Braking with the gears what ridiculous practice

BillScarab

pault123 wrote: »

Reading this article on Eco driving

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7530652.stm

The gent admits

""For as long as I have driven, I've used the gears to slow down. But with eco-driving, the idea is to lift off the gas in a higher gear, and allow the car to lose momentum."

Can anyone who drops down from 6th to 5th to 4th to 3rd, to 2nd to 1st simply to come to a stop - instead of using a higher gear with engine braking and then neutral gear and foot brake explain why?!

The wear factor must be insane on the clutch, flywheel, gearbox by using the gears to slow the car.

Why would the wear factor be insane? I can see that it may increase wear on the transmission a little but I'd hardly call it insane. The minute you lift off the accelerator your car starts slowing down using the gears anway. It's also recommended practice on steep hills to use low keeps to control your speed so you don't overheat the brakes. You shouldn't be braking in neutral anyway as your not in full control if you're not in gear.

Conor_3

oldagetraveller wrote: »

Even before the "eco nazis" took over the country it was always advised to use brakes to slow down. The reasoning being that it's cheaper and easier to replace brake components than anything subjected to the wear and tear of using the gears to slow down, e.g. the clutch.

How do you prematurely wear the clutch?

nihcaj

AdrianHi wrote: »

As my driving instructor told me 21 years ago:
"Gears are for going, brakes are for stopping."

Mine taught me exactly the opposite, and that was 31 years ago! Changing from say, 4th to 2nd without going through 3rd was not seen as good practice then either, sitting with a foot on the clutch at junctions was a total no-no. Doesn't say either system is totally right or wrong.

This is turning into a typical internet black OR white argument for the SAKE of argument ;-(

Times change, clutch release bearings change, petrol prices change and traffic levels change. Driving needs to adapt. There are benefits and pitfalls to different arguments in varying proportions, those not interested in petty trivialities get on with it and balance those, and drive according to situation and circumstance as they go. What was good to pass your test was never much to do with actually getting out and driving anyway!

Idiophreak

tbh I'm terrified not only that more people don't use engine braking (ie, they're just not fully in control of their car) - but also the amount of people on here that seem to think it's a crazy idea. This is an argument for driving test renewals if ever there was one. These are the numpties that sit on the brakes for miles down hills...it's the only way they understand how to slow a car...

The only *real* problem you'll have using engine braking is if you go into 2nd gear at 90mph and spin your engine so fast it shakes itself to bits...If you change down sensibly, it's just the same of "easing off" in fifth, you just *slow down* more and *use brakes* less.

pault123

An example... coming off a motorway onto a sliproad, speed 70mph.

Using the gear technique i've seen people drop it
from 6th through the gears all the way down to 1st. By the time you reach 1st your at the red light.

What I do leave it in 6th but take foot off revs, . When there is about 10 metres left to red light the car has slowed down to reasonable speed. Apply brake and depress clutch when revs require it to prevent a stall.

I really don't get the 5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 1st technique, how is it of benefit when the brake can simply be used and clutch depressed when revs require.

If every stop you go through ALL the gears this is an insane amount of wear, if you factor every stop, every journey, every day, every year it adds up to a lot of uneeded clutch and gearbox use.

Same example again dual carriage way 40mph, 4th gear. Take foot off revs - let the engine braking go as long as possible then brake and use clutch as needed. But yet some insist on 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 1st!

*EDIT* engine braking I get, understand and use myself. I'll also drop to the next lowest gear when the speed takes the revs to 1100-900 and the traffic is still moving. Its the use of the gears as a brake where travelling at 40mph say and someone wants to get to 30mph, revs are at 2000, they'll drop the gear to third and let the gear brake them down.

BillScarab

pault123 wrote: »

An example... coming off a motorway onto a sliproad, speed 70mph.

Using the gear technique i've seen people drop it
from 6th through the gears all the way down to 1st. By the time you reach 1st your at the red light.

What I do leave it in 6th but take foot off revs, . When there is about 10 metres left to red light the car has slowed down to reasonable speed. Apply brake and depress clutch when revs require it to prevent a stall.

I really don't get the 5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 1st technique, how is it of benefit when the brake can simply be used and clutch depressed when revs require.

If every stop you go through ALL the gears this is an insane amount of wear, if you factor every stop, every journey, every day, every year it adds up to a lot of uneeded clutch and gearbox use.

Same example again dual carriage way 40mph, 4th gear. Take foot off revs - let the engine braking go as long as possible then brake and use clutch as needed. But yet some insist on 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 1st!

*EDIT* engine braking I get, understand and use myself. I'll also drop to the next lowest gear when the speed takes the revs to 1100-900 and the traffic is still moving. Its the use of the gears as a brake where travelling at 40mph say and someone wants to get to 30mph, revs are at 2000, they'll drop the gear to third and let the gear brake them down.

If you change down as you your speed drops you're always in the correct gear to pull away again if you suddenly have to accelerate. Also the engine braking will be more effective at lower speeds in a lower gear. To be honest I just can't see it being an 'insane' amount of wear on the transmission. How often do people have to replace gearboxes these days? There are far quicker ways of knackering a clutch than changing gear when slowing down as well.

Inactive

Conor wrote: »

And no, the wear factor isn't insane on the clutch or the flywheel or gearbox at all, why would it be? If it were, you wouldn't have 44 tonne lorries going 500,000 miles on a single clutch because with a lorry, you DO have to use engine braking.

We are not talking about 44 tonne trucks, we are talking about cars.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Dropping through the gearbox to slow the car to a halt is a very silly idea.

1 - it requires more thought
2 - it takes one hand from the wheel
3 - it unbalances the car
4 - overall, it causes the driver to be less in control of the vehicle than he/she otherwise would be

The safest method of stopping the car is to use the brakes, allowing the engine speed to drop to a point just above where it naturally begins to labour, and then to dip the clutch, using the brakes to stop the car, applying the parking brake, and then moving the gear selector to neutral.

Using engine braking to control the vehicle's speed through a corner is fine - using it to bring the car to a halt is just bloody stupid.

Inactive

Conor wrote: »

Do you even have a clue !!!!!! you're on about?

Do you?..your driving style flies in the face of advice given by the DSA, so don't tell people how they would fail a driving test.:rolleyes:

The above poster got it spot on, gears are for going, brakes are for stopping.

looby-loo_2

When I taught my children to drive all music was banned in the car so they learned to listen to the engine too.