Car rolling backwards

Spangly Shiny wrote:

My father, a lifelong cyclist, warned me to treat every driver as a homcidal maniac looking (or not) for an oppotunity to kill. Peds, cyclists, animals, doesn't matter, caveat equitem. (I know it's for horses but the Romans din't have bikes).

Hmmm, the trouble with that approach is the logical conclusion, if you really adopted it consistently, is to give up cycling.  And possibly walking as well.

  Or maybe it's to get a large calibre firearm and take the bastards out first, from a safe distance (I assume, given the your initial assumption, in Florida that would  be acceptable, under their infamous 'stand your ground law'...but I am not a lawyer, so, er, probably best not to take my word for it)

madcarew wrote:

The driver clearly wasn't driving with due care and attention, but regarding the handbrake comment, many cars now days comewithout a hand brake. They just have a foot operated park brake. No excuse for the young lady to not hold the vehicle with the brake pedal to make sure it doesn't roll back into other road users.

Do you mean electronic hand brake  operated by a button? Otherwise how do you do a hill start ?

hirsute wrote:

madcarew wrote:

The driver clearly wasn't driving with due care and attention, but regarding the handbrake comment, many cars now days comewithout a hand brake. They just have a foot operated park brake. No excuse for the young lady to not hold the vehicle with the brake pedal to make sure it doesn't roll back into other road users.

Do you mean electronic hand brake  operated by a button? Otherwise how do you do a hill start ?

electronic button operated (My Mum's svt) or small foot pedal park brake (many GM family cars).... all auto. Is 'on' or 'off'. It's simple to do your hill start. You either come to a stop with your normal brake and hold it on the foot brake while using the accelerator in the normal fashion, or you have it on the park brake, increase the 'tension' on the auto and release the park brake (not really the greatest system)

hirsute wrote:

I notice a lot of drivers rollback these days, even on a gentle incline.

I think it's because they just use the brake, then swap to the accelerator.

The last one rolled back a couple of feet, and I banged on her side panel, as I thought she was going to hit the car behind (I was tucked away in a hatched area out of harm's way).

And to John Smith, you might want to check the driving test examination about rolling back.

 

Its becasu they don't use the handbrake - a damn nuisance if you are behind them whatever your vehicle.

John Smith wrote:

Whilst in an ideal world everyone would have perfect cluch control and never move backwards, the reaity is that the vast majority of people do roll backwards to a greater or lesser extent when setting off on a hill. I'd suggest either giving much more room, waiting until the road is clear or not using that bit of rubbish half arse infrastructure at all and riding in the road. Thats a truly crap bit of shared-use path, not even some paint. I can't realy blame the driver in this case. 

Really?

You can't blame the driver for not being in control of their vehicle?

If you can't move forwards without rolling backwards then you need to learn to control your vehicle in a safer environment before endangering other road users. It is completely your own responsibility and nothing to do with infrastructure, hills or any other tired, lame excuse.

hawkinspeter wrote:

John Smith wrote:

Whilst in an ideal world everyone would have perfect cluch control and never move backwards, the reaity is that the vast majority of people do roll backwards to a greater or lesser extent when setting off on a hill. I'd suggest either giving much more room, waiting until the road is clear or not using that bit of rubbish half arse infrastructure at all and riding in the road. Thats a truly crap bit of shared-use path, not even some paint. I can't realy blame the driver in this case. 

Really?

You can't blame the driver for not being in control of their vehicle?

If you can't move forwards without rolling backwards then you need to learn to control your vehicle in a safer environment before endangering other road users. It is completely your own responsibility and nothing to do with infrastructure, hills or any other tired, lame excuse.

Ok, want to be like that? I was trying to politely suggest a bit of consideration. If not, the OP should have treated the edge of the pavement as a give way like and waited for he car to pull off then crossed if we are going to start on what people “should” do. Perhaps everyone on road.cc is a driving god with every bit of their car perfectly working at all times, totally clutch control, total awareness of the whole road, follows all of the rules and never makes any mistakes. But in the real world people do sometimes not use enough revs, have a clutch that is not perfect, or a car with a food operated parking break (which can be a pain on hill starts) or a modem automatic, which do roll back a few inches. Or perhaps they just don’t use the hand break. Ultimate the OP should not have gone until the car had gone. If he had treated it as a give way line and waited to cross until the car had gone, as he should have, there would never have been an issue.

Its not about how I may or may not drive, but about just showing a bit of consideration for others. It’s this lack of tolerance on all sides that drives the way cyclists are treated on the roads.

John Smith wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

John Smith wrote:

Whilst in an ideal world everyone would have perfect cluch control and never move backwards, the reaity is that the vast majority of people do roll backwards to a greater or lesser extent when setting off on a hill. I'd suggest either giving much more room, waiting until the road is clear or not using that bit of rubbish half arse infrastructure at all and riding in the road. Thats a truly crap bit of shared-use path, not even some paint. I can't realy blame the driver in this case. 

Really?

You can't blame the driver for not being in control of their vehicle?

If you can't move forwards without rolling backwards then you need to learn to control your vehicle in a safer environment before endangering other road users. It is completely your own responsibility and nothing to do with infrastructure, hills or any other tired, lame excuse.

 

Ok, want to be like that? I was trying to politely suggest a bit of consideration. If not, the OP should have treated the edge of the pavement as a give way like and waited for he car to pull off then crossed if we are going to start on what people “should” do. Perhaps everyone on road.cc is a driving god with every bit of their car perfectly working at all times, totally clutch control, total awareness of the whole road, follows all of the rules and never makes any mistakes. But in the real world people do sometimes not use enough revs, have a clutch that is not perfect, or a car with a food operated parking break (which can be a pain on hill starts) or a modem automatic, which do roll back a few inches. Or perhaps they just don’t use the hand break. Ultimate the OP should not have gone until the car had gone. If he had treated it as a give way line and waited to cross until the car had gone, as he should have, there would never have been an issue.

 

Its not about how I may or may not drive, but about just showing a bit of consideration for others. It’s this lack of tolerance on all sides that drives the way cyclists are treated on the roads.

It is not just the lack of basic vehicle control but the even more basic lack of awareness of what was going on around her. The driver had the option of simply holding the car on the brake if she was unsure of her ability to perform a hill start without rolling backwards. The final straw is the lack of being able to accept that she was at fault and simply apologise for the error.

As to the OP or anyone on the wrong end of poor driving or even just reading about it on an internet forum: It is possible to be 100% blameless and still learn something from the experience so that you are better able to avoid a similar situation again.

John Smith wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

John Smith wrote:

Whilst in an ideal world everyone would have perfect cluch control and never move backwards, the reaity is that the vast majority of people do roll backwards to a greater or lesser extent when setting off on a hill. I'd suggest either giving much more room, waiting until the road is clear or not using that bit of rubbish half arse infrastructure at all and riding in the road. Thats a truly crap bit of shared-use path, not even some paint. I can't realy blame the driver in this case. 

Really?

You can't blame the driver for not being in control of their vehicle?

If you can't move forwards without rolling backwards then you need to learn to control your vehicle in a safer environment before endangering other road users. It is completely your own responsibility and nothing to do with infrastructure, hills or any other tired, lame excuse.

 

Ok, want to be like that? I was trying to politely suggest a bit of consideration. If not, the OP should have treated the edge of the pavement as a give way like and waited for he car to pull off then crossed if we are going to start on what people “should” do. Perhaps everyone on road.cc is a driving god with every bit of their car perfectly working at all times, totally clutch control, total awareness of the whole road, follows all of the rules and never makes any mistakes. But in the real world people do sometimes not use enough revs, have a clutch that is not perfect, or a car with a food operated parking break (which can be a pain on hill starts) or a modem automatic, which do roll back a few inches. Or perhaps they just don’t use the hand break. Ultimate the OP should not have gone until the car had gone. If he had treated it as a give way line and waited to cross until the car had gone, as he should have, there would never have been an issue.

 

Its not about how I may or may not drive, but about just showing a bit of consideration for others. It’s this lack of tolerance on all sides that drives the way cyclists are treated on the roads.

In my view it's not about having perfect clutch control, but being safe. If you can't control a car well enough to prevent it rolling backwards whilst performing a standard, common manoeuvre, then you are not safe enough to be on the roads.

Would you be able to pass a driving test if you were unable to pull away without rolling backwards?

hawkinspeter wrote:

In my view it's not about having perfect clutch control, but being safe. If you can't control a car well enough to prevent it rolling backwards whilst performing a standard, common manoeuvre, then you are not safe enough to be on the roads. Would you be able to pass a driving test if you were unable to pull away without rolling backwards?

I'd be mortified if I rolled backwards; just shows poor control

He's one view in the test I found

https://www.diaryofanadi.co.uk/?p=3069

John Smith wrote:

or a modem automatic, which do roll back a few inches.

Automatics creep forward when in drive, so you'd have to be pretty useless to roll back.

I have to use the handbrake on mine even on small hills to stop moving forward.

John Smith wrote:

But in the real world people do sometimes not use enough revs, have a clutch that is not perfect, or a car with a food operated parking break (which can be a pain on hill starts) or a modem automatic, which do roll back a few inches.

Yeah, sometimes you need to know when to give up on an argument.

Foot operated parking brakes are common on American cars, but only ever with an auto box, and automatics do not roll backwards unless there is a fault, or the car is in neutral. No car which behaved as you suggest would pass its construction and use cert.

(aside from which, the OP describes the driver holding the car on the clutch - a practice which I loath as all it does is shorten clutch life just for the sake of laziness - so auto boxes don't even enter the debate)