Is engine braking good or bad?
Discussion
davepoth said:
If sarcasm falls in the woods and nobody realises, does it make a sound? 
Apologies, sarcasm was not intended. Let me attempt to make things clearer; should someone who claims to be an ‘advanced’ driver consider it acceptable to be involved in collisions as long as it’s the other drivers fault?7mike said:
Apologies, sarcasm was not intended. Let me attempt to make things clearer; should someone who claims to be an ‘advanced’ driver consider it acceptable to be involved in collisions as long as it’s the other drivers fault?
Yes..Because with their skill they can control the severity of the crash and be quids in at the same time
and one more brainless sheep learns an expensive lesson about following the 2second rule
SystemParanoia said:
Yes..
Because with their skill they can control the severity of the crash and be quids in at the same time
and one more brainless sheep learns an expensive lesson about following the 2second rule
Skill; my arse.Because with their skill they can control the severity of the crash and be quids in at the same time
and one more brainless sheep learns an expensive lesson about following the 2second rule
s
t drivers spend their time "teaching" others lessons, whether it's brake testing, flashing or swerving around percieved middle lane hoggers. Nothing advanced about that at all, just another moron the roads would be better without. Using your gears to slow you down is a good skill to acquire and when used in the right circumstances .
When travelling down a very long decent when heavily loaded 9 passengers in your land rover and a roof rack full of camping gear tank full of fuel etc, as just using your brakes alone could cause brake fade, planning the decent early and getting into a lower gear is when you would use engine braking.
When using a 4x4 off road and travelling down large steep slopes (low box 1st gear) again engine braking.
If all your brakes completely fail gearing down will sympathetically will bring your vehicle to a standstill using your brakes to slow.
I understand your brakes aren't exactly up to formula one standard and you may be thinking you’re wearing them out quickly but gearing down to slow is going to cause your clutch to wear quicker and this is more expensive and harder to replace than adjusting your brake shoes or replacing them, what is going to cause brakes to wear out is hen drivers approaching traffic lights just slip I into neutral and then just brake. Unless your letting your vehicle slow right down and matching the road and gear speed perfectly (and basically pi--ing any one who is behind you right off) you are always going to get a little bit of clutch slip as you come off the clutch but a lot more if your slowing using your gears, think about it you have just geared down if you come of the clutch quick you going to get a sharp judder as the engine braking comes into play so you are bringing the clutch up slowly and using it like a brake pedal in the reverse manner.
Any one behind you must be wondering what’s going on its not a case of well if they hit me its there fault (terrible immature attitude) You re giving him/she no indication that you are slowing no brake lights not even a hand signal, if your brakes fail completely or another situation arises where you need to use your gears to slow touch your brake pedal enough to bring on the brake lights the driver behind is not a mind reader he /she can only act on what they can see.
My advice would be to just use brake and clutch overlap, apply brake pressure to slow the vehicle to a lower speed and while still braking gear down, yes you will still get a bit of clutch slip but not as much as before you will have better control of your vehicle and following vehicles will know what’s going on.
The two second rule will only come into play when travelling at speed above 40mph.good planning, scanning and anticipation is the only thing that’s going to stop you running into the back of the vehicle in front, and if the vehicle in front has brake lights.
Jaspermolly
When travelling down a very long decent when heavily loaded 9 passengers in your land rover and a roof rack full of camping gear tank full of fuel etc, as just using your brakes alone could cause brake fade, planning the decent early and getting into a lower gear is when you would use engine braking.
When using a 4x4 off road and travelling down large steep slopes (low box 1st gear) again engine braking.
If all your brakes completely fail gearing down will sympathetically will bring your vehicle to a standstill using your brakes to slow.
I understand your brakes aren't exactly up to formula one standard and you may be thinking you’re wearing them out quickly but gearing down to slow is going to cause your clutch to wear quicker and this is more expensive and harder to replace than adjusting your brake shoes or replacing them, what is going to cause brakes to wear out is hen drivers approaching traffic lights just slip I into neutral and then just brake. Unless your letting your vehicle slow right down and matching the road and gear speed perfectly (and basically pi--ing any one who is behind you right off) you are always going to get a little bit of clutch slip as you come off the clutch but a lot more if your slowing using your gears, think about it you have just geared down if you come of the clutch quick you going to get a sharp judder as the engine braking comes into play so you are bringing the clutch up slowly and using it like a brake pedal in the reverse manner.
Any one behind you must be wondering what’s going on its not a case of well if they hit me its there fault (terrible immature attitude) You re giving him/she no indication that you are slowing no brake lights not even a hand signal, if your brakes fail completely or another situation arises where you need to use your gears to slow touch your brake pedal enough to bring on the brake lights the driver behind is not a mind reader he /she can only act on what they can see.
My advice would be to just use brake and clutch overlap, apply brake pressure to slow the vehicle to a lower speed and while still braking gear down, yes you will still get a bit of clutch slip but not as much as before you will have better control of your vehicle and following vehicles will know what’s going on.
The two second rule will only come into play when travelling at speed above 40mph.good planning, scanning and anticipation is the only thing that’s going to stop you running into the back of the vehicle in front, and if the vehicle in front has brake lights.
Jaspermolly
Whilst I don't disagree with you Jaspermolly, I think you might be over-analysing the OP's described circumstance. He's pootling to the shops and seemingly rev matching. So I really don't think that what is wearing out quicker and brake fade are really a top priority. It's just a case that by not using the brakes to tell the person behind he's slowing, he's increasing the risk of someone driving into his rear. It's not a big risk, but it's very reducable.
And as for ...
I presume you also get all whiny when your insurance goes up when you have a non-fault accident?
Bert
And as for ...
SystemParanoia said:
so its his fault if someone runs into the back of him?
that doesn't seem right to me
Thanks for proving my point so well there SP. Being a natural control freak, I quite like to influence as much around me as possible. If I can reduce the risk of being rear-ended, then I find that quite a good thing to do. It saves my insurance, saves a lot of hassle and makes me feel superior. Good all round.that doesn't seem right to me
I presume you also get all whiny when your insurance goes up when you have a non-fault accident?
Bert
DukeDickson said:
His problem, not yours. No more complicated than that.
+1. Driving to conditions and all that. Shouldn't need an idiot-light flashing red in your face to tell you to hold back / slow.A closely related aside; amazes me the number of people who have no clue to simply managing their speed. For example, close to home - the A4 down through Saltford approaching Bath, everyone knows damn well there's a camera at the bottom (actually switched off!) protecting a tricky hairpin turn -off junction yet none regulate their speed downhill via throttle and gears but runaway downhill then brake hard as if it's a surprise every time (max 30 limit all the way, and for a mile beforehand). Same idiots every time.
Huff said:
Same idiots every time.
Makes it easy to avoid them then, doesn't it. What is it about people wanting to cause crashes because it "isn't my fault"? It's like being in a playground.
It doesn't matter who's fault it is - if you can do something to avoid an incident, do something to avoid the damn incident. It's not exactly rocket science. Sod who's to blame - if you take steps to stop them hitting you you'll get home a lot sooner, your car won't be damaged, and you won't have to spend twenty minutes arguing with an idiot. At least until you log back onto Pistonheads...
If I've read this right,
Engine braking and down changing isn't illegal (even if it is showing off), but is frowned upon because it causes confusion.
I should at least push the middle pedal enough to activate the lights.
And right or wrong the bloke behind should have left a bigger gap and been concentrating more (the fact the big yellow Land Rover was getting closer should have given him a clue that I was slowing down surly)
Engine braking and down changing isn't illegal (even if it is showing off), but is frowned upon because it causes confusion.
I should at least push the middle pedal enough to activate the lights.
And right or wrong the bloke behind should have left a bigger gap and been concentrating more (the fact the big yellow Land Rover was getting closer should have given him a clue that I was slowing down surly)
I recently had to assess a company driver with the 'not my fault' attitude. Recently been involved in several non fault collisions, the last vehicle to go into the back of theirs was a 40t LGV. fking lucky to be alive. Like a few here who pride themselves on their driving skills; competency was never the issue, won't keep them out of bother though.
OP; this is not intended as a dig at you btw.
king lucky to be alive. Like a few here who pride themselves on their driving skills; competency was never the issue, won't keep them out of bother though. OP; this is not intended as a dig at you btw.
real4star said:
If I've read this right,
Engine braking and down changing isn't illegal (even if it is showing off), but is frowned upon because it causes confusion.
I should at least push the middle pedal enough to activate the lights.
And right or wrong the bloke behind should have left a bigger gap and been concentrating more (the fact the big yellow Land Rover was getting closer should have given him a clue that I was slowing down surly)
It's his fault if he hits you, simple as. But if there's something you can do to avoid it, wouldn't that be better than wasting your time at the side of the road having an argument after said crash?Engine braking and down changing isn't illegal (even if it is showing off), but is frowned upon because it causes confusion.
I should at least push the middle pedal enough to activate the lights.
And right or wrong the bloke behind should have left a bigger gap and been concentrating more (the fact the big yellow Land Rover was getting closer should have given him a clue that I was slowing down surly)
It's the attitude on here that gets me - not yours BTW - the whole "it's his fault, f
k it, let him crash into you and get another idiot off the road" type thing. It's moronic. Whatever happened to defensive driving? All the time I see cars about to pull out on me, straight line roundabouts when I'm in the inside lane, switching lanes without looking *down* and noticing me there. I'd be involved in 20odd crashes a year if I thought "their fault, what the hell, it's their insurance...". I'd also probably be dead.
As with anything else - if you can see an accident about to happen, and you know how to avoid it, you'd have to be pretty dim to be involved in the crash anyway, even if it's not technically "your fault".
For the record op, if as you say, he wasn't sitting on your bumper at the start, it's obviously just a bit unfortunate and you caught him unawares. More fool him, but as suggested - now you know that a dab of the brake lights could help diffuse or avoid a similar situation. It's something I usually do if anybody is close enough as my car slows down quite sharply (it's light) when I lift off.
I don't like the idea that other drivers are relying on the brake lights to warn the vehicle in front is slowing down.
What if my lights had been broken and he had run into me?
Would it have been my fault (improperly maintained vehicle) or his for DWDC&A... or would it be a knock for knock accident?
What if my lights had been broken and he had run into me?
Would it have been my fault (improperly maintained vehicle) or his for DWDC&A... or would it be a knock for knock accident?
real4star said:
I don't like the idea that other drivers are relying on the brake lights to warn the vehicle in front is slowing down.
What if my lights had been broken and he had run into me?
Would it have been my fault (improperly maintained vehicle) or his for DWDC&A... or would it be a knock for knock accident?
Still be his fault, but you can make it easier by keeping an eye on your lights! You don't even have to get out of the car - just dab the brakes when there's something behind you and watch it light up. If it doesn't, they're knackered! What if my lights had been broken and he had run into me?
Would it have been my fault (improperly maintained vehicle) or his for DWDC&A... or would it be a knock for knock accident?
To put it in more simple terms - you know full well the roads are full of morons. People who are too stupid to drive, really. You can see it in many of the responses to threads on here, let alone the people who aren't petrolheads.
They're out there, and they need all the help they can get. Think of it like an indicator - people shouldn't react 100 per cent off the back of a driver indicating (although they do), but it's a great indication of what they're going to do next. You know full well that when they don't indicate, it's often easy enough to guess what they're likely to do (if you're watching to see how they position the car, speed, where they're looking etc), but that indicator will make it a lot easier for 99 per cent of drivers who aren't looking for other (for want of a better word) indications.
What harm does it do? It irritates you. What good does it do? It could save you from being in an accident. In which case, think of it like a bloody bright yellow bib for cyclists - they're f
king annoying to wear but they could stop somebody from ploughing into the back of you. I don't think I'm an advanced motorist. I've never joined the IAM or taken extra training or anything like that.
I do get attached to my cars though, and have never considered them to be disposable. I don't even see insurance hassle as being a major concern compared to the notion that someone just tw@tted my car. Insurance becomes a major concern as soon as they get involved, because most bodyshops are rubbish and British labour hugely expensive. Unless your car is worth a great deal of money insurers will usually try to write it off - that's a Very Bad Thing (Copyright JD).
I also have had several aspects of my life which have clearly demonstrated how crucial good communications are.
With all that in mind, keeping my pride & joy the same shape is my highest priority (besides preventing injury to myself or others, obviously) so anything I can do to help prevent someone from misinterpreting my intentions and having a collision with me simply has to be best practise by a long way.
I drive both autos and manuals and whilst engine braking does have some uses, I'll always aim to illuminate the brake lights when slowing at any appreciable rate to try to ensure whoever is following me is aware of it.
Anyone who thinks it's ok to have a crash because it's someone else's fault isn't a car or driving enthusiast because if they were they'd care that their car was bent. Anyone who thinks it's ok because the insurance will deal with it has clearly never been involved in a non-fault insurance claim - particularly if your car was relatively low value. It goes along the lines of "Here's a cheque for £x minus your excess. We'll collect our courtesy car this afternoon. We suggest you buy some clapped out rusty generic eurobox with the pocket money we're giving you. Lastly, we're cancelling your policy now as the car is a total loss - too bad you were only 3 weeks away from another year's NCD!". It's quite moronic to hold the attitude that it's ok since it's someone else's fault. Everyone loses in a crash - unless you're making fraulent claims for injuries you don't have.
I do get attached to my cars though, and have never considered them to be disposable. I don't even see insurance hassle as being a major concern compared to the notion that someone just tw@tted my car. Insurance becomes a major concern as soon as they get involved, because most bodyshops are rubbish and British labour hugely expensive. Unless your car is worth a great deal of money insurers will usually try to write it off - that's a Very Bad Thing (Copyright JD).
I also have had several aspects of my life which have clearly demonstrated how crucial good communications are.
With all that in mind, keeping my pride & joy the same shape is my highest priority (besides preventing injury to myself or others, obviously) so anything I can do to help prevent someone from misinterpreting my intentions and having a collision with me simply has to be best practise by a long way.
I drive both autos and manuals and whilst engine braking does have some uses, I'll always aim to illuminate the brake lights when slowing at any appreciable rate to try to ensure whoever is following me is aware of it.
Anyone who thinks it's ok to have a crash because it's someone else's fault isn't a car or driving enthusiast because if they were they'd care that their car was bent. Anyone who thinks it's ok because the insurance will deal with it has clearly never been involved in a non-fault insurance claim - particularly if your car was relatively low value. It goes along the lines of "Here's a cheque for £x minus your excess. We'll collect our courtesy car this afternoon. We suggest you buy some clapped out rusty generic eurobox with the pocket money we're giving you. Lastly, we're cancelling your policy now as the car is a total loss - too bad you were only 3 weeks away from another year's NCD!". It's quite moronic to hold the attitude that it's ok since it's someone else's fault. Everyone loses in a crash - unless you're making fraulent claims for injuries you don't have.
BertBert said:
SystemParanoia said:
if someone chooses to run into the back of him... that is their own fault
I don't think you're really into "Advanced Driving" are you?The best outcome is that the other guy doesn't really realise how hard the AD is working to help him out and certainly isn't grateful for it. The AD is happy (often apparently smugly so) with this ingratitude because of his superior attitude.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff