Quick question about "rev-matching" and wearing on the clutch.
06-17-2007, 03:41 PM
#63
New Member
Originally Posted by bailey bill
Amazing!!!
I've been drving manual trannies for over 50 years, and I never know it was so complicated.
And I never knew clutches and trannies were so fragile. I have abused both pretty badly at times, (showing off, racing, pulling trailers, etc) so I can't understand why I have never broken or worn out either one.
bill
I've been drving manual trannies for over 50 years, and I never know it was so complicated.
And I never knew clutches and trannies were so fragile. I have abused both pretty badly at times, (showing off, racing, pulling trailers, etc) so I can't understand why I have never broken or worn out either one.
bill
--Spike
06-17-2007, 05:36 PM
#64
Registered User
Originally Posted by Spike100
You understand. I have less experience (45 years in my case). I know exactly what you are describing. The "kids" here have no idea.
--Spike
--Spike
But now manual trannys are somewhat unique, so those who drive them want to believe its a very complex task, with lots of rules and special techniques, that only the most skilled drivers can master.
But the procedure hasn't changed.
1) Step on the clutch
2) Select the gear
3) Release the clutch
bill
06-17-2007, 06:11 PM
#65
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 930
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christ what a bunch of BS.
1.) Engine braking DOES not hurt your car. Does reving your car from 0-5,000 hurt it? No. So why would dropping your rpms from 5,000-0 hurt it. Use your brain.
2.) Double clutch all you want. If anyone can find me ONE in car race showing the driver double clutching I MIGHT believe your not an idiot.
3.) Rev matching is how its SUPPOSE to be done. You've got two thing spinning. The Engine and the drive shaft. Common sense says if your going to engage the two to become one you want them spinning at the same speed. If not one will have to adjust QUICKLY.
So how the f**k would rev matching hurt it?
1.) Engine braking DOES not hurt your car. Does reving your car from 0-5,000 hurt it? No. So why would dropping your rpms from 5,000-0 hurt it. Use your brain.
2.) Double clutch all you want. If anyone can find me ONE in car race showing the driver double clutching I MIGHT believe your not an idiot.
3.) Rev matching is how its SUPPOSE to be done. You've got two thing spinning. The Engine and the drive shaft. Common sense says if your going to engage the two to become one you want them spinning at the same speed. If not one will have to adjust QUICKLY.
So how the f**k would rev matching hurt it?
06-17-2007, 06:44 PM
#66
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christ [Needs a comma or an exclamation point] what a bunch of BS. [B.S.]
1.) Engine braking DOES not hurt your car. [Why emphasize "does" but not "not?" That does NOT make any sense.] Does reving [Revving, not reving] your car from 0-5,000 hurt it? No. So why would dropping your rpms from 5,000-0 hurt it. [Usually questions end in a question mark, even if they are "rhetorical"] Use your brain. [Consider an exclamation point]
2.) Double clutch all you want. If anyone can find me ONE [One what?] in car race showing the driver double clutching [Needs a comma.] I MIGHT believe your not an idiot. [You're, not your. And you were doing so well before]
3.) Rev matching is how its SUPPOSE to be done. [Supposed, not suppose.] You've got two thing spinning. The Engine and the drive shaft. [Fragment, consider revision.] Common sense says [The comma is your friend.] if your [You're. YOU'RE!] going to engage the two to become one [Again with the comma.] you want them spinning at the same speed. If not [My kingdom for a comma.] one will have to adjust QUICKLY. [Why emphasize "quickly?"]
So [The last of the missing commas.] how the f**k would rev matching hurt it?
[If you're going to call names, especially names like idiot, you should have a minimum grasp of English. Thank you for your kind words.]
1.) Engine braking DOES not hurt your car. [Why emphasize "does" but not "not?" That does NOT make any sense.] Does reving [Revving, not reving] your car from 0-5,000 hurt it? No. So why would dropping your rpms from 5,000-0 hurt it. [Usually questions end in a question mark, even if they are "rhetorical"] Use your brain. [Consider an exclamation point]
2.) Double clutch all you want. If anyone can find me ONE [One what?] in car race showing the driver double clutching [Needs a comma.] I MIGHT believe your not an idiot. [You're, not your. And you were doing so well before]
3.) Rev matching is how its SUPPOSE to be done. [Supposed, not suppose.] You've got two thing spinning. The Engine and the drive shaft. [Fragment, consider revision.] Common sense says [The comma is your friend.] if your [You're. YOU'RE!] going to engage the two to become one [Again with the comma.] you want them spinning at the same speed. If not [My kingdom for a comma.] one will have to adjust QUICKLY. [Why emphasize "quickly?"]
So [The last of the missing commas.] how the f**k would rev matching hurt it?
[If you're going to call names, especially names like idiot, you should have a minimum grasp of English. Thank you for your kind words.]
06-17-2007, 07:17 PM
#67
Originally Posted by Korki Buchek
Christ [Needs a comma or an exclamation point] what a bunch of BS. [B.S.]
1.) Engine braking DOES not hurt your car. [Why emphasize "does" but not "not?" That does NOT make any sense.] Does reving [Revving, not reving] your car from 0-5,000 hurt it? No. So why would dropping your rpms from 5,000-0 hurt it. [Usually questions end in a question mark, even if they are "rhetorical"] Use your brain. [Consider an exclamation point]
2.) Double clutch all you want. If anyone can find me ONE [One what?] in car race showing the driver double clutching [Needs a comma.] I MIGHT believe your not an idiot. [You're, not your. And you were doing so well before]
3.) Rev matching is how its SUPPOSE to be done. [Supposed, not suppose.] You've got two thing spinning. The Engine and the drive shaft. [Fragment, consider revision.] Common sense says [The comma is your friend.] if your [You're. YOU'RE!] going to engage the two to become one [Again with the comma.] you want them spinning at the same speed. If not [My kingdom for a comma.] one will have to adjust QUICKLY. [Why emphasize "quickly?"]
So [The last of the missing commas.] how the f**k would rev matching hurt it?
[If you're going to call names, especially names like idiot, you should have a minimum grasp of English. Thank you for your kind words.]
1.) Engine braking DOES not hurt your car. [Why emphasize "does" but not "not?" That does NOT make any sense.] Does reving [Revving, not reving] your car from 0-5,000 hurt it? No. So why would dropping your rpms from 5,000-0 hurt it. [Usually questions end in a question mark, even if they are "rhetorical"] Use your brain. [Consider an exclamation point]
2.) Double clutch all you want. If anyone can find me ONE [One what?] in car race showing the driver double clutching [Needs a comma.] I MIGHT believe your not an idiot. [You're, not your. And you were doing so well before]
3.) Rev matching is how its SUPPOSE to be done. [Supposed, not suppose.] You've got two thing spinning. The Engine and the drive shaft. [Fragment, consider revision.] Common sense says [The comma is your friend.] if your [You're. YOU'RE!] going to engage the two to become one [Again with the comma.] you want them spinning at the same speed. If not [My kingdom for a comma.] one will have to adjust QUICKLY. [Why emphasize "quickly?"]
So [The last of the missing commas.] how the f**k would rev matching hurt it?
[If you're going to call names, especially names like idiot, you should have a minimum grasp of English. Thank you for your kind words.]
I do agree that BabyZiLLa post was rather lame in its formulation. It's a kids thing I think... Leave be
06-17-2007, 07:20 PM
#68
Originally Posted by RedVisineX
What about engine braking? I take it that hurts the car?
Engine braking might burn more oil thought. Piston oil rings rely on combustion pressure to seal properly. So while engine braking, more oil is left in the cylinder, sloshing around and waiting for the moment you hit the gas to burn and be expelled. No biggies really.
06-17-2007, 07:58 PM
#69
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 930
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Korki Buchek
Christ [Needs a comma or an exclamation point] what a bunch of BS. [B.S.]
1.) Engine braking DOES not hurt your car. [Why emphasize "does" but not "not?" That does NOT make any sense.] Does reving [Revving, not reving] your car from 0-5,000 hurt it? No. So why would dropping your rpms from 5,000-0 hurt it. [Usually questions end in a question mark, even if they are "rhetorical"] Use your brain. [Consider an exclamation point]
2.) Double clutch all you want. If anyone can find me ONE [One what?] in car race showing the driver double clutching [Needs a comma.] I MIGHT believe your not an idiot. [You're, not your. And you were doing so well before]
3.) Rev matching is how its SUPPOSE to be done. [Supposed, not suppose.] You've got two thing spinning. The Engine and the drive shaft. [Fragment, consider revision.] Common sense says [The comma is your friend.] if your [You're. YOU'RE!] going to engage the two to become one [Again with the comma.] you want them spinning at the same speed. If not [My kingdom for a comma.] one will have to adjust QUICKLY. [Why emphasize "quickly?"]
So [The last of the missing commas.] how the f**k would rev matching hurt it?
[If you're going to call names, especially names like idiot, you should have a minimum grasp of English. Thank you for your kind words.]
1.) Engine braking DOES not hurt your car. [Why emphasize "does" but not "not?" That does NOT make any sense.] Does reving [Revving, not reving] your car from 0-5,000 hurt it? No. So why would dropping your rpms from 5,000-0 hurt it. [Usually questions end in a question mark, even if they are "rhetorical"] Use your brain. [Consider an exclamation point]
2.) Double clutch all you want. If anyone can find me ONE [One what?] in car race showing the driver double clutching [Needs a comma.] I MIGHT believe your not an idiot. [You're, not your. And you were doing so well before]
3.) Rev matching is how its SUPPOSE to be done. [Supposed, not suppose.] You've got two thing spinning. The Engine and the drive shaft. [Fragment, consider revision.] Common sense says [The comma is your friend.] if your [You're. YOU'RE!] going to engage the two to become one [Again with the comma.] you want them spinning at the same speed. If not [My kingdom for a comma.] one will have to adjust QUICKLY. [Why emphasize "quickly?"]
So [The last of the missing commas.] how the f**k would rev matching hurt it?
[If you're going to call names, especially names like idiot, you should have a minimum grasp of English. Thank you for your kind words.]
Its a car forum.. You obviouslly know nothing about cars so you turned to English?
Originally Posted by Kolia
Someone is running out of technical arguments and turning to spellcheck for salvation!
I do agree that BabyZiLLa post was rather lame in its formulation. It's a kids thing I think... Leave be
I do agree that BabyZiLLa post was rather lame in its formulation. It's a kids thing I think... Leave be
Last edited by BabyZiLLa; 06-17-2007 at 08:01 PM.
06-17-2007, 11:23 PM
#70
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A) Grammar with an R, grammar.
B) There was not an "argument" in any of your post. You made a few virtually unsupported conclusions relying on "common sense," barnyard physics and name calling. If you offered something in the way of support for anything you said, I could try to make a legitimate response. But the only thing you gave me to work with was some assertions with ****ty punctuation. So, that's what I responded with.
C) I obviously know nothing about cars. You're right, I'm not a mechanic or an engineer. Maybe you could enlighten us. Are you seriously claiming that there is no difference between increasing engine speed from idle to 5,000 RPM in normal driving and dropping from a higher gear so that the engine speed jumps to 5,000 RPM in less than a second? There is no more wear and tear on the engine and drivetrain? This is acceptable for your transmission?
D) I still find it funny that a person who cannot spell, punctuate, or use emphasis correctly would be calling others idiot.
Korki B [Get your prose game up]
B) There was not an "argument" in any of your post. You made a few virtually unsupported conclusions relying on "common sense," barnyard physics and name calling. If you offered something in the way of support for anything you said, I could try to make a legitimate response. But the only thing you gave me to work with was some assertions with ****ty punctuation. So, that's what I responded with.
C) I obviously know nothing about cars. You're right, I'm not a mechanic or an engineer. Maybe you could enlighten us. Are you seriously claiming that there is no difference between increasing engine speed from idle to 5,000 RPM in normal driving and dropping from a higher gear so that the engine speed jumps to 5,000 RPM in less than a second? There is no more wear and tear on the engine and drivetrain? This is acceptable for your transmission?
D) I still find it funny that a person who cannot spell, punctuate, or use emphasis correctly would be calling others idiot.
Korki B [Get your prose game up]
06-18-2007, 06:51 AM
#74
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 930
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Korki Buchek
Some of us are big shots in real life, too. What percentage is you?
06-18-2007, 06:03 PM
#77
New Member
I've read this thread a couple times, and I would rate this one as having the most misinformation, misunderstandings, and ridiculous advice of any thread posted to the Forum. 
The term "double-clutching " is not relevant to this discussion since the Z has synchromesh on every forward gear. bailey bill and I had to do this procedure (double-clutching) on cars and trucks we had back in the 1950's and 60's because some the cars we drove in that period had a three speed column-mounted transmission with no synchromesh on first gear; and trucks in the period often had no synchromesh at all (e.g., the 1950's series Dodge PowerWagon did not have synchromesh on any gear, and required rev-matching on both upshifts and downshifts).
Since the Z has synchromesh on every forward gear, you never need to anything except push in the clutch pedal, select a gear (shift), and release the clutch pedal.
Upshifting is just that simple, and does not require any attempt to match engine speed to gear speed (i.e., "rev-matching"). When downshifting, it is probably a good practice to match engine speed to gear speed. You do this by "blipping" the throttle (increasing the engine speed to match the higher gear speed when selecting a lower gear). "Blipping" the throttle ("rev-matching") while downshifting has some advantages:
1) Reduces wear on the clutch
2) Reduces stresses on the transmission and engine
3) Sounds cool
4) Provides a smooth transition (no jerking) when going from higher gears to lower gears
And of course, downshifting keeps you in the correct range for optimum torque when pulling out of turns and regaining speed.
I realize that all of what I say above is mostly a repetition of individual messages posted on this thread. In fact, I am mostly paraphrasing what BabyZilla said in his message (the message that Korki corrected grammar and spelling errors). I only wanted to put the information into a single coherent message, which I think this thread deserves. I'm not an expert here, so I welcome any additional comments.
--Spike
The term "double-clutching " is not relevant to this discussion since the Z has synchromesh on every forward gear. bailey bill and I had to do this procedure (double-clutching) on cars and trucks we had back in the 1950's and 60's because some the cars we drove in that period had a three speed column-mounted transmission with no synchromesh on first gear; and trucks in the period often had no synchromesh at all (e.g., the 1950's series Dodge PowerWagon did not have synchromesh on any gear, and required rev-matching on both upshifts and downshifts).
Since the Z has synchromesh on every forward gear, you never need to anything except push in the clutch pedal, select a gear (shift), and release the clutch pedal.
Upshifting is just that simple, and does not require any attempt to match engine speed to gear speed (i.e., "rev-matching"). When downshifting, it is probably a good practice to match engine speed to gear speed. You do this by "blipping" the throttle (increasing the engine speed to match the higher gear speed when selecting a lower gear). "Blipping" the throttle ("rev-matching") while downshifting has some advantages:1) Reduces wear on the clutch
2) Reduces stresses on the transmission and engine
3) Sounds cool
4) Provides a smooth transition (no jerking) when going from higher gears to lower gears
And of course, downshifting keeps you in the correct range for optimum torque when pulling out of turns and regaining speed.
I realize that all of what I say above is mostly a repetition of individual messages posted on this thread. In fact, I am mostly paraphrasing what BabyZilla said in his message (the message that Korki corrected grammar and spelling errors). I only wanted to put the information into a single coherent message, which I think this thread deserves. I'm not an expert here, so I welcome any additional comments.
--Spike
06-18-2007, 06:17 PM
#79
New Member
^^ But... It was clever and entertaining... good reading and good humor... probably the best message on the entire thread. I think Korki posted this "in good fun," and he did not mean it to be "mean."
--Spike
--Spike
06-18-2007, 07:12 PM
#80
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 930
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Spike100
^^ But... It was clever and entertaining... good reading and good humor... probably the best message on the entire thread. I think Korki posted this "in good fun," and he did not mean it to be "mean."
--Spike
--Spike