Downshifting to slow down.

  • Thread starter Boz Mon
  • 55 comments
  • 5,884 views
1,478
Err, I have been having a debate about this on a Prelude forum that I frequent and I kinda wanted to get some input from you guys. Heres the deal: A lot of people are telling me that downshifting to slow down is not needed, and a little unhealthy for the transmission. I (along with a small amount of other people) think that it is ok for someone to downshift to slow down (aka compression breaking). There are also some people who tell me that EVERY TIME that they downshift, they rev-match. I dont see how that is practical for every day driving. I have been driving my car for 20k miles now and downshifting to help me slow down for all of them. Mind you it isnt like I am at 4k RPMs and downshifting to have the engine wind out to like 5 grand. My downshifts usually end up at or around 3k give or take.

Fire away. :)
 
Which costs more to replace: your transmission or your brakes?

The only time I ever use the tranny to slow down the car is if I want to avoid riding the brakes for more than one or two continuous miles (for example, if there’s a long, steep downhill with strict, low speed limits). I very rarely run into such situations.
 
If I understand you correctly, you aren't talking about engine braking, you are talking about not rev matching your down shifts, so you just down shift then let the clutch out and you get that deceleration from the engine having to speed up.

My only concern with this would be that you are probably increasing wear on your clutch, although honestly that's probably not that big of a deal unless you have a car that is already prone to going through clutches. I really doubt your transmission is going to care one way or the other, assuming you aren't just dumping the clutch on down shifts.

I always rev match down shifts, it's really not that big of a deal. My mom does what you are describing on her Accord, the motor on the Accord is still running along happily at 205k miles, the first clutch lasted until 160k.
 
So lets say that you are going 55mph and you have to turn onto a street that is 35 mph. How do you slow down? Leave it in gear and use the breaks then rev-match, heel and toe it, or brakes with downshifting to slow you down?

Edit: I understand that a lot of people here like to heel-and toe but I highly doubt that the majority of the general public knows how to do that or even what heel and toe is for that matter...
 
Oh, is that what you’re asking? Then in that case, I agree with retsmah – I (almost) always rev match, if only to increase the longevity of my clutch and make shifts a bit smoother.

In your scenario, I would be on the brakes and heel-and-toeing during downshifting.
 
I haven't learned to do the heel toe thing on my car, the pedals are kinda poorly spaced. So in that situation I would probably keep the car in gear while slowing down, then put the clutch in, down shift, and let the clutch back out when I am ready to accelerate again.

Sometimes when I am slowing down I'll down shift and let my foot off the brake so I can give it a little throttle.

On my motorcycle I would do a "heel toe" down shift, except it's not really heel toe... more like... fingers... palm? On a motorcycle it's a little more critical, a non rev matched down shift can lock up the back tire fairly easily.

I don't think what you are doing will really hurt anything, I just don't do it because a rev matched down shift is a lot more comfortable to me.
 
Its not like I am dumping the clutch when I let it out. I kinda feather it so the revvs rise slow and the car slows down. If I want to carry more speed through the corners, I'll rev match too but if I want to slow down I dont see why I cant use the engine to help me. The users manual for my car even talks a little about this.
 
I usually only downshift when I want to slow down over a larger distance. "Taking it easy", as it were. I do, however, always rev-match when doing it, just to avoid excessive wear of the clutch.

It saves gas, too. If the wheels are driving the engine, the fuel injectors will shut off.

Sometimes I wonder how much it confuses people (or pisses them off) who are behind me coming up to a light. If I'm going, say, 40mph, and drop it into second, the car slows down pretty quickly.. without ever touching the brakes.
 
Thats pretty much my driving style right there. I always make sure that there is enough space between me and the car in front and just take it easy on stopping.
 
Its not like I am dumping the clutch when I let it out. I kinda feather it so the revvs rise slow and the car slows down. If I want to carry more speed through the corners, I'll rev match too but if I want to slow down I dont see why I cant use the engine to help me. The users manual for my car even talks a little about this.

Thats what I do and i don't seem to have any problems with the clutch, I don't bother using the heel and toe method cuz i drive my parents' Corolla :lol: and I dont see much point. Teh damage done to our car is from me dad who skips gears and starts it in 2nd and sometimes 3rd :ouch:
 
I think it's a moot point in terms of wear.

My engine revs kind of slow so I blip the throttle first and then get on the brakes while letting out the clutch while the revs are still up, which effectively rev-matches without the heel-and-toeing.
 
Its safe to skip gears just as long as you wait a little longer for the revs to fall when you re-engage the clutch.

BTW, skip whats a "moot point"?
 
It means a point that's unimportant, irrelevant, or meaningless.

What you're doing is "Engine Braking". It's not terrible, but still not good for the car, and can affect the behavior of the car and drivetrain, as opposed to coasting. As Ross Bentley puts it, "The engine is there to make you go faster, the brakes are there to slow you down".

You honestly don't need to be learning heel-toe, it's a racing technique that's meant for rev matching in the least possible time, under maximum breaking, to allow ultra-fast return to the throttle. What you should be doing is simple rev-matching, as on the street, you have plenty of time to get off of the brakes, once you're at the desired speed, and then blip the throttle and get back on the power.

Heel-toe is usable on the street, and I use it quite a bit, but it's really got no advantage there, most people who do it, instead of simple rev matching, just do it because they've developed the habit on the track, or because they drive on the track and like to do it to keep their skills up.
 
It means a point that's unimportant, irrelevant, or meaningless.
Yeah, what I meant was the amount of wear it would impart on the clutch and save on the brakes in terms of service interval, replacement cost, etc. ends up not making enough of a difference to matter: engine brake if you feel like it, or coast into the corner on the brakes, neither is arguably worse for the car.
 
I engine brake every chance I get, and that's mainly because my Del Sol engine brakes like a semi truck, no matter what gear I'm in. You have to love high compression, high gear ratios, and a light weight car. :D

I also rev-match almost every time I downshift. It saves the clutch from rubbing, as it would if you didn't blip the throttle a bit. Of course, my clutch is getting pretty worn, so I try to take care of it.
 
There's a thread on this already, though the title escapes me at the moment. In short, here's what I do:
  • I never downshift below 4th if I'm slowing to a complete stop. I let the car wind down while trail braking, then as the revs get low I pop it into neutral and use the brakes alone to stop the car. Like Sage said, brake pads are a $50 job I can do myself in an hour. A clutch is $600 for a pro.
  • I downshift while braking if I know I'm going to accelerate immediately, i.e. for turns.
  • I rev match every downshift via heel/toe.
 
  • I never downshift below 4th if I'm slowing to a complete stop. I let the car wind down while trail braking, then as the revs get low I pop it into neutral and use the brakes alone to stop the car. Like Sage said, brake pads are a $50 job I can do myself in an hour. A clutch is $600 for a pro.
  • I downshift while braking if I know I'm going to accelerate immediately, i.e. for turns.
  • I rev match every downshift via heel/toe.

Which is exactly what I do.

For the clutch it doesn't cost me all that much ($80 AUD for a standard clutch plate) but what concerns me more is the bother (I do it myself), especially with my heavy strong trans, no thanks if I can prevent it.
 
So lets say that you are going 55mph and you have to turn onto a street that is 35 mph. How do you slow down? Leave it in gear and use the breaks then rev-match, heel and toe it, or brakes with downshifting to slow you down?

Whilst driving the Jetta, I generally am I on brakes a bit all while down shifting to where engine speed would be acceptable for the gear I'm selecting. I guess I've never considered the fact that I should be rev-matching here, as I'm generally not driving that quickly.

When I was driving to work today, I know that when I was going down an industrial park road I use to get to one of the main roads I left the car in a high gear and coasted to the light, all while down shifting (without throttle blips) into 3rd to catch the light green, down into 2nd for the tight corner (the engine never spinning over 2500 RPM the whole time), and onto the "straightaway" until I got to work.

...Hmmm. I'm not sure. I haven't noticed any problems with my transmission, so I have no idea what is going on inside of there other than the usual VW issues with reverse not wanting to engage in cold temperatures. This one seems to be better answered by the other folks here...
 
I will admit that I've not mastered heel-and-toe downshifting.

That said, I will do one of two things, depending on the situation.
1. Throttle blip while downshifting, essentially rev-matching. I've been doing this lots lately because my car has recently decided not to like idling, that it would rather quit sometimes.
2. Stay in whatever gear I'm driving in, and let the car idle down as I brake, before depressing the clutch at 700-1000 RPM.

I very rarely let the clutch make up the difference between the engine RPM and the transmission speed, and never when the difference is greater than 1000 or 1500 RPM's.
 
There's a thread on this already, though the title escapes me at the moment. In short, here's what I do:
  • I never downshift below 4th if I'm slowing to a complete stop. I let the car wind down while trail braking, then as the revs get low I pop it into neutral and use the brakes alone to stop the car. Like Sage said, brake pads are a $50 job I can do myself in an hour. A clutch is $600 for a pro.
  • I downshift while braking if I know I'm going to accelerate immediately, i.e. for turns.
  • I rev match every downshift via heel/toe.

Same here. There's no point in downshifting to a complete stop.
 
My thoughts match Duke's on this one.

The following may be of interest, its a post of mine from the GT4 & Brakes thread, which looked at how GT4 braking matches with real world braking. The following post covered engine/compression braking and may be of interest.

Compression Braking

Compression braking or as it is commonly know Engine braking is an often used and just as often misunderstood term. I hope in this post to clarify exactly what it is and how it functions as well as discuss its use, miss-use and disadvantages for track use.

In a future post I will also be looking at how Compression braking has been implemented in GT4.


How does Compression Braking work?

In the simplest terms Compression Braking is using the engine to slow the car. It occurs because unless the clutch is engaged and/or the brakes are applied the speed of the driven wheels is determined by the engine; remove your foot from the throttle and the engine will slow and with it the driven wheels. However if you remove your foot from the throttle and engage the clutch, the engine and driven wheels are not connected and the only thing slowing the car will be friction from the tyres and the resistance of the air, as a result the car will take much longer to stop.

This is all fairly simple stuff and it is possible to judge approximately what speed a car should be doing at any engine speed in a particular gear, using the ‘MPH per 1,000 rpm’ figure, which is derived from the cars gear ratios, axle ratio and tyre diameter.

If for example we take the Ford GT, with the following MPH per 1,000 rpm figures as an example.

1 = 9.8
2 = 15
3 = 20.1
4 = 27.2
5 = 33.2
6 = 40.6

Now using these figures we can examine Compression braking both in gear and through the gears.

If the car is in 3rd gear at 5,000rpm the car speed would be approx 100.5 mph, if you lifted off the throttle completely and relied on the drop in engine speed to slow the car the speed would drop according to the engine speed (if you remain in 3rd gear) as follows.

5,000 rpm = 100.5 mph
4,000 rpm = 80.4 mph
3,000 rpm = 60.3 mph
etc

This clearly shows the relationship between allowing engine speed to drop and it slowing the car; the amount of time this would take depends on a number of factors, such as engine compression ratio (generally the high this is the quicker the drop in engine speed) and flywheel and driveshaft weight. Using this method to slow the car down will always be far, far slower that using the brakes.


Compression braking when changing down through the gears can have a far more dramatic effect as illustrated below (using the Ford GT figures).

The car is travelling at approx 100 mph in 3rd gear (approx 5,000 rpm) when the driver begins to brake slowing the car to 50mph, the speed required to take our imaginary corner.

At this point the gear is changed to 2nd with the revs at approx 2,000 rpm, when the clutch is disengaged the engine speed dictates a speed of 30mph (2 * 15mph per 1,000 rpm).

The car is travelling at 50mph, but the engine speed and gearing dictate that it should be travelling at 30mph. This 20mph difference in the speed the car is travelling at compared with the speed the engine wants to travel at is going to be transferred to the driven wheels and slow the car in a dramatic and un-controlled manner. In turn the wheels will also try to resist this rapid deceleration and speed up the engine.

If however the driver had ‘blipped’ the throttle to approx 3,300 rpm before the clutch is disengaged then the engine speed would match the car speed and no additional braking would be experienced, keeping the car stable.

Compression braking on the road
Many driver use compression braking on the road when changing gear to help slow the car and with older cars it can help if the brakes are poor or fading. With modern cars it is generally considered unnecessary as the braking system is more that sufficient.

Many people would argue that using compression braking saves on wear and tear on the brakes, however just as many people would say that what you save in pads and discs you lose in wear and tear to the engine and drive-train. Its hard to say who is 100% right on this one as it would vary from car to car and driver to driver.

On a personal level I don’t using compression braking when changing down as I consider the sudden braking force it generates too sharp and prefer the smoother experience you get with heel and toe downshift that match engine speed to road speed.

One useful aspect of in-gear compression braking is often used in off road driving when descending a steep slope, here the rev limiter and knowledge of mph per 1,000 rpm can be used to control your descent speed without touching any of the pedals.


Compression braking on the track
I would be surprised if many professional drivers use compression braking (even on endurance events) and I am yet to come across a race school that recommends its use. While it does help conserve the pads, it does no good to a race tuned engine; they are not designed to slow the car, but to power it.

With Compression braking it is very difficult to judge how much additional deceleration you will get, as a result if you are already at the threshold of braking (or near it) you could well overload the tyres grip level and lose control, flat spots on the tyres will result which will hammer your lap times.

Changing the pads on an endurance race spec car is relatively quick and easy, and a task regularly carried out in the pits during endurance racing. It is also far less time consuming to have to change the pads, than it is replace an engine component (or retire through engine failure) or lose time over a number of laps because you've just flat spotted a tyre.

I have watched numerous endurance races, and have session reviews of Le Mans dating back to the 1960's, also a documentary on the Morgan team at Le Mans and Bathurst. I can't remember ever hearing a driver talk of using compression braking out of choice. Now if the brakes have failed for some reason, you may not have a choice; but that’s a different thing.

You should also remember that compression braking will only directly effect the driven wheels, shifting the brake bias in that direction. With the majority of race cars being rear wheel drive, this would mean a major brake bias to the rear wheels, if the car is anything other than straight you may now be in a situation of just trying to control the car rather than brake and setup the car for the corner entrance. Even if the car is in a straight line, if the car is running a high compression engine (which increases the effect of engine braking) it can be enough to lock the rear wheels and get the back of the car twitching. Neither of these scenarios is worth conserving a little bit of brake pad material. You would get more of a saving on the brakes through good brake control and technique than you ever will through engine braking.

A quick quote from Danny Sulivan (of the Skip Barber racing school) illustrates this point
"To put it into perspective, at Laguna Seca, which is hard on brakes, Rick Mears and I were team mates at Penske and Rick finished the race with only 70 thousandths of an inch of brake pad material left. I only used 70 thousandths of the pad in winning the race. People brake differently but can still run the same lap time, especially in a race"


The following is an extract from the Russ Bentley books "Speed Secrets - Profressional Race Driving Techniques"

"Again, the reason for downshifting is not to slow the car. I can't emphasise this enough. That's what brakes are for. Too many drivers try to use the engine compresion braking effect to slow the car. All they really achieve is upsetting the balance of the car and hindering braking effectiveness (if the brakes are right at the limit before locking up and you then engine braking to the rear wheels, you will probably lock up the rear brakes), and more wear and tear on the engine. Brake first, then downshift."


This is from Skip Barber's "Going Faster"

"What downshifting is really for.
We ask this basic question of every racing school class. The most frequent (and incorrect) answer is, "to help slow the car down." In a racecar with good, durable brakes (the majority of modern racecars), downshifting to help slow the car down is unnecessary. The brakes slow the car down. You downshift to get the car in the proper gear to exit the corner."


Now Russ Bentley has raced Indy cars, World Sports cars (including endurance) and is now a race instructor, Skip Barber should need no introduction, but the book I refer to has been written with the assistance of ten instructors from the Skip Barber Racing School.

Brakes slow the car, not the engine; unless your brakes are shot in which case you do not have a lot of choice, but unless you're Moss or Fangio you're not going to win like this.

Problems with Compression braking on the track

1. Its less effective than normal braking.

As Compression braking effects only the driven wheels it will have a major effect on the brake bias of the car; incorrect brake bias (or brake balance) can increase braking distances significantly. Even with 4WD cars the effect of engine braking is limited to the front/rear split of power distribution and will normally affect the brake bias negatively.

It is also not possible to accurately predict the level of Compression braking or modulate it once it has been applied, making accurate and controlled braking almost impossible.


2. It does not give ‘more’ braking force if you are already at the limit

This one is a common myth of Compression braking, that it will allow you to get more braking force for free. While in the distant past braking systems were not powerful enough to exceed the grip limit of tyres (and this is a long way in the past), modern braking systems are more than capable of exceeding the grip levels (measured in straight line braking as the slip percentage) of the tyres.

If you are already at the braking ‘threshold’ adding more braking force through compression braking is just going to exceed the slip percentage and lock the tyres.

Using the Ford GT example from above and assuming that the car was already braking at the tyres threshold (assume max 10% slip percentage for this example). If when the clutch is released (with the car at 50mph) the tyres are already using the full 10% slip in braking, the additional braking caused by compression braking (20mph vs. 50mph) will exceed the 10% max by a large margin, the rear wheels will lock, the tyres will flat spot, braking distance will actually increase and unless the car is totally straight the major rear bias will possibly cause a loss of control.


When to use Compression braking?
Obviously with road driving compression braking and its use is very much a case of personal preference; however on the track most instructors and drivers share the belief that the disadvantages more than outweigh the advantages (and some would argue that it has no advantages).

However should you find yourself in an older car (historic racing), suffering from brake fade or even brake failure then you have little choice but to use what ever method you can to slow the car.

As Skip Barber’s book says:

”In this case you certainly do use the downshift to slow the car down – but it’s a last resort”

From a personal point of view I always heel and toe downshift, all of them, I have an issue with uncontrolled and unbalanced braking, even braking from high speed and at the threshold of the tyres should be smooth and controlled. I agree with Duke that brake components are far cheaper and easier to replace that driveline components, and I for one would much rather be in control of the braking process. Using the brakes allows you to modulate the level of force being used, engine braking does not allow this and if the conditions are poor its more than possible to lock-up the driven wheels. Not too bad in a front wheel drive car, but a potential accident in a rear wheel drive car.
 
Great post Scaff (but three times :sly:)👍. I don't use compression braking unless there's only small change in speed needed but I don't think that's really what's being discussed here. I would use the brakes for any notable changes in speed for reasons already mentioned.
 
zOMG über-triple-post...my scrollbar got pwned by that one. :lol:

Anyway, so if I'm reading that correctly, compression braking means you downshift without matching the RPM? Doing that is just dumb.
 
If I read it right it just means you use the engines speed to slow down the wheels speed, it doesn't have to be by changing down a gear.
 
First sorry for the triple post, my connection at work slowed right down and then dropped out, so I didn't even know if it even managed to get posted once!!


zOMG über-triple-post...my scrollbar got pwned by that one. :lol:

Anyway, so if I'm reading that correctly, compression braking means you downshift without matching the RPM? Doing that is just dumb.

If I read it right it just means you use the engines speed to slow down the wheels speed, it doesn't have to be by changing down a gear.

Both are correct and both are compression braking, using a small lift of the throttle to slow the car and/or shift the load is fine, the level of compression braking in most cases here is small. Its using compression braking when downshift, either in addition to the brakes or in place of the brakes that is a far more problematic situation and one I certainly never do.

Regards

Scaff
 
Its using compression braking when downshift, either in addition to the brakes or in place of the brakes that is a far more problematic situation and one I certainly never do.

Now I'm confused, because if engine braking was so widely discouraged in racing, you wouldn't be able to hear drivers downshifting for a corner (because they'd put in the clutch and use nothing but the brakes while downshifting, and simply rev-match before reengaging the clutch) and the heel-toe technique wouldn't exist.

Or are you talking about letting out the clutch without RPM-matching again?
 
Now I'm confused, because if engine braking was so widely discouraged in racing, you wouldn't be able to hear drivers downshifting for a corner (because they'd put in the clutch and use nothing but the brakes while downshifting, and simply rev-match before reengaging the clutch) and the heel-toe technique wouldn't exist.

Or are you talking about letting out the clutch without RPM-matching again?

I must confess I'm not sure what the cause of confusion is here?

Any form of gear-change that does not match the engine speed to the road speed will cause problems, heel and toe exists to allow you to match the engine speed to the new gear and road speed.

The following may help...

page17cr.jpg


...but basically its compression braking during the gear change (as you release the clutch) that is the problem area.

Regards

Scaff
 
Scaff - I believe what Wolfe is saying is this:

If you're not supposed to use 'compression braking' on track, why don't racers just keep the clutch in and downshift, say 4~>2 in one go before rev matching and reengaging? Why go 4~>3~>2 and engage the clutch between each shift?

My quick answer is that it's easier to do accurately in multiple smaller steps rather than one big one, with less chance of disaster from a mistake. I'd also posit that it allows the driver to make a quick decision to stay in the intermediate gear if opportunity allows.
 
Scaff - I believe what Wolfe is saying is this:

If you're not supposed to use 'compression braking' on track, why don't racers just keep the clutch in and downshift, say 4~>2 in one go before rev matching and reengaging? Why go 4~>3~>2 and engage the clutch between each shift?

My quick answer is that it's easier to do accurately in multiple smaller steps rather than one big one, with less chance of disaster from a mistake. I'd also posit that it allows the driver to make a quick decision to stay in the intermediate gear if opportunity allows.

Ah right now I understand.

Well if that is the case I would have to agree with the reasons Duke has given, but also add that from my own reading on the subject it does also depend on the driver, the car and the situation.

In corners with a long braking zone you would have much more time to brake down through the gears, slower corners with a shorter braking distance may require gears to be skipped. The car may also force your hand, if it has a sequential gearbox you will have no choice but to cycle down through the gears.

Driver preference does also play a part, but most racing/driving schools do advocate working down through the gears, mainly for the reasons Duke outlined. You are much less likely to make a mistake if you work through the gears and many drivers find it gives them a rhythm to the braking/downshift cycle.

The book Going Faster by the Skip Barber racing school goes into it in much more detail and is the one book I would recommend anyone serious about driving (road or track) pick up a copy of.

Regards

Scaff
 
When I drive a manual, downshifting is all about staying in the proper rev range for acceleration. Whether it be coming out of a turn, coming out of OD to pass a slower car, or to get out of the way of a faster one.
As Duke says, it's cheaper to replace brake pads, and even to have rotors turned, than it is to replace clutches, and have flywheels re-surfaced.
Plus, when you downshift to slow down, it is usually a "less than smooth" transition for the passengers, unless you rev-match the shift. So rev-matching is a pretty integral part of the downshifting process, no matter why you're downshifting.
 
Back