MisterTwo wrote:One thing to think about: brake pads are getting cheaper relative to engines and fuel. So downshifting to get engine braking may not be as cost-effective as you might think. (Modern ECM may cut fuel in this case, so maybe fuel isn't so much of an issue any more... I learned to drive in the olden days of carburetors.)
Well said!
Also...brakes are made for braking and, believe it or not, are extremely good at that job! It's a good habit to depend on your brakes for your braking needs, though it's good to be sufficiently practiced in alternatives in case you ever do have a brake failure. Your brake pedal sends well-proportioned braking to all 4 tires, unlike engine braking which goes to 1 or 2 tires (2 or 3 if a AWD/4WD system is engaged), which is very important in low-traction situations like snow.
For someone who wants to dig into the cost issue, it's actually a much more complex issue than you might think. There's the cost of clutch wear, synchro wear, etc. There's fuel cost; deceleration fuel cut off (DFCO) is
not simple or reliable, it depends on a variety of conditions to be met which vary from one model to the next and people who think they are taking advantage of it are often using MORE fuel than if they just idled in neutral while braking instead. Further, OBDII equipment and built-in fuel economy displays often don't detect DFCO properly and under-report or over-report it.
1980 Buick LeSabre 4.1L 5MT
Put your car in your sig!
Learn to launch/FAQs/lugging/misused terms:
meta-sig
watkins wrote:Humans have rear-biased AWD. Cows have 4WD