OT: Driving electric cars in winter

[harry]

Electric cars drive perfectly down any hill with the regenerative braking. I can descend any hill under perfect control using the throttle pedal only.

And think of all the energy recovered.

[Mr Macaw]

I didn't say pedestrians were distracted. It's the drivers who are distracted - it's harder to see an unlit pedestrian when there are cars with bright lights shining in your eyes.

Austria banned them after seeing a 12.2% increase in accidents when they were introduced.

Here's some graphs:

[bert]

In article , Blanco writes

It tended to hang in first gear for too long when setting off no matter what you did with the throttle.

[bert]

There were also a few Rang Rover P38s which had a BMW engine and they didn't either.

[bert]

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)" writes

They went out with the ark. Even my 1967 1100 was 4 speed.

[bert]

I've never felt the need to left foot brake in all the autos I've driven except when driving down steep hills off road.

[Mr Macaw]

If you can see things a few hundred yards away without lights, you don't need lights. That is the case in thin mist. Lights only light up the water vapour anyway (the first thing they come into contact with), the only use for lights in fog is to be seen, not to see.

Doesn't work. You just light up the fog.

In THICK fog I used dipped lights as they become the same brightness as sidelights through fog to other road users. I don't use them to see though. If it's daylight and foggy, I can't see any better with lights on than off.

Lights don't help at all, I just slow down until I can see my stopping distance.

Which doesn't change the ratio of the two.

The former. What about an unlit object like a stray animal?

The road always exists at all distances. Use that.

Reflecting off a taillight is pointless, as you would se the light from the taillight bulb anyway.

No. It's fine if the person is looking at my car at the point I start braking. But if he looks at my car and sees bright lights, do I have fog lights on or am I braking?

The only car I've seen with a single reverse light is a Ford Fiesta. And possibly a Ka. As in the bottom of the range. My Golf had two reverse lights. It was 1998, I think that's Mk4? Why don't they put the Mk number on the car like a Mitsubishi Evo?

I find reverse lights don't illuminate the road at all. In pitch black (eg a farm track), I've reversed with my brakes, fogs, reverse lights, and hazard lights on.

Make use of the brake and tail areas?

That's insane. Did they forget to swap it over when they moved the steering wheel to the correct side?

That wouldn't make sense, even for the law.

Agreed. And indicators that are not on the corners are stupid. I actually saw a car indicate once where the indicator was so near the centre of the car it took me a while to figure out which way he was indicating!

[Peter Parry]

It was a bit disconcerting at first, you touched the brakes and the retardation was greater than expected. Once I had read the manual and realised what was going on it was perfectly sensible and particularly useful when going down a steep hill near here rarely cleared in winter when it was snow covered.

Overall it was a good idea.

[Bob Martin]

I've driven automatics for 50+ years and always used left-foot braking. The last time this came up, 2-3 years ago, everyone here who replied said I was wrong/stupid/dangerous. The local specialist auto gearbox shop said they didn't recommend it, but I still do it (and always will).

My current car is a Megane auto and I was disconcerted on first driving it to notice that it didn't freewheel when I took my foot off the accelerator.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Stupid drivers end up pressing both at the same time and wearing out gearboxes torque converters and brakes

>

[Davey]

There is a reason that the brake pedal is usually big enough for the left foot to reach it easily, and that's it.

What was the shop's reasoning for not liking it?

[The Natural Philosopher]

They have enough issues with worn out clutch release bearings and indeed clutches from people resting their feet on them...

[T i m]

I was wondering why it was often (but not always) bigger on an auto than a manual though.

I think there may be several reasons:

Easier to find.

Easier to use two feet on if a) you aren't very strong / emergency stop and b) historic, possibly before power assisted brakes c) to easier overcome a 'runaway' (where unlike a manual you can dump the clutch).

To fill some of the empty space (no clutch pedal on an auto).

Whilst I can and have used my left foot on an auto foot brake, I don't normally use it for braking as such but for more as for a 'holding brake'.

Cheers, T i m

[John Rumm]

On mine, if you use the down shift on the steering wheel while in full auto mode, then it changes down and stays there so long as you don't touch the throttle. If you accelerate, then it reverts to full auto a few seconds after, and will usually change back up (depending on speed).

[John Rumm]

Plenty of three speed boxes around much later than that though - certainly into the 80's if not later.

[Davey]

Well, yes, but that's on manuals. Whatever.

[The Natural Philosopher]

My point being that (ignorant) people's left feet tend to 'rest' on pedals to the detriment of the car.

[Davey]

No argument there.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Same here. I'd not read about this feature in road tests of the car, etc. So was surprised when first experienced it.

Quite. If you'd normally select a lower gear on that sort of hill manually, and it's an auto, seems eminently sensible it does it for you.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Think you should learn about torque convertors. They aren't a clutch and don't wear as such. They can be overheated, but very unlikely in normal use.