Is it true that you can saver your brakes by shifting to a lower gear? If this is true, are there any downsides to downshifting? Does downshifting cause any damage?

I'm asking this question after having driven through mountains with steep (8%) inclines and declines. I don't see myself using downshifting in city driving, since I drive in such a way that I don't need to brake often, anyway.


I drive a 1995 Civic LX automatic transmission.

 

As long as you're not downshifting at high rpm, I don't see why going from drive to 3 at slower speed would do any damage. I wouldn't shift it from L all the way to D because in retrospect auto transmissions are meant to stay in D unless you're going up or downhill. I used to have an FG and I would "shift" gears in it all the time. After a while the tranny started slipping and I had to eventually get it rebuilt. If you're down shifting to maintain speed up a hill or engine brake downhill you should be fine. If you wanna bang gears and chirp your tires, get a standard gearbox next time.

 

I would not recommend it. Worn brakes are cheaper to repair than a worn transmission.
In racing situations, manual or automatic, drivers use the brakes heavily and try to rev match gear changes to engine speed. Modern automatic shift points are carefully programmed.
The only time I use engine braking is on a fresh rebuild to help seat the rings.

 

I agree with you. As long as you're within the 3,000-4,000 RPM limit, you're safe.

 

there are alot of things you can do to save your trans like,not resting your hand on the shifter, not balancing between clutch and gas on a hill. keeping your car in neutral at red lights.

 

do what you want, this is your Honda and you are going from a white belt to black so learn as you go.....

I keep my car in gear always so you can hit the gas if needed, so I am not keeping it in neutral at lights (that is me)

I have tried the techniques of the gurus on this board of not using the down shifter to slow down, and use what works for my driving style.

Jay Leno stated brakes are cheap clutches so we can go from there,

I have read a bit on these forums of downshifting for control on corners.

 

This question used to get asked in the Element owners group too every so often, and as someone who lived at the end of a 2 mile winding dirt road, high at the top of a hill, this was always my answer.

Coast in neutral, fine, but downshifting to a gear is way more costly than replacing brake pads and rotors. Besides you also chew up gas. Never made sense to do that if hypermiling was the goal. JS.

 

I am curious as to why you say you chew up gas?

Have you done any field tests to support this claim?

I understand that the first "assumption" is that coasting in neutral is a gas saver,
but I usually keep my car in gear as that is what the owners manual says so I do not shift it in neutral but will sometimes ride with my clutch pressed in or use the brakes when I do not need power.

I appreciate your reply Yvvon, thank you

but curious as to why you say neutral does not chew gas?
some forums have stated keeping it in gear is better on gas as the computer is sending the appropriate fuel amounts? I dunno,, will find the link and post

 

Coasting in neutral usually means fuel is not being injected and consumed (I can't vouch for all transmission/engine combinations, but my manuals always worked that way). Sure what is already there in the engine is probably being consumed, but no new gas is being added.

Being in gear means you are using gas. I don't need to do a test. None of our cars would run if gas wasn't being consumed while we were in gear.

If you have the time and space, coasting is going to be the cheaper way to come to a stop if you're a hypermiler.

 

I appreciate a healthy discussion here; opinions which I value vs facts is good for us

My question is are you shifting it into neutral or just depressing the clutch pedal
and in your opinion do you believe driving with the clutch depressed (which is most likely safer than in neutral gear) causes more wear on the components than having it in neutral and if so how much more wear?

I am still at a debate as to how you think you are consuming less gas in neutral without actually doing a field test though. I like your view of no new gas being sucked into the fuel injection during the neutral gear, but would like to know your view on new gas being sucked into the engine while using the engine as a brake and having no pressure on the pedal. My guess here is while in neutral the engine is running at idle speed, and your guess is that while in gear the engine speed is higher and using more fuel.

We are also talking about the same automobile here right? 1991-present fuel injected.

Thank you for bearing with me during this,
and like I said
your Honda drive it how you want,
but will not catch me in neutral for extended coasting,
maybe on an easy city curve with clutch depressed and brake used then down shift to regain speed
take care