DCnativeTS6

2 Questions for all of you CL and TL 6-speeders:

? 1 - At how many miles are you: a) currently at with your stock clutch OR b)at when you replaced your stock clutch? Aftermarket clutches tune in too, im curious about those too.

I am at 71K miles in 03 CL with my stock clutch and it still feels good, no slippage so far..

? 2 - How about your brakes? - i just replaced mine at 70K. Generally, i rarely use my brakes for normal deceleration so I'm curious about everyone else..

spdy0001

23K miles

Clutch - Like new
Brakes - Like new

Downshifting is the key to saving brakes

NSX-Tuner

Just turned 51k miles in my CLS 6MT. It's got all the CT goodies (i/sc/h/full-catback, etc...). The stock clutch still feels good even after 30K miles with the sc. As for the brakes, I replaced the OEM's at about 25k miles with the front Brembo BBK and the rears with cross-drilled.

6MTpromises

42k in my CLS6

NSX-Tuner

But can also lead to excessive drive-train wear is over-used. Brakes are a whole lot cheaper/easier to replace and/or repair too.

Starter

1) I'm at 84K so 'B' is n/a.

2) Brakes are just fine. Last time I looked, at around 79K, I had about 35-40% left on the pads. Mostly hwy driving and I shift down.

Starter

??? Not if you blip the motor to match drive train RPMs (double clutching). Haven't worn out a clutch yet, on any car, with hard driving and well over 100K on most of them.

Blieb

That's what I was thinking. Didn't want to open my mouth as such a n00b. Clutch is a bit more expensive than new brakes. I only use the tranny to slow down if it's a sudden stop ... it's subconcious now ...

I have 118k on a 98 S10 ... original clutch ... still seems good, but I'd expect it to go bye bye 125-150k.

It depends how YOU drive stick, how much city driving you do vs freeway, and so many other factors!

EDIT:

I'm not saying you'll wear out the drive train ... but the constant engaging and disengaging of the clutch uses clutch-life & surface. Not to leave out the extra gas consumption from the non-idle RPMs.

NSX-Tuner

True, but most people don't bother or know how to properly double-clutch and rev-match, not to mention heel-toe.

mt6forlife

Stock 03 CL-S/6 @ 57,000 miles

Clutch is fine

Front rotors are warped and have been for a while. Pads are probably pretty thin by now. Going to have both replaced at 60k service.

123456SPEED

03 CLS 6 speed at 25k miles, no problems with clutch or brakes. it's true, it's smarter (cheaper) to use the brakes to slow than the tranny, but I do both too.
i do a lot of coasting in neutral now to slow down, saves on gas and brakes.

spdy0001

Ill admit that most of the time I dont' rev match, but I also know that the drivetrain in the car can take it. In my explorer I don't really rely on engine braking that much, but it also sounds like hell over 3K rpm.

spdy0001

You don't want to open that can of worms......

First of all coasting in neutral is hazardous, because what are you going to do if you need to accelerate to avoid an accident? I won't argue with you on the gas thing, its not worth it

Jayhawk1

45K in my 6spd CLS...no clutch issues so far; dont anticipate any for over 100K. Brakes are showing some sign of pulsation...plan to have them checked and probably have rotors cut shortly

BlueCLS6

Only 9,241 miles so not really applicable to your questions. The clutch slips if I floor it in 3rd or 4th... mostly due to the excessive torque.

6MTpromises

Ok, ill do it...sharing knowledge is key...
If you leave your car in gear while you coast, you use the momentum of the car (wheels/transmission) to keep the engine turning....no gas. On the other hand, when you put the car in nuetral you are burning gas to keep the engine on.

g1underground

iTrader: (1)

54,000 on the clutch, zero problems-shifts like new.
Upgraded the brakes because I like better braking so no problems there either.
Enjoy, you should find few problems.

ANDY03CL-S

2003 CL-S 6 speed.

44K
Clutch like brand new
And i just bought Brembo rotors yesterday. I had a lot of vibratrion in my stopping. This should fix the problem.

mt6forlife

I heard Brembo made stock sized replacements for our car. Is that what you got?

Allout

Absolutely. I'll replace brakes any day of the week over wearing the clutch and drivetrain.

Allout

Put 27K on the stock flywheel and clutch. Swapped to Comptech Flywheel/ clutch combo and have put 15K miles on it. So far- so good

gurot1

at 74K Km, clutch still feels fine.

Front Rotors have been turned twice and a new set of pad...all done by the dealer due to warping issues.

I do a combo of downshifting and/or braking depending on situation (and how fast I can take the off ramp )

anothercls

96k Miles on stock clutch
Rotors have been cut, and now replaced and pads have been replaced 2 times and I have warped my latest set of rotors. I would still contribute this to calipers over rotors/pad selection.
I'm also on my 3rd set of tires.

BlueCLS6

Do you find the Comptech clutch disc grips better than the stock unit? I am in need of a stronger clutch but would like to include the lightened flywheel with my upgrade. Comptech says it was designed for their S/C'd applications so one would assume it can hold more torque. However I don't see how much of a difference just the clutch disc would make without the addition of a new pressure plate to increase the clamping force. Thanks.

silvervtec96

61k all original...knock on wood.....

Joe5.0

34k on stock clutch, no probs. Already have had to do brakes twice, but I abuse them from time to time.

Allout

I think both setups gripped equally well. Never had slippage with either. I would agree that the limitation is still with the stock pressure plate. Motor spins up and rev matches a lot easier. The dual mass flywheel stored more energy and held RPM which is good and bad. More throttle to start the car rolling. Less buffering for the gearbox with the lightweight flywheel. Motor is more responsive.

allmotor_2000

Stock Clutch - 12K miles (not much wear at all)
Comptech Clutch #1 - 1500 miles then broke
Comptech Clutch #2 - 150 miles then broke
Comptech Clutch #3 - 200 miles then broke
Stock Clutch #2 - 35K miles with nearly 500hp and 400 torque to the clutch... no problems!

goredcar

I agree... I rarely use downshifting anymore after having to pay $1500 Can. for a new clutch / flywheel.

I bought my CLS-6 this summer, with about 55K miles on it. I have no idea how the previous doufus drove it, but the clutch slipped badly the first time I tried to race someone. When they pulled it apart to replace the friction plate they found that the flywheel was totally cooked, so I had to replace both. There are very limited options for after market clutches... with Comptech being really the only option, and there are mixed reviews on the CT clutch / flywheel combo.

After reading Allmotor's post I am really glad that i didn't go for the CT clutch.

goredcar

OK - I'll bite on this one... I often coast in neutral. Take a look at your tach when you do this and you will find that the RPM drops to under 1K. Conversely when you use the engine to brake, RPM is ofte up in the vicinity of 2 - 3K (or more). Unless the engine stops firing, it is burning more gas at 2K than you are at 1K in idle.

So... I don't really agree with your statement that you burn NO gas when using the engine to brake... it just doesn't seem logical to me.

03CoupeV6

Gas consumption is largely based on throttle input. If you're not touching the gas, you're not using much, if any (using the momentum, as mentioned). I'd like to see some official info on it, though.

Saldino_9885

damn.

6peedSleepR

Aint that some shit.. Lol Hey Ramanan I always read your article in Turbo mag. I cant ever seem to get enough of it!

Roady

27K on my CL-S - the clutch is great (I can still chirp third); I downshift regularly, but not as to put a lot of strain on the clutch. The low miles - I ride my Harley anytime I can.

goredcar

Agreed... but what we are really comparing is revving at 2+K or idling, both with no throttle input.

Logically I would say the higher revving will consume more fuel as the cylinders are firing twice as often... and fuel must be consumed for combustion. Gas consumption is definately a function of throttle input, which normally is correlated to RPM. In this case, RPM increases are mechanically induced rather than by throttle stimulation, so I would expect consumption to be less than say WOT, but more than idle.

Would appreciate a professional opinion on this as now I am curious...

All Mine

He writes in turbo? Cool. I'm going to have to subscribe to it just for that reason. (no sarcasim)

03 CL TypeS

I share the exact same thought on the matter.

Unless the fuel injectors shut down completely during 0% throttle engine-braking, there's no way that letting the car idle while using your brakes consumes more gas.

spdy0001

Lets assume you guys are right and you are saving "some" gas. It won't be enough for you to tell at the pump. Plus you are still being unsafe by coasting in neutral.

spdy0001

He doesn't write for TURBO mag, but his car was featured in it some months back. Very cool article and someone posted the pages on here so you should be able to find them.

goredcar

I agree that this would not be measurable at the pump... the discussion was really only theoretical.

I am not sure I buy the safety thing about keeping the car in gear. I can't recall the last time that I had to accelerate to avoid an accident when I was coasting to a stop light. I can on the other hand recall when I had to use the brake... and my foot is already on that pedal when coasting.

To be be fair, I notice that when coasting in neutral, it takes a hell of a lot longer to slow down than coasting in neutral... of course requiring more brake pedal.