Joined: Aug 02, 2006
Posts: 705
Location: McLean, VA, USA
Posted:
Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:21 pm
There are just two methods of starting your manual car up a hill that I'm aware of. I don't think other methods exist.
First is the easiest one, but somewhat slow and sloppy. You wait for a green light with your parking brake engaged. As soon as light turns green, you depress the clutch, shift into the first, and release the clutch to engagement start point. Then you simultaneously release parking brake, add gas, and release the clutch. It seems a bit complex on paper, but it is not. Basically you start as usual, you just add parking brake release, simultaneously with clutch engagement. It usually takes just a couple of tries to get it right, providing you already can start on a flat surface without a problem.
Second method is more complex and harder to master, but you don't have to mess with a parking brake. You wait for a green light as usual, keeping your car from rolling back with normal brakes. When light turns green, you depress the clutch pedal, switch into the first, and start releasing clutch, while still having your right foot pressing the brake pedal. When you release the clutch until it starts engaging, you release the brake pedal and quickly move your foot to gas, and then you follow normal starting sequence.
I usually use the second method, but if I'm on a really steep hill, I go with the first one.
Last edited by Misha on Sat Apr 10, 2010 7:45 pm; edited 5 times in total
From my experience on this one, I'd recommend simply avoiding big hills until you get used to driving on flat roads. it was a pain in the butt to learn.. especially in the city where you KNOW some guy in a Beamer is gonna pull to a stop 6 inches behind you.
(if you see one pulling up, let off the brake and start rolling backwards at them, they'll stop!)
Joined: Aug 02, 2006
Posts: 705
Location: McLean, VA, USA
Posted:
Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:48 pm
Yea, I definitely agree with taking it easy at first, but it's not always possible. So I think the best thing to do is to get yourself prepared You can practice this somewhere on a quiet street, when you don't have the pressure of a traffic on your back...
Joined: Oct 05, 2008
Posts: 79
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posted:
Tue Oct 07, 2008 12:24 am
Decades ago, when I learned to drive, we would lose points on the driving test if we used the hand brake to start on a hill. During the test, we had to start up a really steep hill, which we all dreaded. I guess that there was a good reason for that at the time since handbrakes were not very easy to reach and it was difficult to use the handbrake and still watch the traffic. However, the handbrake on modern cars is so convenient to use that it makes more sense to use it, at least on steep hills.
Starting on a hill without the handbrake is easier on some cars than on others. Some engines have poor low speed torque or clutches which are not easy to control, and that makes it difficult to start on a hill without using the hand brake.
It's easier on a motorcycle. The left hand controls the clutch, the right hand controls the throttle, and the right foot controls the rear brake so, with a bit of practice, starting on a hill is very easy. Unfortunately, having controls like that on a car would be impractical.
Joined: Aug 02, 2006
Posts: 705
Location: McLean, VA, USA
Posted:
Tue Oct 07, 2008 3:41 pm
Well, automatic transmission made this task a breeze, and if transmissions are moving to the mix of auto and manual, like steptronic, this skill will eventually become obsolete...
Joined: Oct 05, 2008
Posts: 79
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posted:
Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:07 pm
Perhaps, but in the middle 50s, many said that within a few years, automatic transmissions would totally replace manual transmissions; it didn't happen. Perhaps it never will. On some cars, it seemed that the manual transmission was designed as poorly as possible to encourage people to get automatic transmissions. Beginning in 1955, the gearshift on Chevrolets was so horrible that anyone would be discouraged. My mother bought a 1958 Chevrolet with a manual transmission and I never got over cringing everytime I had to shift from 1st to 2nd. If you didn't move the lever just right, it would jam before you got out of 1st gear and you had to pull it back into 1st gear and start over. The shift lever rattled incessently. The ratios were good for performance (2.21 and 1.32). You could go 55 in 1st and 90 in second, but he gears whined loudly. Some Chrysler corporation cars also had horrible manual transmissions.
Another thing car manufacturers did was to provide cars with automatic transmissions for high school driver education classes so that students wouldn't learn how to shift gears. Surveys indicated that most students wanted to learn how to shift gears, but they were not provided with the opportunity.
While starting a car uphill first release the hand brakes and start the car apply brakes and switch on the indicator to which side you like to turn and then shift to 1st gear and keep pressing the throttle pedal and drive.
green lights? Brakes? Lost me. I've never driven a car with all those things. For hill starts it's just a simple case of applying the handbrake, depressing the clutch pedal while shifting the stick into 1st gear, depressing the gas pedal until you feel the engine trying to put the car in motion, then releasing the handbrake.
It is something that needs a bit of practise, and certainly not in heavy traffic on a city street.
Joined: Aug 02, 2006
Posts: 705
Location: McLean, VA, USA
Posted:
Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:45 am
LOL Izzy, I meant traffic lights. In other words, starting uphill when you are at a traffic light and it turns green. Sorry, I did not make myself clear on that. This was intended for people who are just learning how to drive stick shift, not for a pro like you
Who are you calling a pro! LOL
Ah, see I jumped in feet first without reading the post properly, sorry.
Traffic lights on hills should be banned for new drivers - they are nervous enough without this added burden.
At red lights most taxi drivers I know sit on the clutch, with the car super ready for taking away as soon as the light changes, especially on a hill.
I know its not good for the car, but it can be done without damage if you have the experience to do it exactly right, but I certainly wouldn't recommend this for newbies.
Joined: Oct 05, 2008
Posts: 79
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posted:
Thu Dec 31, 2009 2:36 pm
I'm not certain what you mean by "sit on the clutch."
If they keep the clutch partially engaged to keep the car from rolling back, then they are causing wear and if they do that very often, expensive repairs will result. However, if they have the clutch totally disengaged, i.e., keeping the clutch pedal to the floor, they they are not causing any wear on the friction surfaces of the clutch, although they are causing a bit of wear on the throwout bearing, which may not be important since on modern cars, other things generally wear out before the throwout bearing wears out.
You couldn't be talking about the United States since here, 99.44% of taxis have slush pumps, also known as automatic transmissions.
No, talking of the UK.
'Sitting on the clutch' is a frowned upon practise. It basically is sitting with the clutch partially engaged and the gas pedal partially depressed. It has to be exactly right so that the the engine has enough acceleration so that the car doesn't roll back, but it doesn't move forward either.
I'm sure its not good for the car, but we never went through any more clutches than any other high mileage driver.
I've driven taxis with automatic transmissions too, but not advisable in the UK where fuel prices are sky high as these type of transmissions are heavier on the juice than manual transmissions.
Joined: Oct 05, 2008
Posts: 79
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posted:
Thu Dec 31, 2009 3:18 pm
You're right about the additional fuel used when a car has an automatic transmission.
The EPA, an agency of the U.S. federal government, rates cars for fuel consumption. However, it doesn't test cars under actual driving conditions so, although the figures have some merit, their accuracy is limited. In some cases, the EPA fuel mileage for cars equipped with automatic transmissions is equal to or very slightly greater than for the same cars with manual transmissions.
Although I cannot prove it, I have reason to believe that with practically all cars, a driver who knows how to maximize fuel mileage can get better mileage with a manual transmission, although the difference could be less than 10%. Probably the EPA simulates using manual transmissions the way they think most drivers will use them, and that is not optimal for maximizing fuel mileage.
Some passengers will object when a manual transmission is used as efficiently as possible because it does not result in the smoothest possible operation. For example, if one is accelerating with a heavy foot in 1st gear then at 2000 rpm suddenly throws out the clutch to shift to 2nd then suddenly engages the clutch and presses the accelerator most of the way down, there will be fairly rapid acceleration, followed by a sudden pause during which passengers will move forward in their seats, followed by sudden acceleration causing passengers to move back against their seats. That is the most effective way to maximize fuel mileage. One can release the accelerator a bit more gradually before shifting from 1st to 2nd and then depress the accelerator more gradually after shifting to 2nd, which results in smoother operation, but will reduce efficiency by a slight amount. Everything is a compromise.
One of the advantages of an automatic transmission is that it shifts under power so there are no interruptions in the acceleration. That can make it impossible even to feel the shifts. And, if the radio is on, there may be no way at all to tell when the shifts occur since then you cannot even hear the changes in engine speed.
Interesting stuff you know about there:)
I just drive, I don't know what goes on under the bonnet, except I can change a fan belt in a hackney taxi in emergency.
I always liked to drive in such a way that gave the most comfort to passengers and the automatic taxis used to cost about £2 per 100 miles more than the manuals for refuelling.
You've explained why, I think. Thanks:)
View next topic View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum