Quick question about "rev-matching" and wearing on the clutch. - Page 5 - MY350Z.COM - Nissan 350Z and 370Z Forum Discussion

Go Back  MY350Z.COM - Nissan 350Z and 370Z Forum Discussion > General > 2003-2009 Nissan 350Z
Reload this Page >

Quick question about "rev-matching" and wearing on the clutch.

Notices
2003-2009 Nissan 350Z

Quick question about "rev-matching" and wearing on the clutch.

Old 06-18-2007, 08:57 PM
  #81  
Spike100
350Z-holic
 
Spike100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Edina, Minnesota
Posts: 6,905
Thanked 115 Times in 105 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BabyZiLLa
Fun. Playfull.. Call it what you will.. I call it one misinformed soul that should stick a pipe in it..
I only meant to say that Korki went from posting information (misinformation according to other readers/posters on this thread) to taking a shot at you (for spelling and grammar) that was meant to distract readers from the overwhelming support you received from others (guys who know what they are talking about, such as Kolia). My long message (4 or 5 up above from this message) is mostly a repeat of what you originally posted.

The information Korki presents in his messages on this thread is confusing and bogus. Reading through the thread, you see that nobody agrees with his statements. He dissected your posting in fun, and it was pretty clever. Korki is probably a college Journalism major, but not an expert on driving cars.

BTW: I usually attempt to post my messages using correct spelling and grammar. But, sometimes I am in a hurry and post quickly without doing spelling and grammar checks. I think that is OK here (after all, we're not in "English 101"). I would rather see a message with accurate information than one that has correct grammar and spelling. Having both is great, but this is a Forum, not a college Journalism class.

--Spike
Spike100 is offline  
Old 06-18-2007, 10:14 PM
  #82  
Korki Buchek
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

A) There is no point in arguing any of this anymore. In every other such thread there is at least one other person (if not a majority) who says that they double clutch. I realize there is synchromesh in our cars, I understand what that means. But I have yet to hear a coherent argument from anyone aside from "we have synchromesh so it isn't necessary." My post responding to "BabyZilla" was a reflection of the fact that there is no reasoning behind what anyone is saying. There are a ton of opinions not backed up by fact. If one person could give me a reason why double clutching is bad for the car, I'll be happy to hear it. That has not been provided.

If I continue to double clutch, it is because I believe it saves wear on the system. Is it necessary, probably not. Do I think it helps maintain the vehicle? Yes. I didn't just pull this information out of thin air. It came from numerous discussions with mechanics, people who track their cars frequently, and other threads on this very forum. So, I am not going to play the "yes it is," "no it isn't" game anymore.

B) I responded to BabyZilla's post in the way that I did because I am rampantly procrastinating. His post was aggressive and unsupported. On top of that he said he believed that I was an idiot. That is pretty strong language for someone who has sub-par fluency in English and little in the way of knowledge. I commend his effort to "fit in" online by reading what everyone else has said, agreeing with it, and then regurgitating it in an antagonistic way. But the only idiocy I see is throwing insults at people you have never met IRL in order to seem cool on a forum. I am just not in the habit of burning bridges.

C) I don't have any experience in journalism beyond what I read in the Times with my Honey Bunches of Oats in the morning. Nor have I been in English 101 for going on a decade. But if you are going to act superior to others, you might expect that sort of reaction. Especially as a 17 year old talking to a grown up.

Good luck to all; I'm glad to have generated so much interest.
Korki Buchek is offline  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:12 PM
  #83  
Spike100
350Z-holic
 
Spike100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Edina, Minnesota
Posts: 6,905
Thanked 115 Times in 105 Posts
Default

Well crap. I should not do this, but I cannot resist. I blame Korki for my bad behavior.

Originally Posted by BabyZiLLa
Fun.[Weak opening statement/word that needs more emphasis; consider using an exclamation point] Playfull.. [Playful, not Playfull; and the use of an ellipsis is three dots (...), not two dots] Call it what you will..[consider "want" in place of "will," and again ellipsis is three dots] I call it one misinformed soul that should stick a pipe in it..[single period should be here instead of two dots]
Sorry,

--Spike
Spike100 is offline  
Old 06-18-2007, 11:40 PM
  #84  
Korki Buchek
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I think the issue is not knowing whether sentences end in periods or ellipses and "splitting the difference" by using two dots. I believe this is only acceptable in cases where you end a sentence on an abbreviation. E.g., today I ran errands: I went to the store; I got a haircut; I did my laundry; &c..

There is also a fundamental misunderstanding of style and tone. I think he was shooting for sarcastic, which should have made the post something like this:

Fun... Playful... You can call it what you will, but I call it a misinformed soul that should "stick a pipe in it."

Or maybe spiteful:

Fun? Playful? Call it what you will. I call it a misinformed soul that should stick a pipe in it!

Grammar is FUN-damental. Consider this a wise investment, it will change your life: http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Style...2235737&sr=8-1

Last edited by Korki Buchek; 06-18-2007 at 11:50 PM.
Korki Buchek is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 12:54 AM
  #85  
redlude97
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle/Portland
Posts: 2,755
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Korki Buchek
A) There is no point in arguing any of this anymore. In every other such thread there is at least one other person (if not a majority) who says that they double clutch. I realize there is synchromesh in our cars, I understand what that means. But I have yet to hear a coherent argument from anyone aside from "we have synchromesh so it isn't necessary." My post responding to "BabyZilla" was a reflection of the fact that there is no reasoning behind what anyone is saying. There are a ton of opinions not backed up by fact. If one person could give me a reason why double clutching is bad for the car, I'll be happy to hear it. That has not been provided.

If I continue to double clutch, it is because I believe it saves wear on the system. Is it necessary, probably not. Do I think it helps maintain the vehicle? Yes. I didn't just pull this information out of thin air. It came from numerous discussions with mechanics, people who track their cars frequently, and other threads on this very forum. So, I am not going to play the "yes it is," "no it isn't" game anymore.

B) I responded to BabyZilla's post in the way that I did because I am rampantly procrastinating. His post was aggressive and unsupported. On top of that he said he believed that I was an idiot. That is pretty strong language for someone who has sub-par fluency in English and little in the way of knowledge. I commend his effort to "fit in" online by reading what everyone else has said, agreeing with it, and then regurgitating it in an antagonistic way. But the only idiocy I see is throwing insults at people you have never met IRL in order to seem cool on a forum. I am just not in the habit of burning bridges.

C) I don't have any experience in journalism beyond what I read in the Times with my Honey Bunches of Oats in the morning. Nor have I been in English 101 for going on a decade. But if you are going to act superior to others, you might expect that sort of reaction. Especially as a 17 year old talking to a grown up.

Good luck to all; I'm glad to have generated so much interest.
I already told you the reason to not double clutch, it requires 2 seperate depressions of the clutch, and its slower than a normal revmatch. You only argument is it MAY reduce wear on the syncros
redlude97 is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 03:36 AM
  #86  
Kolia
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Kolia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 2,821
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Time for more popcorn... Hehe
Kolia is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 04:10 AM
  #87  
Kolia
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Kolia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 2,821
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

On a more serious note, and using spell check, the only “issue” I have with Korki’s technique is the double clutch on upshifts. Going from the premise that synchros mesh better and easier when they’re spinning faster than the gear they are meshing to (the main reason we would double clutch on down shifts), and that the next higher gear’s synchro is always spinning faster, it doesn’t make sense to wait for the synchro’s to slow down. You then need to have it spool back up to speed to complete the upshifts.

The more or less wear question isn’t an issue. Double clutch or not, the transmission and clutch should last the life of the car. Look elsewhere for the cause of a premature clutch wear.
Kolia is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 07:37 AM
  #88  
Kegsbane
Registered User
 
Kegsbane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 485
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Korki Buchek
Grammar is FUN-damental. Consider this a wise investment. It will change your life: http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Style...2235737&sr=8-1
Fixed that for you. Sentences are separated by periods, not commas.

I used to be a grammar ****. Then I turned twelve.
Kegsbane is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 08:35 AM
  #89  
Korki Buchek
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

In fact, both of us are wrong.

"Consider this a wise investment; it will change your life..." is correct.

Thank you for pointing this out to me, though.
Korki Buchek is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 10:13 AM
  #90  
BabyZiLLa
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
 
BabyZiLLa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 930
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Korki Buchek
A) There is no point in arguing any of this anymore. In every other such thread there is at least one other person (if not a majority) who says that they double clutch. I realize there is synchromesh in our cars, I understand what that means. But I have yet to hear a coherent argument from anyone aside from "we have synchromesh so it isn't necessary." My post responding to "BabyZilla" was a reflection of the fact that there is no reasoning behind what anyone is saying. There are a ton of opinions not backed up by fact. If one person could give me a reason why double clutching is bad for the car, I'll be happy to hear it. That has not been provided.

If I continue to double clutch, it is because I believe it saves wear on the system. Is it necessary, probably not. Do I think it helps maintain the vehicle? Yes. I didn't just pull this information out of thin air. It came from numerous discussions with mechanics, people who track their cars frequently, and other threads on this very forum. So, I am not going to play the "yes it is," "no it isn't" game anymore.
Your looking for proof of why not to double clutch? Are you serious?

I don't care if you been racing for 50 years. Physics say its impossible for it to be faster. Your wanting proof? Your the only one thats pro double clutching. How bout you show us some proof of someone actually doing it in the 21st century.

My money is on the fact you heard the term double clutching in a movie.. Looked it up.. Saw a few posts saying its better for ya tranny. Off you went on that tangent.

Link us to to some of these mechanics quotes please..

B) I responded to BabyZilla's post in the way that I did because I am rampantly procrastinating. His post was aggressive and unsupported. On top of that he said he believed that I was an idiot. That is pretty strong language for someone who has sub-par fluency in English and little in the way of knowledge. I commend his effort to "fit in" online by reading what everyone else has said, agreeing with it, and then regurgitating it in an antagonistic way. But the only idiocy I see is throwing insults at people you have never met IRL in order to seem cool on a forum. I am just not in the habit of burning bridges.
I never once called you specificially an idiot. And even if i did? What are you a girl scout? Water off a ducks back..

So my opinion is aggresive and unsupported because I don't write like that of an english major. Yet posting in a pompous, look down upon tone is better? Please..

Noone is agreeing and trying to fit in.. I can't help if my FACTS/opinion match others cause its correct. Yours is wrong. Simple.

Last edited by BabyZiLLa; 06-19-2007 at 10:20 AM.
BabyZiLLa is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 10:29 AM
  #91  
spf4000
Registered User
 
spf4000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SF, freezing my @ss off
Posts: 2,420
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Okay, BabyZilla, it's time for you to give up. Your arguments come from left field and fail miserably at making valid counterpoints against Korki's arguments (as flawed as they are).

And just to note, people do double clutch on a regular basis--Koila does it, and I do it as well. It makes the gear engagement smoother on downshifts. I don't do it all the time, but it's a technique worth learning.

What we didn't agree with was Korki's assumption that double clutching on an up shift was necessary. I also disagreed with Korki saying that if you're not double clutch during a shift, you're doing something wrong.
spf4000 is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 02:20 PM
  #92  
BabyZiLLa
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
 
BabyZiLLa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 930
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by spf4000
Okay, BabyZilla, it's time for you to give up. Your arguments come from left field and fail miserably at making valid counterpoints against Korki's arguments (as flawed as they are).

And just to note, people do double clutch on a regular basis--Koila does it, and I do it as well. It makes the gear engagement smoother on downshifts. I don't do it all the time, but it's a technique worth learning.

What we didn't agree with was Korki's assumption that double clutching on an up shift was necessary. I also disagreed with Korki saying that if you're not double clutch during a shift, you're doing something wrong.
left field? Everything i replied was in context with Korki's reply. Maybe read ALL of the post..

And double clutching on a down shift only makes it smoother for those that can't rev match correctly. Im PRO rev matching. Id challenge anyone to feel the difference between a good driver rev matching on his downshifts and someone double clutching.

I have no problem if you guys wanna double clutch. What do i care? My concern is rookie drivers listening to BS advice.
BabyZiLLa is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 02:33 PM
  #93  
Korki Buchek
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Your looking for proof of why not to double clutch? Are you serious?

Yes, I am serious. Could you provide any?

I don't care if you been racing for 50 years. Physics say its impossible for it to be faster. Physics says it is impossible, huh? What theorem are you using to support that? Do you have any numbers? Evidence? An expert opinion? (By the way the field "Physics" is not plural)

Your wanting proof? Yes, I'm looking for proof. (And again, it is You're. You are: You're) Your the only one thats (That is: that's.)

pro double clutching.

How bout you show us some proof of someone actually doing it in the 21st century. I double clutch, I am in the 21st century. I am also not interested in arguing about your opinion and my opinion. When you have facts to back up what you're saying (or at least a minimum of credibility, like Kolia has) I will be happy to discuss it with you.

My money is on the fact you heard the term double clutching in a movie.. (You don't need two periods here.) What movie would that be?Looked it up.. Learn to punctuate, seriously.Saw a few posts saying its better for ya tranny. Off you went on that tangent.

Yes, that's exactly how it happened. Back when I was 14 years old, learning to drive a stick shift full-size truck without functioning synchromesh, I came online and looked up this forum and found a few posts on it. Also, you're using "tangent" wrong. You ought to invest in a dictionary or a thesaurus. Websters and Roget's make wonderful editions of both.

Link us to to some of these mechanics quotes please.. Again with the two periods. Do you have a problem with your keyboard? Also, how should I link you to something a mechanic told me in person? Next time I'll ask if I can record our conversation over dinner so I can stream it online.

***

I never once called you specificially an idiot. Your direct quote was, "if [...] I MIGHT believe your not an idiot."

And even if i did? What are you a girl scout? No, I am someone who doesn't appreciate 17 year old children with no respect calling names. If this were "IRL" you wouldn't have spoken as aggressively, if at all.

Water off a ducks back..Exactly! But at this point, this is purely for entertainment value.

So my opinion is aggresive and unsupported because I don't write like that of an english major. Your writing like a person who does not speak English (not that there is anything wrong with that) does not have anything to do with the support or tone of your opinion. Your "opinion was aggressive" because of the misplaced emphasis and name calling. Also, opinions are generally not "aggressive," but people or statements are. Again, Webster's, you might need the unabridged version.

Yet posting in a pompous, look down upon tone is better? Please.. I posted in a "pompous, look down upon tone" because you called me an idiot without a reason or much room to talk given that you can't formulate a proper sentence.

Noone is agreeing and trying to fit in.. I can't help it if my FACTS/opinion match others cause its they are correct. You haven't stated a FACT yet. But at least you have the emphasis down now. Others' has an apostrophe as does it's.

Yours is wrong. Simple. What a logical argument. Kudos.

Last edited by Korki Buchek; 06-19-2007 at 02:35 PM.
Korki Buchek is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 02:55 PM
  #94  
Kolia
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Kolia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 2,821
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BabyZiLLa
left field? Everything i replied was in context with Korki's reply. Maybe read ALL of the post..

And double clutching on a down shift only makes it smoother for those that can't rev match correctly. Im PRO rev matching. Id challenge anyone to feel the difference between a good driver rev matching on his downshifts and someone double clutching.

I have no problem if you guys wanna double clutch. What do i care? My concern is rookie drivers listening to BS advice.
Downshift smoothness has very little to do with double clutching or not. With the momentum of a 3,400lb car pushing on it, the pound synchro won't have any other choices than spinning and meshing in the gear when you yank the shifter.

Downshifting smoothness is a result of proper rev matching and clutch pedal release speed. You said it yourself.

Double clutching is used to make it easier to get the synchro to mesh (you won't feel the difference unless you're the one holding the stick). That's all. Is it necessary? Hell no! Is it a good idea? In certain instances, yes. Like downshifting to 1st, going to reverse, when you're skipping gears or when you really really need a gear to get in now.

Last edited by Kolia; 06-19-2007 at 02:58 PM.
Kolia is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 06:23 PM
  #95  
Spike100
350Z-holic
 
Spike100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Edina, Minnesota
Posts: 6,905
Thanked 115 Times in 105 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kolia
Downshift smoothness has very little to do with double clutching or not. With the momentum of a 3,400lb car pushing on it, the pound synchro won't have any other choices than spinning and meshing in the gear when you yank the shifter.

Downshifting smoothness is a result of proper rev matching and clutch pedal release speed. You said it yourself.

Double clutching is used to make it easier to get the synchro to mesh (you won't feel the difference unless you're the one holding the stick). That's all. Is it necessary? Hell no! Is it a good idea? In certain instances, yes. Like downshifting to 1st, going to reverse, when you're skipping gears or when you really really need a gear to get in now.
As usual you deliver the correct information in a concise, clear, and accurate manner. I doubt anyone here will argue with your post that I quote above.

It's also interesting that the OP's original question (the first posting on this thread) was never answered directly. If you go back to the first page (and first message) on this thread, you see why I say this. Actually the OP's question was flawed (based in an incorrect premise), and that may be what started the "waterfall" of misinformation and arguments.

This thread might be a case where it is appropriate for a Forum Moderator to provide comments. At least that would end the spelling and grammar lessons (which admittedly I did find entertaining), and move us to more factual information.

--Spike
Spike100 is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 07:46 PM
  #96  
DIGItonium
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
DIGItonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kansas
Posts: 4,836
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thumbs down

OMG... those who worry about clutch wear [period] should go back to driving slush boxes.

Last edited by DIGItonium; 11-17-2009 at 01:00 PM.
DIGItonium is offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 09:26 PM
  #97  
Spike100
350Z-holic
 
Spike100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Edina, Minnesota
Posts: 6,905
Thanked 115 Times in 105 Posts
Default

^^ Jeez... gotta tell you man... wish you didn't post that picture.

I get the point (and, it is valid), but your choice of a picture is disturbing.

--Spike
Spike100 is offline  
Old 06-20-2007, 06:06 AM
  #98  
DIGItonium
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
DIGItonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kansas
Posts: 4,836
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Hehe... I wasn't aiming at anyone in particular with this comment. Someone will eventually dig up this thread and argue some more. So be ready haha.
DIGItonium is offline  
Old 06-20-2007, 06:10 AM
  #99  
Kolia
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Kolia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 2,821
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Spike100
As usual you deliver the correct information in a concise, clear, and accurate manner. I doubt anyone here will argue with your post that I quote above.

It's also interesting that the OP's original question (the first posting on this thread) was never answered directly. If you go back to the first page (and first message) on this thread, you see why I say this. Actually the OP's question was flawed (based in an incorrect premise), and that may be what started the "waterfall" of misinformation and arguments.

This thread might be a case where it is appropriate for a Forum Moderator to provide comments. At least that would end the spelling and grammar lessons (which admittedly I did find entertaining), and move us to more factual information.

--Spike
Oh, thanks!
Kolia is offline  
Old 06-20-2007, 06:21 AM
  #100  
Firehawk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 326
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Korki Buchek
Talk to me in a couple more years about your synchros and your clutch and why the car is making funny noises. Ask anyone who tracks their car whether they double clutch. And, if you're heal-toe downshifting w/o double clutch, you're doing something wrong.
I have tracked Z's and other cars with synchros for years, covering 200K+ miles each on several cars used for street and road courses and never double clutch. No one I know who races double clutches. Only people who have really old cars do that. The tranny I disassembled on one car had normal syncro wear. The tranny even had thousands of power shifts.

Enjoy the car. The tranny will be fine.
Firehawk is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Quick question about "rev-matching" and wearing on the clutch.


Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: