Honest John and Left Foot Braking?

[DonkeyApple]

Paul_M3 said:

thiscocks said:

JimSuperSix said:

I don't think one person has said they cover the pedal all the time, in fact I and probably others have specifically stated (over and over and over) that we cover the pedal at times when its most likely to be needed.

So you won't be covering it in any sudden unexpected emergency situations.

That's correct. And nor will the rfb.

In sudden emergency situations there is no benefit, both methods are equal. Again, nobody has ever said any different...

Why are both methods equal when it’s clearly quicker to get the right foot over to a brake pedal designed and positioned for right foot braking over getting a left foot off the foot rest, up to the pedal and then down? And that’s before considering that some people will probably catch their foot on the brake pedal as they are lifting it off the foot rest in a panic or that the heel is going to be coming off the ground which arguably means a loss of some control.

Unless covering the pedal the left foot is going to be at a disadvantage in a sudden event because the car is designed for right foot braking.

[FiF]

DonkeyApple said:

Paul_M3 said:

thiscocks said:

JimSuperSix said:

I don't think one person has said they cover the pedal all the time, in fact I and probably others have specifically stated (over and over and over) that we cover the pedal at times when its most likely to be needed.

So you won't be covering it in any sudden unexpected emergency situations.

That's correct. And nor will the rfb.

In sudden emergency situations there is no benefit, both methods are equal. Again, nobody has ever said any different...

Why are both methods equal when it’s clearly quicker to get the right foot over to a brake pedal designed and positioned for right foot braking over getting a left foot off the foot rest, up to the pedal and then down? And that’s before considering that some people will probably catch their foot on the brake pedal as they are lifting it off the foot rest in a panic or that the heel is going to be coming off the ground which arguably means a loss of some control.

Unless covering the pedal the left foot is going to be at a disadvantage in a sudden event because the car is designed for right foot braking.

What about those of us who don't have left foot on foot rest? In my daily the comfortable place for left foot is heel on floor slightly to left of brake pedal. Natural angle of foot position from there is in line with pedal so a small swivel to the right and you are on the brake without needing to move the heel, or lift the foot off the floor or any other of the various straw grabbing scenarios invented in your brain. Real life experience unfortunately.

[thiscocks]

DonkeyApple said:

Paul_M3 said:

thiscocks said:

JimSuperSix said:

I don't think one person has said they cover the pedal all the time, in fact I and probably others have specifically stated (over and over and over) that we cover the pedal at times when its most likely to be needed.

So you won't be covering it in any sudden unexpected emergency situations.

That's correct. And nor will the rfb.

In sudden emergency situations there is no benefit, both methods are equal. Again, nobody has ever said any different...

Why are both methods equal when it’s clearly quicker to get the right foot over to a brake pedal designed and positioned for right foot braking over getting a left foot off the foot rest, up to the pedal and then down? And that’s before considering that some people will probably catch their foot on the brake pedal as they are lifting it off the foot rest in a panic or that the heel is going to be coming off the ground which arguably means a loss of some control.

Unless covering the pedal the left foot is going to be at a disadvantage in a sudden event because the car is designed for right foot braking.

Don't let the blindingly obvious get in the way of their superior braking ways

[DickyC]

Where's leglessAlex when we need him?

[thiscocks]

FiF said:

What about those of us who don't have left foot on foot rest? In my daily the comfortable place for left foot is heel on floor slightly to left of brake pedal. Natural angle of foot position from there is in line with pedal so a small swivel to the right and you are on the brake without needing to move the heel, or lift the foot off the floor or any other of the various straw grabbing scenarios invented in your brain. Real life experience unfortunately.

Assuming your footrest is close to, and dead level with the brake pedal (in most autos this is not the case) then it's still no quicker than rotating your right foot from the accelerator pedal.

[FiF]

thiscocks said:

FiF said:

What about those of us who don't have left foot on foot rest? In my daily the comfortable place for left foot is heel on floor slightly to left of brake pedal. Natural angle of foot position from there is in line with pedal so a small swivel to the right and you are on the brake without needing to move the heel, or lift the foot off the floor or any other of the various straw grabbing scenarios invented in your brain. Real life experience unfortunately.

Assuming your footrest is close to, and dead level with the brake pedal (in most autos this is not the case) then it's still no quicker than rotating your right foot from the accelerator pedal.

Didn't say it was. Post was in answer to Donkey A waffling about lifting heel off floor, getting foot caught under brake pedal because of foot rest position.

Specifically foot rest position in mine is not comfortable whereas foot position described is supremely so. HTH

[Taylor James]

Paul_M3 said:

Taylor James said:

Trouble is, that assumes the rfb has inferior hazard perception. Why wouldn't the rfb be off the gas and covering the brake at the same time as the lfb?

No it doesn't assume that at all. This has been discussed / explained multiple times.

The rfb can't cover the brake AND maintain speed.

Here's a simple real life example - You're driving past a school at kicking out time. The road is lined with young kids and parents for several hundred metres. Both lfb and rfb observe the hazard and slow down to 20 mph. The hazard is present for much longer than a few seconds, so the rfb will be back on the accelerator to maintain 20 mph.

The lfb also has to get back on the accelerator, but keeps their left foot over the brake should one of kids suddenly chase their ball into the road. Once past all of the kids, they'd move their left foot back to the dead pedal.

I like real examples.

Here's my take on your scenario. You describe a road "lined with young kids and parents". Well, in that scenario, using rfb, I would slow to an appropriate speed as I approached the hazard. In the scenario you've described it might well be less than 20mph but let's say I reach the start of the hazard travelling at that speed. My car will happily maintain an adequate speed for the duration of the hazard, during which time I'll be covering the brake with my right foot the whole time.

Let's take another real life example. You're approaching a crossroads at say 50mph with right of way. I don't try and maintain a constant 50mph and use both feet. I would simply lift off the gas as I approached the junction and cover the brake with my right foot until I was past. My speed wouldn't drop by more than 1 or 2mph if that so no inconveniencing other road users and completely safe.. Again, absolutely no need for any left foot braking.

[NewUsername]

I think my last comment will be to those claiming (unsupported by any actual evidence other than anecdata) is that if its so clear cut LFB is safer because you can definitely stop more quickly then why isn't endorsed by IAM/ROSPA/etc etc and why isn't it taught, particularly to those only having an automatic license?

I know there will be another ten pages of double jointed, swivel ankled driving gods who grew up left foot braking their mums uterus before they were born who do it day in day out but the fact of the matter is it isn't any better than using the right foot and no driving organisation who has any influence on legislation has either recommended it or embarked on a study to show/that shows its beneficial. That should tell you more than some idiot on youtube (who actually says in the quoted video somewhat ironically you cant do it all the time anyway).

[anonymous-user]

DonkeyApple said:

Paul_M3 said:

thiscocks said:

JimSuperSix said:

I don't think one person has said they cover the pedal all the time, in fact I and probably others have specifically stated (over and over and over) that we cover the pedal at times when its most likely to be needed.

So you won't be covering it in any sudden unexpected emergency situations.

That's correct. And nor will the rfb.

In sudden emergency situations there is no benefit, both methods are equal. Again, nobody has ever said any different...

Why are both methods equal when it’s clearly quicker to get the right foot over to a brake pedal designed and positioned for right foot braking over getting a left foot off the foot rest, up to the pedal and then down? And that’s before considering that some people will probably catch their foot on the brake pedal as they are lifting it off the foot rest in a panic or that the heel is going to be coming off the ground which arguably means a loss of some control.

Unless covering the pedal the left foot is going to be at a disadvantage in a sudden event because the car is designed for right foot braking.

Do you have any data to support any of those assertions?

[Cold]

NewUsername said:

I think my last comment will be to those claiming (unsupported by any actual evidence other than anecdata) is that if its so clear cut LFB is safer because you can definitely stop more quickly then why isn't endorsed by IAM/ROSPA/etc etc and why isn't it taught, particularly to those only having an automatic license?

I know there will be another ten pages of double jointed, swivel ankled driving gods who grew up left foot braking their mums uterus before they were born who do it day in day out but the fact of the matter is it isn't any better than using the right foot and no driving organisation who has any influence on legislation has either recommended it or embarked on a study to show/that shows its beneficial. That should tell you more than some idiot on youtube (who actually says in the quoted video somewhat ironically you cant do it all the time anyway).

Because there are far too many who INSIST that it just isn't possible to left foot brake safely and therefore would be impossible to teach.

[anonymous-user]

NewUsername said:

I think my last comment will be to those claiming (unsupported by any actual evidence other than anecdata) is that if its so clear cut LFB is safer because you can definitely stop more quickly then why isn't endorsed by IAM/ROSPA/etc etc and why isn't it taught, particularly to those only having an automatic license?

I know there will be another ten pages of double jointed, swivel ankled driving gods who grew up left foot braking their mums uterus before they were born who do it day in day out but the fact of the matter is it isn't any better than using the right foot and no driving organisation who has any influence on legislation has either recommended it or embarked on a study to show/that shows its beneficial. That should tell you more than some idiot on youtube (who actually says in the quoted video somewhat ironically you cant do it all the time anyway).

Unfortunately for your "argument" it is demonstrably better and asserted as such by people who are likely much better drivers than any of us, whether you call them idiots or American retards or whatever else.

These driving organisations have to cater for the lowest common denominator, such as those who think it's fine to text and drive, and if you told them to use more than one foot at a time they would probably kick themselves in the head.

[InitialDave]

JimSuperSix said:

Do you have any data to support any of those assertions?

I always carry my reference book with me.

[anonymous-user]

InitialDave said:

JimSuperSix said:

Do you have any data to support any of those assertions?

I always carry my reference book with me.

Very apt book title

[Taylor James]

JimSuperSix said:

Taylor James said:

Here's a simple real life example - You're driving past a school at kicking out time. The road is lined with young kids and parents for several hundred metres. Both lfb and rfb observe the hazard and slow down to 20 mph. The hazard is present for much longer than a few seconds, so the rfb will be back on the accelerator to maintain 20 mph.

I do the school run every day , which means driving along a narrow village centre past a few schools and an almost solid row of parked cars for about 1 mile - how would you cope with that without having your right foot on the throttle for most of it?

Answer : you cover the brake with your left foot simple.

My car would probably cope with that by being on and off the brake. There might be some points where I'd have to stop and would need a jab of throttle to get going again. It sounds like a situation where you should be travelling very slowly and the speed limit is way above an appropriate speed.

It just reinforces my assertion that the benefits are debatable and marginal at best. I don't suppose you have any stats on how many lives you've saved by lfb? I do know I haven't run anyone over using rfb.

[Scrump]

If you drive an automatic and don’t left foot brake then you will not get even wear on your driving shoes and will wear out the right one first.

[anonymous-user]

Taylor James said:

JimSuperSix said:

Taylor James said:

Here's a simple real life example - You're driving past a school at kicking out time. The road is lined with young kids and parents for several hundred metres. Both lfb and rfb observe the hazard and slow down to 20 mph. The hazard is present for much longer than a few seconds, so the rfb will be back on the accelerator to maintain 20 mph.

I do the school run every day , which means driving along a narrow village centre past a few schools and an almost solid row of parked cars for about 1 mile - how would you cope with that without having your right foot on the throttle for most of it?

Answer : you cover the brake with your left foot simple.

My car would probably cope with that by being on and off the brake. There might be some points where I'd have to stop and would need a jab of throttle to get going again. It sounds like a situation where you should be travelling very slowly and the speed limit is way above an appropriate speed.

It just reinforces my assertion that the benefits are debatable and marginal at best. I don't suppose you have any stats on how many lives you've saved by lfb? I do know I haven't run anyone over using rfb.

Ah you're back to insisting that I would be travelling too fast because I am covering the brake with my left foot
And I don't think it reinforces what you think it does.

I know for a FACT i have saved at least twelve and a half lives by left foot braking...I'll compile you a graph.

[anonymous-user]

Scrump said:

If you drive an automatic and don’t left foot brake then you will not get even wear on your driving shoes and will wear out the right one first.

Pah , you amateur - do you not rotate your shoes at the same time as your tyres and wing mirrors?

[anonymous-user]

JimSuperSix said:

Taylor James said:

JimSuperSix said:

Taylor James said:

Here's a simple real life example - You're driving past a school at kicking out time. The road is lined with young kids and parents for several hundred metres. Both lfb and rfb observe the hazard and slow down to 20 mph. The hazard is present for much longer than a few seconds, so the rfb will be back on the accelerator to maintain 20 mph.

I do the school run every day , which means driving along a narrow village centre past a few schools and an almost solid row of parked cars for about 1 mile - how would you cope with that without having your right foot on the throttle for most of it?

Answer : you cover the brake with your left foot simple.

My car would probably cope with that by being on and off the brake. There might be some points where I'd have to stop and would need a jab of throttle to get going again. It sounds like a situation where you should be travelling very slowly and the speed limit is way above an appropriate speed.

It just reinforces my assertion that the benefits are debatable and marginal at best. I don't suppose you have any stats on how many lives you've saved by lfb? I do know I haven't run anyone over using rfb.

Ah you're back to insisting that I would be travelling too fast because I am covering the brake with my left foot
And I don't think it reinforces what you think it does.

I know for a FACT i have saved at least twelve and a half lives by left foot braking...I'll compile you a graph.

Here you go - DATA!!!

[Toltec]

DonkeyApple said:

Why are both methods equal when it’s clearly quicker to get the right foot over to a brake pedal designed and positioned for right foot braking over getting a left foot off the foot rest, up to the pedal and then down? And that’s before considering that some people will probably catch their foot on the brake pedal as they are lifting it off the foot rest in a panic or that the heel is going to be coming off the ground which arguably means a loss of some control.

Unless covering the pedal the left foot is going to be at a disadvantage in a sudden event because the car is designed for right foot braking.

You have a point in that some layouts lean more towards lfb than others, in my main car I only use it occasionally for quite specific reasons because the brake pedal is set to the right of the steering column so it isn't a natural thing to do, in my wife's car I lfb quite a lot because the pedal is a little to the left of the column so using either foot works, in the Smart Roadster I just sold I used lfb all the time because the pedal was so far to the left that rfb was a bit uncomfortable.

[DonkeyApple]

FiF said:

DonkeyApple said:

Paul_M3 said:

thiscocks said:

JimSuperSix said:

I don't think one person has said they cover the pedal all the time, in fact I and probably others have specifically stated (over and over and over) that we cover the pedal at times when its most likely to be needed.

So you won't be covering it in any sudden unexpected emergency situations.

That's correct. And nor will the rfb.

In sudden emergency situations there is no benefit, both methods are equal. Again, nobody has ever said any different...

Why are both methods equal when it’s clearly quicker to get the right foot over to a brake pedal designed and positioned for right foot braking over getting a left foot off the foot rest, up to the pedal and then down? And that’s before considering that some people will probably catch their foot on the brake pedal as they are lifting it off the foot rest in a panic or that the heel is going to be coming off the ground which arguably means a loss of some control.

Unless covering the pedal the left foot is going to be at a disadvantage in a sudden event because the car is designed for right foot braking.

What about those of us who don't have left foot on foot rest? In my daily the comfortable place for left foot is heel on floor slightly to left of brake pedal. Natural angle of foot position from there is in line with pedal so a small swivel to the right and you are on the brake without needing to move the heel, or lift the foot off the floor or any other of the various straw grabbing scenarios invented in your brain. Real life experience unfortunately.

Your insult doesn’t actually make sense if you think about it.

Depending on which foot you just shot it’s probably handy to be able to brake with either.