Question about standard transmission
 

I just got my first standard vehicle, and someone told me that if, when slowing down, i downshifted and let the engine do more of the work than the brakes, it would lsat longer. Is this true? I'm wondering if this is a good thing to do, or is it just better to use the brakes? In emergencies and stuff, i would just use the brakes like normal, but for like.. coming to a stop sign or something, should i just downshift, and let the engine slow the vehicle down for me? I have a 1993 4WD Nissan Pickup, if that matters. Thanks

As someone who has been driving a standard for over 15 years now, I would say; definately downshift.

It just reduces wear on your brakes, and done properly does not harm your engine or clutch one bit.

as someone who just recently got their first stick too, i don't downshift usually, i just brake. i know it saves the brakes and all to downshift, but i feel more comfortable using the brake instead and i feel that's more important.

i might start downshifting one day, but the way i see it, i'm not wasting my brakes any FASTER than i was with automatics, i'm just not wasting them slower.

I don't drive stick on a daily basis but whether its my car or a motorcycle I always downshift. I rather let the engine do the work. It slows me down quicker and is much smoother.

Do what your comfortable with but what are brakes for anyways? I don't see any auto tranny cars having extreme wear on brakes. The engine braking will lessen the wear and tear on the brakes but its minimal.

wow, thanks for all the quick replies. I'll probably do about 50/50 brakes and downshifting, depending on the situation

thanks again!

Seems to me that unless you match engine speed to the lower gear you will downshift into by blipping the throttle, it will wear the clutch faster than otherwise.

Which is cheaper to replace, clutch or brakes? I rest my case.

In most cases, I just move the stick into neutral and use the brakes. If you want to get a little fancy and enjoy/play with learning the rev matching stuff, do it. If you need the assist of the engine to help slow down safely, like downhill, or on snow or slick surface, proper downshift will help but on slippery if you don't match revs and "jolt" by downshifting unsmoothly you can loose traction suddenly.

IMO and experience, it really is not a major difference regarding wear of brakes or clutch, so be careful, learn to drive smoothly, do what you prefer.

I've just had it for 4 days now, and when I got it I didn't know how to drive a clutch. But in that time, the ride has gotten a lot smoother. Unfortunately, theres an unknown problem that I'm working on right now, but I'm not able to drive it as much as I'd like to. Thanks for the advice

When I used to own a manual, I'd usually just downshift 1 gear and just leave it in gear while I was slowing down, pressing the clutch just before I'd come to a stop. You'll get a little bit of engine braking that way and not but any more wear on the clutch.

I rarely downshift for stoplights when driving a manual. Its noisy and takes extra effort for no gain.

You trade a little wear on the engine, transmission and clutch for some brake wear if you do it, although I doubt either is significant at all. If you like to do it, go ahead, but I don't think there's anything more to it than personal preference

I agree. You've got it spot on

I downshift when I brake, but this is more because I drive aggressively and downshifting (whilst braking) brings you to a halt faster. In my case, I think I add engine wear to brake wear, since I do both simultaneously. I had to replace my clutch two months ago, after 165000kms of trouble-free motoring. But then again, I always knew I'd end up doing that, so I'm notr complaining. 'f you're thinking that you're making any appreciable gains by falling either side of the downshifting vs braking debate, you're not. Both are valid (I downshift more when its raining, for example) and neither really saves you bucketloads of money in the short term.

brake. That is what they are there for. Trucks downshift because they have heavy clutches. Also, if they are loaded up, their brakes will quickly overheat. They just cannot put enough rotor under their wheels to act as a heat sink. One reason they have so much lash when they take off. Brakes are a lot cheaper. I just replaced the pads on my wrx at 50,000 miles, and they still probably had 10,000 miles to go. My acura had rears replaced at over 40,000 and fronts at over 60,000.

BTW, braking and downshifting will not slow you down faster than braking alone. Tires are what limits your braking ability. This is of course unless you are going really fast, like well over 100 mph. But if you can lock up your brakes, then the engine will not stop you faster. and if you are panic stopping or racing, there is not enough time to downshift and brake and steer. notice racecars do not downshift to slow down. Many would spin if they did that, because one set of tires would decelerate faster than the other set, causing the car to break free and slide.

It really isn't so much a trade-off between the clutch and the brakes - I think you can be good to both. For one thing, I think the benefit to the brakes when down-shifting to a stop sign from 35-45 mph is negligible. I always just brake and then pop into neutral once I'm going slowly enough. When I'm on the highway and slowing to a stop from higher speeds, I always down-shift.

My other piece of advice is to ignore all of this advice until you've driven manual long enough to be really sensitive to the sound of your engine. (I'm assuming you haven't already learned this driving automatics, so forgive me if you already know this.) I never down-shifted (except going down steep hills) during my first couple of months driving because I was still getting used to listening to the engine. Once I learned what my engine sounded like when it was struggling, I was able to down-shift without hurting the car.

In my opinion, driving stick is one of the great joys of life - enjoy your new car!

Thanks a lot, I'm looking forward to it. Now if I could just get all these misc. problems with it fixed, I'd be happy.:rolleyes:

Match revs when you downshift, and don't downshift into first. This way, you'll prevent some wear on your brakes, and your clutch won't wear, either.

brakes are for braking - use them.

like some ppl have pointed out, a brake job is a lot cheaper than a clutch job.

As the others have said its alot easier to change brakes than a clutch

Get used to downshifting. It keeps the engine in its powerband, giving you better control, and saves your brakes. Automatic transmissions downshift as you brake so that argument is specious. As long as you dont rest your foot on the clutch pedal or slip it, your clutch will outlast your brakes.

Look at the list of Forum Mechanics. I would never steer you wrong my friend.

Downshifting for braking = no no

To properly downshift, one must rev match, which won't really slow the car down much.

What nobody has mentioned, is that engine braking also increases wear on your rod bearings.

<b>What nobody has mentioned, is that engine braking also increases wear on your rod bearings.</b>

Ya know, I just have to have that explained to me. Do you have a reference for that?

Not enough to do anything. If you take your foot off the pedals in an automatic, it will always coast unless you manually shift it into a lower gear (and no, they don't upshift as soon as you let off the brakes).

Wow I would of fucked up alot of motorcycles by now.

A racecar coming into a corner downshifts and lets the clutch out before they get into the corner, the engine braking helps the racer slow down to the right speed without having to put it all on the brakes...if they did that then they would lock up. A racer doesn't just push in the clutch and slam on the brakes or they would have no control over the car. There is also a thing called brake bias that help offset the "one set of tires spinning faster than the other". If you have ever been to a race or even watched it on tv it is obvious that they downshift and brake to slow their cars up.

Racers slow down before the corners so they can accelerate through. Brake bias is manually set before the race, but it can be adjusted through the race with a lever or knob. But not while actually braking in a corner. Also, racers heel and toe downshift, they brake and apply gas to match revs when the let the clutch out. Basically, the big toe and ball of the foot operate the brake, the side of the foot and the heel operate the gas. The ball of the foot is needed for control, the heel can basically mash the gas to get the revs up. Another thing. Racers use heavy duty components like carbon-fiber clutches and dog gear trannies. Their budget is also a lot bigger than yours. This thread is not about going the fastest , this is about what is best for all around driving. Racing and driving have very little in common.
One more thing, if you are diving into a corner, you mash the brakes, most of the weight transfers to the front wheels. Then you throw the clutch out and let the wheels slow down by engine-braking. All of the sudden your rear end spins out because you already have lightened the rear end. Especially if you have done any trail braking, or if setting up for multiple corners with transitions (like an S-curve) your car is slightly unbalanced and on the threshold, then the car will spin.
last last point. In a race, the car is kept at a very high rpm, near max. Their is no room left in the rev range for engine braking. Downshifting at max rpm is called engine breaking. And the engine will never overpower or be better than properly finctioning brakes. Next time you are out, try pushing on the brakes hard while pushing on the gas. You will feel the car slow, even when giving it gas. Now do you think the little residual compression left from engine braking will help brakes?

The point of downshifting is to have more engine braking for the purpose of slowing down. Almost all professional drivers that drive a manual for a living whether racing or truck driving will downshift. Even if the amount of engine brake is small compared to the brakes it's better than nothing. As it's been said already big rigs have to downshift and rely on engine braking for most of their braking because if the brakes overheat they won't be able to stop. When they downshift the engine still doesn't apply enough engine brake to really slow them down so they have a device called a jake brake that they turn on after they downshift and it basically turns the engine into a big brake. All race car drivers that drive on a track will downshift rather than brake for the reason that once they burn up the brakes they won't be able to stop anymore. For any race car driver brakes are for unplanned moments or to add a touch extra braking to an already downshifted car. So if you wanna be pro with your car you downshift all the way to 2 gear, if you wanna save your clutch and save yourself the hassle of going down all the gears when you don't feel it worth the while then don't. Personally I don't downshift most of the time because it's easier for me to change brake pads than the clutch and the way I drive downshifting doesn't help much more than just leaving it in gear until I'm slow enough to put it in neutral. On the days I feel racy I downshift not really for the braking but instead for the gear matching for when I'm making a corner or something.

First of all, driving a race car or a big rig has nothing to do with driving a passenger car. They have nothing to do with each other either. Yes, you should always downshift going down mountains (in an auto too), but you will not stress the brakes at all for stopsigns, which is what this post was originally about.

Second, racers do not downshift to slow down! There are many reasons. It is uncontrollable, inefficient, you don't have revs to spare, you add a lot of wear to expensive driveline parts, and most importantly its not reliable enough. Everybody will miss a shift at some point in a racing situation. If you're at the limit, and you were relying on a downshift to stop the car, you'll eventually end up a part of the wall.

Of course racers do downshift while braking, but this is not to slow down the car. Its to be in the proper gear when they start accelerating out of the corner. The go straight from brakes to gas (smoothly), so the only time they have to change gears is when braking. Hence the heel-to-toe technique.

Racers know the amount of heat their brakes can take. If they're so far gone that they need the engine to stop the car, they might as well give up. That's an extremely unsafe condition.

In an emergency stop with a regular car, do not waste time downshifting. Your regular brakes will stop the car as well as it can be stopped. The brakes have more capacity than the tires, so you don't add anything by braking and downshifting together. Well, you might cause your car to spin out if its RWD.

Everything you said was true (and great info) except this line. Brakes do not always have more capacity than the tires, especially if your tires are very good, and your brakes are stock and/or not 100%.

The real question is one of economics and skill. Does downshifting reduce wear on the brakes? Sure, but if you don't do it right (revmatching, etc) it increases wear on transmission parts, especially synchros. It's a lot more expensive / time consuming to replace bad synchros than it is to swap out brake pads - synchros can take all day while brakes usually don't take more than 15 minutes per wheel.

Everything I've ever driven much had no problems locking up the tires or activating ABS. What kind of cars don't have massively overdesigned brakes? I've never driven a car with drums, so I'm guessing that those might not be so good.

Brake pads : $30/NAPA

New Engine : $500-$5000

Rebuilt clutch : $300

New clutch : $600

Rebuilt Transmission : $500+

New Transmission $1000+

Out of these choices, which would you rather burn through first?

Hint: You can buy a tremendous amount of brake pads for the cost of an engine or transmission... and clutches WILL go out at some point no matter what you do...

I wish my auto would downshift, it just stays in whatever gear it's in until the torque converter can't spin any slower, then drops into neutral until I hit the gas and it goes back into gear.

Ok, thanks for the replies. Now I've got a new question, if nobody notices I might put it into a new thread, but... When coasting, is it best to just take foot off the gas and go, or can you put the clutch in, or should you just throw it in neutral? Putting it in neutral doesn't make sense to me, because if you do that, then you've got to shift, plus swerve or whatever if something unexpected happens, and that can't be good. I've heard arguements for all, and a lot of you seem to know what you're talking about, so what do you think?

Well, if you simply take your foot off the gas, you will slow down. In which case you will need to put it back on. Works great controlling speed going down a mountain grade, but otherwise, not very useful for coasting. Just pushing in the clutch is what i would do, it wont cause any extra wear, and will leave you in a better position to react to your surroundings. You could put it in neutral and let the clutch out, but why? So your foot doesn't get tired? it makes far more sense to me just to keep it in gear, and reapply the clutch when needed.

Yeah, those were almost my exact thoughts about it, thanks!

Whoa, Funny. The brake pad estimate is for the parts alone, wheras the clutch seems to be parts+installation. I've never seen just a clutch disk and pressure plate go for more than $250 or so for a new one. If you do the work yourself, everything is much cheaper.

And as long as you don't downshift to first and rev match while going 60mph, you won't need a new engine.

If you slow down gradually, you don't wear out the brakes so fast.

If you don't downshift to slow down, you aren't putting a lot of unneeded strain on your driveline.

Damn, it makes sense.

Oh, my bad. Feel free to create a new list with the actual cost of parts, and the amount of time it takes to do each. I still think my point gets across, considering you can change brake pads faster than clutches,transmissions, and engines, and the average person has the facilities/tools/technical knowledge to change brake pads and is more likely to do so without going to a mechanic . The money figures are just ballpark anyway .. there can be wide variation in those numbers.

Of course, I could be wrong, everyone could be able to swap clutches faster than brakepads and wants to do it at home.