[mgdlbp]

There's definitely confirmation bias causing me to not notice stops where there isn't a jerk. And perhaps by the Baader-Meinhof effect you'll begin to notice them more frequently, too. But stops without any perceptible jerk are rare enough that when they happen I get an odd feeling of floating forwards like when the train beside your own at a station departs—perhaps it's because my subconscious, still anticipating the jerk, believes that I'm still in motion.

In some cars there's hysteresis in the brake pedal (perhaps caused by the booster or self-energizing system) that makes it hard to smoothly release the brake even when the driver tries to. But metros seem to increase their braking force—visible in standing passengers leaning progressively more—as speed decreases. Is there some physical cause to that?

> only minimal pressure should be necessary

I gathered that it was best practice to fully brake when stopped in case someone hits you, especially at a light where you might be rear-ended and roll into the intersection.

[jonsen]

If rear-ended with your brakes engaged more of the impact energy will go into crumbling your car than if it's allowed to transfer into forward speed. If you see it coming, let go of the brake, and then step on it after impact. That's the advise I got.

[swimfar]

It depends on if you're trying to minimize damage to your car, or the passengers. For a light impact where you aren't going to sustain any injuries it might be optimal to let off the brake. But if the accelerations are going to cause injury, then you would want to apply the brakes to minimize the acceleration of the car.

[checker]

Strategy sounds legit but my concern would be that the (previously distracted) incoming driver attempts to dodge at the last second. Their car will hit your car with torque that could send it into oncoming traffic. But that angled impact also means less push in your car's forward direction, so maybe this concern is overblown.