Shifting from 2nd to 4th. Problems?

  • Thread starter dkstz
  • 18 comments
  • 11,302 views
413
Brazil
São Paulo, SP, Brazil
arten_v
Hi, I just thought about it. The car I usually drive is a Fiat Palio ELX, 96, 1.0 liter. I'm not sure about the power, but it's pretty low. It has absolutely no torque, so lately I found out that pushing 2nd a little longer then going to 4th gear is better than the usual 2-3-4.
In this damn country I live the roads are more like rally stages than a road :scared: . So cruising speed is low, and 40 km/h is ok in the small city I live. :drool: And the cars has no problem in keeping that speed at 4th gear.

My question: is there any problems in doing that? Am I stressing the transmission toomuch? It sounds normal, the car doesn't jerk or anything... but maybe I shouldn't...

thanks.
 
I cant see how there's any harm in that, I assume your not over revving it in 2nd? If not then I dont think you got anything to worry about.
 
Over here we actualy get told to do that at driving school. More economic and enviromental apparently.

It shouldn't harm your car unless you over-rev.
 
Its probably better for your gearbox this way - as long as you don't over rev in second (like BMW POWER posted) or ride your clutch too much when changing up to forth.

I am, however, suprised that you find it quicker by missing out 3rd. Small engined cars with little torque usually need all the gears they can get their hands on, 3rd is usually quite a long gear in the sort of car that's often bought as a 'city' car.
 
dkstz
Hi, I just thought about it. The car I usually drive is a Fiat Palio ELX, 96, 1.0 liter. I'm not sure about the power, but it's pretty low. It has absolutely no torque, so lately I found out that pushing 2nd a little longer then going to 4th gear is better than the usual 2-3-4.
In this damn country I live the roads are more like rally stages than a road :scared: . So cruising speed is low, and 40 km/h is ok in the small city I live. :drool: And the cars has no problem in keeping that speed at 4th gear.

My question: is there any problems in doing that? Am I stressing the transmission toomuch? It sounds normal, the car doesn't jerk or anything... but maybe I shouldn't...

thanks.

If your transmission has synchros they will get damaged if you skip shift. Since I'm not familiar with Fiat mechanics I'd ask your local Fiat service guy if it's safe just to be sure.
 
I think you'll be fine. As someone else mentioned, it's probably best for fuel economy too to use second to get up to speed quickly then drop it into fourth.
 
The synchros will be fine, actually... as long as the car's going quick enough at the top of second to slot into fourth, it shouldn't be a problem. You'll find that many "city cars" have very close transmission ratios, to get the most acceleration out of their tiny engines.

I usually skip shift from 1st to 3rd or 4th or from 2nd to 4th when I'm driving and bored. (My 5th pulls from 40 km/h / 25 mph).
 
niky
The synchros will be fine, actually... as long as the car's going quick enough at the top of second to slot into fourth,
That's the point I would make. Overreving in 2nd is probably less damaging than consistently underreving in 4th. I'd be a little hesitant to skip-shift in a low-powered 1.0 liter car, but if the engine doesn't sputter, labor, or make funny noises when you do it, it's probably okay.
 
Choosing to shift from 2nd to 4th instead of shifting 2-3-4 is like choosing to skip a step while climbing a set of stairs.

Don't worry about it.
 
It can be an amusing thing to do if you're bored. If I rev up to around 5000-6000 in 2nd gear, I'll be doing 50-55mph and can change straight to 5th gear. :sly:
 
If I'm lazy, and not heading anywhere fast, I'll go 1-5. My car will do 10mph in 5th.
 
I often (mainly in my fast cars) would accelerate fast in 2nd to cruising speed then go straight to 4th, like other said as long as you not overevving 2nd and struggling 4th you should be fine.

Synco's shouldn't be a problem as you revving 2nd higher, but if there is a large difference between 2nd and 4th e.g 2nd revs high and 4 bogs down and you shift relatively quick then there will be more wear on your synco's.
 
I can go 1-5, too... my 1st goes up to around 60 kmh, and 5th pulls from 40. Sometimes, when I'm bored, I'm tempted, but naaah... I usually just go 1-4.
 
Encyclopedia
Over here we actualy get told to do that at driving school. More economic and enviromental apparently.

It shouldn't harm your car unless you over-rev.

better on your engine shifting from 2-4???? unless you rev the piss out of it its going to dog the motor way down at least from my experiences i used to have an 88 vw fox with a fried 3rd gear syncro so i have done it before but i dont understand why it would be more economical/env friendly esp on a low power car on a car with more than 250 hp its not bad well ive drivin a t56 f-body that had the skip shift and it wasnt too bad
 
B_B_B
better on your engine shifting from 2-4???? unless you rev the piss out of it its going to dog the motor way down at least from my experiences i used to have an 88 vw fox with a fried 3rd gear syncro so i have done it before but i dont understand why it would be more economical/env friendly esp on a low power car on a car with more than 250 hp its not bad well ive drivin a t56 f-body that had the skip shift and it wasnt too bad

and its got that "spare gear" there for a reason might as well use it :)
 
It isn't more economical, but it doesn't harm the car, either.

Just like how I used the stairs example -- skipping every other step will probably make you tired more quickly, but you probably won't injure yourself doing it.
 
When I had my EF, I was pretty much shifting from 3rd to 5th everytime I was entering an highway ( high revving power :D ). I never had problems with my transmission whatsoever.

I guess it may depend on what car it is, but hey what can I say. :)
 
i hated my ef so much i stopped touching the clutch except for taking off in 1st. i just rev-matched every gear.....too bad i had a standard so there were only 4 forward gears.
 
Back