Informal Mac poll
Poll
 | 32 votes (56.14%) | ||
| | 3 votes (5.26%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 3 votes (5.26%) | ||
| | 4 votes (7.01%) | ||
| | 2 votes (3.5%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 6 votes (10.52%) | ||
| | 2 votes (3.5%) | ||
| | 5 votes (8.77%) |
57 members have voted
Quote: weaselmanHuh? Are you going to downshift every gear one by one from the fifth while breaking to stop at a red light?
I am sorry, I have to ask ... have you ever driven a manual transmission car?
Yeah, I grew up on them. Took my driving test in one, my first 4 cars were standard, raced street rally, streetbikes, ATV's, all manual.
This is standard manual procedure whether in your daily commute or in your weekend time attack at the track. You downshift and slowly let off the clutch until revs match, all the while dragging the brakes. Once the RPM's get to be such that you have very little engine braking, you downshift again, slowly letting off the clutch until revs match. Repeat until stopped. If you just put it in neutral (by either gear selection or clutch depression), you only use the brakes to stop, prematurely wearing your brakes. If you're in 5th and dump it into 2nd (or 1st if your synchro is shot) and feather the clutch to scrub speed, you wear your clutch plates out. A progression through each gear maximizes engine braking, saves your brakes, saves your clutch, and keeps your car in gear should you need to gas it in an emergency situation. Race driving is the exact same except you heel&toe, blipping the revs up for an instant rpm mesh instead of waiting for them to "come to you".
Granted, if I'm driving very aggressively I may do a quick dump from 6th to 4th or 5th to 3rd provided I wasn't high in the revs in top gear, but yeah, a progression through gears is how it's SUPPOSED to be done, whether racing or daily commute. I know it's not mandatory, hell, even I get lazy and do the "shift to 2nd and feather the clutch" to slow down, but it's not the recommended procedure.
Quote: Face
This is standard manual procedure whether in your daily commute or in your weekend time attack at the track. You downshift and slowly let off the clutch until revs match, all the while dragging the brakes.
No, it isn't. You break first. Then downshift into whatever gear you end up fitting into.
If you you want to stop, just break, until you have almost stopped, then hit the clutch.
Quote:If you're in 5th and dump it into 2nd (or 1st if your synchro is shot) and feather the clutch to scrub speed, you wear your clutch plates out.
To the contrary. You wear them out by shifting too much. Or, if you shift into second while moving too fast. But that's not how it is done.
You break first. Then, when the speed/rpm is right, go into 2nd. That is if you are planning to keep going at that speed. If not, don't bother, just keep breaking, and go into neutral right before you stop.
Bottom line: never ever downshift while breaking. It is dangerous, unnecessary, and kills the clutch. Seriously, don't do it. Nobody does.
It is definitely not how it is "SUPPOSED" to be done. (Unless you are talking about engine breaking, which is a different beast - you (almost) don't touch your breaks in that case, just keep downshifting. It's rarely a good idea - will kill your clutch really fast, but sometimes, you have little choice but to use it - like on a long, icy downhill slope).
Edit: your post surprised the hell out of me - usually people either know how to drive "the stick", or they don't. But you seem to be somewhere in the middle. Clearly, you have driven it, but at the same time, you are wrong about things so basic, it is just stunning.
Anticipating, that you, probably, are not going to just take my word that you are wrong in such an elementary thing, here is a wiki page describing this stuff. Maybe, that will ... well .. not convince you, I know there is no hope of that, but at least, make you doubt yourself a little bit ... maybe, enough, to ask someone you trust for an opinion ...
Here is one more, while I am at it.
Another edit: I just thought, maybe, I am being unfair to you not knowing how old you are. Back in the 50s or 60s, downshifting was indeed a standard and recommended procedure, because the drum brakes that were in use back than just were not efficient enough.
But man ... it's been like half a century since then ...
Quote: weaselmanNo, it isn't. You break first. Then downshift into whatever gear you end up fitting into.
If you you want to stop, just break, until you have almost stopped, then hit the clutch.
Yeah, brake first, I agree with that much. But if you're in 5th and just brake to a stop without shifting, your engine will start chugging at 20mph and actually pull against the brakes. And if the light goes green, or the guy in front of you turns, you're stuck in an impossible gear for that speed. If you mirror check and see the guy behind you isn't stopping (common in NY winters) then what? You have no chance to escape.
Quote: weaselmanBottom line: never ever downshift while breaking. It is dangerous, unnecessary, and kills the clutch. Seriously, don't do it. Nobody does.
It is definitely not how it is "SUPPOSED" to be done. (Unless you are talking about engine breaking, which is a different beast - you (almost) don't touch your breaks in that case, just keep downshifting).
Yeah, I'm talking about engine braking.
I dunno, man. Different worlds, I guess. You say nobody does it, I don't know anybody who doesn't. From elite pro drivers, to us wanna-be weekend warriors, hell, even my mom drives like I described. I can honestly say I know of no one who drives as you've described, outside of life long auto drivers that for some reason made the switch to manual. "Dangerous" is questionable, though. You have a point in a RWD vehicle in winter, as the engine braking can break the rear loose. I don't dispute that one bit, since I do that a lot on purpose. Other than that, I don't see danger. And I'm sure you would definately go through brakes faster than I. But I guess it's all meh. I downshift like I'm in hour 23 of LeMans, you choose to coast down to 10mph in 5th. No biggie.
Did you hear there's actually auto drivers than put it in neutral on hills?! ;)
Quote: weaselmanHow much gas do you think you are saving by this per year?
I don't care. I make the passage faster.
Quote:Yeah. Your idle is way too high. If it wasn't, it would stall if it went 25% below.
Do you know anything about cars? every car I've driven behaves just like that. Idle on drive while advancing at speed is higher than idle on neutral.
Quote: FaceYeah, brake first, I agree with that much. But if you're in 5th and just brake to a stop without shifting, your engine will start chugging at 20mph and actually pull against the brakes.
Not at 20, more like around 5-10. That's when you hit the clutch. And shift into second, without engaging, in case the light turns green.
Quote:And if the light goes green,
yeah ... see above.
Quote:or the guy in front of you turns, you're stuck in an impossible gear for that speed.
No you are not stuck, why would you say that? You just shift into whichever gear is appropriate for your current speed, engage the clutch and go.
Quote:If you mirror check and see the guy behind you isn't stopping (common in NY winters) then what?
A big financial success!
Quote:You have no chance to escape.
Why not? Put the car in right gear, and go. What's the problem?
Quote:I dunno, man. Different worlds, I guess. You say nobody does it, I don't know anybody who doesn't.
I edited my last post to add something, I guess you have not seen it. If you were driving back in the 60s, that would explain a lot.
Back then, indeed everybody was doing engine breaking, because the drum brakes that were in use then were so damn fragile and inefficient. Those times are long gone though.
Unless you are on a really long slope, save your clutch, and use your brakes for what their purpose is - brake with them.
Quote:Did you hear there's actually auto drivers than put it in neutral on hills?! ;)
I heard about one, yeah ... Just learned about her today.
Quote: weaselmanNot at 20, more like around 5-10. That's when you hit the clutch. And shift into second, without engaging, in case the light turns green.
What do you drive, if I may ask? I just don't understand this. Even my dads truck, which is geared absurdly lower than average, can't do 10mph in 5th gear without the valves flapping like a diesel and the whole truck shaking as it nears stall speed.
Quote: weaselmanNo you are not stuck, why would you say that? You just shift into whichever gear is appropriate for your current speed, engage the clutch and go.
Because if you need to go, you need to go. The green light issue is no big deal, really, but the non-stopping, out of control car/truck is. I don't want the extra time having to emergency shift in a panic, or the chance that I grab 4th instead of 2nd.
Quote: weaselmanA big financial success!
Ha! Good point, and quite funny =) But when my 2yr old's in the back seat, I'd prefer having the option of instant-go.
Quote: weaselmanIedited my last post to add something, I guess you have not seen it. If you were driving back in the 60s, that would explain a lot.
Back then, indeed everybody was doing engine breaking, because the drum brakes that were in use then were so damn fragile and inefficient. Those times are long gone though.
Unless you are on a really long slope, save your clutch, and use your brakes for what their purpose is - brake with them.
Nope, born in '80 (but my current '05 Silverado has those blasted drums on the rears ><) I don't really know what else to say. You think my way is dumb and dangerous, I have never even heard of your way. Where do we go from here? =)
Quote: weaselmanI heard about one, yeah ... Just learned about her today.
I was just foolin', a little humor to lighten things up ;) There are things I do that some would find odd just to save a penny or two, but I do it because that stuff adds up. Nareed has hers, and other than not having the ability to emergency accelerate (how often do you need that anyway?) I don't see a problem with it. If she was really bored she could figure her [(displacement volume * rpm's saved) fuel flow at idle] * minutes at reduced rpm = volume saved * cost of volume and quantifiably determine the cost savings of her downhill coast. I'd be interested (hint, hint ;))
Quote: FaceWhat do you drive, if I may ask? I just don't understand this. Even my dads truck, which is geared absurdly lower than average, can't do 10mph in 5th gear without the valves flapping like a diesel and the whole truck shaking as it nears stall speed.
I drive Acura TSX now. Have driven lots of different cars and trucks in the past, including Russian rarities like Lada,
Volga, KAMAZ and ZIL.
I have never seen a car unhappy in any gear as long as you let it idle, and are not trying to accelerate or get any torque from it.
Quote:Because if you need to go, you need to go. The green light issue is no big deal, really, but the non-stopping, out of control car/truck is. I don't want the extra time having to emergency shift in a panic, or the chance that I grab 4th instead of 2nd.
Nah, come on, what extra time? It's not like emergency breaking, where you are counting milliseconds. Shifting a car into gear won't take more than a few anyway.
Quote:Nope, born in '80 (but my current '05 Silverado has those blasted drums on the rears ><) I don't really know what else to say. You think my way is dumb and dangerous, I have never even heard of your way. Where do we go from here? =)
Well ... I pretty stunned really. I was sure everybody knew this stuff, and there was absolutely nothing to argue about.
You do realize, at least, that you are wearing your clutch unnecessarily, right?
Try googling it yourself if you don't believe me ...
Quote:Nareed has hers, and other than not having the ability to emergency accelerate (how often do you need that anyway?) I don't see a problem with it.
It's not emergency acceleration, that's the problem (it really never is, even if someone is going to hit you at the back, just hit the clutch, you'll be fine). It's emergency BREAKING. Never ever ever attempt to do it while the car is in neutral.
Quote: weaselmanNah, come on, what extra time? It's not like emergency breaking, where you are counting milliseconds. Shifting a car into gear won't take more than a few anyway.
Perhaps it has to do with geography. There have been times, granted, not a whole bunch, where I had to "emergency accelerate". The last one was just last year. I live in the hilly ski country of WNY, and just as I descended a hill and was nearly stopped at a stop sign, I glanced up to the mirror and seen a minivan slideways trying unsuccessfully to stop behind me. I happened to be in an auto so I just punched it, saving myself an after-work hassle of exchanging info and filing reports in the middle of a midnight blizzard. If I had been in a manual doing your 4th/5th gear coast, the chances increase that I A)wouldn't have had time to shift or B) that I would've missed 2nd and plunked into 4th. I'm not saying it's like old school, non-synched tranny's or some big-rig double clutch nonsense to grab a gear and go. I'm only saying I much prefer to be in the gear my speed declares I should be for any given situation, which means no 5th gear at 20mph.
Quote: weaselmanWell ... I pretty stunned really. I was sure everybody knew this stuff, and there was absolutely nothing to argue about.
You do realize, at least, that you are wearing your clutch unnecessarily, right?
Try googling it yourself if you don't believe me ...
Depends on your definition of "wearing" </Clinton> ;) Normal operation of a vehicle "wears" your bearings, your shocks, your brakes... in this sense, yeah, my constant shifting wears my clutch. I DON'T see it as unnecessary abuse, like slipping the clutch to use it as a brake, or left foot braking and constantly having the brakes just barely on.
Quote: weaselmanIt's not emergency acceleration, that's the problem (it really never is, even if someone is going to hit you at the back, just hit the clutch, you'll be fine). It's emergency BREAKING. Never ever ever attempt to do it while the car is in neutral.
I know what emergency braking is. Due to my penchant for doing stupid things in my youth, I kind of consider myself an expert ;) Hopefully by my first paragraph in this post, you now know what I mean by emergency acceleration. I could give more examples, but they all involve the same premise - winter driving in the hills bring situations where you need to move, post haste. I still don't know how your car can be fine chugging at 10mph in 5th gear (I assume it's just a different personal definition of "fine", no big deal) but you keep warning of not braking in neutral. Not only warning, but a STRONG warning. A "Never" with two "evers"?! Please explain, if you don't mind our little arguing session continuing another post or two =)
Quote: Face
Depends on your definition of "wearing" </Clinton> ;) Normal operation of a vehicle "wears" your bearings, your shocks, your brakes... in this sense, yeah, my constant shifting wears my clutch. I DON'T see it as unnecessary abuse, like slipping the clutch to use it as a brake, or left foot braking and constantly having the brakes just barely on.
Look at it this way. The clutch is expected to serve you through so many shifts. Because you make so many more of them than necessary per trip, the clutch will serve you shorter time than it otherwise could.
Quote:Hopefully by my first paragraph in this post, you now know what I mean by emergency acceleration.
I know what you mean. But (1) I don't buy it takes any time worth talking about to jump into gear, and, more importantly, (2) I believe, it is way more dangerous to accelerate all of a sudden, then to just put it in neutral and accept the hit from behind. The latter is not that bad at all. The former ... well, they put that stop sign there for a reason, you know?
Quote:Not only warning, but a STRONG warning. A "Never" with two "evers"?! Please explain, if you don't mind our little arguing session continuing another post or two =)
When there is no engine power applied to the wheels, braking will make them lock (antilock or not), and send you into a skid. It is a very bad idea.
Quote: weaselmanLook at it this way. The clutch is expected to serve you through so many shifts. Because you make so many more of them than necessary per trip, the clutch will serve you shorter time than it otherwise could.
This is true. However, I've never, in any of my cars, bikes or toys, as bad as I beat the tar out of them, had a clutch wear out. In my experience, a clutch has never worn out before the vehicle itself was spent, so it's worth it to me to use it as much as I can, for whatever reason, be it being in a gear I think I need, or using engine braking to save my actual brakes (which do wear out often)
Quote: weaselmanWhen there is no engine power applied to the wheels, braking will make them lock (antilock or not), and send you into a skid. It is a very bad idea.
I still don't get this. I mean, I get the concept, but not why you feel it's an issue. Without the engine pulling against the brakes, you just use less brake to acheive the same amount of deceleration.
As an aside, I conducted a downhill coasting experiment today. I obtained a constant coast on a particular hill at 50mph. The rpm's were at 1,400. Popped her in neutral and they dropped to 600.
I smiled, then silently cursed Nareed's name for reintroducing this obsession into my daily driving ;)
Nareed, don't you dare buy no Hyundai because my manual WARNS against shifting into N while car is moving, at the risk of damage to the vehicle. I'm going to heed their warning and not coast down no dang hills.
Quote: FaceHowever, I've never, in any of my cars, bikes or toys, as bad as I beat the tar out of them, had a clutch wear out.
That's what I'm thinking. I drive as you do, shifting up and down, since I was a teenager. Over the years I've driven many manual shift cars from new to 100K miles without replacing the clutch or brakes.
Quote: dmNareed, don't you dare buy no Hyundai because my manual WARNS against shifting into N while car is moving, at the risk of damage to the vehicle.
You're the first person I've ever met who's admitted to having read a car manual :)
I haven't more than thumbed through mine.
Quote:I'm going to heed their warning and not coast down no dang hills.
Suit yourself. Does the manual say why?
Quote: dmI know it was too late when I saw the recommendation to try to not exceed 60 for the first 1000 miles.
I thought that was an old myth. Here it's do not exceed 100 for the first 1,000 kilometers. I must ahve broken that pretty soon, as I recall going to Toluca well before I coudl have acumulated even 500 km. So there's ana ctual car manual that says so? Who'd have thought...
Quote:Just going from memory it may have referred to the workings of the continuous transmission. Just be assured I am not making this up. I was just thumbing through it, to put it in your words.
It could be continous transmissions have different rules than regular automatic ones. I've no idea.
Quote: NareedI thought that was an old myth. Here it's do not exceed 100 for the first 1,000 kilometers. I must ahve broken that pretty soon, as I recall going to Toluca well before I coudl have acumulated even 500 km. So there's ana ctual car manual that says so? Who'd have thought...
It could be continous transmissions have different rules than regular automatic ones. I've no idea.
I gather that is the evolving sophistication of the transmissions that improves the MPH ratings. Some automatics actually get better mileage than standards, because the improved transmissions can shift better than you can. I could scan in the appropriate warnings if I had a scanner. Just kidding, I trust you believe me.
