Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
any tips for a complete newb to stick shift?
The most important thing to do is to find the point in the clutch travel where it begins to grab.
Try letting out the clutch every-so-slowly until you feel it begin to grab. Don't even let the clutch out, push it back in.
Then find that point again. And again.
Do it without using the throttle. Once you know where that friction point is, you can add throttle and ease off gradually.
It's a skill you will need when going up a steep ramp, for instance.
Get on level ground, and keep easing that clutch out till you feel it start to hook up... Once you get to that point, no hill will ever bother you.. you'll be able to hold it, without even using the gas...
(We've been working on that at home, this week....
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Of course, I learned on a '57 Chevy with a column shifter. It's a wonder I ever drove a MT again.
or
How to Destroy a Clutch Quickly and Efficiently
1. Use the clutch to hold the car while on a hill by engaging/disengaging it and having the car rock back and forth. (This is one of the best ways to mangle a clutch)
2. When approaching a red light at high speed, jam the transmission into a lower gear. Not only does this put stress on the transmission synchos for no good reason, and shock the clutch and pressure plate and driveline, it will save those precious $75 front brake pads.
3. The clutch pedal makes a great foot rest. Just keep your foot on it while you drive so that the clutch might be allowed to slip ever so gently.
4. If you get stuck in snow, just rock the car back and forth for half an hour while wildly spinning the wheels and changing gears quickly from first to reverse. I mean, why join AAA for $60 a year when you can maybe get out of this spot for a mere $800?
5. If you can, drive around town in 5th gear at 1500 rpm. Yes the car will shudder and lug, but think of how many ounces of gas you're saving by doing this and not 'revving" the engine in 3rd gear like those other guys next to you.
When I pulled the engine out of my dad's 1962 Bug it had over 100,000 miles on it with one valve job at 70,000.
Thje original clutch disc looked so good I was tempted to just put it back in but I replaced it.
Others complained because they would have to replace a clutch every 30,000 miles. Of course, they blamed it on the car.
I have ridden with people who have driven nothing but sticks yet still don't know how.
starting today and for most of summatime, i'll be DDing my slightly-modded V8 with stickshift unless wild storms are predicted....
For the worst city/commute/brutal-rushhour driving V8 with stick does get old fast, and then I'll drive my vw TDI (stickshift) for a week or two, it handles the stop & go much more patiently.
Nothing wrong with downshifting to save brake wear as long as you don't put a shock load on the driveline ( DIY Rev matching).
Well there you have it; low on power and low in fuel efficiency for a given displacement doesn't make for a well regarded engine in my book.
I think an F1 unit, say in a McLaren, can go from 6th to 1st in about 3 seconds flat. I don't think those other cars are going to do that.
In the early '90s, my brother's first attempt to get me driving a MT was done using his now-wife's 1982 Chevy Cavalier... 4-speed, no tach. Didn't leave me with a good feeling at all.
A couple years later, he had me drive his 1986 Accord... World. Of. Difference. The next 4 cars that would grace my household over 7 years were manuals... I think my favorite of them was the 1993 del Sol, but the ones I spent the most time with were a 1994 Saturn SL2 (surprisingly bad gearing for a supposed close-ratio box) and a 1999 Corolla (transmission was the best part of an otherwise boring car).
Downshifting as an aid to braking is also a way to "stabilize" a RWD or R/awd vehicle for quick slowing, especially when in a turn, like having a "drag" anchor. But while applicable, rarely, to public road use that's more of a "track" thing and of course should NEVER be tried in a FWD or F/awd vehicle.
Very bad idea, especially when conditions are slippery. You pull that stunt in a RWD car in slippery conditions and you'll either end up sideways or in a loop-de-loop.
Like it or don't, believe it or not, it is far safer to use downshifting as a means of (limited) deceleration in a FWD or AWD car when traction is marginal.
In most cases, if you're going to do anything sudden with the gas pedal, the brake pedal, or the gearshift knob, do it when the vehicle is in a straight line.
Were it only that simple; consider the following scenario:
Car: Late model RWD BMW with a manual transmission and traction control fully engaged.
Geography: Rolling hills with roads which wind around the local landscape with lots of elevation changes.
Temperature: Within a degree either way of freezing.
Weather: New light snow.
The drive: Descending a long curvy grade in second gear.
In the above scenario it is highly likely that the car will encounter conditions where the rear wheels lose traction, especially on a curve, while the front wheels are still tracking where they're pointed. When the loss of traction occurs, it is 100% guaranteed the car will quickly enter a spin.
If the above scenario was repeated in a vehicle with either FWD or AWD, the worst case would be the nose of the car would start to plow (albeit at a higher threshold than with the RWD vehicle).
You bring up an interesting point, though...whether traction controls can sense compression braking...I know ABS wouldn't...but TC might only measure *differential* wheel spin, and with compression braking there wouldn't be a differential...
Perhaps some sophisticated stability control system can detect compression braking and compensate.....?
Last time I checked, no car, regardless of drive orientation can correct for idiocy behind the wheel. :P
"You bring up an interesting point, though...whether traction controls can sense compression braking...I know ABS wouldn't...but TC might only measure *differential* wheel spin, and with compression braking there wouldn't be a differential...
Perhaps some sophisticated stability control system can detect compression braking and compensate.....?"
I can tell you from first hand experience that even BMW's sophisticated traction and stability control systems are unable to correct for a loss of traction due to compression braking.
When the scenario I outlined above happened to me I was surprised to see a mailbox heading in my direction and it took a tenth of a second or two for me to figure out what was wrong and quickly press the clutch pedal in. As soon as the clutch disengaged, sanity was restored.
That is to be avoided since it's hard on the drivetrain and as they say "pads are cheaper to replace than clutches" (and they have a lot more brake- power).
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
it was enough to get you pulled off the track during training. a total no-no for a racer. (it's not the fastest way to go around the track!)
and yes in winter driving it is not unusual to have the rear get loose and the car get sideways due to engine-braking or downshifting at the wrong time. an automatic transmission can downshift at the wrong time going downhill in the snow and voila your car is sideways or backwards.
this risk/effect is usually increased high-compression/high-hp vehicles with lots of cylinders... (my favorites!)
First off, the old wives tale which says engine braking is hard on the drivetrain is simply false (assuming you're not jamming gears at RPM thresholds which are too high).
Second, I've been hearing the old adage that "pads are cheaper than clutches" for many-many years, and the truth is, the statement is only relevant when you're talking about stop-and-go driving with lots of short duration braking events. If you look at friction material wear from the opposite side of the spectrum, a long multi-mile descent using engine braking versus brakes; using the engine braking is a no-brainer in terms of component wear. Think about it, a car on a one-mile descent at 30 mph will endure say two minutes of brake pad wear versus less than a second of clutch wear for the same trip. If the descent is longer in duration, the math works out even more in favor of using engine braking.
Ok, I live in Eagle Vail CO in the winters and driving I 70 all you see is side steep staight up a mountain dirt roads for truckers who lose their brakes.
How do you drive down MT Washington?
Someone posted they wouln't dare to buy a used BMW 3 with a six spd as it might be risky. I'm on my third one and my favorite cars were Integras and thr Type S never had a clutch problem and when I got rid of them they were just as good as new. Driving a A/T , Steptonic or a DSG is boring to me. Pretty soon we wil have an autro pilot so people can muti task. Have a good one I enjoy your post.
Hmmm, I must still be a kid then as I still like to go out in the white stuff and mix it up.
I don't think the transmission's synchros think it's an old wives tale. What is holding the car back when you brake hard with the transmission?---not the brakes---all that force is transmitted to the gear set. So if you're in a 3500 lbs car and you use the transmission to scrub off speed rapidly from 60 mph to 30 mph, where do you think all that energy went?-- clutch face, gear set, synchros, axle shafts, differential....
If you compression brake when the car is not set properly, it's no different than slamming on the brakes when the car is not set properly--such as imbalance in a turn---
To me, it is all about goals, purposes, degrees and compromises. The secondary or perhaps primary issue, it takes a whole lot of information and data to figure this out. On a greater level TMI if you will (too much information). When a greater percentage of the population were manual transmissions, a lot more folks cared. Now with the manual transmissions being app 20%, a lot LESS folks care.
The appliance and automatic concepts really does not contribute to the mechanical understanding of what is really happening.
Another example I can use is heading down out of the mountains from Red Mountain Pass and into Silverton, CO; I drove that entire distance with zero brakes one time. During that trip I used constant engine braking (with no sudden gear changes or RPM swings) to safely arrive in Silverton. Turns out my master cylinder had failed, and once a new one was put in, I was good to go.
Long story short; please don't confuse how some idiots slam into say second gear and then sidestepping the clutch pedal when travelling at highway speeds with what has been traditionally known as "engine braking".
"compression braking" implies by its very definition, a sudden, rapid decrease in RPM by downshifting
I would argue that compression braking can be as gentle as a summer's breeze, as in Shipo's excellent description in post #6893, of descending a long grade. There are degrees of compression braking, and slamming it into second as you enter a turn, sending RPMs to redline is unquestionably hard on the machinery.
But there is nothing implied by the term that says that a more moderate application is impossible. :shades:
The above discussion seems to be completely devoid of any references to radical gear changes and extreme RPM transients. Go figure.
We weren't talking mountain driving when we got off on the compression braking. If I'm approaching a red light in city traffic, if anything, I'm blipping out of gear and using my brakes. Seems cheaper in the long run than trying to rev match and use the engine to slow the car down.
But as a rule, even on public roads I don't personally recommend that anyone ever use the gearbox strictly for braking unless you plan to use that lower gear for something. As for coming into a turn quickly, I recommend that you do any downshifting while the car is still balanced, before entering the curve.
On a long downhill, compression braking can be a good thing, if used in conjunction with the brakes themselves---otherwise you can defeat the rev limiter.
The Lake Tahoe journey usually starts from sea level UP to where roads are @ app 7,000 ft. So a downgrade can be all of app 110 miles. In a Jetta TDI I normally come down from 7000 ft + a tad slower than I went up for there is an almost tremendous advantage to the no fuel draw scenario on a diesel (TDI). Normally it is +5 to +8 mpg advantage. Of course, I normally average the fuel mpg on the R/T.
hey HR puffinstuff, you drive down steep hills very carefully in a high-compression stickshift car, even with the best snow tires. (I used to use snows only on back but nowadays always use 4 regardless of fwd/rwd.)
as for clutches vs pads only being relevant during stop & go - I drive mostly highway - just a bit of commuting/stop&go, and it melted my clutch. I did not beat on the car, these (GM) clutches fail on their own after ~100k, that's just the way it goes. I drove with an insanely broken clutch slide for a year and let another $1500 of engine/drivetrain damage accrue to the drivetrain don't let this happen to you
really, wwest, engine braking only on the track ?! I had one fun day at laguna seca in 1972 formula fords, and the instructors were very clear and did bag me because I engine brakes twice, so they made me pull over and stop racing and be lectured because I was engine-braking a bit out of habit into the wacky turns - but they totally prohibited it! Are you saying it's faster to engine brake?! I can't say I believe it. They taught me that fastest is to accelerate maximum to last second, brake at last second, and accelrate out of the turn. It sure did seem right to me! To this day it works for me pretty good on the interstates/ramps too.
there is a big difference between downshifting and braking. in downshifting the force/energy is 99.999% on the drive wheel(s). with braking there is a complex hydraulic system plus and ABS-pumps/computers/solenoids operating the brakes. so braking much safer and more effective than simple pV=nRT causing one or two wheels of reverse-torque especially on wet roads like for this years USA monsoons. (Al Gore invented monsoons, you know.)
apparently shipo knows something about snow/ice driving too - in some USA states we are driving on ice/floods practically 50% of the year and have to be seriously concerned&controlled about loose-rear/sideways on ice/RWD. you lucky sun-bleached southern/flatlanders just don't get it
(ps - please do sell me some southern real-estate - is it summer there yet?)