Is the use of a handbrake or parking brake still taught?

[slim_boy_fat]

I learnt to drive when cars only had 4 gears

My first car had 4 as well....3 forward + reverse.

 

[rtbcomp]

Being pushed forwards when hit is better than staying still.

It isn't. If you stay put you don't get whiplash and you don't hit the windscreen like you would if you get shoved into the car in front.

 

[wookie]

Roundabouts are easy.

On simple non mini ones:-

<blah blah blah>

Mini roundabouts:-

<blah blah blah>

Okay then, when does a roundabout become a mini or a normal one ? Size ? what's in the centre ?

 

[normspanners]

My first car had 4 as well....3 forward + reverse.

You dont know you where born 3 wheel Morgans had two speeds and you had to get out and push it back.

 

[wookie]

I'd never say the way people are taught to drive today is wrong, the training is based on current thinking and maybe its right. New driver, well teach everyone a safe simple system.

Part of the problem with that is if the new driver then drives an older car then they could potentially end up in a dangerous situation, surely it's far better to teach to the lowest common denominator i.e an old car without ABS, traction control, stability control etc etc ? After all these aids can and do fail which then leaves the driver with no option but to have a crash.

I have old vehicles that only have drum brakes and knowing how they can fade on a big hill I choose to always use engine braking rather that rely solely on the brakes even when driving modern vehicles and I feel it would be far better to teach this technique to today's youngsters than "push the clutch and rely on the brakes".

It's better to drive in a manner that avoids problems in the first place rather than rely on technology to keep you safe IMO.

 

[normspanners]

I had to teach my lads how to press the three pedals with two feet, it came as standard driving when I was taught, I think I had two lessons, and passed the day after my birthday. ok I had a few more for class one hgv 6/8 ish
So when putting a car on ramps etc they are like, wow thats easy !! how come we dont know
when I drive an auto-- two pedals two feet----- simple.

 

[Justme]

Across the line and into the path of an HGV (or whatever the current term is) who is proceeding through a green light?

Or through the gate and onto the track into the path of a high speed commuter train?

Ok, if you say so.

I'd rather stay still.


Also, if you're not at the front of the queue and you are pushed (or lurch) into the car in front, there's another fault claim for the collection.


Also, if you're still (and stay that way) you have one shock loading on your neck. If you get hit and lurch then reslam (new word) the brakes, you get 3 - initial impact, forward shock from stopping, rearward reactive movement. Then you might get hit from the side too - by a truck, or a train (you get the idea).

Did I mention I'd rather stay still?

Whilst your points do have some validity your neck will be better off not accelerating hard.
Its the same re stopping.
Notice that cars now have crumple zones? Same thing in reverse.

 

[Justme]

Okay then, when does a roundabout become a mini or a normal one ? Size ? what's in the centre ?

Nothing to do with size. Signs on approach & whats in the centre.

 

[normspanners]

Whilst your points do have some validity your neck will be better off not accelerating hard.
Its the same re stopping.

with no brakes on you will accelerate a lot faster, if rear rammed 0 to twenty mph in .0001 secs ! with your brakes on the car takes the force.

 

[Justme]

I passed my test after 5 lessons, averages be damned.

I paid for them myself, my parents were not involved (well, apart from my dad teaching me basics like clutch control in things like long wheelbase hitop transits in fields from about the age of 11, I suppose that's frowned upon now).

I have always had the opinion that driving lessons never teach you how to drive - they teach you how to pass a test at which point you are licensed to learn.

The majority of my road knowledge learning came from riding a moped, most of my technique and technical knowledge came from messing around in fields and such as a teenager - my actual lessons simply taught me what was required for testing.

I don't know the real figure, but let's say the average is 30 hours tuition to pass.

I challenge anyone who says that amount of hours is enough to teach someone with no prior knowledge how to actually drive.

I'd say that to take someone who doesn't know what pedal or lever does what (most modern teenagers) and train them to drive well, be able to react to (almost) any situation - i.e. be a good driver - that's in the hundreds of hours or more.

No driving instructor for learners on the planet can realistically claim otherwise.





Yeah, alright.

Of course they know - the teachers know, the schools know and the examination boards know they know because they tell them.

Sure, they don't get a list of questions, but they get notification of which subject areas are going to be covered.

Driving proper off road is ok.
Average is 47 instructed hours & 20 in own car.
Many ADI's get them to test in 20 ish hours. Thats teaching to test.


Odd that non of my kids have ever know what the tests will contain on any of their exams.

35 mins of driving is not enough to test their skills very widely.

 

[normspanners]

Average is 47 instructed hours & 20 in own car.

WOW--- me, two half hr lessons, then the test, but that was with a man walking in front with a flag .

 

[Justme]

I have old vehicles that only have drum brakes and knowing how they can fade on a big hill I choose to always use engine braking rather that rely solely on the brakes even when driving modern vehicles and I feel it would be far better to teach this technique to today's youngsters than "push the clutch and rely on the brakes".

It's better to drive in a manner that avoids problems in the first place rather than rely on technology to keep you safe IMO.

They are not taught to dip clutch & rely on brakes.
Lots do it as its an easy way to cope. Sadly it allows you to get caught out in the wrong gear at the wrong time as you ahve no feed back of if the gear you are in is the right one.

They are taught to use engine braking via over run but in addition to using the brakes, not changing down to speed up the rate of decent. Missing gears as needed so they are ready to go. Minimising changes to just what is needed rather than routinely going through the numbers. Its more about thinking about how, why & when than just doing it.

 

[GW8IZR]

P I feel it would be far better to teach this technique to today's youngsters than "push the clutch and rely on the brakes".

I don't believe that is what they are taught

 

[brightspark]

I went on a drivers awareness course and they weren't amused at me using the gears to slow down . the thing I will say is though older vehicles had larger heavier cranks and flywheels and u could use the engine for braking. modern vehicles have light cranks and flywheels and give very little engine braking when u take your foot of accelerator and drop gears

 

[wookie]

Nothing to do with size. Signs on approach & whats in the centre.

Nice to know somethings haven't changed since I last took a test .

They are not taught to dip clutch & rely on brakes.
Lots do it as its an easy way to cope. Sadly it allows you to get caught out in the wrong gear at the wrong time as you ahve no feed back of if the gear you are in is the right one.

They are taught to use engine braking via over run but in addition to using the brakes, not changing down to speed up the rate of decent. Missing gears as needed so they are ready to go. Minimising changes to just what is needed rather than routinely going through the numbers. Its more about thinking about how, why & when than just doing it.

Well it's good to hear that they are teaching engine braking, posts earlier in this thread implied otherwise, anyone caught just dipping the clutch should be instantly failed.

I still think far to many drivers today rely on the safety features of their car though rather than driving with a bit more forethought.

I've had hydraulic brake pipes fail on me, drum brakes fade on long descents and other such problems but it never has resulted in me loosing control of the vehicle and having a collision but I know several people who solely rely on the technology in their cars to keep them safe and they have all had an accident when the technology has failed or the conditions have been too much for the tech to cope with.

 

[GW8IZR]

I went on a drivers awareness course and they weren't amused at me using the gears to slow down . the thing I will say is though older vehicles had larger heavier cranks and flywheels and u could use the engine for braking. modern vehicles have light cranks and flywheels and give very little engine braking when u take your foot of accelerator and drop gears

I think the modern DMF may not be ideal in this situation either but thats just speculation on my part.

 

[Farside]

Slowing down by going thro the gears when approaching lights and applying the hand brake isn't taught these days.

It's not been taught for a while now, and I've had numerous arguments over the last decade or so about it. Those who have been taught the newer way defend their sloppy habits, of course
The most ludicrous example postulated was that brakes are cheap to replace, gearboxes aren't.
As far as I'm concerned, if a gearbox can't take deceleration, the car is a piece of junk.

 

[normspanners]

As far as I'm concerned, if a gearbox can't take deceleration, the car is a piece of junk.

problem is most are... but thats another argument. Facts are gearboxes are half the size for cars twice the weight all this tosh that they are making cars lighter is crap the mad thing is the designers reduce the metal in say a subframe then the engineers bolt on a massif lump of steel they loosely call harmonic balancers, to stop drumming etc.
I allways have and allways will use engine braking and miss my manual disco because of the extra braking my auto disco that I hate with a vengeance and having to put extra vented brakes on it for towing etc etc basically redesigning the thing to safely do what I want.

 

[Tiggy_dorset]

Funny thing is, three of my automatic transmissions have changed down themselves when descending hills. (Nissan, Toyota and Saab) so 'they' must think its ok.

I drive a 2005 Astra automatic, that too will drop down a gear going down hills. It must have a tilt sensor or other methods to detect hills.
Auto's have very little engine braking which took some getting used too after driving a manual for so long. I find myself driving it very similarly to a manual wheras I make use of the 1, 2, 3rd gears rather than leaving it in Drive for the whole journey. Perhaps it might be frowned upon driving this way on an auto, but it makes my driving experience far safer and comfortable.

It amazes the behaviour of drivers in front of me going downhill...flash, flash, flash constantly, or even braking the whole distance. I am sat behind in the correct gear (in an auto) same speed having not touched the brake once during the decent.

 

[MCKDAVID]

My first car had 4 as well....3 forward + reverse.

Mine had 3 as well, OK it officially had 4 but it permanently jumped out of second, so bypassed it, Scream it on first, thén Third, thén fourth.... Worked fine ish...