Big Cat

When I learned to drive, 50 years ago (in 1956, the year of the Suez crisis!) I was taught to use the gearbox to reduce speed rather than rely entirely on the brakes when slowing down or stopping.

A very good friend of mine is a driving instructor (he does AIM tests and is used by the police to give motoring offenders compulsory extra tuition when ordered by the courts) and he is adamant that my method of driving is bad practice. He taught my two boys and they both follow his method of remaining in constant gear when slowing down and only shifting to the 'right' gear when ready to accelerate away.

Bob (my AID mate) says that using the engine as a brake is totally unnecessary in these days of high performance brakes and that the wear and tear on the engine is unwarranted - it being cheaper to replace the brake pads rather than replace the engine.

I can see his point but still believe I am right, particularly with regard to the Stook which is a lightweight car with little gravitational inertia to slow it down when the foot is taken off the accelerator. Indeed, the S2000 Owner's Manual states (on page 165 of my 2001 version) "When slowing down, you can get extra braking from the engine by shifting to a lower gear. This extra braking can help you maintain a safe speed and prevent your brakes from overheating while going down a steep hill." Bob says "yes, but only as a precautionary measure as in the example of a steep hill". I say "rollocks, a lightweight car benefits from using the gears to match engine speed to road speed and the great benefit is always being in the right gear for immediate acceleration".

My two boys are not slouches when it comes to fast safe driving - those of you who attended the Honda Institute meet will know that they drive a Civic Type R and an Integra Type R respectively - but it irritates me to see them remain in a high gear when slowing down and then losing time in changing down at the last moment. That change means going straight from fourth/fifth to second at a time when the engine revs are not in synch with the gear revs which cannot be a good thing.

Now I know that when I learned to drive it was almost essential to match engine and gear revs because synchromesh was only available on first and second gears in 1950s and 1960s cars. Double de-clutching (disengaging clutch, going from gear into neutral, engaging clutch, then giving a quick blip on the accelerator to match up revs, disengaging clutch again, then dropping into the lower gear and engaging clutch again - which is quicker than it sounds) was de rigeur to avoid gear crashing. Indeed, I stripped the synchro off my lower gears in my new 1962 Mark I Mini by assuming that synchromesh worked better than it did. No doubt that was one reason why changing down through the gears whilst slowing down was taught at that time.

But what do you all think? Am I right or wrong in my driving technique?

I know that fellow S2k drivers on meets such as the French Connection meet last year have remarked on how little I use the brakes even when going into a tight bend. That, of course, is because I have matched gear to roadspeed by dropping down through the gears and therefore should not need to brake except in emergency or when coming to a complete stop. I see so many tailgaters braking hard and often because firstly, they are too close, but, secondly, because they are in too high a gear which causes overun when they lift off the accelerator pedal.

My own view is that if I have had to brake I have failed as a driver by not correctly reading the road conditions and by not being in an appropriate gear when slowing down.

Your views would be welcome.

(but they will not change my driving technique!)

CiderBoy

Use both.

Heel and toe rules!

Dembo

Indeed. If you're not using both, you're not getting the maximum deceleration, and engine braking alone isn't nearly enough on a track. On the road you could argue that if you're needing to brake hard before a bend you're probably going too fast. But that isn't always true.

Also engine braking only brakes via the rear wheels, which will mean less rear grip and more tendancy to oversteer. The brakes are always biased to the front, so braking with the brakes will be more stable.

And as for staying in a high gear until you've slowed down, I'd agree that you're then not in the correct gear for the speed you're going, so you're not fully in control. I suspect part of the reason is to keep the car stable, which is not an issue if you heel and toe.

How many people double declutch whilst doing heel and toe? It should only be necessary if you don't have a synchromesh, yet some people will tell you that's the "correct" way of doing it, whereas it seems to me it can only serve to slow down your gear changes.

CiderBoy

Never!

mikey k

I have to say I like being in the right gear at the right time

Just using the brakes could put you in a postion were you need to move off quickly and find yourself in too high a gear. Plus just because you change down through the gears as you slow doesn't mean you have to use the egine for braking. I rev match in all my cars (no heel and toe on public roads ) so the engine is not being forced up to higher revs as you change gear, I also find people saying I don't use the brakes a lot

Nick Graves

I double-declutch when H&T.

Probably why engine oil in the cog box bothers me not.

The lever effort is so light that way, I doubt it's any slower than not, & anyway, SFW? Changing gear quicker will not permit later braking.

I've always thought that the AIM are FOS anyway.

The plod driving standards has to allow for people who may be adrenalined up/not natural race drivers/not very bright/etc, so a 'safer' style may well be the reason its employed.

Dembo

Just twice as much work for your left leg. And like being in the wrong gear is bad, being in neutral is also bad so I think the faster change the better. But yes probably doesn't make any difference.

Nick Graves

...and yer right one, but I need the exercise.

BTW, there is nothing particularly wrong with being in neutral, since the car is being stabilised by the brakes.

Far worserer to do a jerky downchange, as non-H&T-ers would, causing rear-end lock-up.

This is why the flopped-over one-hand-on-wrong-side-of-wheel nova-wankers crash so spectacularly.

dreamer

I think the problem with downchanging and using engine speed to slow down, is a potential lack of stability; some people do jerky downchanges which can upset the balance of the car, and if you are braking hard at the same time as downchanging then sometimes I like to have both hands on the wheel if the road surface is uneven, hence not downchanging at the same time. (However I do love listening to someone braking and downchanging with H&T!)

I like to DDC if I'm taking it easy, cruising, on the motorway etc., but (probably due to my slowness of doing it) I find it too slow to do at roundabouts etc.

H&T I can see the use for, I just need to perfect my technique - was just getting it togehter when the last car go twritten off !

I was taught when I first learnt to drive to use the correct gear for your speed, but after doing an advanced driving course I was taught to leave the car in the high gear, and always match your gear to your speed, as opposed to the other way around (i.e. always choose your gear to match the speed you are doing, rather than choosing a gear to help you slow down to the correct speed)

Nick Graves

That's a good point - you may find a sudden need to accelerate, so one should be in the correct rev range.

I admit that I do sometimes H&T direct to third, partly out of laziness, partly because I like the noise!