But its not named that in the manual. Toyota/Subaru does not intend for it to be used in that manner. Would I use it in an emergency if my brakes failed? Probably, but I also take good enough care of my car that I wouldn't let the brakes get to that point in the first place. I wouldn't expect it to perform as a method of stopping my car in an emergency either.





And another side note, fun winter parking brake fact!

So you're saying that the proper use of the handbrake is to NOT use it when parking? That is simply untrue. The Owner's Manual of your car refers to it as a PARKING Brake; not an EMERGENCY Brake. The Owner's Manual also has setting the parking brake as part of the normal process for parking both automatic, and manual transmission vehicles. Because that's what you are supposed to do.

If you want to use the parking prawl in your automatic transmission vehicle to hold the car still, that's your prerogative, but that is IMPROPER OPERATION of the vehicle, regardless of how common it is to do. Using the parking prawl to keep the vehicle from rolling, especially on hills, puts stress on the prawl, and on the shift linkage, both of which can break as a result (think back to those times when you've had to tug really hard at the shift lever to come out of park on a steep hill because the prawl was loaded with the weight of the vehicle.)

Your statement regarding a vehicle bumping you from behind is also false. A firmly set parking brake WILL help prevent damage to your transmission if your vehicle is hit while parked, because it will prevent the wheels from rotating too much. Otherwise, such an impact can potentially snap the parking prawl. Not only that, but IF the parking prawl is snapped by an impact, your vehicle could roll away. With the parking brake engaged, even if the impact is violent enough to snap the parking prawl, the vehicle won't roll afterward, which itself could prevent more damage to your vehicle, or other objects/people.

It is simply wrong to not use it as a parking brake. That's what it is called, and that's what it is there for.

End of rant.

All true and accurate but will not change my use of the term since that is what I have called it for 45 years.


Although I have used them as parking brakes hundreds of thousands of times I have indeed used it as an emergency brake no less than 3. As I said earlier the main use in modern cars is indeed as a parking brake. The use in older vehicles often was due to brake failure no matter how ell maintained your brakes were.


Uses that I recall:
Army Deuce and a Half truck. Plug came out of air brake accumulator. Fully loaded truck. Emergency! Hand brake worked and nobody died.


1964 Impala. Hit dog on highway. Dog rolled under car taking brake lines with him. Emergency! Hand brake worked and nobody except dog died.


58 Chev. Sudden and catastrophic failure of single master cylinder seal. Headed into intersect at high rate of speed. Emergency! Hand brake worked and nobody died.


91 Eagle Talon. Hit piece of tire on highway. Took out both front and back brake lines. Heavy traffic (which is why could not avoid said tire part). Emergency! Hand brake worked and nobody died.


It is indeed intended to be used in that manner and hopefully it never will but if it does it will get the job done. Just don't pull the damn thing up into full lock!

fun reading another over-analyzed ft86 thread

Back in 1990's I almost never saw cars with drl's. They were permitted in 1990 but not required till 1995. Manufacturers like to keep things cheap on the bottom end of the car models, by not including non required features. Just like ABS, In the United States, the NHTSA has mandated ABS in conjunction with Electronic Stability Control under the provisions of FMVSS 126 as of September 1, 2013. That means manufacturers could opt out of including this.

Canada has lower intensity of daylight due to latitude and having the DRL implemented as an mandatory requirement earlier than the U.S. was important. In reality, there has been research done that shows DRL doesn't have a big impact on accident prevention.

LOL There are 27 States that are at least partially north of my part of Canada. There are 13 that are competently north.

How effective they are depends solely upon what study you want to side with.

Happens to me too. Figured it was normal and no concern.

Holy semantics, Batman!

More like generational communication difficulties. (Its still a parking brake, and I use it as such).

You are all wrong!

https://youtu.be/sySx6-lGues

I enjoy a good debate, so I'll keep it going :P

Again, it doesn't matter how YOU use it. You don't get to decide what proper vehicle operation is. Just because you don't use the parking brake, doesn't make it "correct operation" of your vehicle. It means you choose to operate your vehicle incorrectly. It might not have resulted in anything, but it's still wrong. That's like saying, "For me, correct operation of my vehicle is to always leave it running when I fill it with gas." Actually, no. You are using it wrong.

There is not a single vehicle I have ever seen that labels it as an Emergency Brake. Ever. It's always a (P) symbol for "Parking Brake". Even commercial vehicles label it as a "Parking Brake." The only reason people call it an emergency brake, is because it has become common practice to [incorrectly] not use that brake unless you are parked on a 45 degree incline. And so people now associate it with something that should only ever be used in emergencies. In reality, it's laziness that has lead to it being referred to as such. One day turn signals will also be referred to exclusively as "emergency signals" because so few people use them as is that eventually people won't even consider them turn signals.

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qim...d6b24a7f009cfd

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/o62X4miQnk8/maxresdefault.jpg

http://www.ford-taurus.org/taurusinf...es/P-brake.jpg

Except not doing those things would REALLY SUCK, so we accept that we must do them within reason. I'd love for you to explain to me the reason why setting the parking brake would be a HUGE inconvenience to you. Oh... right. It isn't. At all. It has literally NO downsides; only upsides. Not being able to adjust the air conditioning, or not being able to talk to your passengers has quite a few downsides.

Most people I know don't use their turn signals either. Or turn their headlights on at dusk. Or...

Lots of things are over-engineered on a vehicle. They have to be, because people are stupid and will misuse/abuse things. Have you ever seen the testing they put vehicles through during development? None of that is stuff anyone in their right mind would willingly do to a vehicle they cared about. Just because something doesn't break, doesn't mean you are supposed to use it in that manner. It just means the engineers were good at their job.

I'm confused. Are you suggesting that the Parking Brake only applies to a single rear wheel? Because that is incorrect.

As far as your examples, they are very specific, but I can give you plenty of others. What if you're in a parking lot, nose in to a spot, facing another vehicle. The vehicle in front of you pulled in after you, and is only 3 inches from your bumper (this is not an uncommon scenario.) Without the parking brake, it is likely that if someone else bumps your car while reversing out of their spot, it will easily roll at least those 3 inches, as the parking prawl method of parking leaves a LOT of slack in the drivetrain. With the parking brake immobilizing the rear wheels, you'll likely prevent having damage on both ends of your vehicle.

But it doesn't make sense. That's the thing. Setting the parking brake is nothing but added protection. It doesn't inconvenience you. It doesn't lower your fuel economy. It doesn't do anything bad. It literally only does good things. It makes the shifter easier to pull out of park, and reduces stress on the shift linkage. It minimizes vehicle movement. It keeps the car from rolling an inch or two when you're leaning into the engine bay working on it. Etc... Why not set it? What's the argument to not set it other than, "because I don't want to?" That might be a "reason," but it isn't a very good one.

I lol'd. :D

the ones that are on during the day are the day time running lights not the whole headlight. putting your car into park or pulling the e brake will not cut off the headlights off if they are on.

What word is used is one thing and almost irrelevant since anybody should understand what is meant by calling it any of it's several names.
What floors me is the total lack of understanding on how and why it should be used when parking or the simple FACT that it only turns off the DRLs and not all the lights. Even back in the early days when the headlights were the DRLs it would turn them off when parked and the actual headlights were not turned on.

Thanks. You saved me a bunch of writing.