to this topic were genuinely intended to broaden the debate to other aspects of gear changing that weren't covered (eg timing) and to offer some thoughts on areas where the video could be improved given its target audience (eg. a comparison with ddc changes, and a clearer demonstration of separating braking from gear changing).
Reg is obviously free to accept or reject these comments as he sees fit. He clearly regards some of my comments as trivial, and unworthy of further consideration. And that's fair enough as far as I'm concerned. It's his video; they are trivial points. But, then again, I don't think any of us would expect to be seeing glaring errors in such a short instructional video of a common-or-garden technique by a highly qualified instructor and professional driver. The devil is in the detail.
WilliBetz
Edited by WilliBetz on Saturday 1st September 15:46
GreenV8S said:
That's what I think Reg said he was doing. It's what the video shows him doing. I think it's what *you* say he's doing. So the last step is why you consider this is "slipping the clutch" or showing any lack of mechanical sympathy. What's wrong with it and how would you suggest it can be improved?
I can see I am going to have to get a copy of this blue book that you all speak of, I now feel that maybe I came into this conversation halfway through it, you ask "Whats wrong with it and how would you suggest it can be improved".I can answer both questions at once, seeing as I don't understand why he is doing what ever it is he's doing, my comments are immaterial, If on the other hand he is showing us how to drive when pursuing villains he should perhaps have made that clear, what is the point of driving slowly, which is what he was doing but incorporating pursuit driving tactics, to say moving from gear to gear without lifting off the throttle(lets not split hairs) is "better" than doing whilst lifting off is bound to be controversial, I like many others on here was not taught that way and have managed to keep out of trouble.
My driving style is more of a mix of economy with a little speed, I don't need to try to gain an edge here and there because I'm not driving that near the limit, so perhaps that's where me misunderstanding the purpose of the post came from, I try to imagine I've got my dear old mother in the front seat and my grand children in the back seat and if I can drive without either party complaining then I must be safe.
I still can't see the benefits of driving like that but I promise I will get a copy of Roadcraft then at least I will be getting the full picture.
Edited by Yung Man on Saturday 1st September 14:07
WilliBetz said:
My replies to this topic were genuinely intended to broaden the debate to other aspects of gear changing that weren't covered (eg timing)
I appreciate the benefits of the approach that R_U_LOCAL has shown us, but I have to say it's not a technique that I use. The metod I use is to smoothly close the throttle, declutch as the transmission becomes unloaded, select the new gear, smoothly open the throttle as the revs approach the appropriate speed for the new gear, engage the clutch when the revs are correct, carry on opening the throttle to accelerate away in the new gear. Typically it takes about two seconds and results in a smooth and gradual transition from acceleration to coasting to acceleration with (if I do it right) no jolts or torque reversals.To work right, this technique requires the timing of the engine rev change and the gear selection to be right, so it requires waiting for whichever of these is the slowest. If I'm changing at low rpm the engine responds far quicker than the gearbox will accept the new gear so I will just lift the throttle rather than close it completely. At higher revs I will have to close the throttle completely (complete with some glorious pops and bangs if I'm in the right car
) and wait longer for the revs to drop to the right level. If I'm pressing on then I will sometimes engage the clutch early and use the clutch to pull the last few hundred revs down. What I won't do, and hate seeing other people do, is pull the revs down on the clutch while opening the throttle so the clutch is fighting against the engine torque. It's a technique that seems to be very common on track especially in less powerful cars and IMO demonstrates an extreme lack of mechanical sympathy.The significant difference is that R_U_LOCAL's approach doesn't depend on timing, mine does. Mine is likely to be slightly faster. If you applied R_U_LOCAL's approach as quickly as possible, it would effectively be the same as mine.
Edited by GreenV8S on Saturday 1st September 14:30
Yung Man said:
to say moving from gear to gear without lifting off the throttle(lets not split hairs) is "better" than doing whilst lifting off is bound to be controversial, I like many others on here was not taught that way and have managed to keep out of trouble.
I'm sure now that we're talking at cross purposes because the video does NOT show Reg changing gear with constant revs or constant throttle, he is using the throttle to adjust the engine speed to match the road speed in the new gear, which surely is what you're advocating.GreenV8S said:
Yung Man said:
to say moving from gear to gear without lifting off the throttle(lets not split hairs) is "better" than doing whilst lifting off is bound to be controversial, I like many others on here was not taught that way and have managed to keep out of trouble.
I'm sure now that we're talking at cross purposes because the video does NOT show Reg changing gear with constant revs or constant throttle, he is using the throttle to adjust the engine speed to match the road speed in the new gear, which surely is what you're advocating.I thought the whole part of your argument was that instead of matching clutch and throttle you just kept the revs up to meet which ever gear you where selecting (up or down).
Am I living in a parallel universe?.
R_U_LOCAL said:
Watch the movement of the rev counter to see what I'm doing with my right foot during the upchanges.
R_U_LOCAL said:
Following a short drive, you'll see me perform a favourite little gearchanging exercise, where I hold the car at a given speed (40ish mph in this case), whilst changing between various random gears, either raising or lowering the engine revs during the change to smooth it out.
Does this help?.
Yung Man said:
Am I living in a parallel universe?.
Perhaps. 
But as far as I can see, the technique you're suggesting is essentially the same that R_U_LOCAL is suggesting, and is what he is intending to show in his video. I think the video does show him doing that. You think it doesn't. C'est la vie. Yung Man said:
to say moving from gear to gear without lifting off the throttle(lets not split hairs) is "better" than doing whilst lifting off is bound to be controversial, I like many others on here was not taught that way and have managed to keep out of trouble.
We who were taught that way obviously do not find it "controversial". Edited by Yung Man on Saturday 1st September 14:07
Perhaps this explanation to go with Reg's video may assist :-
http://artofgearchanging.blogspot.com/
Yung Man said:
GreenV8S said:
I'm sure now that we're talking at cross purposes because the video does NOT show Reg changing gear with constant revs or constant throttle, he is using the throttle to adjust the engine speed to match the road speed in the new gear, which surely is what you're advocating.
Sorry but my eyes and ears are telling me something different, If you look again at 1 min 19 sec, 1 min 38 sec, 2 mins 05 and 2 mins 08 you will see and hear the revs either constant between gears or they don't even do that, they just rise. I thought the whole part of your argument was that instead of matching clutch and throttle you just kept the revs up to meet which ever gear you where selecting (up or down).
Am I living in a parallel universe?.
Edited by GreenV8S on Saturday 1st September 15:32
Yung Man said:
Come on Reg tell us, did you lift off or not (as in lift off completely).
No, not completely. Just enough to let the engine revs drop sufficiently to match the road speed for the next gear.As described here...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
GreenV8S said:
I've just looked again at the particular segments you refer to. They show Reg using the throttle to increase the engine revs during downshifts. Yes the revs rise, of course they do, that's because he's changing down, the revs in the new gear will be higher than in the old one.
It's a bit like a DDC with only one D, IMO doing this involves reving the engine with the clutch pedal down instead of up, if you want to do that in your own car thats fine, you are the one paying the bills.Edited by GreenV8S on Saturday 1st September 15:32
Maybe on the track or chasing villains requires your type of approach, don't take this the wrong way but I wouldn't lend you my car.
It must be a age thing I remember seeing some film footage of the late great Graham Hill driving smoothly with a glass of water on the dash, from memory he went up and down the box without spilling any of it, I wonder how he changed gear.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff