Rev matchers 'probably intend to drive too fast'
Discussion
As a member of RoSPA/RoADAR, I received this month's magazine today. In an opinion column, a barrister - Mr Andrew Prestwich - writes in response to mention of (what he calls) 'toe and heeling' thus:
"My view is quite simply that modern engines, clutches and gearboxes obviate any real need for such a technique. My guess is that if you are using it, you probably intend to drive too fast."
He goes on to say it's 'rarely a good idea' to use the same foot for two pedals, and that he once saw a crash where the at-fault driver was wearing Wellington boots (what they has to do with heel and toe or rev matching, I don't know?). I thought about it for a while, then - unusually for me - decided I had to write to the editor in reply:
"Sir,
In reference to Mr Andrew Prestwich's opinion column (p21, CoR February 2017). Responding to mention of what Mr Prestwich refers as 'toe and heeling' in his column, he states that:
"My view is quite simply that modern engines, clutches and gearboxes obviate any real need for such a technique. My guess is that if you are using it, you probably intend to drive too fast."
He then goes on to draw parallels with an RTA he witnessed in which the at-fault driver was wearing Wellington boots.
Quite what the relevance of wearing Wellington boots has to the matter of heel and toe, I am unsure. Wearing them would, I concede, make it much more difficult though! It drew vivid and emotional imagery to put one off the idea, but for quite what sound reason I don't know. Heel and toeing, or otherwise 'rev matching' is an invaluable technique in a motor car with a manual gearbox, allowing the driver to match the engine speed to the road speed when changing to a lower gear; for example in preparation of accelerating from a 30mph to NSL or in preparation of an overtake.
Of course in following the System one can usually just as readily rev match in this way separately, without employing heel and toe. First by reducing road speed (if necessary) and then by blipping or sustaining revs with the clutch depressed while selecting the new lower gear. Just as with brake-gear overlap, sometimes this isn't possible and heel and toe is helpful (eg on a downhill gradient). Regardless of modern transmissions and drivetrains, are we really to suggest that mechanical sympathy and smoothness is to be a thing of the past? I would suggest the idea of appropriate footwear for driving is valid, but to suggest heel and toe is invalid based on someone in Wellingtons is a logical fallacy at best.
More to the point, heel and toe or otherwise rev matching is usable and practical at even low speeds. I rev match around town sub 30mph where required, does that mean Mr Pretwich would infer I was 'probably driving too fast'? Hand-wringing nonsense, I'm afraid.
I for one would never wish to change from - for example - 4th gear to 2nd gear in preparation of an overtake, without first matching the revs. The sharp jolt of the vehicle, sudden increase in revs and resultant wear on the clutch and shock to the drivetrain wouldn't take long to take its toll on the car, let alone the passengers! Of course some (few) modern cars with manual transmissions do 'rev match' for the driver automatically, but this dumbing-down is a different discussion altogether.
Suffice to say I was quite shocked and moderately concerned to read such pooh-poohing of a valid driving technique in a magazine published by an organisation intended to attract and improve the safety of 'advanced drivers'. Whatever next; manual transmissions keep your brain too busy operating levers and pedals with your hands and feet, when you could easily be in an autonomous EV instead? I paid my subscription to RoSPA, not BRAKE!
Yours faithfully,"
I invite your thoughts and comments, in either direction.
"My view is quite simply that modern engines, clutches and gearboxes obviate any real need for such a technique. My guess is that if you are using it, you probably intend to drive too fast."
He goes on to say it's 'rarely a good idea' to use the same foot for two pedals, and that he once saw a crash where the at-fault driver was wearing Wellington boots (what they has to do with heel and toe or rev matching, I don't know?). I thought about it for a while, then - unusually for me - decided I had to write to the editor in reply:
"Sir,
In reference to Mr Andrew Prestwich's opinion column (p21, CoR February 2017). Responding to mention of what Mr Prestwich refers as 'toe and heeling' in his column, he states that:
"My view is quite simply that modern engines, clutches and gearboxes obviate any real need for such a technique. My guess is that if you are using it, you probably intend to drive too fast."
He then goes on to draw parallels with an RTA he witnessed in which the at-fault driver was wearing Wellington boots.
Quite what the relevance of wearing Wellington boots has to the matter of heel and toe, I am unsure. Wearing them would, I concede, make it much more difficult though! It drew vivid and emotional imagery to put one off the idea, but for quite what sound reason I don't know. Heel and toeing, or otherwise 'rev matching' is an invaluable technique in a motor car with a manual gearbox, allowing the driver to match the engine speed to the road speed when changing to a lower gear; for example in preparation of accelerating from a 30mph to NSL or in preparation of an overtake.
Of course in following the System one can usually just as readily rev match in this way separately, without employing heel and toe. First by reducing road speed (if necessary) and then by blipping or sustaining revs with the clutch depressed while selecting the new lower gear. Just as with brake-gear overlap, sometimes this isn't possible and heel and toe is helpful (eg on a downhill gradient). Regardless of modern transmissions and drivetrains, are we really to suggest that mechanical sympathy and smoothness is to be a thing of the past? I would suggest the idea of appropriate footwear for driving is valid, but to suggest heel and toe is invalid based on someone in Wellingtons is a logical fallacy at best.
More to the point, heel and toe or otherwise rev matching is usable and practical at even low speeds. I rev match around town sub 30mph where required, does that mean Mr Pretwich would infer I was 'probably driving too fast'? Hand-wringing nonsense, I'm afraid.
I for one would never wish to change from - for example - 4th gear to 2nd gear in preparation of an overtake, without first matching the revs. The sharp jolt of the vehicle, sudden increase in revs and resultant wear on the clutch and shock to the drivetrain wouldn't take long to take its toll on the car, let alone the passengers! Of course some (few) modern cars with manual transmissions do 'rev match' for the driver automatically, but this dumbing-down is a different discussion altogether.
Suffice to say I was quite shocked and moderately concerned to read such pooh-poohing of a valid driving technique in a magazine published by an organisation intended to attract and improve the safety of 'advanced drivers'. Whatever next; manual transmissions keep your brain too busy operating levers and pedals with your hands and feet, when you could easily be in an autonomous EV instead? I paid my subscription to RoSPA, not BRAKE!
Yours faithfully,"
I invite your thoughts and comments, in either direction.
My view is prestwich doesn't know his bottom from his elbow and his views on advanced driving are probably not worth listening to. I edit to add - why on earth would a magazine from an advanced driving group publish that? Surely the editor should have scrubbed it and instructed him thus; "ok, do it again, but not rubbish this time".
Edited by Chainsaw Rebuild on Friday 10th February 15:56
k what this chap thinks 
Chainsaw Rebuild said:
My view is prestwich doesn't know his bottom from his elbow and his views on advanced driving are probably not worth listening to
I concur. Except for your use of the word "probably". Mr Prestwich needs to sort out his crooked trade before pontificating on motoring matters, then get clued up on the latter in order to avoid making an idiot of himself.
Dr Jekyll said:
The letter is referring to Heel and Toe, not rev matching. There is perfectly reasonable argument that in most circumstances the time saving from using heel and toe instead of separation isn't relevant in road driving unless you really are in too much of a hurry.
No distinction was drawn, and what is heel and toe used for? As I alluded in my letter I'm perfectly aware it's possible with separation, I made the same argument myself in my letter. That said, neither way should be condemned by an 'advanced driving organisation' in its official magazine, imho. If that's what Mr Prestwich meant then he should have said so instead of using the remaining column inches to wax lyrical about Wellington boots. Tying in the use of heel and toe with cars finding themselves in ditches on their roofs (as per the rest of his paragraph) draws the uninformed reader to a certain conclusion, does it not? Add in the apparent motive of the heel and toe user to 'intend to drive too too fast' (why?), and it's a veritable political statement from the Green Party via BRAKE. Nonsensical in such a publication, if you ask me.
When you say 'unless you are in too much of a hurry', are you talking about compressing System, taking the racing approach of trail braking into corners, or driving quickly? During day to day driving heel and toe can be more convenient than rigidly sticking to separation, especially if you're used to doing it. We had a girl (yes a real one) turn up at our group recently, with a VRS festooned with Ring stickers and EU vignettes. She'd spent years on track days and whatnot, and didn't come back. Most members of the group spent the whole time telling her she was wrong about everything, rather than watching her drive and giving her ideas to improve the performance and safety of her road driving. No wonder what small percentage of the driving public actually cares enough to engage with AD ends up alienated to such a large degree.
Edited by rainmakerraw on Friday 10th February 19:03
rainmakerraw said:
When you say 'unless you are in too much of a hurry', are you talking about compressing System, taking the racing approach of trail braking into corners, or driving quickly? During day to day driving heel and toe can be more convenient than rigidly sticking to separation, especially if you're used to doing it. We had a girl (yes a real one) turn up at our group recently, with a VRS festooned with Ring stickers and EU vignettes. She'd spent years on track days and whatnot, and didn't come back. Most members of the group spent the whole time telling her she was wrong about everything, rather than watching her drive and giving her ideas to improve the performance and safety of her road driving. No wonder what small percentage of the driving public actually cares enough to engage with AD ends up alienated to such a large degree.
I'm talking about compressing the system, saving a few seconds which is relevant in a race but unlikely to matter on the road. I appreciate that if it's something you're used to you might do it because it's become easier than avoiding overlap, but I can see where the letter writer is coming from. How about downhill corners/junctions/restricted views? Can either BGOL, come off brakes rev match but lose ability to control speed, or H&T to rev match and remain on brakes.
Previously I would just overlap, but why wouldn't you just slip in a H&T?
It's about recognising situations where it may be appropriate/beneficial and using it.
Previously I would just overlap, but why wouldn't you just slip in a H&T?
It's about recognising situations where it may be appropriate/beneficial and using it.
rainmakerraw said:
As a member of RoSPA/RoADAR, I received this month's magazine today. In an opinion column, a barrister - Mr Andrew Prestwich - writes in response to mention of (what he calls) 'toe and heeling' thus:
"My view is quite simply that modern engines, clutches and gearboxes obviate any real need for such a technique. My guess is that if you are using it, you probably intend to drive too fast."
I always thought that barristers were trained to think clearly and logically. Obviously this one is incapable of doing so and has consequently ended up as a journalist writing nonsense for an irrelevant publication."My view is quite simply that modern engines, clutches and gearboxes obviate any real need for such a technique. My guess is that if you are using it, you probably intend to drive too fast."
Rick101 said:
Didn't receive that magazine as I didn't bother renewing either Rospa or IAM (national memberships) this year. Total waste of money.
Still confuses me as to why they can't support the clubs that actually do the training and we have to pay them in addition!
Groups do receive a payment (£31?) from the IAM for each associate. The IAM does allow groups to claim for the cost of some equipment and advertising.Still confuses me as to why they can't support the clubs that actually do the training and we have to pay them in addition!
Dr Jekyll said:
The letter is referring to Heel and Toe, not rev matching. There is perfectly reasonable argument that in most circumstances the time saving from using heel and toe instead of separation isn't relevant in road driving unless you really are in too much of a hurry.
What a load of tripe.It's not just about time saving, it's about smooth driving.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff