2018 Mustang Manual vs. Auto--MotorTrend

[Norm Peterson]

So a bit of engine braking might be a good thing, even in a Mustang.

Agree 100%.

Although brakes these days are way better than they were 20, 30, or more years ago, there's no need to test their limits. Ford won't ever be putting true track pads on these cars, and even with track pads rated to 1475°F like what's on my car right now I'd still drop it down a gear or two to mostly maintain speed on a long downhill rather than ride the brakes the whole way down.

As a side thought, when you ride the brakes for an extended length of time, you can catch the driver behind you off guard if you suddenly have to slow down a lot harder (your brake lights are going to be lit the whole time and nothing about them changes to let the guy behind you know that you just stepped on the brake pedal a bit harder).

So maybe consider downshifting on long downgrades a cheap investment in protecting you from the rear. When you do step on the brakes (and light the brake lights) it's because you suddenly mean business.


Norm

Sponsored

 

[w3rkn]

I've been trying to keep it in as general a sense as possible. Difference in driver intent might change the values of the forces and so on, but not what and how they're working. Downshifting to exaggerate the amount of engine braking is nothing more than the driver choosing to execute an extreme case of coast-down deceleration.


Norm

NO, we are talking about using engine braking instead of using your brakes to slow down the car to a complete stop. Since I gave an exact scenario which sparked this, you don't get to change the goal posts. 80mphs to zero mph and eventually coming to a complete stop, such as a highway off ramp.

Nobody is talking about coasting either.

One would have to downshift more than a few times to engine brake a car down below 10mph. There is a big difference in knowing how to use a manual, and driving a car. Subsequently, I know people who drove manuals for years, then never learned to short shift... and they use the same stupid excuse that they weren't taught that way in driving school.

Again, why use the engine, when you can use your brakes..?

 

[w3rkn]

you are unable to follow logic...

So if youre in 6th(manual) at 70 or 80 and let off is that not engine braking?
Dont autos essentially engine brake all the time?
Should write ford and ask them why they programmed my car to shorten its own life?

i am not in a lot of situations where i go from 80 to a stop i guess.
You seem to be caught up on this vroom. you dont need to downshift keeping high rpms.

No, that is coasting..!
We are discussing, using engine braking to purposely to SLOW DOWN YOUR CAR, instead of braking.

Ie: Using engine braking to get to a lower speed, instead off applying the brakes, where One downshifts several time into to a lower gear and purposely drags the engine along to eat-up the car velocity, instead of just applying the brakes.



This^ was already explained to you and now I know for a fact you are either incompetent, or a bad troll.

 

[Angry50]

No, that is coasting..!
We are discussing, using engine braking to purposely to SLOW DOWN YOUR CAR, instead of braking.

Ie: Using engine braking to get to a lower speed, instead off applying the brakes, where One downshifts several time into to a lower gear and purposely drags the engine along to eat-up the car velocity, instead of just applying the brakes.



This^ was already explained to you and now I know for a fact you are either incompetent, or a bad troll.

i know for a fact you are garbage and an idiot if you noticed youre the only moron arguing with everyone like a buffoon.

see i can use pointless insults too.. coasting is when we were discussing coasting in neutral.

so you then need to define engine braking.. allowing the engine to slow the car is engine braking. doesnt mean it has to be a stop not in any case i was making. if im going 80 and want to slow to 50 and instead of using the brakes i downshift to 5th.. that would qualify as engine braking.

example taking a rounded exit ramp off the highway one might down shift from 6-5-4 maybe keeping rpms in the 3-4k range which would maintain throttle control while slowing the vehicle down (engine braking).

do you have any dispute with this? my argument was that this action wouldnt not increase wear out side of normal range.

 

[w3rkn]

Backlash, or the distance (angular or linear) before two parts re-engage when motion has been reversed, is not relevant here as once the wheels begin loading the engine, loading direction remains the same. Let's not throw out irrelevant key words. Backlash comes in to play when your RPM drop too low and you begin to get gear rollover. The power strokes fight the compression and the rotational motion of the crankshaft is far from constant.

Backlash in transmissions not only accounts for thermal expansion, but also determines things like radial and tangential preloads.

Unless designed for a specific application, manual transmissions don't care which way they go. Clockwise or Counter-Clockwise the thing will spin just the same. Infrequently a manual transmission will have an oil pump (ie. the ZF6) which requires the valving to be correct for the rotation. However, reversing an oil pump is trivial.

BTW, what kind of gearing do you deal with? Just need a frame of reference on this one.


Option 1: use compression braking as much as possible and extend the life of wearable items. Internal combustion engines are made to take the pressure after combustion... compression isn't much of a load.

Option 2: use the wearable items as much as possible and replace them sooner.

I'm not going to tell anyone what to do... but...

"Facts" aren't facts if they are made up.

:clap2:

Thanks, but backlash also refers to loading-up of the backside of gears... and correct, in use they are made to withstand that, but not designed to be used as a wear item, instead of brakes.

In all your techno babble, did you forget to read where engineers acknowledge that it isn't beneficial unless you have components specifically designed for constant negative load.

Go look at actual gears that are cut in a manual transmission.. (Go ahead we will wait). They are DESIGNED optimally for load, wear and heat to be on the load-bearing side, not the backside. (You only covered heat, ergo oil)

Again, nobody is talking about IF gears are able to withstand it, that still doesn't make negative loading of a transmissions gears optimal, or even beneficial in slowing down a car.


Specially when there is something already designed and engineering for the exact same thing... your brakes. Otherwise you are essentially saying the most effective way to slow down your car is engine braking... and I am laughing at your for trying to uphold that logic... and going the long way to do it.

 

[Jimmy G]

...Again, why use the engine, when you can use your brakes..?

Because, that's what you do when you own a manual. You use the thing that's in the middle of the car, the stick connected to the gearbox. Brakes are the option for losers.

Didn't I first mention engine braking a week ago.....and you're still rabbiting on about it??

 

[w3rkn]

i know for a fact you are garbage and an idiot if you noticed youre the only moron arguing with everyone like a buffoon.

see i can use pointless insults too.. coasting is when we were discussing coasting in neutral.

so you then need to define engine braking.. allowing the engine to slow the car is engine braking. doesnt mean it has to be a stop not in any case i was making. if im going 80 and want to slow to 50 and instead of using the brakes i downshift to 5th.. that would qualify as engine braking.

example taking a rounded exit ramp off the highway one might down shift from 6-5-4 maybe keeping rpms in the 3-4k range which would maintain throttle control while slowing the vehicle down (engine braking).

do you have any dispute with this? my argument was that this action wouldnt not increase wear out side of normal range.

:headbonk:

Yep, you are a troll. Name calling..? lulz…

Read back little kid. I already defined an exact scenario. That is how this all got started. Yes, all cars engine brake on their own, but we are discussing the Driver forcing additional engine braking by downshifting into a lower gear, to cause the engine to drag along and eat up a car's velocity at a greater rate than coasting...


In your scenario... I am asking why would you 6-5-4... or have any need to maintain throttle control... if up ahead is a stop sign/light and you are coming to a complete stop regardless..?

What is the point of stabbing 2 additional (negative) gears..?

 

[Angry50]

:headbonk:

Yep, you are a troll. Name calling..? lulz…

Read back little kid. I already defined an exact scenario. That is how this all got started. Yes, all cars engine brake on their own, but we are discussing the Driver forcing additional engine braking by downshifting into a lower gear, to cause the engine to drag along and eat up a car's velocity at a greater rate than coasting...


In your scenario... I am asking why would you 6-5-4... or have any need to maintain throttle control... if up ahead is a stop sign/light and you are coming to a complete stop regardless..?

What is the point of stabbing 2 additional (negative) gears..?

nice try troll.. have a seat before you fall off your tricycle.

well not sure if youre familiar with high ways or if you stay under your rock.
i never stated you were coming up to a stop, frankly you dont know until youre at least partly down the exit. you might need to speed back up to merge or maybe stop if there is too much traffic.
you may need throttle if you leave it in 6th you will lug the engine if apply throttle at to slow a speed. So you keep your Rpms in a usable range so if you need the throttle youre not suddenly trying to shift from neutral to an appropriate gear.
none of this even matters to the point of if it causes extra wear on the engine or not..

we know people do it when "carving corners" or maybe having a spirited drive. its used and it serves a purpose. I am not sure who or when it was proposed that someone is coming to a complete stop using no brakes.

you are trying to attack 2 different points..
1. does it cause wear
2. whats the purpose
im debating the wear aspect. purpose you can go ask all the pro racers..

 

[thehunterooo]

opcorn:

 

[Joe 5.0]

Manuals are way better than automatics because one feels more connected to the car and the road. Only true car enthusiasts drive manuals. /end thread

Sincerely,
A 6MT owner who knows automatics are faster but can't accept that fact

 

[gixxersixxerman]

wow........ this forum will literally argue about anything..

 

[Angry50]

wow........ this forum will literally argue about anything..

yes.. change my mind.. lol

We established that driving a manual automatically makes you a pro driver and engine braking is useless and will destroy your car.

 

[Joe 5.0]

yes.. change my mind.. lol

We established that driving a manual automatically makes you a pro driver and engine braking is useless and will destroy your car.

I've been waiting for my pro sponsorship for three years now...

 

[nastang87xx]

wow........ this forum will literally argue about anything..

youporn vs pornhub? Hint...they're the same company. :lol::cheers:

 

[bluebeastsrt]

Little disapointed this isn't up to 500 posts yet! Ford still sells an automatic & manual.

Sponsored