Why is it wrong to brake and down-change simultaneously?
Discussion
25NAD90TUL said:
vonhosen said:
It's not wrong but that's your reasons & others will have their reasons for not doing it (& that's not wrong either).
It's one way of doing it, but that's all it is.
What benefit does separating give you, that can't be achieved in any other way?
Apart from the obvious?...I pass my AD tests! It's one way of doing it, but that's all it is.
What benefit does separating give you, that can't be achieved in any other way?
Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 5th January 19:48
Only benefit I can think of is that it lets me know I'm planning ahead and concentrating.
I didn't write Roadcraft, I don't know why it's in there, only that it is. I'm assuming it's connected to fumbling with the gear stick while braking and possibly steering and taking observation. Each piece of the system is separated out I'm assuming. All I do know is that now to overlap seems incredibly amateurish and fussy, when I watch other people overlap it always seems as if the gearchange is hurried and sloppy and late. When I was an associate I had the same argument as others offer me here, separating seemed so alien and I didn't understand the point and the only answer I got was more or less that it was what was required no reason given why. Perhaps Von you could inform me as to why it was included originally? Like double-declutching, supposedly outdated since the arrival of synchromesh...In actual fact even on a modern synchromesh trans if you double-declutch as you go down into second or first it's more sympathetic, the synchros will last longer! What are your views on overlapping steering with braking?
You still didn't tell me what organisations or tests recommend overlapping, for example where would you be marked down for using the separation technique?
Furthermore, why is separation bad?
Are the Police not the high standard of driving that I have been led to believe? And if not why not? Surely they should be shaken up if their methods are outdated.
Who, aside from the Police should I be looking to for this better method? What driving manual should I be reading instead of Roadcraft?
So many questions, so few answers, you're meant to be the expert here not me. Let your expertise flow and enlighten one who wishes to be enlightened.
If I were to have to have to separate for a test I can, but I don't have to outside of that test so don't need to do it for the sake of doing it. That equally doesn't mean that I don't separate at all.
Of course it's possible to plan ahead & concentrate when overlapping, the only difference then is the choice of whether to overlap or not.
Separation was in there originally because the braking systems weren't as efficient as they are now. Cars would be far more likely to pull left/right when braking & you'd have steering that wasn't power assisted & required far more effort to control accurately.
It's not all about organisations/tests, but the DSA don't demand separation, the HPC don't demand separation (as examples). You don't have to be part of an organisation or take their tests in order to seek improvement in your driving. Only a minute number of drivers are members of the advanced driving organisations.
It's not that separation is bad. If it offers you what you want that's fine. It's just that it shouldn't be foisted onto people & sold as it's the way they should do it. If it solves a problem they have & makes them better fine, but alternatively if overlapping does it for them that's equally fine. the main thing is that they perform better doing it the way they use.
The Police aren't some sort of utopian model for driving, you'll find good & bad in there like anywhere else.
The key to good driving is in the mind & that's the part that isn't addressed sufficiently with conventional methods of instruction, methods which can actually undermine the potential for development of it within the learning environment.
Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 5th January 20:46
vonhosen said:
Separation was in there originally because the braking systems weren't as efficient as they are now. Cars would be far more likely to pull left/right when braking & you'd have steering that wasn't power assisted & required far more effort to control accurately.
And separating brake and gears helped with that how?Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 5th January 20:46
25NAD90TUL said:
vonhosen said:
Separation was in there originally because the braking systems weren't as efficient as they are now. Cars would be far more likely to pull left/right when braking & you'd have steering that wasn't power assisted & required far more effort to control accurately.
And separating brake and gears helped with that how?Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 5th January 20:46
vonhosen said:
The Police aren't some sort of utopian model for driving, you'll find good & bad in there like anywhere else.
Good and bad? Not surprising if their methodology is outdated as badly as you say? And the bad ones, should they be out there policing us then? Bad drivers can pass the Police test then?
They should be the best seeing as they are every day assessing our driving out on the roads! I have to say and I'm neither an angel nor a criminal, that I haven't seen much bad driving from the Police but I have heard tales as we all have.
The few rare times I have been stopped by traffic, I've been complimented on my driving, once my legality had been ascertained (I look a bit dodgy)! The three or four Trafpol I've been in with have been bloody good imo. Sure they are human though and may make errors of course, hopefully very rarely.
Von in my plebian way I rate the IAM/RoADAR, I rate Roadcraft as a method. I comment on it because I do know it. I can't comment on any other methods and don't because I don't know them. I'm limited in what I can comment on. I looked at a thread on Cadence driver training, but it looked like another HPC style thing which isn't my bag. I'll perhaps go further with a Masters or try for a Gold maybe. The truth is I'd have liked to do some Police training and would have applied to join but I heard somewhere you had to do two years as a beat bobby before you could apply for traffic.
PS: I don't try to push separation on anybody I'm neither an observer or a driving instructor, I just tried to answer the OP...Perhaps my answer should have been 'cos the IAM says so'. Thanks for this intercourse anyway!
vonhosen said:
Because with steering that required greater effort & a car that was prone to wandering under braking, you had both hands on the wheel at the time you were doing that braking to address that need (not one of them reaching for the gear lever).
That is exactly what I had assumed and had stated that it was to avoid taking a hand off the wheel, seeing as down changing and braking is usually a prelude to some other form of input such as cornering or negotiating a potential hazard. New cars can have braking imbalances too, many people's cars are in a terrible state of repair even today, some cars have blown light bulbs because some require an hours work in a garage just to replace a headlamp bulb, to me a driver not being able to change his own light bulb easily is disgusting, not blaming drivers it's the manufacturers.You've obviously mastered separation yourself, was this to pass a test or to evaluate it's virtues for comparison? Sometimes I will avoid it if I feel that the firm braking stage might un-nerve a following driver, which could be it's downside I'm well aware.
Toltec said:
I am sure you could do it in many vehicles as you have a lot of practice, I just think it is as far away from normal IAM style driving as hnt.
It is yes, clutch less changes aren't a technique the IAM push for, I was told that if I could do it perfectly every time on test fair enough but if not it was best avoided. I did it and got a 1 for use of the gearbox, not an easy mark to get on test in a diesel land rover I can tell you! It's a good job the stretch of dual carriageway on test was downhill, I'd have never made 70mph in the other direction. We have no motorway here, nearest one is a hundred mile drive from here. Years ago I did a test in a 1970 Plymouth Cuda 318 V8, left hand drive of course, the examiners look of surprise and body language when I pulled out to get a pre-overtake view was priceless, he soon sat down again though when the second pair of venturis opened! I love driving and love talking about it, people here know me and although they dislike me mostly I can always detect a hint of secret admiration. I'm not the best driver that I've seen, I'm pretty good that's all, speed these days isn't a priority, sometimes making progress is difficult here in my daily driver with only 67bhp and some of the gradients we have, I live not far from Lands end. Best wishes!25NAD90TUL said:
MC Bodge said:
Er, yes.
ps. Do you find that you need store up your posting energy for a few weeks before opening the taps and letting it all gush out in one mad, frenzied batch of fundamentalism?
What it is is this. Wherever I post there eventually comes the personal insults, always the same few from the sewer that is ADUK, in the absence of any ability to reasonably debate anything they descend to personal insult level and I disappear for a bit!ps. Do you find that you need store up your posting energy for a few weeks before opening the taps and letting it all gush out in one mad, frenzied batch of fundamentalism?
I like PH, and there are some good people here, but to describe ADUK as a sewer leads me to conclude that your balance and judgement are not what they might be. Perhaps you could consider re-assessing things?
25NAD90TUL said:
p1esk said:
In that case I hereby claim to be on the road to expertness. 
Sorry TripleS but why do you even post in Advanced Driving forums? You're attempt at IAM was a joke, you certainly couldn't adapt to the training and packed it in big-baby style.Didn't really want to insult you as I actually like you but you constantly offer up insight into a subject you know nothing about. Why do you insult me when you hold no certificates whatsoever?
Easy answer ADUK member!
25NAD90TUL said:
p1esk said:
Oh aye: another troublemaker! 
My last comment apropos yourself doesn't mean I assume you are not a great driver, with your wealth of experience and high mileage (no pun intended) I'm sure you are but I don't know how you can debate the finer points of the system if you haven't got it down to the letter that's all.I think he understands me, well at least I hope he does.
25NAD90TUL said:
Quoting now from a RoSPA manual of Advanced Driving Gordon Cole...
''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''
A Police driving instructor told me the same about H&T when I was a learner and I'll take that advice to the grave with me, although I can do it no problem, in fact he mentioned it because I was using the technique!
So we're basically saying here that the perceived wisdom handed down to Moses direct from God is no good, yet we offer no alternative advice? This 'new methodology we should be looking towards implementing is only noticeable by it's absence, how can I adapt to the new methods if no-one can tell me what they are? All I get here is that separation is unnecessary yet when I look at my literature on the subject every manual says more or less what is quoted above. What conclusions am I meant to arrive at by this?
You will probably find that what the manual says actually changes with the passage of time, so it's no use getting too hung up on it today (and for evermore?) when the new version, next month or next year, will quite likely have modified its advice, and quite right too.''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''
A Police driving instructor told me the same about H&T when I was a learner and I'll take that advice to the grave with me, although I can do it no problem, in fact he mentioned it because I was using the technique!
So we're basically saying here that the perceived wisdom handed down to Moses direct from God is no good, yet we offer no alternative advice? This 'new methodology we should be looking towards implementing is only noticeable by it's absence, how can I adapt to the new methods if no-one can tell me what they are? All I get here is that separation is unnecessary yet when I look at my literature on the subject every manual says more or less what is quoted above. What conclusions am I meant to arrive at by this?
25NAD90TUL said:
vonhosen said:
Separation was in there originally because the braking systems weren't as efficient as they are now. Cars would be far more likely to pull left/right when braking & you'd have steering that wasn't power assisted & required far more effort to control accurately.
And separating brake and gears helped with that how?Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 5th January 20:46
Toltec said:
Having said that I am interested in how you handle a downhill bend using separation. How do you stop the car from gaining speed without using either the brakes or engine braking? Another option would be slowing sufficiently before turn in so that even the subsequent gain in speed would still leave you going slow enough at the apex. That would be very messy though.
Personally I enjoy using H & T and that is what I do into a downhill bend in most vehicles including a diesel Land Rover. However I sometimes think you can get a perfectly satisfactory result without using H & T. The option you mention is rather untidy, but there are others. You can stay in your current higher gear - since you are going downhill you don't need the torque of a lower gear. If it is flat after the downhill bend and you do need a lower gear you can change down after you finish braking when you need the torque. Otherwise you can overlap, changing gear while still braking but when going slow enough or into a high enough gear that the revs are still low after you let the clutch out; at low revs failing to rev match is not a significant problem.25NADetc, what makes you think that someone can teach you a right or better way? Why do you want more driving qualifications? You are obviously an expert driver; from where you are at, why don't you just try different techniques and make your own mind up about which you prefer?
For some reason you seem to hate 'HPC' - not sure what you associate with HPC, the club's published standards, the training required to get into it, the character of a small minority of members including myself who post on these forums, or whatever. But what is relevant here is the attitude the club expects to different techniques, as set out in the standards - that different techniques and the advantages and disadvantages of each should be understood, and appropriate selections made.
BTW, congratulations on the Gold records - would we know who you are?
Why the choice of a Land Rover for road driving in favourable conditions?
For some reason you seem to hate 'HPC' - not sure what you associate with HPC, the club's published standards, the training required to get into it, the character of a small minority of members including myself who post on these forums, or whatever. But what is relevant here is the attitude the club expects to different techniques, as set out in the standards - that different techniques and the advantages and disadvantages of each should be understood, and appropriate selections made.
BTW, congratulations on the Gold records - would we know who you are?
Why the choice of a Land Rover for road driving in favourable conditions?
p1esk said:
The idea was (as I understand it) that separating leads you to observe and plan further ahead, and thus give yourself more time to sort things out on the approach to a hazard.
Superb post TripleS! I take back my earlier comment, you have mirrored here exactly what I have said earlier!My comments apropos ADUK...Dave you do know I'm the separation master Right?
waremark said:
25NADetc, what makes you think that someone can teach you a right or better way? Why do you want more driving qualifications? You are obviously an expert driver; from where you are at, why don't you just try different techniques and make your own mind up about which you prefer?
For some reason you seem to hate 'HPC' - not sure what you associate with HPC, the club's published standards, the training required to get into it, the character of a small minority of members including myself who post on these forums, or whatever. But what is relevant here is the attitude the club expects to different techniques, as set out in the standards - that different techniques and the advantages and disadvantages of each should be understood, and appropriate selections made.
BTW, congratulations on the Gold records - would we know who you are?
Why the choice of a Land Rover for road driving in favourable conditions?
I have more Land Rovers than any other model, plus I drive in conditions often where I need the capability. Also the reliability makes me favour them.For some reason you seem to hate 'HPC' - not sure what you associate with HPC, the club's published standards, the training required to get into it, the character of a small minority of members including myself who post on these forums, or whatever. But what is relevant here is the attitude the club expects to different techniques, as set out in the standards - that different techniques and the advantages and disadvantages of each should be understood, and appropriate selections made.
BTW, congratulations on the Gold records - would we know who you are?
Why the choice of a Land Rover for road driving in favourable conditions?
I don't 'hate' HPC, one of my driving heroes is John Miles so how could I? It isn't anything related to any kind of dislike for HPC, it's just that speed doesn't interest me anymore and the HPC isn't my thing.
I don't want teaching any better way, my comments were directed at Von Hosen who was telling me there are other methods but wouldn't elaborate, my input was more on the lines of wanting to know what training she was recommending...I got no satisfactory answer.
The gold discs? No I haven't been on TOTP, I'm, well was, a behind the scenes man, actually a session Bass player.
25NAD90TUL said:
p1esk said:
The idea was (as I understand it) that separating leads you to observe and plan further ahead, and thus give yourself more time to sort things out on the approach to a hazard.
Superb post TripleS! I take back my earlier comment, you have mirrored here exactly what I have said earlier!My comments apropos ADUK...Dave you do know I'm the separation master Right?
But as for separation versus BGOL, I think one can get an equally good result either way. It should be a free choice, so long as we bear in mind the primary objective, which is to allow sufficient time to get the speed and gear matched to the hazard we are approaching.
If we can do that consistently and reliably in a smooth and unhurried fashion, that's good enough in my book.
BertBert said:
Other than showing a fine skill of control and judgement, what is the benefit of this perfect clutchless change? How does it improve safety?
Bert
It doesn't! It's merely a fine display of vehicle control and knowledge of what the gearbox layshaft is doing at any given rpm. Improve safety, no not one jot.Bert
p1esk said:
No, I didn't know that, but nevertheless, hello, again.
But as for separation versus BGOL, I think one can get an equally good result either way. It should be a free choice, so long as we bear in mind the primary objective, which is to allow sufficient time to get the speed and gear matched to the hazard we are approaching.
If we can do that consistently and reliably in a smooth and unhurried fashion, that's good enough in my book.
Dave I agree 100%, I just felt that in this thread no-one was offering the IAM viewpoint on the original question, that's all it is. Also I wanted to know why IAM observers were rubbishing their own training. I thought everyone here knew who I was. Actually I'm not a bad guy, just mis-understood in AD internet circles, not in real life where I'm pretty highly rated by those examiners and chief observers who have had a taste! Best wishes TripleS!But as for separation versus BGOL, I think one can get an equally good result either way. It should be a free choice, so long as we bear in mind the primary objective, which is to allow sufficient time to get the speed and gear matched to the hazard we are approaching.
If we can do that consistently and reliably in a smooth and unhurried fashion, that's good enough in my book.
p1esk said:
You will probably find that what the manual says actually changes with the passage of time, so it's no use getting too hung up on it today (and for evermore?) when the new version, next month or next year, will quite likely have modified its advice, and quite right too.
It doesn't...I have every update of IAM and RoSPA literature from 1974 onwards on the subject. Roadcraft also I have many different copies. They don't vary that much.Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff