Clutch Foot Positioning for MT

[paulca]

Originally Posted by Frishkorn

If everyone followed your example of being stopped without depressing the foot brake, that's the cause of the pileup. How on earth do I know you're stopped if your brake lights (which aren't activated by the EMERGENCY / PARKING brake) aren't activated. The EMERGENCY / PARKING brake should only be used in those two scenarios.

If you can't tell someone is stopped, you shouldn't really be on the road to be honest. They may not be stopped but they could be going slowly. It is always the driver behinds fault in a rear ending incident, unless the driver in front entered your braking distance, ie. pulled out in front of you. You should ALWAYS be able to stop in the distance you can see is clear. Pedestrians, cyclists, horses etc don't have brake lights, nor do broken down or parked cars.

The highway code referenced also says you should wait for the traffic behind to stop before releasing the brake pedal, probably for this reason.

The pile up in question was caused by heavy fog on a bridge with people not reducing speed or using their lights. There was a stoppage further along the bridge and too many people hammering down through the fog at 70mph+ Not enough time to stop in the distance they could see due to the fog.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-23970047

[extrashaky]

Christ Almighty, the hits keep coming.

Originally Posted by paulca

Sitting with your foot on the foot brake with the brake lights on is distracting and spoils the night vision of those behind you.

No it doesn't. Red lights do not affect night vision. That's why tail lights are red and why pilots use red lights in cockpits.

You just keep piling up more nonsense upon nonsense. Here's a hint: More words do not make you any less ridiculous.

[Ubersuber]

See, I warned you, it's a British thing. There's no reasoning with them about this (and other driving topics).

For example, the described practice suggests a pile up in fog was caused by not having the "hand brake" on (British drivers are unfamiliar with American style pedal operated emergency brakes, as well as the idea of trying to emergency brake a 5,000 lb car equipped with drum brakes using just your arm!) when obviously if everyone had kept their foot on the brake the brake lights would IMPROVE visibility of the line of cars. Nothing like running into an unlighted car stopped in front of you. Maybe they "should" also put their park lights on (sorry "side lights") when stopped on the freeway in neutral because they are then actually parked. Parking on the freeway is illegal here. We think that's safer.

Another illogical point: it's OK to dazzle people behind you with your bright brake lights (I think they're bright for a reason) as long as you are still moving, once you stop you must switch off those warning lights immediately or approaching drivers will be dazzled. Heck, I WANT bozo the clown following me to be dazzled, so he sees me in time to stop.

Then of course, as your tired old eyes have just readjusted to the dark again while everyone was stopped they have to adjust again as all those people restart their cars. Putting an automatic into gear from neutral after being stopped for more than a second or two requires that you put your foot on the brake again just before you start up, flash flash, oh and just by the way you cannot use your full night vision capability when driving at night because to do so you must drive with NO lights on which is illegal for pretty good reasons. Remember the British still don't buy automatic transmission cars much so don't sit stopped while in D very much. Popping an automatic from D to N and back again just because traffic is heavy is pretty dumb.

Although another poster quite correctly pointed out that red light doesn't affect your night vision (much anyway) you aren't actually using your full night vision when driving at night because of the headlights you must use. If you doubt that, try driving up your unlit private driveway at your stately country home (all Brits have stately country homes) with no lights on at all, including no dash lights, and check out the difference when you are truly relying on night vision...scary stuff .

There are other driving things the British are passionate about like "underpassing" and lane discipline which drive some of us crazy if we are used to the opposite. In my jurisdiction it is legal to pass on either side and illegal to hog the passing lane. In the UK they still hog the passing lane but woe betide anyone who passes such an idiot on the "wrong" side. UK drivers also change lanes alot on multi lane freeways whether they need to or not, very dangerous. They think they have to. Me? I tend to reverse cut-off the dufous hogging the passing lane which almost always prompts them to immediately move back over into the nice safe trucking lane where they should've been in the first place and unless someone wants to pass me I continue to drive in whichever lane I happen to be in, that's what rear view mirrors are for. Move over when you need to, otherwise why bother? Remember that a 10 hour drive from anywhere to anywhere else in the UK puts you in the ocean so they have no concept of just steadily driving for hours and only stopping for gas and a pee, it is just not done over there.

[paulca]

Just some clarifications... It does say to wait until following traffic has stopped before putting your brakes lights out. From personal experience, driving a motorbike, at night, in the rain, when I come off a section of unlit country road down to a dual carriageway junction, there might be 20 cars queuing at the red light, most of them WILL have their brake lights on still, sitting, no doubt in 1st with the clutch and pedal brake floored. What it does is light up all the rain on my visor in red streaks and water "flowers". It's not "that" bad, certainly not compared to be in the 5 miles of dark country road being faced with people with badly aligned xenon HID lights which are completely blinding in the rain for a biker.

We still have tail lights of course when the brake lights are out. They are plenty bright to see, brake lights are a lot brighter and there are three of them. And our indicators (turn signals) are amber. If you drove an american car here people would think that only one brake light was working and wondered why you were flashing it.

If you are parking on an unlit road it is a legal requirement to have parking lights on, which must at least be the off-side tail and side lights. However, few cars have these parking lights fitted, so you would have to leave your whole side lights on all night! Battery trouble anyone? Side lights are tail lights + small "position" lights on the front, about as powerful as an old bicycle light.

We have yellow (and red) lines to signify if you are allowed to stop/park or wait at the road side. Single means "At times shown" on a sign, double means "Never". We have "Urban clearways" (round blue sign with a red diagonal X) meaning no stopping or waiting at any time. Then of course we have motorways were there is a "hard shoulder" which should only be used in an emergency or break down, even then you are recommended to get out of the car and cross the safety fence in case an accident causes someone to hit your parked car at speed.

As to the handbrake when stationary. It's basically put like this. If you are stationary for a period, you should "secure the car", ie. handbrake and neutral. This means you can relax, take your feet off the controls if you want and no silly little misshaps will result in the car bolting forward. As it is mentioned in the highway code and is considered safe driving practice here, and that insurance companies are wankers, they will try and argue part fault if you are shunted while not sitting with the handbrake on in a line of traffic. They try and agrue that in the shunt your foot might come off the foot brake and this might aid you making it to hit the car in front. Whether there is any sense in this or not, talk to the insurance companies.

As there was a lot of discussion about clutch wear in this thread, consider that sitting in 1st with the clutch floored and the foot brake on is potentially "high wear" for the clutch. Over here if you are not in gear you should have the handbrake on.

Some Mercedes have pedal "parking brakes", others like new VW Golf's have an electronic push button handbrake.

Yes, lane discipline here would work great if more people paid attention to it. People do tend to pay attention on motorways, but not so much on multi-lane carriageways where they will hog the right hand lane because they are taking a right hand junction 10 miles down the road. Your choice comes down to illegally "under take" them, or patiently wait behind them while everyone else undertakes both of you. Annoying. Flashing the lights, beeping the horn at them could be construed to be "Aggressive driving"

[paulca]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

No it doesn't. Red lights do not affect night vision. That's why tail lights are red and why pilots use red lights in cockpits.

Actually they are red because they signify danger or STOP.

[Ubersuber]

Originally Posted by paulca

Actually they are red because they signify danger or STOP.

Geez, and I've been looking for the green lights showing me the starboard side.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by paulca

Actually they are red because they signify danger or STOP.

Coincidence. They are red because red light does not spoil night vision. Look up the effects of red and white light on night vision and write another book about it.

The rear parking/running lights are also red. If red lights meant "stop," nobody would be able to go anywhere at night. Every driver would see the lights of the car in front of him and say, "Oh! Danger!" and pull the hand brake.

[Frishkorn]

Originally Posted by paulca

If you can't tell someone is stopped, you shouldn't really be on the road to be honest. They may not be stopped but they could be going slowly. It is always the driver behinds fault in a rear ending incident, unless the driver in front entered your braking distance, ie. pulled out in front of you. You should ALWAYS be able to stop in the distance you can see is clear. Pedestrians, cyclists, horses etc don't have brake lights, nor do broken down or parked cars.

The highway code referenced also says you should wait for the traffic behind to stop before releasing the brake pedal, probably for this reason.

The pile up in question was caused by heavy fog on a bridge with people not reducing speed or using their lights. There was a stoppage further along the bridge and too many people hammering down through the fog at 70mph+ Not enough time to stop in the distance they could see due to the fog.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-23970047

I've never once been stopped in traffic and said to myself, "Gee those tail lights are just too bright to deal with". I think it's funny that you say people weren't using their lights, well no shit, the rear tail lights aren't going to be lit if you don't hold down the pedal. If I'm a quarter mile away from someone and their tail lights aren't lit, I'm going to have a hard time judging distance in the fog or at night on a motorway. My issue here isn't that you're taking the extra step to apply the handbrake. It's the fact that you're relying on a cable rather then a hydraulic brake with no indication that you're handbrake has been applied to other drivers.

Having lived in the UK for several years, it's always pissed me off with your brain-dead actions that you justify, because well Americans are just our children.

When you folks start driving on the correct side of the road like the rest of the world, I'll start taking your driving advice.

[paulca]

Originally Posted by Frishkorn

Having lived in the UK for several years, it's always pissed me off with your brain-dead actions that you justify, because well Americans are just our children.

When you folks start driving on the correct side of the road like the rest of the world, I'll start taking your driving advice.

A lot of you are the ones we got rid of oh... no wait, that's Australia, you guys are the ones that left cause they hated the English assholes I can sympathize, I'm not English.

Just because all the sheep are standing in one corner of the field does not make it the best corner. There is actually a list of places that drive on the left, like Japan who make our car. It was born RHD I guarantee.

I question a lot of these practices myself, I certainly don't religously put my handbrake on, everytime at the lights, but I can see logic in their arguments. I do on hills or if I know I'll be there a while maybe.

If you do get hit from behind in a motorway shunt, what are the chances of your foot remaining on the foot brake as you get hit? Then again what are the chances of the handbrake holding you? I'd actually side with having both on just in case if I seen someone coming into the back of me.

Tail lights are dim, just enough to see the car in front is there and easily enough "where" based on their size and how far apart them are. For when it get's foggy we have rear fog lights (if you can't see a car behind) They are really bright. (The US do have fog lights don't they?).

Brake lights over here are several times brighter. They light up the whole wall in my car park, but the tail lights don't. Granted they are being a bit pedantic about the dazzle, but don't just think of yourself... I shot this video five years ago. If you don't watch it all skip to at least 1:00 for dazzle when you don't have a wiper! (Yes it's sped up!)

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3m-t__TTXI"]Riding a motorcycle at night in the rain EDIT - YouTube[/ame]

[Frishkorn]

Originally Posted by paulca

A lot of you are the ones we got rid of oh... no wait, that's Australia, you guys are the ones that left cause they hated the English assholes I can sympathize, I'm not English.

Just because all the sheep are standing in one corner of the field does not make it the best corner. There is actually a list of places that drive on the left, like Japan who make our car. It was born RHD I guarantee.

I question a lot of these practices myself, I certainly don't religously put my handbrake on, everytime at the lights, but I can see logic in their arguments. I do on hills or if I know I'll be there a while maybe.

If you do get hit from behind in a motorway shunt, what are the chances of your foot remaining on the foot brake as you get hit? Then again what are the chances of the handbrake holding you? I'd actually side with having both on just in case if I seen someone coming into the back of me.

Tail lights are dim, just enough to see the car in front is there and easily enough "where" based on their size and how far apart them are. For when it get's foggy we have rear fog lights (if you can't see a car behind) They are really bright. (The US do have fog lights don't they?).

Brake lights over here are several times brighter. They light up the whole wall in my car park, but the tail lights don't. Granted they are being a bit pedantic about the dazzle, but don't just think of yourself... I shot this video five years ago. If you don't watch it all skip to at least 1:00 for dazzle when you don't have a wiper! (Yes it's sped up!)

I was just being a typical American ass about RHD . I will say if I get rear-ended from a complete stop by another vehicle traveling 60+ MPH, staying in one spot is the least of my worries. And I'm not scientist, but I think moving WITH the force of the impact has to be better then trying to take the whole brunt of the force.