General shifting question...

[autoguy]

What is the best way to slow down/stop when driving a manual transmission? I know to downshift when descending a hill, but what about when approaching a stoplight on a level street while in city traffic? Is it best to brake, push in the clutch and take it out of gear while continuing to coast to a stop, or to downshift while slowing.

C

[Pringles]

Don't downshift whilst braking if you are going to stop at the lights. Simply brake and as your speed drops below 5mph, press the clutch pedal in, put it into neutral and let go of the clutch pedal.


Some people press the clutch pedal in, select first gear and just hold the clutch pedal in until the lights turn green. This is bad for the transmission!

[autoguy]

Thanks for the reply.

This is probably a stupid question, but so was my last one. Do I just brake down to 5 mph without shifting or taking it out of gear even if I'm in a high gear (5th)? I thought this type of thing would cause engine lugging.

Thanks,
Craig

[SaabJohan]

The best way is by downshift through all gears while using the engine to help you brake. Don't use the clutch as a "brake" since this will cause unnecessary wear on the clutch, the clutch should be engaged/disengaged fast during gearshifts and the engine and transmission should preferbly have the same rpm when the clutch engage them.

There are no reasons why you shouldn't have the first gear in while waiting at the stoplights, the releasebearing will handle this without any problems.

[Pringles]

Originally Posted by SaabJohan

The best way is by downshift through all gears while using the engine to help you brake. Don't use the clutch as a "brake" since this will cause unnecessary wear on the clutch

AAARGH!!!

YOU DO NOT DO THIS

How would you use the clutch as a 'brake'?

[2strokebloke]

Actually, it's very smart to downshift through all of the gears as you come to a red light, as you never know when it may turn green - and it'd be stupid to leave it in high gear, or have it in first if you're going to need to get going again. I do not recomend pushing the clutch in and then simply going straight to first - this'll wear out the snychros eventually, and is a dumb idea anyway unless you're certain you're going to stop (in which case you'd want to be in nuetral anyway so you don't cause wear on the throwout bearing - unless of course you're just stopping for a stop-sign)
A habbit I've gotten from 2-strokers is to knock it out of gear when coming to a light, because 2-stroke engines "buck" (do to irregular firing when the throttle is closed) instead of providing the engine braking effect a 4-stroker does. This is a good way to handle this situation, because you can simply put it in the proper gear if traffic gets going again before you come to a stop.

[Pringles]

OK. I've heard enough . I'm outta here.

[2strokebloke]

Originally Posted by Pringles

OK. I've heard enough . I'm outta here.

Uh oh - somebody doesn't like it that people may actually have different opinions than their own... or drive differently...
But I do have to ask - what do you have against shifting down through the gears as you slow down? (or does anybody else know why we "DO NOT DO THIS" ?)

[standard_chick]

It is common knowledge that a lot more wear and tear is placed on both the clutch and the transmission when you use engine braking (unless you make a habit of double-clutching in normal city driving situations, which is ridiculous). 2strokebloke, I tend to agree with your approach of popping the car into neutral and coasting/breaking until coming to a full stop. The brakes are there for a reason and are a hell of a lot cheaper to replace than a clutch.

[SaabJohan]

The clutch only wears when there are a difference in speed between the engine and gearbox, simply match the engine speed with the throttle and there will be no problem. Transmission wear will not be an issue.

Most people that put the gear into neutral and slow down is because they can't drive that good, and doing it this way is much easier.

Then of course you will save fuel by downshifting and using the engine to brake (as modern engines shut off the fuel during engine braking).

It's however not recommended to use 2 stroke engines for braking, this since the fuel is mainly shut off when doing this, and with the fuel also the lubrication.

[Sluttypatton]

There may be a very miniscule increase in wear on the clutch when using the engine to brake, however if you do not, then there will be an increase in wear on the brakes. I downshift whenever I stop, and I am just doing my clutch now, after almost 200,000 km. Shift quickly and match rpm's and your clutch will love you long time. By the way, you use your engine as a brake by simply downshifting...you use the engines vacuum to help slow down.

[Moppie]

I drive more kms/miles a year than I would say at least 99% of the members here, Iv been driving trucks and cars profesionaly for the last 5 years.

And I agree totaly with what SaabJohan, Sluttypatton and 2strokebloke have to say.
Having a car in neutral while slowing down removes a major form of control from the driver, should something change with out warning, being able to acclerate away from the hazard can be a life saver.

And any claims that there is increased wear on the driveline are pure BS. An engine and transmission experiance most of thier wear during accleration, the forces encoutered during deccleration are significantly less, to the point of being insignificant. However the saving in wear on the braking system can be quite noticable. You only have to look at the brake pad change period between a correctly driven manaul car and an automatic. The brake pads on a manual car can last up to 30% longer than those on an automatic.

[standard_chick]

Well, there's no real way to win this argument one way or the other. The bottom line is, it is a matter of personal preference. I personally prefer to use my brakes for their intended purpose rather than worry about double-clutching, heel-and-toeing, etc. in order to prevent wear and tear on the clutch and transmission, especially when driving in the city. I mean, I love my car, but I don't love it enough to constantly shift gears and play with the pedals when there's no real good reason to do so. And besides, brake pads cost what, $30 to replace; a clutch costs well over $1000. My last car was an automatic and I drove it for 5 years before trading it in and didn't have to replace the brakes on it once. I sure as hell am not going to worry about it now on my manual car.

[MagicRat]

Originally Posted by standard_chick

It is common knowledge that a lot more wear and tear is placed on both the clutch and the transmission when you use engine braking (unless you make a habit of double-clutching in normal city driving situations, which is ridiculous). 2strokebloke, I tend to agree with your approach of popping the car into neutral and coasting/breaking until coming to a full stop. The brakes are there for a reason and are a hell of a lot cheaper to replace than a clutch.

Folks, it depends on what you are driving.
Chick is right, if you are just driving a car, especially around town.
If you are driving with a heavy load, lots of weight, towing a trailer or driving a big truck, you want to downshift to maintain greater control.

As I drive in both situations, I let the driving conditions and situation dictate my driving style.

Also people.....be nicer to each other!!

[burnM]

I prefer to use the engine to slow down as well as the brake. However, I do not use the clutch at all in my Jimmy, except from a dead stop, or to a dead stop. If you get to know the vehicle well enough, you can accomplish this easily enough. This does not wear out the clutch, because it is always engaged. The trick is to exactly match the speed of the engine to the gear and speed that you are driving. If you do it wrong though, you can seriously wreck a perfectly healthy transmission.

On a side note, it was my father who taught me to drive in this fashion, and he has been driving transports for the better part of 30 years.

But hell, to each their own!