OT: Mature driver review

Scott snipped-for-privacy@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote

He was wrong

There is no 'straining of the engine' unless you are stupid

The assessor is right

Snap! You must be my long lost bruvver :-)

your dad (like me) probably remembers when brake pads had asbestos in them and the discs would last for the lifetime of the car.

He might even remember that some cars with disc brakes didnt even have a servo :-\

What sort of rpm might be 'low speed' or 'as long as possible'?

Again, what sort of rpm? My car suggests I change up at 1,500 rpm unless I'm accelerating, but my wife's has a more sensible 1,750 rpm.

Again the conflict between economy and safety.

My automatic will coast for miles. When not on a hurry on an empty road I play the game of 'lets see how seldom I have to brake'

Saves litres of fuel

The option to engine brake needs use of the paddle shifters which are a pain...

In a hurry I used to left foot brake and hit the throttle together to keep the revs up and force a downshift.

This car just throws a warning code...

My sports cars used to benefit from a change up at 5500 rpm.

And, a change down at 3000...that way the engine was always in its power band if you needed it in a hurry.

I assume the assessment wasn't in Wales with the 20mph limit :)

Was it a conflict when the advice was given though?

Depends when it was given. By the 1960s hydraulic disk brakes at least on the front plus synchromesh gearboxes made braking a better option than using the engine, by and large. I was taught to brake first, change down later and change down direct from 4 to 2 if necessary.

My cousin, who had an old 1950s sit-up-and-beg ford popular with cable operated drum brakes, drove without using the brakes at all, mainly sideways.

Some people believed that the handbrake was a strap around the propshaft and could be used without fading the main brakes.

Other believed that reversing up steep hills was the only option in some cars

Having driven from Oxford to Cambridge on Friday night rush hour with no hydraulic brakes at all, using the hand brake and engine, I can assure you that while this works, it's no match for proper brakes.

All these tricks from WWII and earlier were true at one time for certain vehicles and conditions, just not universally true.

Sadly it is in the nature of people to like universal rules and for driving instructors to supply them...

That's much too recent!

My car gives useful hints on the dash about when to change up - they are usually wrong, more so when travelling on winding and hilly country roads.

Checking Google AI for my Ford eco boost 1l engine...

Ignore the Shift Indicator: Factory Eco-shift lights often prompt you to shift way too early, resulting in a sluggish, lugging engine. Trust the sound and feel of the car to keep revs slightly higher.

Engine dependant. On my small 1l engine with turbo they recommend 2000 to 2500rpm before changing up. 3000+ rpm when going up hill :)

When I learned to drive in the early 1980s, the test required (or so my instructor said) drivers to change down sequentially through their gears as they slowed down for a junction. From recent discussion, there seems to be some contention as to whether this was or wasn't essential for the test, but given that he was an advanced driver himself (he had been a Police Class 1 instructor until he retired) you'd think he'd only teach sequential changes if they were absolutely necessary, since advanced (IAM) driving favours staying in the approach gear until the last moment, then dipping the clutch and changing to the appropriate departure gear once you've assessed whether or not you need to come to a complete halt at a give way. I remember him taking me for a post-passing lesson and saying how much it pained him to teach sequential changes for the ordinary test and that "you don't normally do it in *real* driving".

When I took my IAM test 10 years later, they taught direct 6th-to-2nd changes, which took a bit of mastering, but for the past 35 years is second nature.

So I remain in top gear until I can see what gear I'll need to accelerate away, and I only press the clutch when the car is running at a few mph and I'm about to select the departure gear. Since the engine is being turned by the wheels until I press the clutch, it can turn at well below idling speed without juddering - just don't try to accelerate in that gear ;-)

The other thing I learned for my IAM test which no-one had told me about before was "progressive braking", which means that you apply the brake gently at high speed, gradually increasing the pressure as you slow down, then gradually reduce the brake pressure as the car comes to a halt, so you *almost* come off the footbrake altogether as you stop. And then apply the footbrake firmly and change to handbrake. It feels weird at first because it feels as if you are not braking hard enough in the early stages. It gives smoother braking because there isn't the initial fairly firm braking at high speed, nor do you lurch to an abrupt halt. Again, second nature to do that now.

Not long after I'd passed my IAM test, I did a night-school course in making a short video, and the story required a driving scene. I drove as I had been taught for the IAM test: direct gearchanges, progressive braking and push-pull steering (never taking either hand past 12 o'clock in normal driving, only when manoeuvring. The lad who was directly laughed at me for "driving like a granny" and asked me to drive like a "real driver" - so I had to cross my hands when steering, leave one hand on the gear lever for a long time and all the other bad habits that I'd just un-learned ;-) It felt very wrong.

Similar, don't engage the clutch until the car is close to stalling, never change down to 1st unless you've actually stopped.

I often do that; the only difference is that I have a manual car.

I was following a car along a B road with a few gentle bends and slight gradients. I know it well and know where to brake and change gear. The other driver may have been new to the area. Even so...

I think I braked about 5 times over the whole 10 miles, losing speed in most places simply by lifting off the power and letting the car slow down by friction and air resistance, changing gear if necessary as I accelerated out of bends. Most times when I braked it was because of slight downhill gradients which caused me to speed up more than I wanted to (eg starting to get too close the the car in front). In the same distance, the car ahead flashed his brake lights - either momentarily or for many seconds - at every microscopic down-gradient and every very slight bend. I kept up with him, so I wasn't driving any slower or accelerating any less, but I hardly touched my footbrake. I dread to think how short the lifetime of his brake discs/pads must have been since he was applying them so often. Maybe he was one of those drivers who thinks that you must always have your right foot on one pedal or the other, and that lifting off the power without then braking was "a sin".

dis-

I think at one time there was some sense in doing it: reverse gear was sometimes a lower ratio than first gear. I've never driven a car (the oldest was my mum's 1976 Renault 6) where first gear wouldn't get me up any hill. I've even occasionally had to do a hill start on a 1:3 hill when the car ahead has ground to a halt and has started rolling back towards me (think goodness I always leave a very large safety distance on steep hills). A bit hairy in a car with a small petrol engine when you need high revs to get enough torque to set off, so there's a worrying amount of clutch-slippage for a second or so; much easier in a diesel car that has torque at low engine speed so there is less slippage.

My grandpa was still driving when he was in his 90s. I rode with him driving when we went out for the day. I was pleased to see that he was still as safe and careful (and yet not unduly hesitant) as I would have been in those road conditions. The only quirk was that he took the car out of gear as soon as he lifted off the power in preparation for turning at a junction. Apparently with older cars, that did actually save a bit of fuel, important during petrol rationing in WWII. Nowadays it would actually make things fractionally worse in a car with fuel injection: if the wheels are keeping the engine turning while you are off the power, the injection supplies no fuel at all; if you take the car out of gear (or press the clutch) the injection needs to supply a bit of fuel to keep the engine idling. I can see that with the instantaneous fuel consumption reading on my car's "computer": it reports 999 mpg (theoretically "infinite") if I stay in gear and lift off the power and about 200 mpg if I press the clutch and lift off the power.

If the wheels are driving the engine, you can stay in gear (even top gear) until the engine is turning a lot slower than idling, with the fuel injection not needing to supply any fuel at all. And there's no judder; that only happens if you try to accelerate with the engine going too slowly in too high a gear. My rev counter needle drops well below the idling speed of about 700 rpm.

I usually press the clutch when I'm maybe 10 yards from the give-way line as I'm deciding whether I'll need to stop completely or can continue without coming to a halt - and then select the appropriate gear.

Engine speeds for normal driving (ie not when you are slowing potentially to a halt at a junction) depend very much on the car. My car has a 1.6 HDi diesel engine. I normally change up at about 1500-2000 rpm in normal driving, only delaying until 2500 if I need fast acceleration when I'm pulling out of a side road and I have to take the best gap that there is in traffic, requiring brisker acceleration than normal. Changing down rpm is very much governed by circumstances, especially gradient. I have to alter my technique when I drive my wife's Honda which also has a more powerful 1.6 diesel but it has a *lot* less torque at low rpm so I may need one or even two gears lower on a hill or going round a corner. I wonder whether its turbo is running out of puff because I've approached with no accelerator and therefore less exhaust to spin the turbo, so there's no reserve of air when I ned to burn more fuel, whereas the turbo on my own car may supply enough air in that situation. Her car has to be driven more like a petrol car than a diesel one ;-)