Driver Awareness Course - bizarre advice?
Discussion
tannhauser said:
Cliftonite said:
FredClogs said:
I'd go with the 2nd in a 20mph etc... Its not the most efficient from a fueling point of view but you should be driving your car at around the point its making peak torque, it gives you maximum engine breaking and maximum ability to accelerate out of (into) trouble.
I do not ever want to break my engine, thanks!
BertBert said:
Whoa, we are now back in SP&L. Need to make comments about the legality of ABS and locked wheels rather than their effectiveness now 
I'm sure locking wheels is a/ illegal and b/ invalidates your insurance.
Bert
I sometimes feel I am in some sort of parallel universe . . .I'm sure locking wheels is a/ illegal and b/ invalidates your insurance.
Bert
Cliftonite said:
BertBert said:
Whoa, we are now back in SP&L. Need to make comments about the legality of ABS and locked wheels rather than their effectiveness now
I'm sure locking wheels is a/ illegal and b/ invalidates your insurance.
Bert
I sometimes feel I am in some sort of parallel universe . . .I'm sure locking wheels is a/ illegal and b/ invalidates your insurance.
Bert
Though there are indeed some people on this thread in some sort of parallel universe.
BTW, to those complaining about set speed limits and folks obeying them, whilst like vonhosen, given the freedom to choose, very important caveat there, many roads where I would drive faster than the set limit, occasionally significantly quicker, I'd recommend being patient. National Speed campaign next week, lots of extra patrols due to be about certainly on our patch, so best behaviour here.
Cliftonite said:
tannhauser said:
Cliftonite said:
FredClogs said:
I'd go with the 2nd in a 20mph etc... Its not the most efficient from a fueling point of view but you should be driving your car at around the point its making peak torque, it gives you maximum engine breaking and maximum ability to accelerate out of (into) trouble.
I do not ever want to break my engine, thanks!2nd in a 20....You know when you see an old biddy in a car park redline the engine and their car then crawls backwards out of the space at 0.1mph with the RPMs at 6000....I have that image in my head of you driving through a village
<PH disclaimer - 6000prm may not be accurate, insert correct RPM when reading>
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 11th August 10:26
You’re not there to learn anything, just forget about anything ambiguous or you think wrong. You’re there to:
1) Make then money.
2) Be punished, both financially and by time. The course will last 4 hours, come what may. If they managed to impart perfect knowledge to everyone after 2 hours, they would still keep you there for 4.
You’re just punishing yourself even more carrying the discussion on beyond the course.
1) Make then money.
2) Be punished, both financially and by time. The course will last 4 hours, come what may. If they managed to impart perfect knowledge to everyone after 2 hours, they would still keep you there for 4.
You’re just punishing yourself even more carrying the discussion on beyond the course.
JimSuperSix said:
and you've probably achieved fuel consumption comparable to a Saturn5 also...well done.
2nd in a 20....You know when you see an old biddy in a car park redline the engine and their car then crawls backwards out of the space at 0.1mph with the RPMs at 6000....I have that image in my head of you driving through a village
<PH disclaimer - 6000prm may not be accurate, insert correct RPM when reading>
Without wishing to be ageist it tends to be the older generation who think you should be driving everywhere in “top gear” to save petrol. The difference in revs between 2nd/3rd or 3rd/4th is (IMO) relatively small but provides a small amount of additional car control.2nd in a 20....You know when you see an old biddy in a car park redline the engine and their car then crawls backwards out of the space at 0.1mph with the RPMs at 6000....I have that image in my head of you driving through a village
<PH disclaimer - 6000prm may not be accurate, insert correct RPM when reading>
Edited by JimSuperSix on Sunday 11th August 10:26
Chacun a son gout, rodders.......;)
Countdown said:
JimSuperSix said:
and you've probably achieved fuel consumption comparable to a Saturn5 also...well done.
2nd in a 20....You know when you see an old biddy in a car park redline the engine and their car then crawls backwards out of the space at 0.1mph with the RPMs at 6000....I have that image in my head of you driving through a village
<PH disclaimer - 6000prm may not be accurate, insert correct RPM when reading>
Without wishing to be ageist it tends to be the older generation who think you should be driving everywhere in “top gear” to save petrol. The difference in revs between 2nd/3rd or 3rd/4th is (IMO) relatively small but provides a small amount of additional car control.2nd in a 20....You know when you see an old biddy in a car park redline the engine and their car then crawls backwards out of the space at 0.1mph with the RPMs at 6000....I have that image in my head of you driving through a village
<PH disclaimer - 6000prm may not be accurate, insert correct RPM when reading>
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 11th August 10:26
Chacun a son gout, rodders.......;)
blank said:
Can you still get faults on your driving test regarding "eco safe driving"? I'm sure this used to be a thing.
If you were trundling along at 30 in 3rd for a long time with the gearshift indicator telling you to shift up, would it be a fault?
I don't know if it's changed but "eco" used to be only for feedback at the end of the test & didn't count for total faults.If you were trundling along at 30 in 3rd for a long time with the gearshift indicator telling you to shift up, would it be a fault?
Cliftonite said:
tannhauser said:
Cliftonite said:
FredClogs said:
I'd go with the 2nd in a 20mph etc... Its not the most efficient from a fueling point of view but you should be driving your car at around the point its making peak torque, it gives you maximum engine breaking and maximum ability to accelerate out of (into) trouble.
I do not ever want to break my engine, thanks!bigdog3 said:
Inertial loads inside the engine are proportional to the square of engine speed. Wear rates have a similar relationship but can be even worse So just 40% increase in engine speed (eg 2500 to 3500rpm) means the engine wears out at least twice as fast.
But since engines rarely wear out these days it's academic.Dr Jekyll said:
But since engines rarely wear out these days it's academic.
Typically powertrain is engineered for 150,000 miles for 90th percentile customer. Misuse it and that mileage will soon come down. But I suppose most cars get scrapped at lower mileage, particularly if they are not used much 
red997 said:
I'll just stick to 2nd in a 20mph zone
max speed in gear :
1st gear - 49 mph
2nd gear - 77 mph
3rd gear - 106 mph
4th gear - 137 mph
5th gear - 165 mph
6th gear - 191 mph
7th gear - 219 mph (theoretical, drag ltd at 197)
Seems even 7th gear can cope with speeds below the legal limit max speed in gear :
1st gear - 49 mph
2nd gear - 77 mph
3rd gear - 106 mph
4th gear - 137 mph
5th gear - 165 mph
6th gear - 191 mph
7th gear - 219 mph (theoretical, drag ltd at 197)
Noting the naysayers comments have been doing a bit of experimentation, this is in a 2.2TD and a 6 speed Aisin torque converter auto box. Figures in table below are with box set in manual mode and the torque converter appearing to be locked, it was very easy with minor throttle changes at the highest gear low revs setting to cause the TC to slip.
One comment about the 30 in 4th. Slow down to 27 and it shifts automatically down to 3rd, and just before then it's clear the engine is starting to be outside comfort zone.
So looking at those figures it seems to me to support the 2nd in 20 etc advice.
Next step was to check the in a 30 put it in Sport rather than leave it in D. Test area was a 30 limit through the village, some parts of it flat but also some undulating sections.
Essentially on the flat sections with extremely light featherfoot on the gas could get it to stay in 4th, just. As soon as any upgrade, and do mean any, then the box would change down to 3rd, any slight extra on the throttle, likewise. In summary it goes through the village not being able to make mind up, 3 / 4 / 3 / 4, frankly a pita. Put it in Sport, sits in 3rd, stays in 3rd even varying speeds. Only way to keep it in 4th in D mode was to drive noticeably over 30.
So as far as I'm concerned, for this vehicle and ime also others driven, petrol, diesel, auto , manual the advice of the instructor on the OP's SAC wasn't that far out. Secondly those rabbiting on about 2nd in 20 etc breaking engines due to excessive revs are talking twaddle unless the vehicle is very very low geared.
| == | =2nd= | =3rd= | =4th= | =5th= |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 1800 | 1300 | --- | --- |
| 30 | 2300 | 1800 | 1300 | --- |
| 40 | not measured | 2300 | 1800 | 1250 |
One comment about the 30 in 4th. Slow down to 27 and it shifts automatically down to 3rd, and just before then it's clear the engine is starting to be outside comfort zone.
So looking at those figures it seems to me to support the 2nd in 20 etc advice.
Next step was to check the in a 30 put it in Sport rather than leave it in D. Test area was a 30 limit through the village, some parts of it flat but also some undulating sections.
Essentially on the flat sections with extremely light featherfoot on the gas could get it to stay in 4th, just. As soon as any upgrade, and do mean any, then the box would change down to 3rd, any slight extra on the throttle, likewise. In summary it goes through the village not being able to make mind up, 3 / 4 / 3 / 4, frankly a pita. Put it in Sport, sits in 3rd, stays in 3rd even varying speeds. Only way to keep it in 4th in D mode was to drive noticeably over 30.
So as far as I'm concerned, for this vehicle and ime also others driven, petrol, diesel, auto , manual the advice of the instructor on the OP's SAC wasn't that far out. Secondly those rabbiting on about 2nd in 20 etc breaking engines due to excessive revs are talking twaddle unless the vehicle is very very low geared.
rainmakerraw said:
BaronVonVaderham said:
Of the two SACs that I’ve been on, both were run by the aa and delivered by stereotypical ex plods replete with full police-speak vocab 
The 3rd in a 30 and various other ‘tips’ were present along with the idea that that some signage and road furniture is driven by instances of KSI - this actually seems fairly logical imo. If a sharp, blind bend on a nsl road has a SLOW marking on the road and black and yellow directional chevron sign then it’s because some people have failed to drive round it and survive the experience.
Question for popopbangbang: in a modern car with abs is it fair to say that the shortest stopping distance would be achieved by triggering the abs? One of my cars has an EBD system that distributes braking force between the wheels before abs is triggered (and also flashes the hazards), this can be clearly felt as the car squirms under heavy braking.
As a club racing ‘braking enthusiast’ (cheers Bert!) I’ve always been under the impression that max retardation is achieved just before the point of lockup (and abs triggering), however my race car has no abs, and so in that I’m always trying to hit that balancing point.
I'm not 'popopbangbang' but you're basically correct. Maximum braking is (usually) observed just before/at the point of the wheels locking, which is why ABS holds the car at that point through exceedingly rapid (re)application of the brakes, resulting in the characteristic pulsing/judder. On non-ABS cars cadence braking can be used to similar effect, albeit not actually as effective (humans are not computers!). Exceptions to ABS stopping faster include snow, where a non-ABS car with locked wheels can often stop faster due to building up a wedge of snow that the ABS car will drive over (due to not locking up). The 3rd in a 30 and various other ‘tips’ were present along with the idea that that some signage and road furniture is driven by instances of KSI - this actually seems fairly logical imo. If a sharp, blind bend on a nsl road has a SLOW marking on the road and black and yellow directional chevron sign then it’s because some people have failed to drive round it and survive the experience.
Question for popopbangbang: in a modern car with abs is it fair to say that the shortest stopping distance would be achieved by triggering the abs? One of my cars has an EBD system that distributes braking force between the wheels before abs is triggered (and also flashes the hazards), this can be clearly felt as the car squirms under heavy braking.
As a club racing ‘braking enthusiast’ (cheers Bert!
) I’ve always been under the impression that max retardation is achieved just before the point of lockup (and abs triggering), however my race car has no abs, and so in that I’m always trying to hit that balancing point.It senses when a wheel locks and then rapidly releases the braking force to allow the wheel to continue turning. The purposes is to allow you to retain the ability to steer with full braking force applied, something that's not possible when the wheels are locked.
In the past I have found it possible to shorten my braking distance by avoiding triggering the ABS ie. braking on the threshold. This is maybe useful to know on a track but of little use on the road. Also, it was on a car built in the 90s so I doubt the same could be achieved with modern systems. I wouldn't want to disable ABS on a car I drive.
LeoSayer said:
I'm not 'popopbangbang' either, but that's not my understanding of how ABS works.
It senses when a wheel locks and then rapidly releases the braking force to allow the wheel to continue turning. The purposes is to allow you to retain the ability to steer with full braking force applied, something that's not possible when the wheels are locked.
In the past I have found it possible to shorten my braking distance by avoiding triggering the ABS ie. braking on the threshold. This is maybe useful to know on a track but of little use on the road. Also, it was on a car built in the 90s so I doubt the same could be achieved with modern systems. I wouldn't want to disable ABS on a car I drive.
These days, and for some time decent ABS detects if a wheel is about to lock and backs off to prevent it locking, kit's also linked to the stability control so it's threshold braking, but on each wheel independently and with much a lower risk of throwing the car around so impossible to better on the pedal, except on loose surfaces. It senses when a wheel locks and then rapidly releases the braking force to allow the wheel to continue turning. The purposes is to allow you to retain the ability to steer with full braking force applied, something that's not possible when the wheels are locked.
In the past I have found it possible to shorten my braking distance by avoiding triggering the ABS ie. braking on the threshold. This is maybe useful to know on a track but of little use on the road. Also, it was on a car built in the 90s so I doubt the same could be achieved with modern systems. I wouldn't want to disable ABS on a car I drive.
Graveworm said:
These days, and for some time decent ABS detects if a wheel is about to lock and backs off to prevent it locking, kit's also linked to the stability control so it's threshold braking, but on each wheel independently and with much a lower risk of throwing the car around so impossible to better on the pedal, except on loose surfaces.
Good to know 
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff