Be Honest: Do you rev match?

[RevC]

i always rev match (heeltoe). i just can't think of any reason anybody would not rev match to a lower gear driving a manual car.

[OverDrive]

rev matching is like second nature to me.
I don't really even notice doing it sometimes.
________
Yamaha srx history
________
HERBALAIRE REVIEWS
________
Effects of nexium
________
Sc Replays Net

[MTV]

I rev-match allllllll dayyyyy

[E39hijinks]

I also revmatch 100% of the time. Why put shock on your drivetrain for no reason? only noobs downshift and let the clutch out and jerk the car into a downshift. That's why i dont let noobs drive my car. my neck is sore afterwards and my differential bushings (and every other bushing in the car) thanks them

[twenzel]

I heel/toe rev-match 100% of the time. Its passive to me. I dont even have to think about it.

[SlickShift]

Originally Posted by John@BMW

i rev match 100% of the time- its 2nd nature to me.

Same here. I don't even think about it. I usually rev match 6-4-3...clutch in and stop.

[TurboSid]

only if i'm downshifting to a much higher rpm... if i'm going to floor it/race.

[jopa489]

Originally Posted by RevC

i always rev match (heeltoe). i just can't think of any reason anybody would not rev match to a lower gear driving a manual car.

Originally Posted by twenzel

I heel/toe rev-match 100% of the time. Its passive to me. I dont even have to think about it.

Agreed with you guys, and others who do the same. It's completely second nature to me. In my opinion, rev matching is part of driving a manual and should be done. You don't need to know the exact RPM of the car at any given speed and any gear most of the time (though you will learn it eventually). A quick heal-toe blip to get the revs up a bit makes things smooth - and smoothness is key.

[ChrisV]

Originally Posted by FStop7

What you're saying makes no sense. If you downshift into a lower gear without rev matching the car jerks when the revs shoot up. It has nothing to do with synchros, it's gear ratios.

The synchros allow you to smoothly slide into the next gear. If the synchros are worn or bad, then the movement of the gears into place is jerkey. If they are working good, then that part is smooth and how fast you release the pedal then determines how "jerky" it is. MY manual trans cars have NEVER "jerked" when down shifting, rev-matched or not. But I don't SLAM the car into gear and sidestep the clutch. I smoothly use the controls.

Maybe you just need to learn how to drive.



And brakes are for slowing you down. Downshifting is to be in the correct gear if you either have to take off quickly again, or are trying to be in teh correct gear to exit a corner after braking to enter it. Downshifting is NOT to slow you down, on teh street OR on teh track.

If it wore your brakes out noticeably faster to use your brakes instead of downshifting, then automatic cars would have brakes wearing out very fast. Does an automatic 3 series use up it's brakes faster in daily driving than a manual trans one? I'd like to see stats on that.

[TurboSid]

i would have to say it only jerks if u completely step off the clutch very quickly. otherwise i just let the clutch absorb the "jerkiness" of the car jumping a couple hundred rpm's.... 21k miles still on original clutch if anyone thinks im harming/burning the clutch that way.

[ChrisV]

Originally Posted by Crisp

When I owned my 6speed GTO, I always rev matched unless I was using the clutch as a break to combine engine braking with regular braking for more barking power.
I would do this once in a blue moon (use of such heavy engine/clutch braking).

If you can lock up the tires (or make the ABS come on) then there will be no way of adding braking force by using engine braking. The engine braking is on the rear, which only does 20-30% of your stopping anyhow before it will lock up the lightly loaded rear tires (as your mass shifts forward under braking). Adding braking force to the rear is useless after you've already reached maximum tire friction to the road.

With an ABS equipped car, you cannot add anymore braking force than the tires will allow. your brakes can already provide more force than the tires allow, which is what makes ABS come on in maximum effort stops. Which means it's physically impossible to add to your braking in your GTO with engine braking. You can replace one with the other (engine braking is slower) but you cannot add them together and get more than the brakes can do on their own UNLESS the brakes are already fading and can no longer lock up the tires/invoke ABS.

Otherwise, I don't see how it's possible to go from 6th gear at 2k RPM to 5th gear 2.5k RPM without there being a jerk....unless you are riding the clutch out slowly which would obviously take longer.

You only have to be a fraction of a second slower to not be jerky. And on the street, there's no reason not to take that extra fraction of a second to be smooth with the clutch. It helps in every situation to make the car live longer and just be smoother for everyone involved. In fact, it's not really any longer than double clutching and/or rev matching, as it takes that same fraction of a second to bring the revs up before letting the clutch out quickly.

But I guess everyone is into the Mad Tyte, Yo, F&F driving style now.

[ChrisV]

[QUOTE=94JZA80;6193163]

this is only partially correct. it is true that rev-matching is unnecessary with modern synchros b/c it will effectively prevent you from grinding gears. however it is not true that synchros will completely eliminate the "jerk" you'll typically feel when downshifting without rev-matching. the fact of the matter is that the synchros only cushion the blow. they make it possible to make "less-than-perfect" shifts - that is, they sync the drivetrain rpm and the engine rpm when they are not equal (for instance when someone downshifts without rev-matching, or when someone's rev-match is less than perfect). before synchros, this would have resulted in grinding gears - synchros prevent that to a certain extent...but they do not emilminate drivetrain "jerk."[/.quote]

No, they don't completely eliminate it. Just taking the same fraction of a second it takes to bring the revs up to let the clutch out smoothly, however, will eliminate it.

trust me, I've been driving manual trans cars for 30+ years. it's not that hard to do.

the more often you downshift without rev-matching, the faster your clutch will wear from engaging the flywheel at mis-matched rpms (which is the same kind of wear caused by riding the clutch or slippin/feathering it alot).

the point you and some others are missing is that with rev-matching, you are minimizing both wear on the brakes AND wear on the clutch. its downshifting without rev-matching that wears the clutch out.

Barely faster, if at all. I've gone hundreds of thousands of miles in cars that were never rev matched, but still had excellent clutches.

In fact, there is more wear on the clutch (in fact the most wear) when slipping it to accellerate off the line as that's when the car has the most inertial desire to stay put, and you have to get 2000-4000 lbs of mass moving from a stop (which is why you don't want to do it in any higher gear than necesary unless a special situation warrants it, like starting on ice)

[chaforjohn]

I heel toe/rev match pretty often, would say 80% of the time