Driving standards

[Enterprisingwestern]

9 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Air support

 

Plan B.

 

 

 

Mike.

[Flying Pig]

49 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

Plan B.

 

Satisfying, but a bit risky in built-up areas.  I was thinking of a more pinpoint approach.  Though perhaps a more economical solution, at least in town, would just be to bring back the angry lollipop ladies and equip them with ANPR.

 

 

[kevinlms]

Just around the corner from the currently local supermarket, is a roundabout. After stopping and starting to move off, I had to suddenly slam on the brakes. Some stupid kid was riding in the dark, without any lights, or a reflector even, coming from the right.

Much closer than I liked. What is it that people take such stupid risks. Didn't even think about questioning his parentage!

[raymw]

7 hours ago, ejstubbs said:

 

It's not an offence to keep an untaxed or MoT-expired vehicle on private land. 

with a few exceptions, it should be SORN'ed - so they should know who it is registered to

[PaulCheffus]

4 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Just around the corner from the currently local supermarket, is a roundabout. After stopping and starting to move off, I had to suddenly slam on the brakes. Some stupid kid was riding in the dark, without any lights, or a reflector even, coming from the right.

Much closer than I liked. What is it that people take such stupid risks. Didn't even think about questioning his parentage!

Hi

 

Waiting for the chip van in our village I witnessed the same thing and they were lucky the mini bus didn’t hit them. Both on the same bike, no lights and very dark clothing.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

Edited November 27, 2020 by PaulCheffus
Spelling

[johnofwessex]

8 hours ago, ejstubbs said:

 

It's not an offence to keep an untaxed or MoT-expired vehicle on private land.  ......................

SORN?

 

It could of course be made an offence

 

 

[boxbrownie]

2 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

SORN?

 

It could of course be made an offence

 

 

Quite, so what exactly is the point of SORN if not applying for it is not an offence?

[ejstubbs]

AFAIK not SORNing a vehicle that you don't intend to tax is an offence...<checks>...yes, it is:

 

"You must insure and tax your vehicle if you do not have a SORN. If you do not, you’ll automatically be fined £80 for not having a SORN. There’s also a fine for having an uninsured vehicle."

 

Source: https://www.gov.uk/sorn-statutory-off-road-notification i.e. the horse's mouth.

 

The point is, though, that the kind of people who drive untaxed/uninsured/un-MoTed vehicles on the public road clearly don't give a monkey's about the law anyway, and probably never bothered telling DVLA that they'd become the keeper of the vehicle in the first place (especially if they would prefer not to have to explain how it came in to their possession).

[boxbrownie]

16 hours ago, ejstubbs said:

AFAIK not SORNing a vehicle that you don't intend to tax is an offence...<checks>...yes, it is:

 

"You must insure and tax your vehicle if you do not have a SORN. If you do not, you’ll automatically be fined £80 for not having a SORN. There’s also a fine for having an uninsured vehicle."

 

 

Thank heaven......it does make sense......I hoped so as we have SORNED the Landrover since the start of the first lockdown, I don’t see why you wouldn’t really as it costs nothing and saves the tax, unless of course you were a nefarious type!

[ejstubbs]

Just a general observation, as it seems to be becoming more and more prevalent: drivers who ride their brakes all the way down steep hills.  We have a fair few steepish stretches of road around my part of Edinburgh and more often than not I find myself following someone whose brake lights are on all the way down the hill.  Don't people get taught about engine braking these days?

 

(A related behaviour which isn't nearly as common but which still perplexes me: drivers who react to absolutely anything coming the other way on a normal, perfectly spacious single carriageway road with one commodious lane in each direction by immediately touching their brakes.  Some take it even further, dabbing the brakes when passing a traffic island, or more or less whenever they encounter anything which isn't a completely clear road ahead.  As well as obviously being rather nervous drivers who are as a result rather more likely to do something unexpected, having what seems to be an irresistible reaction to go for the brake at the first sign of anything that might possibly, just maybe, in the worst of all possible worlds be something a bit out of the ordinary seems to me to be less than ideal.  It's as if everything could turn in to an emergency stop at any moment.  I find following such people quite hard work as it's so difficult to anticipate what they might do next.  But maybe that's just me.)

[PhilJ W]

Yes, brake dancers. I was taught to use the gearbox to control the speed and leave the brakes alone. When I was learning to drive (53 years since I passed my test) there was no such thing as ABS and very few brake servo's and you had to treat the brakes with caution. Also drum brakes used to fade if used to often.

[JeremyC]

49 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

Just a general observation, as it seems to be becoming more and more prevalent: drivers who ride their brakes all the way down steep hills.  We have a fair few steepish stretches of road around my part of Edinburgh and more often than not I find myself following someone whose brake lights are on all the way down the hill.  Don't people get taught about engine braking these days?

Or are there more people driving automatics these days? Some modern automatics do provide engine braking, but it depends on the type of gearbox. (I live in Edinburgh and a fair number of our hills are beyond the engine braking capacity of my manual car)

[kevinlms]

7 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

Yes, brake dancers. I was taught to use the gearbox to control the speed and leave the brakes alone. When I was learning to drive (53 years since I passed my test) there was no such thing as ABS and very few brake servo's and you had to treat the brakes with caution. Also drum brakes used to fade if used to often.

But modern brake shoes are much easier and cheaper to replace than gearbox and clutches. Not that it excuses riding the brakes as has been previously described. 

[boxbrownie]

11 hours ago, ejstubbs said:

Just a general observation, as it seems to be becoming more and more prevalent: drivers who ride their brakes all the way down steep hills.  We have a fair few steepish stretches of road around my part of Edinburgh and more often than not I find myself following someone whose brake lights are on all the way down the hill.  Don't people get taught about engine braking these days?

Unfortunately you’d hate being behind me then, one annoying thing on the i3 is anything more than a few tenths of a “G” with the regenerative braking the brake lights come on, as per the international regulations......so if it’s an EV in front don’t blame the driver, blame the TUV 

[Reorte]

12 hours ago, ejstubbs said:

Just a general observation, as it seems to be becoming more and more prevalent: drivers who ride their brakes all the way down steep hills.  We have a fair few steepish stretches of road around my part of Edinburgh and more often than not I find myself following someone whose brake lights are on all the way down the hill.  Don't people get taught about engine braking these days?

I've heard (so second hand information, take with an appropriate pinch of salt) a couple of people say that engine braking isn't taught now, the reason being brakes are sufficiently reliable. IMO that's madness so I hope someone's got the wrong end of the stick, seeing as a car using engine braking is under more control regardless of the reliability of the brakes.

 

What do electrics do BTW? I'd have thought that regen braking would be effective in the same way but without needing gears how would it know whether you're trying to coast without the accelerator on the flat or keep the car under control on a hill?

[Enterprisingwestern]

3 hours ago, kevinlms said:

But modern brake shoes are much easier and cheaper to replace than gearbox and clutches. Not that it excuses riding the brakes as has been previously described. 

 

Brake shoes?!!!!

Discs tend to wear out at a similar rate to pads these days, so a re-shoe isn't what it used to be!

 

Mike.

[boxbrownie]

6 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

 

What do electrics do BTW? I'd have thought that regen braking would be effective in the same way but without needing gears how would it know whether you're trying to coast without the accelerator on the flat or keep the car under control on a hill?

The regen is adjustable depending upon throttle pedal position (i3), it is very effective and easily adapted to.....even Mrs BB likes it 

 

It makes the i3 truly a one pedal driveable car.....very rewarding to use, because it makes you think ahead.

 

 

 

Edited December 9, 2020 by boxbrownie

[TheQ]

While I agree engine braking isn't taught any more, the number of people on the brakes, is also because of the Hazard perception test. Where you sit in front of a computer and press a button when ever there is a hazard, that teaches you to brake for every thing you see....

So what I've seen more and more often is people braking when a car comes the other way or braking before overtaking a lorry on a dual carriageway..

[JDW]

Yeah, drives me mad too, likewise the ones who brake every time they hit 71 mph on a clear motorway. 

The whole brake lights thing is interesting as its not always as clear cut as people think. As others have said above, they can come on when regenerative braking kicks in, and also especially for large vehicles like HGVs the cruise control will often maintain speed downhill and/or distance from the vehicle in front and sometimes will use the brakes to do so, again meaning they seem to be braking oddly. 

I get the impression that as well as better brakes, modern engines aren't quite as good at engine braking, maybe because the engine and drivetrain is more efficient and has less drag? I have no scientific evidence for that though!

[ColinK]

A Transit I drive has an automatic gearbox and there is a little switch on the ‘gear lever’ which you can tap to make it change down a gear, you can press it more than once to change right down for engine braking when going downhill. Works a treat. You can change up the same way too, or drive manually using the switch to change gear.

 

I had to smile twice yesterday, first a really helpful observant lady driver must have seen my bus coming and stopped blocking both lanes at the supermarket car park so I could get my bus through. Then I watched another lady driver squeeze her 4x4 into the last parking spot near the supermarket entrance. She switched the engine off, undid her seat belt, then realised she was so close to the other cars she couldn’t open her door.

[stewartingram]

So your engine braking isn't effective enough? But don't you have a gearbox - you could go down a gear (or more), even with an automatic. I despair sometimes.

 

Stewart

[30801]

2 hours ago, Reorte said:

I've heard (so second hand information, take with an appropriate pinch of salt) a couple of people say that engine braking isn't taught now, the reason being brakes are sufficiently reliable. IMO that's madness so I hope someone's got the wrong end of the stick, seeing as a car using engine braking is under more control regardless of the reliability of the brakes.

 

'Gears to go Brakes to slow'

Quoted in every episode of Rory The Racing Car.

[JDW]

44 minutes ago, stewartingram said:

So your engine braking isn't effective enough? But don't you have a gearbox - you could go down a gear (or more), even with an automatic. I despair sometimes.

 

Stewart

 

If that's my post you're despairing at, yes of course I do, I'm well aware of how to use gears thanks, so no need to despair. I've spent my working life as a [competent, experienced] professional driver. But realistically, dropping from sixth to third at 50+mph in fast flowing traffic isn't particularly kind to my engine - dropping one gear has very little effect (barely any more than just coming off the throttle), dropping two a bit of effect on long gradual hills, but for any real effect in terms of retardation I find in most cirumstances the only way is to have the engine revving well above anything it normally sees, and that's really only appropriate for, say, descending a short steep hill at relatively low speed.

As with a lot of driving advice, changing down when descending a hill is good advice, espcilally in snow, and when used properly. It has its place. But at the same time modern cars are not the same as when the advice was written decades ago, nor is modern traffic. Certainly I remember the much smaller petrol engine on my first car as being much more effective in terms of engine braking than the big diesel on my last few cars, and I imagine a modern transmission is more efficient (so less resistance) too. I think you'd be hard pushed to find a modern car that couldn't cope with going down a hill using just the brakes and still be able to stop at the bottom in normal driving circumstances. 

[Reorte]

14 minutes ago, JDW said:

 I think you'd be hard pushed to find a modern car that couldn't cope with going down a hill using just the brakes and still be able to stop at the bottom in normal driving circumstances. 

Sure, but if you're using engine braking to keep the speed down most of the time you (a) don't keep shining your brake lights at anyone behind you, and (b) are in greater control of the car.

 

How recent are you defining modern? My car's 11 years old and the engine brakes it reasonably effectively (it's a petrol though, not a diesel, if that makes any difference). On steep hills I still have to use the brakes occasionally, but that's normal enough.

[JDW]

I didn't say you should go all the way down riding the brakes, and in most cases you don't really need to anyway unless its particularly steep. But it is no longer the danger that it once was. 

 

My current car is a couple of years old. I suspect petrol v diesel might make a difference - in normal driving, mine rarely sees anything over 2,500rpm. The higher the rpm the better the effect of engine braking will be - of course, petrol cars rev higher. 

 

Lest I give the wrong impression, I don't have a magic car with no resistance or engine braking. All cars have some form of retardation in any gear. Whether it's useful enough to slow you down or hold speed is a different matter.