Quick question about "rev-matching" and wearing on the clutch.
06-18-2007, 07:57 PM
#81
New Member
Originally Posted by BabyZiLLa
Fun. Playfull.. Call it what you will.. I call it one misinformed soul that should stick a pipe in it..
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
06-18-2007, 09:14 PM
#82
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
06-18-2007, 10:12 PM
#83
New Member
Well crap. I should not do this, but I cannot resist. 
I blame Korki for my bad behavior.
Sorry, 
--Spike
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]
--Spike
06-18-2007, 10:40 PM
#84
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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 10:50 PM.
06-18-2007, 11:54 PM
#85
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle/Portland
Posts: 2,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
06-19-2007, 03:10 AM
#87
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.
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.
06-19-2007, 06:37 AM
#88
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
I used to be a grammar ****. Then I turned twelve.
06-19-2007, 07:35 AM
#89
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
"Consider this a wise investment; it will change your life..." is correct.
Thank you for pointing this out to me, though.
06-19-2007, 09:13 AM
#90
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
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.
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.
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.
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 09:20 AM.
06-19-2007, 09:29 AM
#91
New Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SF, freezing my @ss off
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
06-19-2007, 01:20 PM
#92
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 930
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
06-19-2007, 01:33 PM
#93
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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 01:35 PM.
06-19-2007, 01:55 PM
#94
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.
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.
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 01:58 PM.
06-19-2007, 05:23 PM
#95
New Member
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 ½ 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.
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.
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
06-20-2007, 05:10 AM
#99
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
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
06-20-2007, 05:21 AM
#100
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Enjoy the car. The tranny will be fine.