A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Incredibly Stupid & Criminal Pedestrian (Long)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 5th 05, 05:59 PM
Ted B.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Arif Khokar" > wrote in message
...
> Ted B. wrote:
>> Only reason he would do that is if he had planned to do so long before he
>> was hit.

>
> Still, to risk getting hit by a car going 30 mph or so...


Initiation of some kind? -Dave


Ads
  #22  
Old July 5th 05, 06:34 PM
Daniel W. Rouse Jr.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Arif Khokar" > wrote in message
...
> bosk wrote:
>
> > Looking back on this, I'm so glad I was driving the older Toyota stick
> > shift, not because of the manual trans. but because the other car I
> > sometimes drive (a relative's) is a similar looking wagon, newer
> > Subaru, but it is automatic and has ABS brakes which I still cannot get
> > used to, particularly the loss of steering and control I've experienced
> > in it.

>
> With ABS, you're better able to maintain steering control as opposed to
> skidding in a stright line like you did in the Toyota.


Except that overcorrecting while steering during ABS braking can lead to a
spinout (car) or rollover (minivan, SUV), if the vehicle doesn't have some
sort of intelligent traction control system.

I'm almost convinced it's better to NOT have ABS and properly learn
threshold braking (releasing the brakes when the wheels first lock up and
reapplying them again when the wheels aren't locked up anymore, then repeat
as the emergency situation requires).

And of course, ABS or no ABS, the inevitable tailgater following too close
behind is always a hazard whenever any sort of emergency braking situation
has to occur. They'll never stop in time, following that close.



  #23  
Old July 5th 05, 06:41 PM
David W. Poole, Jr.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 12:59:31 -0400, "Ted B." > was
understood to have stated the following:

>
>Initiation of some kind? -Dave


Initiation into the ranks of the stupid. I believe aunt Judy went
through this procedure some time back, without as happy of an ending.


--

The last song I started on my PC was: Matchbox Twenty - Angry - Mad Season
K:\Audio\Matchbox 20\Mad Season\01 - Angry.mp3
This is track 29 of 457 in the current playlist.
  #24  
Old July 5th 05, 06:44 PM
David W. Poole, Jr.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 08:39:12 GMT, Alan Baker >
was understood to have stated the following:

>In article >,
> "David W. Poole, Jr." > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 07:10:48 GMT, Alan Baker >
>> was understood to have stated the following:
>>
>> >> >Gearing down would *not* have helped. Think about it: your brakes have
>> >> >the ability to completely lock the wheels, so how would shifting into a
>> >> >lower gear have done anything except distract you from the business of
>> >> >getting stopped as quickly as possible with the system in your car
>> >> >specifically designed for that purpose (the brakes)?
>> >>
>> >> Surely you're not serious? Locking the wheels will provide for better
>> >> control of the vehicle than free-wheeling wheels? Uh, why do they put
>> >> ABS on cars now?
>> >
>> >Read what I said and not what you think I said.

>>
>> Clarification noted.
>>
>> >The brakes are *capable* of locking the wheels, ergo they can provide
>> >all the necessary stopping force and engine braking isn't necessary.

>>
>> In the case of the OP, his wheels locked for 100 feet. That was 100
>> feet he wasn't doing the job of stopping his vehicle as fast as
>> possible. It's also 100 feet that, if he would have had to turn his
>> steering wheel, he may have lost even more control.

>
>People overestimate the difference between optimal braking and locked
>tires. Chances are very good that if he'd been trying to modulate
>braking force to keep the wheels at the threshold of adhesion he'd have
>been less effective at it than is necessary to exceed the deceleration
>of fully locked braking.
>
>Although if he really did lock the brakes, it explains why he kept going
>straight ahead.


Which may have been a bad thing, had he needed to turn.

>> >None of that means that I think locking the wheels is a good idea. It
>> >can be in certain circumstances, but that's another discussion. <g>

>>
>> I understand now.
>>
>> I'm just thankful that I've had the opportunity to drive a manual
>> transmission and learn how to use the engine for deacceleration; there
>> have been times such engine braking has gotten me through situations
>> where foot brakes probably would have cost me, particularly when water
>> or other substances contribute to the asphalt's coefficient of
>> friction.

>
>There's no magic to engine braking and if you have a typical two-wheel
>drive vehicle, it's only operating on half the available contact patches.


If it's a rear wheel drive, at least the front wheels are left to
their main purpose of steering.

>Use engine braking for speed control on long hills? sure. It keeps the
>brakes from overheating.
>
>But use engine braking for panic situations? No. No way.


Perhaps not, at least under dry circumstances. But if the roads get
slick, I would rather not hit the brakes any more than necessary.

As always, YMMV. :-D


--

The last song I started on my PC was: Linkin Park - Opening - Reanimation
K:\Audio\Linkin Park\Reanimation\01 - Opening.mp3
This is track 30 of 457 in the current playlist.
  #25  
Old July 5th 05, 06:46 PM
David W. Poole, Jr.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 5 Jul 2005 06:18:25 -0700, "Harry K" > was
understood to have stated the following:

>
>Agree: It will contribute nothing to braking efficiency. Shifting to
>a lower gear in emergency (as in the scenario) takes time away from
>controlling the car.


100 foot skid marks are not the mark of a car under control.

--

The last song I started on my PC was: 3 Doors Down - Ticket to Heaven - Away From The Sun
K:\Audio\3 Doors Down\Away From The Sun\04 - Ticket to Heaven.mp3
This is track 31 of 457 in the current playlist.
  #26  
Old July 5th 05, 08:19 PM
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Alan Baker wrote:
>
> Use engine braking for speed control on long hills? sure. It keeps the
> brakes from overheating.
>
> But use engine braking for panic situations? No. No way.


BS - it's not one or the other. You can use both and a quick thinking
person will hit the brakes in an emergency and downshift at the same
time. I've never had to do it cause i drive so slowly but some nut
doing 90 mph when he sees a road blockage 50 yards ahead should do both.

  #27  
Old July 5th 05, 08:58 PM
Skip Elliott Bowman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>
> Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>> Use engine braking for speed control on long hills? sure. It keeps the
>> brakes from overheating.
>>
>> But use engine braking for panic situations? No. No way.

>
> BS - it's not one or the other. You can use both and a quick thinking
> person will hit the brakes in an emergency and downshift at the same
> time. I've never had to do it cause i drive so slowly but some nut
> doing 90 mph when he sees a road blockage 50 yards ahead should do both.


Suppose he's doing half that speed, which was the posted speed limit noted
by the OP?


  #28  
Old July 5th 05, 11:18 PM
Dave
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"David W. Poole, Jr." > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 12:59:31 -0400, "Ted B." > was
> understood to have stated the following:
>
>>
>>Initiation of some kind? -Dave

>
> Initiation into the ranks of the stupid. I believe aunt Judy went
> through this procedure some time back, without as happy of an ending.
>
>


Hey, I just remembered later, the pedestrian was wearing a helmet. Yet one
more reason to think that it might have been intentional. Why wear a helmet
to cross the street and then go running? -Dave


  #29  
Old July 5th 05, 11:48 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
> "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> >
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> >>
> >> Use engine braking for speed control on long hills? sure. It keeps the
> >> brakes from overheating.
> >>
> >> But use engine braking for panic situations? No. No way.

> >
> > BS - it's not one or the other. You can use both and a quick thinking
> > person will hit the brakes in an emergency and downshift at the same
> > time. I've never had to do it cause i drive so slowly but some nut
> > doing 90 mph when he sees a road blockage 50 yards ahead should do both.

>
> Suppose he's doing half that speed, which was the posted speed limit noted
> by the OP?


But this may have been in a school zone....

  #30  
Old July 6th 05, 12:38 AM
Alan Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article >,
"David W. Poole, Jr." > wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 08:39:12 GMT, Alan Baker >
> was understood to have stated the following:
>
> >In article >,
> > "David W. Poole, Jr." > wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 07:10:48 GMT, Alan Baker >
> >> was understood to have stated the following:
> >>
> >> >> >Gearing down would *not* have helped. Think about it: your brakes have
> >> >> >the ability to completely lock the wheels, so how would shifting into
> >> >> >a
> >> >> >lower gear have done anything except distract you from the business of
> >> >> >getting stopped as quickly as possible with the system in your car
> >> >> >specifically designed for that purpose (the brakes)?
> >> >>
> >> >> Surely you're not serious? Locking the wheels will provide for better
> >> >> control of the vehicle than free-wheeling wheels? Uh, why do they put
> >> >> ABS on cars now?
> >> >
> >> >Read what I said and not what you think I said.
> >>
> >> Clarification noted.
> >>
> >> >The brakes are *capable* of locking the wheels, ergo they can provide
> >> >all the necessary stopping force and engine braking isn't necessary.
> >>
> >> In the case of the OP, his wheels locked for 100 feet. That was 100
> >> feet he wasn't doing the job of stopping his vehicle as fast as
> >> possible. It's also 100 feet that, if he would have had to turn his
> >> steering wheel, he may have lost even more control.

> >
> >People overestimate the difference between optimal braking and locked
> >tires. Chances are very good that if he'd been trying to modulate
> >braking force to keep the wheels at the threshold of adhesion he'd have
> >been less effective at it than is necessary to exceed the deceleration
> >of fully locked braking.
> >
> >Although if he really did lock the brakes, it explains why he kept going
> >straight ahead.

>
> Which may have been a bad thing, had he needed to turn.


Learn the Powell Motorsports method:

Lock (literally kick the brake pedal to lock all four wheels at once;
avoiding yaw caused by locking at slightly different times) and achieve
a rate of deceleration almost as good as true threshold braking (but
achieve it immediately rather than waste valuable space trying to
achieve threshold while the vehicle is moving its fastest).

Look for clear space and turn the wheel (a quarter turn or so).

Release.

The car will seem to leap sideways.

Very effective.

>
> >> >None of that means that I think locking the wheels is a good idea. It
> >> >can be in certain circumstances, but that's another discussion. <g>
> >>
> >> I understand now.
> >>
> >> I'm just thankful that I've had the opportunity to drive a manual
> >> transmission and learn how to use the engine for deacceleration; there
> >> have been times such engine braking has gotten me through situations
> >> where foot brakes probably would have cost me, particularly when water
> >> or other substances contribute to the asphalt's coefficient of
> >> friction.

> >
> >There's no magic to engine braking and if you have a typical two-wheel
> >drive vehicle, it's only operating on half the available contact patches.

>
> If it's a rear wheel drive, at least the front wheels are left to
> their main purpose of steering.


And with the rear wheels braking and the fronts wheels not, you've
created an almost surefire spin due to weight transfer and available
adhesion. If you're braking is anywhere near the maximum for the rear
wheels (and you'd better hope it is if you want this plan to be better
than braking with all four wheels), then any side force required from
the rear tires is likely to put them over the limit of adhesion (google
"friction circle"). This will cause and imbalance of lateral adhesion
that is already made worse by weight transfer from rear to front that is
caused whenever you brake a car (see "drop throttle oversteer").

In short, you've just given your car the handling characteristics of a
Porsche 911; a car famous for spinning in the hands of the unwary who
would back out of the throttle when it seemed they were entering a turn
too fast.

>
> >Use engine braking for speed control on long hills? sure. It keeps the
> >brakes from overheating.
> >
> >But use engine braking for panic situations? No. No way.

>
> Perhaps not, at least under dry circumstances. But if the roads get
> slick, I would rather not hit the brakes any more than necessary.
>
> As always, YMMV. :-D


Learn to use the brakes properly. It's always a better option than
engine braking for stopping as quickly as possible and in a controlled
manner.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
her tape was stupid, long, and combs over the station Captain Z. O. Walinsky General 0 January 17th 05 12:13 PM
to be stupid or long will seek difficult tailors to familiarly reject Robette General 0 January 11th 05 12:52 AM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! _____________---_ gadkypy David W. Poole, Jr. Antique cars 3 January 4th 05 07:47 PM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!!_________... Gerard Menard Ford Mustang 1 November 17th 04 01:51 AM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!!_________... James Goforth 4x4 0 November 8th 04 02:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.