Adam M

Robertio, thanks for giving me a get out clause, but actually, I was convinced that the back of the car had not cleared the lamp post that I was using as a marker.

To be fair, it is possible that I was so busy concentrating on braking at the irght point, that I may have lost speed before I applied the brakes, btu I did repeat this, in surprise at how much quicker it was than I expected.

I didn't expect people to start attacking me for stupidity on this, but just because I have a somewhat flawed perception of how long it takes my car to stop does not mean I am about to rear end someone.

I am the type of driver who gets sick to death of leaving the correct braking distance on a motorway (at least two seconds)only to find someone taking advantage of the extraordinary gap that has been created.

I nose out of junctions at a pathetic speed in the fear that i may have to make a claim on my insurance.

Until recently I have been referred to as a woos because of the way i drive on the roads, and I m actually quite proud of that. It is better to save it for the track (wich I am not too hot on either).

I would rather be slow and safe, than fast and dead. That is not to say that speed kills, but excess speed, when there isn't sufficient room to make a mistake makes me angry.

Puff The Magic Wagon!

iTrader: (2)

My little phrase is

"Only a fool breaks the two second rule" (thanks Grimesy )

Said between the back of the car in front passing a fixed point & the front of your car coming upon it. It works for differing speeds too.

What then happens is that you drop back & some wuzzock sees a gap & sticks his car in

Also, saying it quickly doesn't make the gap bigger

Adam M

That one belonged to my driving instructor back in southend.

Mr. peter randall.

Perhaps he taught mr. grimes?

Another one was wiggle your toes and off she goes.

Either way, the two second rule may well be outdated by now due to stopping distances, but I still think it is a good indicator.

SDB

Am I the only one who remembers the TV advert "only a fool breaks the two second rule"?

I think it belongs to the Ministry of Transport or something!

nevr

the braking depends on the efficiency of the road surface, some surfaces have better grip i,e shell grip 30% better grip. simon if you increase bias to the rear it will have the same effect of doing a hand brake turn , same result with fitting new tyres to the front older tyres to the rear. In most cases ABS is better because you still have the ability to steer.. Try this one with ABS get up to 40 emergency brake with you hands off the wheel , the car will stop in a straight line

SDB

nevr

Adding a bit more rear bias will not be the same as doing a handbrake turn.

On all (or just about all) non-abs road cars, there is DRAMATIC bias to the front like 70% or more braking at the front.

The reason for this is that the more grip you have, the more braking you need at the front of the car to stop the rears from locking.

The problem with this is that they have to allow for delu-grip (shell grip) tyre surfaces when setting up this brake bias so when you then find yourself on a wet road (which you might only need 60% of the brakes at the front (a HUGE difference in brake bias)) the rears are not providing anywhere near the amount of braking they could, so you don't stop as quick.

The problem is.. if you set the brakes up for wet conditions, you would lock the rears easily in high grip heavy braking situations.

Also..

PLEASE don't try the hands off the wheel thing unless you are on a VERY flat and wide area with nobody else around. Depending on your ABS system, a slight change in surface / bumps, etc could stick you in the hedge quicker that you would believe. And it would do it with the efficiency of a set of tyres being balanced at their optimum by the ABS system!! not good!

All the best

Simon