OT: Brakes seizing on electric cars?

The piston seals pull the caliper pistons back when fluid pressure is released. That takes the pressure off the pads. A bit of flex in the hub bearings is all that is required then for the disc to knock the pistons back a tad so there is minimal pad to disc contact with no pressure. Too much wear in the wheel bearings and the flex in the disc will push the pads and piston back too far. When that happens, pedal travel will be excessive*.

The piston is usually chrome plated. The secret to preventing rust is the dust seals and in regular brake fluid changes. You see, the brake fluid is *hygroscopic* and absorbs water readily. Regularly check, where possible, the state of the dust seals and all will be well.

I've never had a car that would do that, even a 1 litre petrol. Maybe I have more agile feet. If you move your feet quicker, you don't need so much non-throttle power.

Wow, I don't remember being told to do that when I took my test in 1997. Maybe they stopped it. That would take ages!!

I don't recall having to do that either. I think I was told to change down SOME gears, but not every one, and definitely not into 1st, that would cause a jerk.

I do that, but am probably wearing out the brakes. I'm talking about planned stopping for a roundabout, not an emergency. Mind you, I'm also not wearing out the gears and clutch.

Bad idea if it's a lot of slope. I think I've only used gears on a hill once though, in the French alps. It was when the brakes started smelling hot. I was descending a winding road at about 10mph (sharp corners) to 30mph (the straight bits), the hill continued for at least 10 minutes. So I dropped into the manual equivalent of 3rd and sometimes 2nd (it was an auto so 2nd and 1st) to limit the speed to something more reasonable, then used the brakes to adjust the speed for each corner.

Completely unnecessary, just start the car with the clutch pedal pushed in.

I never heard of that and did not have to practice it or do it for the drivers test back in 1966.

We had several weeks of drivers ed and it was with a manual transmission. The car I took my test in was an automatic. We did have to give hand signals,however it was cold when I took the test and the lady giving the test told me she was not feeling well and I could use the electricl signals.

Column shifts are insanely stupid, for autos or manuals. The lever should be on the floor by the parking brake. I had a Honda CRV with an auto gearbox, and a lever on the steering column. You couldn't tell from the lever what gear it was in, you had to look at a seperate electronic readout on the dash! And even worse, the clicks were very weak, so it was far too easy to move it two or even three positions instead of one.

Maybe it's different in the US, but in the UK if you pass your test in an auto, you can't legally drive a manual.

You would have had to use hand signals in a car with electrical ones? What purpose would that serve? Then you'd have passed your test unable to use newer cars.

In the US the type of transmission for the test does not matter. IN NC there is a seperate test for motocycles now. However for anything under so many thousand pounds other than the motocycle it is just one license no mater what you take the test in. Above that I think you get into the comercial license that lets you drive the tractor tralier type rigs.

The three wheel bikes (usually clled a trike) just need the regular drivers license.

Told you the hand signals were a thing back in 1966. Lots of cars on the road back then did not have electrical turn signals.

Hence, the old saying, "If you can't find'em, grind'em."

If what you said was correct, we shouldn't have brake lights, since the person behind should somehow know we're slowing down.

What's that to do with anything? I assume you're one of those that complains that somehow a 21W brakelight can dazzle you, yet you're fine with those horrendously bright daytime running light EU s*it that's coming the other way.

When I did it, there was a very bad smell before any fading. I'd be more concerned about destroying the brakes.

Kinda insane, since if you've never driven a manual, you're gonna be a bit dangerous.

There's some funny rules here about weight. If I hire a van and put more than a certain amount in the back, technically I'm breaking the law. I think.

So the test should have covered both.

Cool. I once got an IT job and was asked at the interview if I drove there on a rather expensive motorbike parked outside. I said no. He said pity, you would have got the job immediately on the condition I can borrow it now and again. So he proceeded with the interview and I got the job on normal merit. Then lost it two weeks later by being late three times.

I once drove my neighbour's van after a tradesman job I was helping him with as he'd had a couple of drinks. He stared at me in shock when I selected third. He said "there is no third". I said "I know, you told me earlier". When I said "double declutch" he'd never heard of it, yet he's older than me. I did have the benefit of the first car I drove after my test was my then neighbour's Austin Gypsy. That needed a lot of coaxing.

I'm not even a mechanic and I feel sorry for cars when people do that. I once drove my Rover Maestro 15 miles with no clutch. Easy enough, until you stop.

If the indicator had 2 and 3 on it, then, rest assured, there was a 1st below that but it just didn't have a *lock* control on it so no indicator at the selector. That is all those numbers indicate - the ability to lock into either 2nd or 3rd without the trans doing auto upshifts.

That much is patently obvious.

Trying to think of any UK post WW2 supplied without indicators. And even many pre WW2 vehicles would have been retro fitted by the mid 60s.

On some transmissions, the lock did just that. Preventing any gear change at all. Starting off in a high gear could be useful on ice, etc.

from school, probably we had a trip round Jaguar in Coventry -1956 I think

- and there was 'production line' of D Types, They had lights rather than indicator arms which was very unusual for the time.

Not on 100mph+ cars..

D types were exclusively le Mans racers. Probably XKSS or XK120

not what the wiki article said.

EXACTYLY what the wiki said

"Designed specifically to win the Le Mans 24-hour race, the slippery D-Type was produced by Jaguar Cars Ltd. between 1954 and 1957. Sharing the straight-6 XK engine and many mechanical components with its C-Type predecessor, its structure however was radically different. Innovative monocoque construction and aerodynamic efficiency integrated aviation technology in a sports racing car, some examples including a renowned vertical stabilizer.

Engine displacement began at 3.4 litres, was enlarged to 3.8 L in 1957, and reduced to 3.0 L in 1958 when Le Mans rules limited engines for sports racing cars to that maximum. D-Types won Le Mans in 1955, 1956 and 1957. After Jaguar temporarily retired from racing as a factory team, *the company offered the remaining unfinished D-Types as XKSS versions* whose *extra road-going equipment* made them eligible for production sports car races in America. In 1957 25 of these cars were in various stages of completion when a factory fire destroyed nine of them.

No indicators on a D type.