I engine brake a lot in my car by using the shift gate by shifting down to 3 and 2, obviously in concordance with the proper revs.
Is this fine, or am I decreasing the life of my transmission and engine by doing this?
As long as you are doing it at a safe "speed match" between gears, then you should have no problem.
I've done it and still do it with every car I own with no detriment to the transmission or converter and to the benefit of brake life.
Most manuals encourage downshifting when descending grades while towing.
If the manufacturer doesn't see stress in this application, then you have no concern about trans overheating in daily driving.
My newest car a C6 Corvette with the A6 paddle shift encourages downshifts and it even "blips" the throttle to match revs.....
I do it a lot....when rolling down hills...when slowing up to a stop...when I'm slowing down and coming up to an on or off ramp...or when i come up behind someone slow on the highway and I'm going faster than them, I shift down to match their speed and try not to use my brakes...
Last edited by chinny4290 : 06-24-2007 at 09:30 AM.
This has been discussed on a number of forums. Concensus typically says that abject engine braking is false economy. This puts wear and tear on the engine and transmission rather than the brakes. Worn out brakes are a lot cheaper to service than worn clutches.
The only exception is when descending downhill, where you have the danger of overheating the brakes.
__________________
This message written with 100% recycled electrons.
This has been discussed on a number of forums. Concensus typically says that abject engine braking is false economy. This puts additional wear and tear on the engine and transmission rather than the brakes vs not using engine braking. Worn out brakes are a lot cheaper to service than worn clutches.
The only exception is when descending a long, severe downhill, especially if towing a trailer where you have the danger of overheating the brakes.
emphasis mine
__________________
'O=00=O' BMW 2002. long live the legend.
From a purely mechanical sense , the worst engine condition is high rpm uncoupled . So on a stick when you depress the clutch at 3000- 6000 would the worst. Since most auto trans are full lock up at rpm ,only crazy down shift would cause problems ( like 55 mph shift to second ) ( 100 mph shift to 3rd ).
As with all machinery the speed and smooth application of the load is key . Done correctly downshifts / engine braking combined with controlled braking spreads the load over two systems . Holding the brakes in a long slope would be a problem in high gear in some cases .
If not done for economy, why is engine braking even considered?
This is not a balanced way to brake a car. Brake systems are engineered to safely distribute the braking load between front and rear. Adding engine braking to the mix can cause the rear wheels to skid prematurely.
I think engine braking is done by drivers with itchy fingers. I see no value with engine braking except for the abovementioned long slopes.
From a purely mechanical sense , the worst engine condition is high rpm uncoupled . So on a stick when you depress the clutch at 3000- 6000 would the worst. Since most auto trans are full lock up at rpm ,only crazy down shift would cause problems ( like 55 mph shift to second ) ( 100 mph shift to 3rd ).
As with all machinery the speed and smooth application of the load is key . Done correctly downshifts / engine braking combined with controlled braking spreads the load over two systems . Holding the brakes in a long slope would be a problem in high gear in some cases .
Sorry, I'm a bit confused by your first part.
When I engine brake...I don't let the revs go above 4500-5000 RPM. I've driven my car plenty to know when to downshift in the shift gate.
Linear Mode
