I've always thought the best way to stop fast is brake and drop gears, but this guy i know swears by it that brakeing and putting in neutral is the best way to stop the fastest. Which way do you guys think is faster??

 

You are doing the right thing, Paul. Your buddy is TOTALLY wrong. By putting the car in neutral, you are asking the brakes to do all the stopping for you, without any help from the transmission. Tell your buddy he's a jackass.

 

why put pressure on engine if you have breaks ????????????
i used to put my car in gear to slow down but not after i talked to dealer ....................


get new breaks cheaper than new engine

 

true, but I meant when I really need to stop fast.

 

There's a difference between downshifting reasonably and responsibly and dropping it into 1st from 4th. Transmissions are designed to assist in slowing a car down. Throwing it in neutral puts all the pressure on the brakes. This is not a good thing. I don't know which dealer you talked to. But using the tranny to slow down ALONG with the brakes is Chapter one of Driving 101.

 

I would suggest you continue talking to your dealer, 'cause I don't think either one of you know what you're talking about. Race car drivers have the most expensive engines going and I they "ALWAYS" use the engine to de-accelerate..

 

Yep, using engine resistance (reasonably) is fine. Most of the time this is used is during racing so the brakes don't catch fire. They do most of the work but the resistance from the engine/transmission helps.

 

I always use the combination of my engine and brakes to brake. I would never put that kind of stress on my brakes. I usually do engine deceleration, but within reasonable RPM range (taking it one gear at a time).

If I need to stop really quick, I brake hard while still in gear, shift down accordingly and don't put the clutch down or in neutral until my RPMS hit below 1500RPM in that gear.

And yes, race car drivers do use engine braking alot since they have lighter flywheels to slow down faster than the traditional cars. Engine braking also gives you an advantage over traditional braking by not taking away as much from the handling during a turn and letting you hit the exit speed out of a turn faster (unless of course you use both your feet for braking and accelerating).

My $ .02

 

In the old days or when you need to stay off the binders down a long grade, a lower gear is great. However, downshifting into a turn is (well, I'll just rip a quote):

"Brakes slow the car; downshifting is not an aid to braking. This practice was used when racing brake systems were marginal. Although in cars with stock brake systems (like showroom stock) as the brakes fade, downshifting becomes a last resort to get the car slowed."


"Dumping a gear" can be used to some effect to alter car balance into a turn with brake bias, but...

 

Isnt downshifting like from 4th to 1st going fast pretty bad? Cuz this guy is asking about stopping from a fast roll

 

if you are talking about 60 to a stop... I wouldn't mess with downshifting unless it is a life or death situation. I have never used 1st to slow the car...2nd then neutral.

under normal circumstances, using the engine to slow you down is not a bad thing.

 

Engine braking is just hard on the clutch. When auto mags test 60-0 braking they dont use engine braking. What would you rather replace brake pads or a clutch? Seems the CL has adequate brakes w/o downshifting, so if you constantly need to use engine braking to stop in time maybe you need to leave some more space to the car in front of you.

I NEVER EVER use engine braking, unless I am going into a corner and I dont need to upshift, or I'm at the roadcourse or auto-x where your brakes take a pounding.

 

Just get bigger, more powerful brakes....

 

Would you suggest the Rotora BBK?

 

if the need to put the car in neutral to stop were correct, then why doesn't automatic trannies shift to neutral when you apply the brake???!?!

DUH!!! it's because the engine is meant to take a little bit of the pressure to slow the car down. using the engine to slow the car down is reasonable.

the way i slow down is simply leaving the tranny in whatever gear it is in, braking up until i feel the car is slow enough for me to either downshift or throw it in neutral and come to a complete stop (usually at about 5 to 10 miles per hr) Usually i don't even bother downshifting to brake unless i have to brake really hard.

in addition, i've been braking like this ever since i can remember, since i learned to drive stick. And it's never been hard on the brakes or engine. in fact, since i bought my CL, i've only resurfaced the rotor's once, and i've bot 90K+ miles on my car. And my engine is still going strong.

 

It depends if you have a 6-speed manual or the automatic. If you have an auto transmission with ABS, the quickest and most reliable way to stop on any pavement surface is to simply bury the brake pedal (at any speed). Don't worry about downshifting the auto, the amount of engine braking will be minimal compared to the force of the brake rotors. Also, don't worry about the hard braking hurting the transmission, it pretty much freewheels as the wheels slow quickly. Just like it downshifts normally as you coast to a stop.

If you have a manual transmission, in an emergency stop situation in a car with ABS, the recommendation is to fully depress the clutch pedal and bury the brake. While leaving it in gear would take a small percentage of the stopping power from the brakes, it wouldn't be significant (and would definitely not result in a shorter stopping distance; it would just change the bias from 100% brake 0% tranny to 98% brake 2% tranny). Burying the clutch in this case is to allow the front wheels to fully utilize their ABS abilities. If the engine is still hooked up to the front wheels while they are trying to come to a full stop, the ABS simply won't be able to fully lock one or both (for a microsecond) without jerking the engine, which then would require the driver to either let off the brake a bit or depress the clutch anyway.

The only time where the above recommendations may not hold true is in extremely slippery conditions such as gravel or sand, where going into full ABS sometimes extends stopping distances compared to holding way short of lockup.

For much less forceful slowing, such as matching someone's speed in front of you on the highway, or shedding just a little speed before an upcoming turn, engine braking is just fine, and any time you don't need to use the brakes, why use them. I wouldn't downshift 3 gears for maximum engine braking or anything like that; just letting off the gas in the current gear. It also helps make you concentrate more on being a smooth driver on the highway if you're not always having to stomp the brake to avoid traffic in front of you.

 

This was the best and most accurate way to describe this!
To reiterate the main point, think of it this way: If you are at maximum braking power and ABS is engaging, how can the engine help any more to slow you down? But if it makes you feel better to downshift while hard braking, then go for it. Just dont make it a habit to use engine braking to slow down all the time.
Finally, if you are caught in a sudden panic situation, especially in an auto, i highly doubt you will even remember to downshift in the process!

 

agreed, very good post aciurczak.

 

Dealer doesn't want to replace more trannies...that's why they recommend against it.

 

Thanks for the informative post aciurczak. I sometimes engine break when Im using my auto and I was just about to ask if it'd be a bad thing to do.