Engine braking?

[Peppermuncher]

Howdy forumers!!!

Just wondering about engine braking?

Whenever i'm slowing down. Corners, junctions anything, i always use my engine to help me to slow down (thinking it'll help reduce the wear on brake pads) Scrooge!!!

Will this do any damage to my gearbox, engine or any other parts?

I am a 'grade A' tool as i know sod all about cars, sorry!

 

[jcp]

This used to be the way to do it when car brakes were feeble drums and prone to fade. It is wrong wrong wrong on a modern car as any wear on clutch and gear train is expensive compared with brake consumables - and with disc brakes if you spare them enough they will corrode and wear out faster than if used as intended. changing down for places you need to arrive at reduced speed is good practice as you are then able to proceed smoothly from the slow point already in an appropriate gear.
The brakes are designed with great skill to slow the car with exact control and the gears and drive train to apply the engine power with measured precision.
The tecnique you are using dates from an era when our fathers-in my case or grandfathers in most caases were first on the road- pre and post WW11.

 

[Nath.]

^^^^^^Agree

Also, tese days you will do 99.9 MPG whilst engine braking or normal foot on the brake braking as the ECU will cut the fuel to a dribble when is detects the brake pedal being pressed. So no diesel geek comments about the old method saving fuel please.

 

[Jedimaster65]

Sorry guys, I strongly disagree.

By relying on your brakes, you are putting all your eggs in one basket, if the brakes fail or you hit a puddle / ice / snow...you are heading straight to the scene of the accident.

All good drivers, even in motorsport use engine braking as a retardation method - though there is a balance to be struck with all things in life, a good blend of braking and engine retardation will always be the best solution.

I once had an accident due to driving (very slowly) downhill on a snowy / icy road, caused soley by relying on ABS. See:
http://www.seatcupra.net/forums/showthread.php?t=205830

Relying soley on your brakes to save you will result in a very big accident one day...
It's just a question of when...

 

[DPJ]

Engine braking doesn't wear the clutch. The extra forces placed on the gearbox aren't significant unless what you are doing is 'jerky'.

Engine braking uses the compression phase of the internal combustion cycle to compress (and heat) air.

 

[predo]

this thread is getting geeky

as for the braking with engine itself I only use it on steep hills where you'd be rolling really quick if you dont apply brakes... and keeping foot on a brake constantly will soon cook them... Have been driving a lot this year in very hilly areas while on trip to South Africa and I can tell you that braking with engine is invaluable aid to brakes...

 

[DPJ]

this thread is getting geeky

.

People usually ignore basic scientific principles...

 

[spenny2004]

there is nothing wrong with engine breaking, especially is you use sustained changes then there is no extra wear to the gear box going down a gear

 

[Poverty]

When giving the cupra some I use engine braking, when pootling about I hardly do as im not going quick enought to even warrant trying.

 

[mhill]

I always use engine breaking in the Transit as the break really are not up to the job, however the modern disc breaks on our cars are!

 

[coggie]

I think in the right situation and with the right application there's nothing wrong with engine braking.
In trucks/lorrys you rely on the engine braking as with the extra weight you'd soon cook the brakes.

If you don't want to strain or put pressure on your gearbox or clutch you'd be driving around at 30mph or leaving your car at home. I personally use engine braking when coming to a dead stop from medium/highish speeds and I'm still on my original brake pads at 36k.

 

[Peppermuncher]

Bloody Hell! I've opened a can of worms here!!!

I must thank everyone, i'm not an aggresive driver so the down shift isn't big plus i use it in conjunction with the brakes anyway.

Still think i'll continue doing it, plus it helps keeping the revs in the best range when i'm feeling frisky!!!

 

[chrisboyle999]

Engine braking uses the compression phase of the internal combustion cycle to compress (and heat) air.

in exactly the same way pads and discs change kinetic energy to thermal energy.

People usually ignore basic scientific principles...

mr einstein i believe.

 

[jcp]

Transits-Yes
Trucks -yes
Ensuring the car is in the appropriate gear for the resumption of chosen speed BIG yes.
Saving petrol- yes- but only while keeping the car in gear with throttle off
Back off and lose speed before or to minimise braking-yes
Brakes are for slowing engines, for going -why would you use a modern well tuned engine as an involuntary air compressor- in an attempt to save the devices developed for that purpose for what other function or are they just unnecessarily powerful devices?
Jedimaster- I'm afraid you have inherited or been taught neolithic driving habits. Of course if your dual circuit brakes fail you will have to use the handbrake, gears, or the softest part of the scenery to reduce your problems and minimise a crash- of course in snow or any low friction or loose surface pressure on the brake can cause skidding and ABS does not help- all it does do is to enable ordinary mortals to steer on tarmac when, without it, locked wheels would "lead you to straight to the scene of the accident". The reason some are switchable is to allow the wheels to lock so snow/gravel can be ploughed to reduce speed.
If your indicators fail we all should know that hand signals are available - do you use them all the time just in case? In Thick fog it can help- at walking pace - to stick your head out of the window to inch along inside the white line- so do you advocate doing that all the time?
If there was an efficiency or safety case for using the engine as a compressor to turn your forward speed into heat-which is how "engine braking" works wouldn't some manufacturer have adopted it? In hybrids the wheel motors can act as generators when slowing and save some energy- what actual benefit does any one attribute to not using the brakes? If you drive smoothly and anticipate well 36k from brake pads is easily achievable and demonstrates the driver is not tearing up to things and hammering on the brakes.
I would be startled if any driving manual or published guidance in the last 25 years would support this whiskery old technique. My dad, who first drove in the 1930s had long grown out of this before he died nearly 20 years ago- mind you he was an engineer.
Sorry about the rant but voodoo style myths like this are in need of rectification. Next you will be advising knocking the car out of gear and coasting- last available as a feature on the "auntie" rovers of the 50s and the Saab 96.

 

[Nath.]

^^^^Wouldn't you know, I agree again. Very well said.

In the last 13 years I have driven on average 40-45k a year and I can't think of one time that my brakes have failed. They have worn out a few times but it's very easy and cheap to replace them.

I'm not saying that I never use engine braking, of course I do but for the most part I use the engine to build up speed and cruise and I use the brakes to slow down.

Simple.

With todays engineering I would hazard a guess that anyone who does silly amounts of engine braking would brake a few engine mounts with the sort of mileage I do and the gear linkage would get very sloppy with almost double the use.

BTW, the most fequently replaced part on every car I have had for doing this job (13yrs) is wiper blades, they only seem to last about 20k max. Maybe I should rig up the exhaust to blow on the screen to dry it off whilst driving in the rain. I could call it engine wiping

 

[Fl@pper]

a good driver would hardly need either brakes or engine braking if looking far enough ahead and evaluating the road prescence

mind you coming from me on my 3rd gearbox to one set of pads ignore that, and in defence they were all dodgy ones and you try town driving a 16v

as you were

 

[Nath.]

a good driver would hardly need either brakes or engine braking if looking far enough ahead and evaluating the road prescence

Agree also.

Going back a few years I had a car with a brake light check function. after you started the engine you got a light on the dash that only went out if you pressed the brake pedal and both brake lamps came on.

I used to play a game where as I would start the car and see if I could get all the way to/from work with the light still on.

BTW I work 85 miles away from home and I managed to win my little game many, many times when driving at night.

Why is this in the mk2 leon section anyway? What is this, the mk1 Leon section................jeeeees. I'm gonna go tell a teacher..................

 

[joolsvern]

If driving at a relaxed pace I will often simply lift off the throttle and gear down once or twice as I come to a junction and then if it allows apply power to continue with no use of brakes, I do however use the brakes if I have a ******** behind me as some people seem to have no perception of speed and distance and need a visual signal that someone is slowing in front of them. I was always taught that unless you expect to come to a full stop you should gear down to the appropriate gear so that you were always making "adequate progress" and driving smooth.

 

[2zeroalpha]

Made the mistake of mentionning this to Mrs 2zero the driving instructor. They don't even teach engine braking these days. If for example you crest a hill in fourth or fifth, you lift off, roll down the hill in whatever gear you're in and come to a stop using brakes only. Changing up and down gears frequently is discouraged as increases wear and consumption.

Don't shoot the messenher....all I know is maths ...

 

[Nath.]

They don't even teach engine braking these days. QUOTE]


More weight to the fact that engine braking is an out dated way of driving, a bit like double declutching, hand signals and a man with a red flag walking in front of the car.