Sudden brake failure in mk3 VW Golf

shazzbat ( snipped-for-privacy@spamlessness.fsnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

There certainly was... The original assertion was here :- Message-ID:

The highpoint was a couple of posts later, though :- Message-ID:

How many times? I agree...

No, you didn't use an analogy. You made a statement which was completely, utterly wrong. You were picked up on it, defended it, then realised how wrong you were and tried repeatedly to change the subject.

. You made a statement which was

I made this statement- You did the right thing in attempting to stop by using the handbrake: this will not cause a spin unless you were doing something stupid like still driving the front wheels or trying to do a boy racer handbrake turn; or as in the case of some Citroens, the handbrake operates the front wheels rather than the rear.

This statement is correct.

I was explaining to the OP how things were in OP world as opposed to what one might call TNB[1] world. She, as opposed to TNB, was more likely to have a spin in the circumstances I described.

Let's make a couple of assumptions. Let's assume that all the OP says can be taken at face value, a point disputed by some, possibly with some justification, but let's ignore that for the moment. Let's also assume that the road was either straight or fairly close to it. Let's also assume that the road was either dry or close to it; on the basis that the OP may have mentioned if there was a sharp bend or if it was pissing down or snowing.

Let's also talk about speed for a moment. Obviously speed is infinitely variable, but let's simplify and say that there is high, or TNB speed, medium, or OP speed, and low speed. Obviously from what the OP posted she will be doing medium, or OP speed. At TNB speeds many things can be induced to happen, deliberately or otherwise, but I'm not concerned with that, we're talking about the OP.

The OP is coming up to the lights with no brakes on her golf. She has the presence of mind to pull on the handbrake. It doesn't work as well as hoped, but that's not her fault. Now the handbrake is putting a drag on the rear wheels, slowing the rear of the car down. The front wheels are pointing forwards or close to it, and there is no drag on them because the brakes aren't working. The rear wheels may or may not lock. If they don't, the car rolls to a halt, still facing forwards. If they do, the car will still come to a halt, but with the wheels locked. The front wheels still face forward, there is no major steering input as in the case of TNB trying to do a handbrake turn. there is still a drag on the rear of the car and not on the front. No spin. It may be a bit off a straight line because of imbalance in the drag between the two tyres, and the road camber etc, but nothing dramatic. The basic physics you're familiar with tells us that a moving body will travel in a straight line unless acted upon by a force. There is no force there which is going to make the car spin.

Now, let's take the OP out of the golf and put her in the Citroen in the same situation. She pulls the handbrake on, which puts a drag on the front but not the rear of the car. As you and several others have gleefully pointed out, there is under normal circumstances a large proportion of the braking effort applied to the front wheels; in the OP's case the ratio becomes 100% versus 0%. There is also a transfer of weight towards the front. The front becomes heavier and the rear becomes lighter. The front wheels may lock, or they may not. Either way, there is a drag on the front end, tending to decelerate the car, and there is no such drag on the rear. What happens next depends on whether the car is in a straight line or not. If everything is straight, the car comes to a halt, possibly somewhat untidily if the wheels lock. If everything is not straight, let's say the front wheels were turned slightly to the left, and particularly if the wheels have not locked, the rear end, which is now somewhat unloaded due to the weight transference, can lose traction, in which case the rear of the car tends to continue forward under it's own momentum, and overtake the front end. Of course at only medium speed, the most likely result is only a partial spin, ending up more or less at right angles across the road. But still, the OP, as opposed to TNB, is far more likely to spin in the Cit than in the golf.

I said she was more likely to spin if she was doing something stupid, or in the Cit; I stand by it.

[1] TNB = A phrase a friend of mine is fond of using -

Turbo Nutter Boy, aka Turbo Nutter Bastard, a close relative of Nova Boy, but capable of knocking larger lumps out of his car and the surrounding countryside due to the higher speeds that he insists on using at every possible opportunity. Exemplified as "I'm the geezer I am, I can drive like f*ck, The cops can't catch me, I can do power slides, I can do handbrake turns, I can do donuts, I can do all the stuff innit"

16 years of doing recovery has given me some insight into the species. I've winched them out of the ditches and trees, and then I've had them in the cab of my truck with their trashed car on the back, and all the way home they're still telling me how great a driver they are, and how unlucky they've been, and how a deer/dog/horse ran out in front of them and they swerved to miss it, or how someone else coming the other way forced them off the road, and of course didn't stop, or how the council has no right leaving that lamppost there. It's been difficult not to laugh out loud on many occasions.

Steve

shazzbat ( snipped-for-privacy@spamlessness.fsnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

It's correct up to the semi-colon. The bit AFTER that is the bit that's being disputed.

Right so far.

Wrong.

If the front locks, then the car will slither straight on. If the front doesn't lock, then the car will neatly slow down.

Wrong.

Good. You're wrong.

Unless and until the rear wheels lock, they still have grip preventing them from travelling sideways. The tail will NOT kick out. It just won't. You've completely ignored the evidence of people who have regularly driven with cars without working rear brakes.

However you do also have to practically lock them before it becomes relevant.

ROFLMFAO. Out of the millions of times per day cars brake on corners, how many of them spin?

Please send me your more inquiry or requirements to my e-mail address to snipped-for-privacy@leadingway.com.tw

Best regards,

Kelvin Chang

shazzbat ( snipped-for-privacy@spamlessness.fsnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

"They have been unloaded"? When did you last see a car do a stoppy?

No, reality.

No, I claimed it wouldn't *just happen*. As you say, it requires additional effort and skill - transferring the weight forward.

D'you see that often with cars? D'you often see BMWs wheelie away from the lights?

Are you trying to add "basic aerodynamics" to the list of things you'll cheerfully demonstrate a total lack of clue of?

Like I said - you haven't read the thread.

Why?

No, I gave you various examples of what can happen when weight is transferred and one end or the other becomes light Note: what *can* happen. As opposed to *hat happens a lot*. It's entirely in keeping with my assertion that the OP was more likely to spin in the Citroen than the golf, which was, and still is, correct.

Wrong. I have read every post in the thread and not one person has claimed to have regularly driven with no rear brakes. Or have they? Name them and give the date/time of their post. Incidentally the links you posted brought an empty windows frame on my screen.

Because they would be driving regularly with defective brakes. Obviously that's very dangerous and stupid, as well as being an offence. Well, not obvious to you apparently.

Steve

It's not very dangerous, if the cars only lightly loaded it's barely noticeable. Not wise but get a sense of perspective.

No it's not. You're beginning to look really stupid now.

Ian

I don't think even my magnificent Citroen DS handbrake can get anywhere near unloading the rear wheel significantly. A back of the envelope calculation suggests that -10% would be an upper limit. It's the ratio of height of cofg above ground level / wheelbase which matters. Bikes can easily unload the back wheel completely because they have a high cofg.

Yup. Because their cofg's are high up.

Ian

I posted about the friend of mine who drove his Alfa Spider 2000 for many years with the rear brakes completely unconnected. I drove it occasionally as well. No problems at all.

Ian

But nowhere near stupid enough to swallow your bullshit story about the missing brake pipe.

Steve

Is this your rattle? I think you dropped it.

Ian

Nice try. Won't work, but nice try.

Steve