Another wrist slapping

Alan Braggins wrote on 24/05/2007 09:54 +0100:

Quoted message said:

In article said:

Niall Wallace wrote on 23/05/2007 20:06 +0100:

Quoted message said:

How on earth do you spin a FWD car without using the hand brake or a
scandinavian flick, which she could have inadvertently done.

Easy, just get some oversteer and don't correct it. It is a fallacy
that many 4WD drivers find out to their cost in slippery conditions that
4WD has superior lateral grip to normal cars.

True, but in this context the F of FWD stands for front, not four.

In that case just watch Top Gear's Star in a Reasonably Priced Car to
see a FWD car oversteering and spinning all the time.

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

Chris Eilbeck wrote on 24/05/2007 11:52 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Dave Larrington said:

In news:[email hidden],
Chris Eilbeck <[email hidden]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell
us:

Quoted message said:

I can't understand how people can drive safely in heels or with no
shoes on at all. I've had to move my car on a private road to
allow someone to move another car and didn't have time to put shoes
on, and it didn't feel at all right or safe.

I, OTOH, prefer driving in bare feet...

Don't you worry about hurting your feet, stubbing your toe, getting a
stone stuck on the bottom of your foot when you need to brake etc.,
and losing control? That one experience of moving a car by less than
20ft really put me off no-shoes driving.

Chris

Not at all. Don't you worry about the lack of sensitivity, the
insulation of your foot from the pedals by the shoe sole, the
possibility of pushing the wrong pedal and not realising until you
realise that the car isn't doing what you expected? Like Mr Larrington
I prefer my feet commando when driving.

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

Chris Eilbeck said:

Tony Raven said:

Quoted message said:

and losing control? That one experience of moving a car by less
than 20ft really put me off no-shoes driving.

Not at all. Don't you worry about the lack of sensitivity, the
insulation of your foot from the pedals by the shoe sole, the
possibility of pushing the wrong pedal and not realising until you
realise that the car isn't doing what you expected? Like Mr
Larrington I prefer my feet commando when driving.

It's gotta be the right pair of shoes. Walking boots are a no-no for
me. No shoes doesn't feel right either.

To address someone else's point from earlier, my pedals are different,
I press different parts of the throttle and brake pedal so I could
easily have a piece of detritus from the footwell stuck to my foot and
not know until I have to brake. If I really do *have* to brake, the
last thing I want is to be hesitant because it might hurt.

What? You have to press hard on the brake pedal to brake hard? You might
want to get a car that fixes that problem.
--
A

Tony Raven said:

Quoted message said:

and losing control? That one experience of moving a car by less
than 20ft really put me off no-shoes driving.

Not at all. Don't you worry about the lack of sensitivity, the
insulation of your foot from the pedals by the shoe sole, the
possibility of pushing the wrong pedal and not realising until you
realise that the car isn't doing what you expected? Like Mr
Larrington I prefer my feet commando when driving.

It's gotta be the right pair of shoes. Walking boots are a no-no for
me. No shoes doesn't feel right either.

To address someone else's point from earlier, my pedals are different,
I press different parts of the throttle and brake pedal so I could
easily have a piece of detritus from the footwell stuck to my foot and
not know until I have to brake. If I really do *have* to brake, the
last thing I want is to be hesitant because it might hurt.

Ach well, each to their own. It'd be good to hear opinions from
people who drive in heels.

Chris
--
Chris Eilbeck

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

To address someone else's point from earlier, my pedals are different,
I press different parts of the throttle and brake pedal so I could
easily have a piece of detritus from the footwell stuck to my foot and
not know until I have to brake. If I really do *have* to brake, the
last thing I want is to be hesitant because it might hurt.

If you're in bare feet, you'll know if you've got detritus from the footwell
anyway. And remember your foot hasn't had the opportunity to pick any up
since you set off either. And of course I don't actually keep drawing pins
in my footwell - I'm not at all tidy, and frequently put muddy/mucky feet in
it, but the footwell doesn't suffer from sharp objects littering it.

I accept that you may prefer to drive in shoes, finding it more comfortable,
but I'm afraid the "detritus from footwell" argument is completely bogus.

cheers,
clive

Clive George said:

If you're in bare feet, you'll know if you've got detritus from the
footwell anyway. And remember your foot hasn't had the opportunity
to pick any up since you set off either. And of course I don't
actually keep drawing pins in my footwell - I'm not at all tidy, and
frequently put muddy/mucky feet in it, but the footwell doesn't
suffer from sharp objects littering it.

No? Mine does. Maybe it's because I don't exclusively park on
concreted/tarmacced surfaces but there's lots of little bits of stone
in the footwell of my car.

Quoted message said:

I accept that you may prefer to drive in shoes, finding it more
comfortable, but I'm afraid the "detritus from footwell" argument is
completely bogus.

You seem to want an argument so here goes, you win.

Chris
--
Chris Eilbeck

Ambrose Nankivell said:

Chris Eilbeck said:

To address someone else's point from earlier, my pedals are
different, I press different parts of the throttle and brake pedal
so I could easily have a piece of detritus from the footwell stuck
to my foot and not know until I have to brake. If I really do
*have* to brake, the last thing I want is to be hesitant because it
might hurt.

What? You have to press hard on the brake pedal to brake hard? You
might want to get a car that fixes that problem.

No, I don't. I don't have to press excessively hard but to emergency
stop if I have to is more than just a tickle on the pedal.

Chris
--
Chris Eilbeck

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You seem to want an argument so here goes, you win.

I've got the experience to know that your worries wrt detritus are
completely unfounded. You don't have that experience. Even with a footwell
full of broken glass, it's possible to safely drive in bare feet - the
relevant point is that you don't put the acting bits of the feet in the
glass while driving, so there's nothing to take you by surprise. And trust
me, when it's important, the instinct to hit the brakes hard overrides any
minor pain you may experience from doing so (this observed from different
situations to bare feet).

You could of course accept that you don't have the experience, rather than
giving the ungracious "I don't want to argue" cop-out you appear to be doing
above.

ISTR we've been here before for some other safety-related thing...

cheers,
clive

Clive George said:

You could of course accept that you don't have the experience,
rather than giving the ungracious "I don't want to argue" cop-out
you appear to be doing above.

ISTR we've been here before for some other safety-related thing...

What a surprise. I came to this group today and wanted to discuss
something, to hear other people's views. You wanted to have an
argument. You win. I concede. You know better than me. Happy now?

Chris
--
Chris Eilbeck

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Clive George said:

You could of course accept that you don't have the experience,
rather than giving the ungracious "I don't want to argue" cop-out
you appear to be doing above.

ISTR we've been here before for some other safety-related thing...

What a surprise. I came to this group today and wanted to discuss
something, to hear other people's views.

If so, why don't you actually listen to other people's views? Why don't you
engage in discussion? Why do you imply that anybody who does engage in
discussion is actually more interested in argument?

Quoted message said:

You wanted to have an argument. You win. I concede. You know better
than me. Happy now?

No. Because having an argument isn't my aim at all, and your concession
appears to be merely an ungracious "I don't want to argue" cop-out, avoiding
any discussion at all.

A simple "fair enough, I'm not happy driving in bare feet but I accept my
worry about [censored] on the floor was a bit misplaced and people can do it
safely" would have done - but you avoided your chance, more than once.

(We have been in a similar situation before - can you remember what it was?)

cheers,
clive

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Clive George said:

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Clive George" <[email hidden]> writes:

> You could of course accept that you don't have the experience,
> rather than giving the ungracious "I don't want to argue" cop-out
> you appear to be doing above.
>
> ISTR we've been here before for some other safety-related thing...

What a surprise. I came to this group today and wanted to discuss
something, to hear other people's views.

If so, why don't you actually listen to other people's views? Why
don't you engage in discussion? Why do you imply that anybody who
does engage in discussion is actually more interested in argument?

The difference is that you want me to accept your position *and*
accept mine is wrong. That is an argument, not a discussion.

Well, there is the minor fact that it's impossible to get surprises from
stones on the bits of your feet which hit the pedals. That's not a position,
or opinion, it's a fact. Sorry.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You wanted to have an argument. You win. I concede. You know
better than me. Happy now?

No. Because having an argument isn't my aim at all, and your
concession appears to be merely an ungracious "I don't want to
argue" cop-out, avoiding any discussion at all.

Bollocks!

Quoted message said:

A simple "fair enough, I'm not happy driving in bare feet but I accept
my worry about [censored] on the floor was a bit misplaced and people can do
it safely" would have done - but you avoided your chance, more than
once.

I said, as I have before, this is my position, this is why I think
this. You've said no, it's like this, you must accept my view. I do
not accept your view. I will not stop wearing shoes because you think
it's safe for me to drive that way.

I'm not asking you to do that. I'm asking you to consider the fact that your
proposed mechanism for stones getting in the way can't actually happen.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(We have been in a similar situation before - can you remember what
it was?)

Look, you may want to carry on that disagreement but I don't care what
your opinion is. You may wish to think you know better than me how I
drive, what feels safe in my car etc. Good for you!

It's not about opinion.

cheers,
clive

Clive George said:

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Clive George said:

You could of course accept that you don't have the experience,
rather than giving the ungracious "I don't want to argue" cop-out
you appear to be doing above.

ISTR we've been here before for some other safety-related thing...

What a surprise. I came to this group today and wanted to discuss
something, to hear other people's views.

If so, why don't you actually listen to other people's views? Why
don't you engage in discussion? Why do you imply that anybody who
does engage in discussion is actually more interested in argument?

The difference is that you want me to accept your position *and*
accept mine is wrong. That is an argument, not a discussion.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You wanted to have an argument. You win. I concede. You know
better than me. Happy now?

No. Because having an argument isn't my aim at all, and your
concession appears to be merely an ungracious "I don't want to
argue" cop-out, avoiding any discussion at all.

Bollocks!

Quoted message said:

A simple "fair enough, I'm not happy driving in bare feet but I accept
my worry about [censored] on the floor was a bit misplaced and people can do
it safely" would have done - but you avoided your chance, more than
once.

I said, as I have before, this is my position, this is why I think
this. You've said no, it's like this, you must accept my view. I do
not accept your view. I will not stop wearing shoes because you think
it's safe for me to drive that way.

Quoted message said:

(We have been in a similar situation before - can you remember what
it was?)

Look, you may want to carry on that disagreement but I don't care what
your opinion is. You may wish to think you know better than me how I
drive, what feels safe in my car etc. Good for you!

Chris
--
Chris Eilbeck

killermike said:

How does someone fail in a genuine attempt at suicide 'several times'?

Option 1) By being too [censored] at the time to do a proper job.
Option 2) By using a method which is believed to be more effective than
it really is.

Chris Eilbeck wrote on 24/05/2007 18:27 +0100:

Quoted message said:

The difference is that you want me to accept your position *and*
accept mine is wrong. That is an argument, not a discussion.

Usually practical experience trumps hypothesis. If both sides were
arguing from theory you would have a point but since you have only tried
it once briefly and apparently didn't actually have the problems you
theorise and others of us do it extensively without problems tends to
indicate your theory is wrong and Clive is right BICBW

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

Richard Bates wrote on 24/05/2007 18:51 +0100:

Quoted message said:

killermike said:

How does someone fail in a genuine attempt at suicide 'several times'?

Option 1) By being too [censored] at the time to do a proper job.
Option 2) By using a method which is believed to be more effective than
it really is.

Option 3) Be as incompetent at committing suicide as you are at driving.

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

Tony Raven <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

Chris Eilbeck wrote on 24/05/2007 18:27 +0100:

Quoted message said:

The difference is that you want me to accept your position *and*
accept mine is wrong. That is an argument, not a discussion.

Quoted message said:

Usually practical experience trumps hypothesis. If both sides were
arguing from theory you would have a point but since you have only tried
it once briefly and apparently didn't actually have the problems you
theorise and others of us do it extensively without problems tends to
indicate your theory is wrong and Clive is right BICBW

I think the experience and opinion of those who habitually wear slippers
(partner dons them to visit the carpeted bathroom at night) will differ
from those who pad about barefoot, like me. Driving barefoot seems
reasonable to me but would terrify my partner, not that we drive.

I'm sure I tried barefoot at some stage during my driving lessons,
gently using just my right big toe. I thought it rather good for subtle
car control.

I don't think one of us would be 'right' or 'wrong', just different.

Heels are something I seldom wore. I have little experience of driving,
thou I passed my test in 1985. I don't think they'd make much
difference; the pedals are usually operated by the forefoot, aren't
they?

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

Chris Eilbeck said:

Clive George said:

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I said, as I have before, this is my position, this is why I think
this. You've said no, it's like this, you must accept my view. I
do not accept your view. I will not stop wearing shoes because you
think it's safe for me to drive that way.

I'm not asking you to do that. I'm asking you to consider the fact
that your proposed mechanism for stones getting in the way can't
actually happen.

Well you may only ever put your feet on the pedals and never touch the
floor of your car. I tend to put my feet on the floor when I get into
the car. I also tend to take them from the pedals and stretch from
time to time. I also drive with my heels on the floor virtually all
the time.

I'm intrigued by how you manage to stretch your right foot when driving.
Mine's almost always on the throttle or on the brake, and the one time
I remember taking it away from the throttle to stretch while
decelerating, I found it took a touch to long to find the brake when I
needed it and decided that that was a BAD PLAN.

As such, I just got used to going two hours with my right foot in that
position, then having a break.

A

Clive George said:

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I said, as I have before, this is my position, this is why I think
this. You've said no, it's like this, you must accept my view. I
do not accept your view. I will not stop wearing shoes because you
think it's safe for me to drive that way.

I'm not asking you to do that. I'm asking you to consider the fact
that your proposed mechanism for stones getting in the way can't
actually happen.

Well you may only ever put your feet on the pedals and never touch the
floor of your car. I tend to put my feet on the floor when I get into
the car. I also tend to take them from the pedals and stretch from
time to time. I also drive with my heels on the floor virtually all
the time.

Now tell me, is it still impossible to get a stone on the bottom of my
foot?

Chris
--
Chris Eilbeck

Tony Raven said:

Chris Eilbeck wrote on 24/05/2007 18:27 +0100:

Quoted message said:

The difference is that you want me to accept your position *and*
accept mine is wrong. That is an argument, not a discussion.

Usually practical experience trumps hypothesis. If both sides were
arguing from theory you would have a point but since you have only
tried it once briefly and apparently didn't actually have the
problems you theorise and others of us do it extensively without
problems tends to indicate your theory is wrong and Clive is right
BICBW

I accept that you and Dave Larrington don't find it to be a problem
and that's fine. I don't accept that someone ignorant of my situation
says I'm wrong in doing what I feel is safest for me and others.

Chris
--
Chris Eilbeck

"Chris Eilbeck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I said, as I have before, this is my position, this is why I think
this. You've said no, it's like this, you must accept my view. I
do not accept your view. I will not stop wearing shoes because you
think it's safe for me to drive that way.

I'm not asking you to do that. I'm asking you to consider the fact
that your proposed mechanism for stones getting in the way can't
actually happen.

Well you may only ever put your feet on the pedals and never touch the
floor of your car. I tend to put my feet on the floor when I get into
the car. I also tend to take them from the pedals and stretch from
time to time. I also drive with my heels on the floor virtually all
the time.

Now tell me, is it still impossible to get a stone on the bottom of my
foot?

Thanks for finally offering something to discuss.

Yes, my heels stay on the floor too. But the proposed danger is the stone
sticking to the feet such that it would cause pain when pressing the brakes
in a hurry - in that situation, would you be pressing the brakes with the
front of the foot or the heel? The front of the foot isn't the bit
potentially picking up stones, and it is the bit used for emergency braking.

Thus although there could be potential for a comfort problem, or a minor
irritation, there really isn't scope for this to translate into a safety
problem.

(you may not feel safe driving barefoot - not being used to the feel of the
pedals, or even just a vague "ooh, this feels wrong" would be an entirely
adequate explanation of that.)

cheers,
clive