[Ack]

I did a search to see what the consensus was on engine braking. I myself use downshifting and my engine to slow down at lights. I downshift before going into turns and I typically brake when the engine can't stop the car in time (i.e. when someone is slowing down to make a turn).

This topic started a buzz back in February about the mis-conceptions of engine braking.

Just wondering what the rest of the group here does and their feeling behind why they use one primarily over the other.

 

[Nick325xiT 5spd]

Any time that my engine can slow me down for whatever I'm doing, my brakes can do it a LOT faster. And if I don't need to use the brakes, I'm probably not goign all that fast. I put the car in neutral coming to stop lights, or downshift for turns.:dunno:

 

[Guest84]

I use both, so I did not poll.

 

[J. Kidd]

I'm with Rip...

I use both also....

 

[Patrick]

No vote here.

I use both, but I think that brakes are a little cheaper to repair than the transmission ...

Patrick

 

[Chris330Ci]

I use both, so I did not poll.

Ditto for me.

 

[abqhudson]

Brakes are a lot cheaper than engines.

NT

 

[CD-55]

I myself use downshifting and my engine to slow down at lights. I downshift before going into turns and I typically brake when the engine can't stop the car in time (i.e. when someone is slowing down to make a turn).

I down shift at the same times/places as you, but not to slow me down. The engine is really lame as a brake, the parking brake could do a better job! I downshift just so I will be as ready as possible to go!

The brakes are to slow me down.

Downshifting is just preparing me to accelerate.

 

[in_d_haus]

Ditto what a couple others have said, brakes are for slowing a car. They are relatively cheap, easy to replace, and designed for the purpose.

If you compression brake you are wearing the engine unnecessarily and it is not as effective, you can even get into trouble if you downshift too high and break loose the backend or over rev.

I voted "normal braking".

 

[Patrick]

Haus: good points.

Now that I think about it, my compression braking consists usually of 4th to 3rd and sometimes if a quick stop is needed, 3rd to 2nd.

BMW has great brakes, but I will also give VOLVO and thumbs up in the brake dept. My buddy's T5-R has brakes that almost rip your teeth out!

Patrick

 

[PunchIt]

Always Rev Match and Engine Brake

My car had 36K miles on it and needed new rotors, the pads were only 25% worn. I can only attribute this to engine braking.

 

[Mystikal]

I have been thinking about this endlessly for the past couple of months. I always think that I am abusing the driveline when I downshift to slow down, and that I should just pop it in neutral and brake to a stop. But then again, my dad's E30 has 230k km's on it and is only on the second set of brakes (pads & rotors done 50k ago). He ALWAYS uses the engine to stop. You'd think that the super-light (relative) use of the brakes would reflect on his clutch wear, but the clutch is still original and feels quite strong. :dunno:

This whole topic is driving me nuts! :banghead:

 

[mffitz]

Engine braking obsolete.

Engine braking became obsolete in the fifties when Jaguar won Le Mans with a relatively weak engine and disk brakes. Drum brakes were so pitiful that the engine was worth using but it totally messed yp the brake balance. Max performance braking plus engine braking will lock the rear wheels. Setting the balance so that doesn't happen seriously reduces brake performance. It can be used around town but definitely should not be used anywhere near the edge of the performance envelope.

 

[little<><]

I use a bit of both, but it depends on conditions and traffic. Usually preparing for the other end of the curve.

Not unlike truck drivers, I use the engine on long hills. But they have the advantage of engine air brakes.

 

[EdCT]

I did a search to see what the consensus was on engine braking. I myself use downshifting and my engine to slow down at lights. I downshift before going into turns and I typically brake when the engine can't stop the car in time (i.e. when someone is slowing down to make a turn).

Mffitz has it right.

Engine braking was done by early race car drivers because braking technology was so pitiful (typically drum brakes all around).

Today's cars have serious brakes capable of tremendous stopping power and subsequent g force.

This is how it works going into a corner:

You brake to slow down, you depress the clutch, you heel and toe to MATCH the speed of the engine to the drivetrain, you step on the gas.

Anyone who doesn't follow this simple procedure needs to go to driving school.

Ed

 

[3LOU5]

For normal everyday driving, I use normal braking. I believe that it is more expensive to replace a clutch than a set of brake pads over the long run. When I sold my '88 Ranger, it had 113,000 miles with the ORIGINAL clutch. I only replaced the pads on it once or twice. :thumbup:

The only time I use engine braking is when I am descending a very steep hill. I also have used it when my ex-girlfriend's 1972 Ford lost some brake pressure, and I had to furiously pump the brakes AND engine brake at the same time ! :yikes:

 

[Pinecone]

No right answer, unless you qualify when.

I use engine braking like you seem to, when I see the light ahead is red, I lift. Once I slow down to the point that there is little braking from the engine, I downshift. There is no reason to run up to the light at full speed and then stand on the brakes. Maybe that's why on the last 3 cars the front pads lasted 80K, 75K, and 99K. If I am closer when the light turns, I just use the brakes.

With spirited driving, I never engine brake. Use the brakes and downshift to be in the right gear. This is both street and track.

 

[ayn]

No right answer, unless you qualify when.

I use engine braking like you seem to, when I see the light ahead is red, I lift. Once I slow down to the point that there is little braking from the engine, I downshift. There is no reason to run up to the light at full speed and then stand on the brakes. Maybe that's why on the last 3 cars the front pads lasted 80K, 75K, and 99K. If I am closer when the light turns, I just use the brakes.

With spirited driving, I never engine brake. Use the brakes and downshift to be in the right gear. This is both street and track.

cool, u got the right answers! =)

--Andrew

 

[E36Shikara]

Mffitz has it right.

Engine braking was done by early race car drivers because braking technology was so pitiful (typically drum brakes all around).

Today's cars have serious brakes capable of tremendous stopping power and subsequent g force.

This is how it works going into a corner:

You brake to slow down, you depress the clutch, you heel and toe to MATCH the speed of the engine to the drivetrain, you step on the gas.

Anyone who doesn't follow this simple procedure needs to go to driving school.

Ed

I think I need to go to driving school NOW!

 

[6 Brit]

brakes are for braking engines are for going...brakes are a lot cheaper to replace than transmissions...