That truck impact was absolute SAVAGERY! My word... Tori's fuel consumption was impressive. I can see why people get already economical vehicles and try and improve it still. It would have been even more interesting to see if they could increase the mileage by adding a lightweight version of the golf ball dimples that Adam and Jamie did with the car in the past. That was so cool!
And on a manual you could run a higher gear to run the engine slower. RPM and consumption aren't linearly correlated, but ICEs have an optimal range. And most people tend to drive higher RPMs than that range, so shifting up would bring the engine down and reduce consumption.
If you have just air between you and the impact point, then that impacting force has to compress or move whatever is in front of you before it gets to you. Putting padding in between can actually do more harm than good. Even when it's actual padding and not... water. For the same reason, construction/military helmets are suspended in the air around your head, instead of being filled up with a crap ton of padding. What those cop analogs did was removing the effect of the crumpling zone.
16:18 A station wagon has far, far more capacity than a SUV. Even medium cars usually have more capacity than an SUV despite being smaller in dimensions cause so much of the space of the SUV is eaten up by styling, awkward angles and overly large suspension. A station wagon is a completely open box on wheels. Though my parents also haul stuff pretty often and they just have a slightly above average car with a towing hook.
well, it depends actually. there're hatchback-based suvs (crossovers) and estate-based suvs. hatchback-based suvs might indeed have smaller capacity than an equivalent estate. but an estate-based suv would be even larger due to increased height. for example, let's have look at three compact cars from peugeot, all having the same emp2 platform. the 308 estate has a boot size of 608 litres. the 3008 crossover has a smaller size of 520 litres indeed, but the 5008 suv with a more squareback shape is the largest size of 780 litres. so a suv can offer the ultimately largest possible room, if it's designed on that purpose
i love how when you watch the slow-mo of the crash the head light closest to the truck only moves like half a meter before hitting the ground the the car has gone about 10m in the same time
It's so good hearing Adam's reasons behind his first car. I have a hatchback as my first car and I bought it for similar reasons as he bought his car, because it's practical! I didn't like wagons much when I first started driving but I now I wouldn't mind buying one, they're so much more practical than a hatchback which is already more practical than a sedan IMO.
Well, I expected it to be worse with the two big "cops" next to him, as yes, they're providing padding, but they're also extremely heavy and when shoved together by the sideways acceleration of the car would act like a hydraulic (literally) press over the little blue dude.
I think given the efficiency gains demonstrated during the hypermiling segment, it shouldn't have been "busted." It should've been "plausible" because it's possible they didn't min-max everything and maybe you get more efficiency gains with different types of cars so given some improvements, it could be possible to get doubled fuel efficiency.
Yeah, I've seen reports of about 15-30% better efficiency by shifting more efficiently. Add that to the 40% they got from their tests and we're already at 90% more, Which is very close to doubling.
It's actually really funny, because in a Q&A for Tested, Adam said that they'd usually set the expectations and plan out how they'd do stuff and the team responsible for their insurance would be like "So, we checked and...you wanna do more than that? You can!"
Strategic mistake on Young Adam's part: a station wagon is a GREAT addition to moving day even if it won't fit huge items. It holds plenty of cargo and you don't have to worry about tarping stuff or putting on a canopy if it rains. Invaluable for book transportation in wet weather! Source: am a guy who likes helping his friends move :)
You get the parking area of a sedan, but with more storage space. And the storage is protected from wind and rain by a roof. And if that's too small, get a van. Proper trucks tend to be better at rough terrain.
Accelerating _that_ slowly is almost certainly actually _bad_ for the mileage since you're just going in less efficient lower gears for much longer, instead of shifting into the more efficient higher gears. Don't floor the pedal if you want to save fuel, but for the average modern car, pushing it about halfway until you're at the desired speed is probably the best.
the first thing to do to save Petrol (which is a liquid not a gas) is to not change speed, then don't brake going down hill (but make sure it is in gear as you have more control over you speed while it is in gear, and you use less fuel while engine braking than when Idling (you can test that on a computer controlled fuel injected car and prove it to be correct) and only maintain your speed going up hill, no acceleration, don't brake for corners, let the engine slow you down, and then there is power required to push the car through the air, the calculation is squared... so if you go twice the speed the wind resistance is quadrupled (If it takes 80hp to hold 160kph but only 20hp to do 80kph you can use 1/4 the fuel to get there in twice the time, but still get there safely!) and you could probably test that too with the fuel usage in both! Ok windows up and AC on... Incorrect... you need to test that on a modern car, with a small engine. like 1300cc... and you will find that the amount of power the AC draws from the engine exceeds the extra wind resistance... in fact the amount of power that the AC draws is enough to increase the 0 to 100kph time by almost a second, and the windows being down makes a mere 0.1 second difference and turning the engine off? well that depends on how long for, as it takes alot more fuel to start the engine that it does to run it for a few seconds so the lateral acceleration may be slowed by the big person on the impact side, but your going to get squashed by the other big person who isn't going to accelerate as fast... big people are not the inside of a helmet!
I was always jealous when I saw other cars turn off at red lights, before I got the Toyota Corolla Touring hybrid two years ago. It charges the battery going downhill or while braking, it uses the battery when it can, it turns off when standing still. This has a 1.8l engine and gives me a lifetime mpg of ~57 MPG (UK) (town, motorways, whatever). We did drive to Germany twice and driving the car at 90 mph or more is way less fuel efficient. The 60-70 mph in the UK on motorways are optimal mpg, pure town stop and go is also not most efficient. With a 43l tank it can go way over 750km range (I get the warning lights at ~750km).
The mileage myth seemed plausible, not busted. They used one type of vehicle, which might have been so optimised it was never feasible to double mileage. They got no expert coaching, analysis or feedback. AFAICT, the results were their first attempt, so 70% is great, but expert feedback and practice might have improved that. The cars had automatic transmission, but hypermilers very tightly optimise engine revs for economy with manual transmission. That alone might account for 30%. Possibly using Engine Management or auto-transmission firmware optimised for hypermiling might improve more. More determined streamlining (eg. making the underside smooth to reduce turbulence and drag, and taping over hood, door and trunk gaps), might have added more. I've driven a car (Honda?) which had dashboard feedback (a row of coloured LEDs) to optimise gear changes. With a simple gizmo, and manual transmission, drivers might straightforwardly learn to be effective at fuel savings. That seems like a reasonable gizmo to make if Mythbusters were made now. With AI, and understanding of the terrain, it might help all drivers get more fuel efficient. So 70% first time out seems to strongly suggest double is plausible. Also, when I looked into hypermiling years ago, a common goal was increasing fuel economy by 50%-67%, not 100%. 50% of the worlds drivers achieving 50% improvements would be significant, and might motivate car manufacturers to offer innovative assistance. Best Wishes. ☮
They started using the Syndavers gradually, usually where they needed accurate injury simulation, rather than just knocking out another ballistics gel dummy with simulated innards. But they didn't use them often - I'm guessing because they cost more than an arm and a leg...
The problem with driving slower on the freeway to save fuel is that you will eventually get rear-ended by some idiot and all the money you saved in fuel will just go into repairing or replacing your car.
AFAIK, driving at 45mph on a freeway is in no way illegal or a fault. So the insurance of the driver who rear-ended you should pay the bills. AFAIK, in the UK, it wouldn't affect future insurance cost either. Trauma, injury, health risks, and stress seem to be much stronger reasons against driving slowly. Best Wishes. ☮
Good one, but hardly anyone knows that word. Some other fun words that only have really esoteric rhymes are "purple", "celery", "anchovy", and "cabbage". For some, you have to resort to proper names, which seems like cheating. I don't think "garbage" has any actual, two-syllable rhyme.
copycat In this show they stated driving with windows up is better, in another show, they said the opposite. THEY ARE LYING BIG TIME I rather want to say that the roads are more adding up to the global warming then the cars itself. All the government wants is that people are paying for such a thing for getting more money that way. Same with tobacco, they want everyone to stop, but at the same time they are selling it for 5 times the amount it used to be. Pretty much stealing if you ask me.
Tobacco is an interesting example. I believe tobacco typically kills smokers from 40s onwards and before retirement. It also kills relatively quickly. For "National Health" (tax-payer funded health system), a smoker typically pays in far more via there taxes or contributions than is ever spent on treating their illnesses. I assume the insurance funded is the same. Best Wishes. ☮
The Volvo 245 can be a valuable car yes. And in the cartoon, it looks like it's a Norwegian police car colors and plates. And it appears to be a Volvo 245 and the front of a 145? Filmed in 2012, because they used a brand new (2012)sedan car in the MPG test together with somewhat older cars.
Aired June 2013. However, the car might not have worked. There was no need for the car to work, and we don't see it drive. They smashed a lot of cars. By 2013 the production team were probably very good at buying scrapped cars cheap. Best Wishes. ☮
Driving overly slow on the freeway impeding the flow of traffic is incredibly dangerous and selfish. To those people I can guarantee that by not driving you save even more and you won't kill anyone else.
Tory: "You hate science?" Well Tory, unfortunately science has taken a bit of a PR hit over the last few years... And speaking from the future, believe it or not, a lot of people have trouble trusting science at the moment. It's a real shame too, because it's not like everyone's mistrust is completely unfounded. But either way, the consequences are yet to fully unfold.
@@nattythepanda4692 I'm sorry; I'd really like to tell you, but someone has decided this conversation is forbidden. I can't even see my original comment, for context.
No, this episode didn't give auto-makers the idea to include auto start-stop system in cars. This episode was aired June 2013. Toyota introduced start-stop in 1974. By 2012, BMW, Citroen, Fiat-Chrysler, Ford, GM, Honda, Hyundai, Jaguar, Kia, Land Rover, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Opel/Vauxhall, Renault, SAAB, Subaru, Volkswagen, Volvo, and others were selling cars with it. Best Wishes. ☮
Pro tip #1: don't drive an automobile. Makes you look like an unwanted, unintended sissi who took multiple wrong turns in life - having to drive in an automobile, wasting everyone's money, health and well-being while wasting their own money, health and well-being 😂 everybody loses! it's great! build more roads! build more parking spaces! asphaltize the whole surface of the earth 😂😂 remember: it's good for you!!
well not new is it? driving faster does consume more fuel but less time... my comfort speed is ~80-90mph and my cheap car does over 29miles per galon - thats not hypermiling - sure your gasoline pipes are not broken on that car? if i just drive highway with ~70mp/h i get up to 36miles per galon. And well you don't need to drive turns with 30mph to not break - just let the car roll out and slightly break - so if you need to stop slow by friction and stop step on gas until you need to break. Thats more save.
Adam: "His head's come off."
Jaime: "Well that's not a good sign."
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Gonna need to take a sick day or something.
I'm re-living my best childhood at 30. I completely forgot about Mythbusters until like 3 months ago, and now one episode every day 😄
Same 🤣
Weak. I eat Mythbusters more than 5x a day. 😂
Best part is: they don't just tell the myths, they put them to the test!
Same 🙏
Im 33 and im in a very similar boat... The boat is made out of duct tape.
3:28 LOL "Adam's got wood"... I guess he was really exited about his truck stand-in... hehehe Gotta love the narration on this show!
That truck impact was absolute SAVAGERY! My word...
Tori's fuel consumption was impressive. I can see why people get already economical vehicles and try and improve it still. It would have been even more interesting to see if they could increase the mileage by adding a lightweight version of the golf ball dimples that Adam and Jamie did with the car in the past. That was so cool!
And on a manual you could run a higher gear to run the engine slower. RPM and consumption aren't linearly correlated, but ICEs have an optimal range. And most people tend to drive higher RPMs than that range, so shifting up would bring the engine down and reduce consumption.
@@HappyBeezerStudios Yep.
There is something satisfying about having the word "Science" painted on the front of that truck 🤣
Love watching these after work:D
If you have just air between you and the impact point, then that impacting force has to compress or move whatever is in front of you before it gets to you. Putting padding in between can actually do more harm than good. Even when it's actual padding and not... water. For the same reason, construction/military helmets are suspended in the air around your head, instead of being filled up with a crap ton of padding. What those cop analogs did was removing the effect of the crumpling zone.
Thank you for again putting which episode/season it is :)
16:18
A station wagon has far, far more capacity than a SUV. Even medium cars usually have more capacity than an SUV despite being smaller in dimensions cause so much of the space of the SUV is eaten up by styling, awkward angles and overly large suspension. A station wagon is a completely open box on wheels.
Though my parents also haul stuff pretty often and they just have a slightly above average car with a towing hook.
he was talking about a pickup
Especially with the modern ones. Lots of fancy stuff, but not that much capacity. And yes, that also counts for pickups.
well, it depends actually. there're hatchback-based suvs (crossovers) and estate-based suvs. hatchback-based suvs might indeed have smaller capacity than an equivalent estate. but an estate-based suv would be even larger due to increased height. for example, let's have look at three compact cars from peugeot, all having the same emp2 platform. the 308 estate has a boot size of 608 litres. the 3008 crossover has a smaller size of 520 litres indeed, but the 5008 suv with a more squareback shape is the largest size of 780 litres. so a suv can offer the ultimately largest possible room, if it's designed on that purpose
19:38 The truck didn't like the impact either, it spat out a visible black cloud on impact, but not before or after.
34:54 "I _bet_ you do!" 😅
Man, love that Mythbusters is back!
i love how when you watch the slow-mo of the crash the head light closest to the truck only moves like half a meter before hitting the ground the the car has gone about 10m in the same time
That closer slow-mo made me laugh when the car got out of the picture before the head light even touched the ground 😂
It's so good hearing Adam's reasons behind his first car. I have a hatchback as my first car and I bought it for similar reasons as he bought his car, because it's practical! I didn't like wagons much when I first started driving but I now I wouldn't mind buying one, they're so much more practical than a hatchback which is already more practical than a sedan IMO.
Never watched this episode before...just great 😊
Head came off so cleanly Adam turned British
Well, I expected it to be worse with the two big "cops" next to him, as yes, they're providing padding, but they're also extremely heavy and when shoved together by the sideways acceleration of the car would act like a hydraulic (literally) press over the little blue dude.
I think given the efficiency gains demonstrated during the hypermiling segment, it shouldn't have been "busted." It should've been "plausible" because it's possible they didn't min-max everything and maybe you get more efficiency gains with different types of cars so given some improvements, it could be possible to get doubled fuel efficiency.
Yeah, I've seen reports of about 15-30% better efficiency by shifting more efficiently. Add that to the 40% they got from their tests and we're already at 90% more, Which is very close to doubling.
@@HappyBeezerStudiosyou may not be able to add them like that. The gears will interact with the other factors.
I love the DIFFERENCE in how Adam and Jamie make the guys. *lol*
damnit Jamy... don't tease us with shrunken heads and than never come back to it...
Interesting to see something regarded as a potential myth now being a common feature in cars for fuel saving (turning off the engine at stops).
If discovery wanted to, they could do a show only about the stress of being their insurance agent 😂
It's actually really funny, because in a Q&A for Tested, Adam said that they'd usually set the expectations and plan out how they'd do stuff and the team responsible for their insurance would be like "So, we checked and...you wanna do more than that? You can!"
Today it would be called fuel maxxing 😂
Strategic mistake on Young Adam's part: a station wagon is a GREAT addition to moving day even if it won't fit huge items. It holds plenty of cargo and you don't have to worry about tarping stuff or putting on a canopy if it rains. Invaluable for book transportation in wet weather! Source: am a guy who likes helping his friends move :)
You get the parking area of a sedan, but with more storage space. And the storage is protected from wind and rain by a roof. And if that's too small, get a van.
Proper trucks tend to be better at rough terrain.
Accelerating _that_ slowly is almost certainly actually _bad_ for the mileage since you're just going in less efficient lower gears for much longer, instead of shifting into the more efficient higher gears. Don't floor the pedal if you want to save fuel, but for the average modern car, pushing it about halfway until you're at the desired speed is probably the best.
30:05 😂😂😂
luckily the start stop systems do it automatically these days .
Blue buster gives me such uncanny valley dude
In the hypermiling test, I feel like they could've made up that last 30% with wheel covers and a flat-bottom underside.
Add another 30% from diving manual and shifting smartly to run the engine at it's most efficient RPM.
the first thing to do to save Petrol (which is a liquid not a gas) is to not change speed, then don't brake going down hill (but make sure it is in gear as you have more control over you speed while it is in gear, and you use less fuel while engine braking than when Idling (you can test that on a computer controlled fuel injected car and prove it to be correct) and only maintain your speed going up hill, no acceleration, don't brake for corners, let the engine slow you down, and then there is power required to push the car through the air, the calculation is squared... so if you go twice the speed the wind resistance is quadrupled (If it takes 80hp to hold 160kph but only 20hp to do 80kph you can use 1/4 the fuel to get there in twice the time, but still get there safely!) and you could probably test that too with the fuel usage in both!
Ok windows up and AC on... Incorrect... you need to test that on a modern car, with a small engine. like 1300cc... and you will find that the amount of power the AC draws from the engine exceeds the extra wind resistance... in fact the amount of power that the AC draws is enough to increase the 0 to 100kph time by almost a second, and the windows being down makes a mere 0.1 second difference
and turning the engine off? well that depends on how long for, as it takes alot more fuel to start the engine that it does to run it for a few seconds
so the lateral acceleration may be slowed by the big person on the impact side, but your going to get squashed by the other big person who isn't going to accelerate as fast... big people are not the inside of a helmet!
I was always jealous when I saw other cars turn off at red lights, before I got the Toyota Corolla Touring hybrid two years ago. It charges the battery going downhill or while braking, it uses the battery when it can, it turns off when standing still. This has a 1.8l engine and gives me a lifetime mpg of ~57 MPG (UK) (town, motorways, whatever).
We did drive to Germany twice and driving the car at 90 mph or more is way less fuel efficient. The 60-70 mph in the UK on motorways are optimal mpg, pure town stop and go is also not most efficient.
With a 43l tank it can go way over 750km range (I get the warning lights at ~750km).
@@Disi2008 That's the thing, you don't have to drive 90. And many aparts of the autobahn have speed limits at 62 or 75 anyway.
The mileage myth seemed plausible, not busted. They used one type of vehicle, which might have been so optimised it was never feasible to double mileage. They got no expert coaching, analysis or feedback. AFAICT, the results were their first attempt, so 70% is great, but expert feedback and practice might have improved that. The cars had automatic transmission, but hypermilers very tightly optimise engine revs for economy with manual transmission. That alone might account for 30%. Possibly using Engine Management or auto-transmission firmware optimised for hypermiling might improve more. More determined streamlining (eg. making the underside smooth to reduce turbulence and drag, and taping over hood, door and trunk gaps), might have added more.
I've driven a car (Honda?) which had dashboard feedback (a row of coloured LEDs) to optimise gear changes. With a simple gizmo, and manual transmission, drivers might straightforwardly learn to be effective at fuel savings. That seems like a reasonable gizmo to make if Mythbusters were made now. With AI, and understanding of the terrain, it might help all drivers get more fuel efficient.
So 70% first time out seems to strongly suggest double is plausible.
Also, when I looked into hypermiling years ago, a common goal was increasing fuel economy by 50%-67%, not 100%. 50% of the worlds drivers achieving 50% improvements would be significant, and might motivate car manufacturers to offer innovative assistance.
Best Wishes. ☮
Do the big guys survive to or just the manwich in the center
You get you can up to speed. Get it to shift and them you slow down your rpm to just before it shifts down
They just have a human skeleton in a bodysuit huh 😂
They started using the Syndavers gradually, usually where they needed accurate injury simulation, rather than just knocking out another ballistics gel dummy with simulated innards. But they didn't use them often - I'm guessing because they cost more than an arm and a leg...
using an automatic for MPG myth testing is sacrilege.
Will its one less variable to consider
@@Notabot1310 the idea is that you can change gear to run more efficient engine RPM. Which isn't peak torque or peak speed, but it's about efficiency.
16:10 He looks older when he was 25yo O.o damn.
I just wonder if Jo Nesbo saw this episode :)
I’m shocked how good the picture is for how old the show is. Show how far technology has (not) come.
Wow - they invented airbags...
The problem with driving slower on the freeway to save fuel is that you will eventually get rear-ended by some idiot and all the money you saved in fuel will just go into repairing or replacing your car.
AFAIK, driving at 45mph on a freeway is in no way illegal or a fault. So the insurance of the driver who rear-ended you should pay the bills. AFAIK, in the UK, it wouldn't affect future insurance cost either. Trauma, injury, health risks, and stress seem to be much stronger reasons against driving slowly.
Best Wishes. ☮
30% increase is a 3/13 margin
".. nothing rhymes with 'orange'" Erm ... 'sporange'?
Good one, but hardly anyone knows that word. Some other fun words that only have really esoteric rhymes are "purple", "celery", "anchovy", and "cabbage". For some, you have to resort to proper names, which seems like cheating. I don't think "garbage" has any actual, two-syllable rhyme.
@@RB-bd5tz shortage
@@undefined40 Ehh ... maybe, with the right accent.
@@RB-bd5tz with the right accent moustache rhymes with garbage.
Also Blorenge, a mountain in Wales. I'm not sure it's fair, but Gorringe is a rare English surname.
Best Wishes. ☮
I don't think I 've ever seen them wear a race harness properly 🤣 Having your straps loose really defeats the purpose. I know...details lol
Currently last
Rip that Volvo wagon, it was nice.
😂❤😂❤
copycat
In this show they stated driving with windows up is better, in another show, they said the opposite.
THEY ARE LYING BIG TIME
I rather want to say that the roads are more adding up to the global warming then the cars itself.
All the government wants is that people are paying for such a thing for getting more money that way.
Same with tobacco, they want everyone to stop, but at the same time they are selling it for 5 times the amount it used to be.
Pretty much stealing if you ask me.
Tobacco is an interesting example. I believe tobacco typically kills smokers from 40s onwards and before retirement. It also kills relatively quickly. For "National Health" (tax-payer funded health system), a smoker typically pays in far more via there taxes or contributions than is ever spent on treating their illnesses. I assume the insurance funded is the same.
Best Wishes. ☮
Did they just destroy a volvo 245? They are worth a fortune now. But this was probably filmed a long time ago
This was filmed around 2009-2010
It might not have been working, as far as I see they doesn't seem to drive it.
The Volvo 245 can be a valuable car yes. And in the cartoon, it looks like it's a Norwegian police car colors and plates. And it appears to be a Volvo 245 and the front of a 145?
Filmed in 2012, because they used a brand new (2012)sedan car in the MPG test together with somewhat older cars.
Aired June 2013. However, the car might not have worked. There was no need for the car to work, and we don't see it drive. They smashed a lot of cars. By 2013 the production team were probably very good at buying scrapped cars cheap.
Best Wishes. ☮
Plusters
593 likes yeah
what the hell is the thing in that blue suit!? got Evangelion vibe's 0_0
Driving overly slow on the freeway impeding the flow of traffic is incredibly dangerous and selfish. To those people I can guarantee that by not driving you save even more and you won't kill anyone else.
Hello from Bosnia and Hercegovina.... mitbusters my cilehud
Tory: "You hate science?"
Well Tory, unfortunately science has taken a bit of a PR hit over the last few years... And speaking from the future, believe it or not, a lot of people have trouble trusting science at the moment. It's a real shame too, because it's not like everyone's mistrust is completely unfounded. But either way, the consequences are yet to fully unfold.
Such people don't hate science; they hate BS foisted on them as "science".
@@RB-bd5tz I'm curious as to what you are talking about, what "BS" is being foisted as "science"?
@@nattythepanda4692 I'm sorry; I'd really like to tell you, but someone has decided this conversation is forbidden. I can't even see my original comment, for context.
did this episode gave the idea for auto makers to include the auto start-stop system in cars? we will never know🤣
No, this episode didn't give auto-makers the idea to include auto start-stop system in cars. This episode was aired June 2013. Toyota introduced start-stop in 1974. By 2012, BMW, Citroen, Fiat-Chrysler, Ford, GM, Honda, Hyundai, Jaguar, Kia, Land Rover, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Opel/Vauxhall, Renault, SAAB, Subaru, Volkswagen, Volvo, and others were selling cars with it.
Best Wishes. ☮
Pro tip #1: don't drive an automobile. Makes you look like an unwanted, unintended sissi who took multiple wrong turns in life - having to drive in an automobile, wasting everyone's money, health and well-being while wasting their own money, health and well-being 😂 everybody loses! it's great! build more roads! build more parking spaces! asphaltize the whole surface of the earth 😂😂 remember: it's good for you!!
lul this one is more dead than the other one...
well not new is it? driving faster does consume more fuel but less time... my comfort speed is ~80-90mph and my cheap car does over 29miles per galon - thats not hypermiling - sure your gasoline pipes are not broken on that car? if i just drive highway with ~70mp/h i get up to 36miles per galon.
And well you don't need to drive turns with 30mph to not break - just let the car roll out and slightly break - so if you need to stop slow by friction and stop step on gas until you need to break. Thats more save.
31:53 There's a mountain in Wales called "Blorenge."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blorenge