Prius Parking Footbrake and N (neutral) Stick Position.

Unlike a conventional automatic, the Prius is not "straining" against the brake while you're stopped. The electric motor is totally off. When you release the brake, the Prius feeds a small amount into the motor to simulate an automatic's "creep". It's not as simple as a switch on the brake pedal, but the effect is the same.

If you just don't like holding the brake pedal while stopped... well, I can't help you there. I personally think stepping on the brake is less trouble than shifting.

 

You can see the affect of pressing the brake pedal on the energy screen. If you press the brake firmly there is no power but softly there is. You would be better to press the park button than neutral. You need your foot on the brake to get back in gear.
The park brake works on the rear wheels. It has cables to actuate it.
Only car I ever saw that had park brake on the front wheels is Subaru.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(patsparks @ Nov 8 2007, 11:25 AM) [snapback]536656[/snapback]</div>

Both SAAB and Citroën have older models that has the park break on the front wheels.

 

Ok, so I'll start by stating, "to each his own."

We each choose the level of risk we are willing to accept for ourselves and those around us based on the rewards or potential rewards we get in exchange for the elevated risk. I might choose to accelerate into a yellow light, while you might choose to remove your foot from the brake while the car is in neutral and not moving on a level road. I won't tell you you shouldn't do it, but I figured it might be a good idea to point out the risks I'm aware of, just so you're making an educated decision.

The first risk I can think of would be a situation where the car might need to sit still for an extended time. If you are in the habit of switching to neutral, and then something happens (an accident on the road ahead?) that prevents you from switching to drive in a short period of time, you could run the battery down with the A/C, your headlights, and the various other electrical devices that might be operating in the car. Since the car is in neutral, when the battery gets low it won't make any effort to recharge the battery. I suspect the car will shut off before the battery gets low enough to damage the battery or restart the car, but I'm not certain.

Another risk I can think of would be that your brake lights won't be lit. These lights exist to communicate to drivers behind you that your car is slowing or stopped. Lacking this stimulus, you increase the risk of contact between the back of your car and the front of a car belonging to someone else.

The last risk I can think of is the possibility that it might take a few fractions of a second longer to engage drive and get the car moving. I haven't tested this, and I might be mistaken, but it seems like a reasonable a possibility. If you happen to notice a situation where impact with your vehicle is likely, those few extra moments might have been what would have allowed you to avoid the impact, or at least might have reduced the severity of injury and damage. If you've already encountered the first risk I listed in the same stopping instance as an occurrence of the third risk, it would seem that it might significantly increase the time from awareness of impending impact to acceleration of your vehicle since you might need to restart it. The reduced battery power might also contribute to reduced acceleration.

As for technical reasons why it might be "bad for the car", no none that I can think of.

 

Adding to Danny's post, if you're stopped but your foot is not on the brake, and you get hit from behind, you'll get pushed into the vehicle in front of you, or if you're first at the light you'll get pushed into the intersection or the pedestrian in the crosswalk in front of you.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tenebre @ Nov 8 2007, 09:19 PM) [snapback]536674[/snapback]</div>

Thanks, I do recall a Saab having front handbrake, a 900 model I think. It's been a while. Not many citroens went through our shop, thankfully.

 

Straw-man hazards.
.
While stopped at a light you should be equally aware of what's behind
you as you are that which is in front; if you see someone coming in
too hot then it would seem that showing them a nice snappy transition
by *lighting* the brake lights right then would do worlds more to
wake them up than sitting there with the brake lights steady-on.
.
And in the "continued awareness" department, if you're keeping track
of the other direction's yellow, you can already be in "D" well
before you get your green. And of course that is not the time to
blast freely across the intersection without a care in the world,
because some yutz might be coming in too hot at 90 degrees from you
while finishing up that earthshakingly important text message to his
buddy about which bar to gather at instead of piloting his own two
tons of scrap metal properly.
.
Let's try to be comprehensively realistic here, and both give people
credit and give them absolutely no credit where either is due.
.
_H*

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hobbit @ Nov 8 2007, 06:12 PM) [snapback]536932[/snapback]</div>

Come on hobbit. All I did is point out the potential. I even went so far as to imply that the asker was welcome to weigh his belief of the likelihood of these risks against his belief of the rewards gained.

You may be perfectly aware of every incoming object from every potential direction at every moment you are stopped, but the reasonable potential still exists for a driver to for some reason be unaware of some incoming object from some direction until such a time as that they need to react quickly to the developing situation.

I didn't say it was a large risk, but still the risk does exist.

Same for the possibility of becoming distracted when forced to be stopped for an extended period of time and forgetting that you left it in neutral. Perhaps not a high risk, but the original poster asked what the potential risks are.

As for the transition to brake lights from no brake lights, I agree that if you press the brake pedal when you see someone approaching you are more likely to gain their attention than if the brake lights were already on. However, the original poster has not indicated that this is part of his habitual process, and as such I hope you'll agree that having the brake lights lit to start with is more likely to gain the attention of the driver of the approaching vehicle than having them off and leaving them off. With the foot on the brake, you certainly haven't removed the possibility of "flashing" the brake lights at a driver that hasn't seemed to notice you.

Based on your response to these potential risks, I assume you would not discourage someone from using Cruise Control in snowy, icy, or wet conditions on a Prius with Vehicle Stability Control, Traction Control, and anti-lock brakes?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Nov 8 2007, 12:21 PM) [snapback]536728[/snapback]</div>

My vote as best answer. There are many good suggestions posted above, but this is how I do it.

Tom