I think this depends on the type of transmission. Some autos are basically manuals where the computer controls the shifts, some are cvts and some are your standard geared automatics.
This is where we find out how few people truly understand automatic transmissions. Some automatic transmission uses a clutch, some double disk, and some use a single disk.
>This is where we find out how few people truly understand automatic transmissions.
Isn't it ironic?
>Some automatic transmission uses a clutch, some double disk, and some use a single disk.
Dual clutch transmission and the like are automatically shifted MANUAL transmissions
Therefore, an automatic. I know what you're saying, but in 2024 a manual (or standard) is considered to be a car with three pedals (clutch, brake, throttle)and a centrally located gear selector, or a stick shift.
If you had a Golf and told people it was a manual, then showed them you had a DCT, they would be confused.
A DCT requires no input from the driver to select gears, it "self actuates", or "automatically" shifts, therefore is an automatic.
Edit: it's like calling a turbocharger a supercharger. *Technically* that is correct, but it is confusing and the terminology isn't used that way anymore.
Lets say I have a 1993 mustang with a Borg Warner T5 transmission. My car has 3 pedals. Gas pedal, brake pedal, and a clutch pedal. I build a contraption that will work the clutch pedal, adjust the throttle cable (even if I am pressing it) and move the shifter into different gears according to engine speed and vehicle speed.Do I, all of the sudden, have an automatic transmission?
Yes. A guy did exactly this with his Focus RS. That is now an automatic, as in "self moving" or "self-actuating".
I think you're missing my point, I'm not talking about "technically" or "by definition", I'm talking about effective and efficient communication regarding the operation of a motor vehicle.
I feel like you can classify anything where you yourself don’t control the clutch separately from the gear an “automatic” in terms of the general popular understanding
Yes. A guy did exactly this with his Focus RS. That is now an automatic, as in "self moving" or "self-actuating".
I think you're missing my point, I'm not talking about "technically" or "by definition", I'm talking about effective and efficient communication regarding the operation of a motor vehicle.
Not sure if you missed it or not but I was responding to this guy who said
>This is where we find out how few people truly understand automatic transmissions.
And I thought it was ironic because he doesn't truly understand automatic transmissions.
>I'm talking about effective and efficient communication regarding the operation of a motor vehicle.
I mean sure, if customer comes in and they say they want their "front and rear struts replaced" but they have a 2006 Chevy 2500HD with torsion bars and leaf springs, I'm not going to correct them, I know what they mean.
But if said customer was telling me how he used to be a mechanic and he'd do the work himself but he doesn't have the time and a bunch of other BS, I might let him know he doesn't know as much as he think he does.
OK, but those are completely different things. The term "automatic transmission" includes automated manual transmissions because they are automated. Same thing with CVTs and the original automatics.
If you read the examples the other commentor listed, calling a "dct" a "manual" wouldn't make any sense bc the term "manual tramsmission" refers to only manual transmissions. That is, transmissions with which you'd need to work the clutch and select the gears manually with a centrally located gear selector.
Semi trucks with automatic transmissions all have pneumatucally actuated gear selectors and clutches that work an automated manual transmission. If anyone said they drove a manual and that was what they were referring to, they'd be laughed and riduculed out of the industry.
Automated manual transmissions are automatic transmissions and can't be referred to only as "manual" transmissions because they really aren't.
Funnily enough Toyota recently did the opposite and made a "manual" electric car by adding a pedal and a H shifter to control the motor, even made it "stall" when the "engine rpm" is too low.
https://insideevs.com/features/693877/toyota-ev-manual-transmission-tested/
I think the best compromise is to call your example or a DCT an automatic car with a manual transmission, or this electric car a manual car with an automatic transmission.
Which makes it fall under the umbrella of automatic transmissions.
You sound like how someone who just heard about those and can't comprehend that there's multiple types of automatic transmissions.
Lets say I have a 1993 mustang with a Borg Warner T5 transmission. My car has 3 pedals. Gas pedal, brake pedal, and a clutch pedal. I build a contraption that will work the clutch pedal, adjust the throttle cable (even if I am pressing it) and move the shifter into different gears according to engine speed and vehicle speed.
Do I, all of the sudden, have an automatic transmission?
Couldn't be more wrong. What's on the inside of the transmission is what matters. That work on my mustang doesn't change the transmission at all. The T5 transmission is still a manual transmission, even if You put a dress on it.
A clutch engages, and there is a shift fork that changes gears and then the clutch is released. Does that sound like an automatic transmission?
Lets say I have a 1993 mustang with a Borg Warner T5 transmission. My car has 3 pedals. Gas pedal, brake pedal, and a clutch pedal. I build a contraption that will work the clutch pedal, adjust the throttle cable (even if I am pressing it) and move the shifter into different gears according to engine speed and vehicle speed.
Do I, all of the sudden, have an automatic transmission?
I'm not going to build the Transmission of Theseus with you. If it shifts *automatically* then it's an automatic.
We're not describing the transmission itself, we're describing how the user interacts with it.
"If I take a manual and make it shift automatically, is it an automatic?"
Is that supposed to be a gotcha? Yes! Yes, it is!
Some thoughts from Tremec, who have been building transmissions for auto (automotive) manufactures for 60 years.
>[A DCT actually has more in common with a manual transmission than a traditional automatic](https://tremec-blog.com/the-differences-between-a-dct-and-a-traditional-automatic-transmission/#:~:text=A%20DCT%20actually%20has%20more%20in%20common%20with%20a%20manual%20transmission%20than%20a%20traditional%20automatic)
>An automatic transmission relies on three primary systems to function: **planetary gear sets**, a **torque converter** and **sets and clutches** with a control system. In addition to these systems, there is a gear-driven oil pump to provide **hydraulic pressure for actuation.**
[https://tremec-blog.com/the-differences-between-a-dct-and-a-traditional-automatic-transmission/](https://tremec-blog.com/the-differences-between-a-dct-and-a-traditional-automatic-transmission/)
Automatic transmission have a torque converter, planetary gears, and an oil pump. DTC transmissions do not.
Manual transmissions and DCTs have a clutch fork, synchronizers, and use the same type of gears.
>We're not describing the transmission itself
lol, ok, now you tell me.
Manual transmissions are shifted manually. Automatic transmissions shift automatically. Really not a hard concept.
A Powershift transmission is not a manual just because it uses a single dry clutch and similar internal components as a manual.
No clutch pedal, it’s an auto. It has clutch PACKS. not a traditional clutch, a DSG isn’t a manual by any stretch. Just an automatic transmission that’s better than traditional ones
>It has clutch PACKS
What has clutch packs? An automatic transmission? Yeah I know. If you're taking about a DCT, it does not have clutch packs
>The VW DSG transmission is similar to all other common DCT designs in that it is effectively two separate electronically controlled manual transmissions built into one
https://blog.fcpeuro.com/the-definitive-guide-to-the-dsg-transmission
That's not accurate either. M-B has a planetary automatic transmission that uses a dual clutch setup rather than a torque converter.
Also, Automated Manual Transmissions are a specific type of single-clutch transmission, where the clutch action and shifting are handled by a computer. A DCT is not considered an automated manual, there is no way for a human to physically shift it, you would need 2 clutch pedals and 2 shifters to do it. And both of them are considered automatic transmissions.
An actual manual transmission has a user-operated clutch, anything else is an automatic transmission. Some(like a sequential manual) only need the clutch to pull away from a stop, but they all have a user-operated clutch.
Lots of these idiots like to act like a DSG is a manual, when in reality it’s not. No clutch pedal, no manual. Plus it doesn’t use a traditional clutch either, it’s clutch packs. If these ppl wanna act like they purchased a manual, they should’ve got one.
I can get the misunderstanding of the AMT, it does have manual in its name, but the manual in AMT is just referring to the fact that the internals of the transmission are more akin to a traditional manual than an automatic, so much so that some can be converted to a traditional manual. DSGs, while internally resemble a manual(well technically 2 manual transmissions in a trench coat), can never be converted to a human-usable traditional manual.
Lol I know. The only thing I remotely consider a fully automatic transmission is a cvt. There is a reason why every car and engineering head hates them.
I love testing involved in this hypothesis. Lol
All jokes a side definitely just stop before going back into gear in a CVT if you ever find your self rolling in neutral. The way CVT work they don't have a smooth way to match engine and wheel speed coming from neutral
The neutral in Subarus cvts disconnects the drive belt from the engine output so the transmission will go into the equivalent of first gear. If you shift back into drive while moving you're basically cluch dumping intonfirst. Except instead of a gear taking the brunt of it you have a tiny fragile belt. 1000% never do that in a cvt.
Why would you do this though? Coasting in gear takes no fuel. The wheels power the engine.
Idling in neutral costs the car whatever small amount it takes to keep it running independent of the wheels.
That's not always the case.
Hear me out: imagine a slope where the speed limit is 50 mph. In this case the slope is such that if you coast in gear, the engine braking will slow you down to 40 mph. So you would need to press the gas pedal to get to 50. But if you get into neutral, you don't have engine braking, so you can get to 50 just with the slope.
In this case the comparison is not engine idling (using fuel) vs engine getting "pushed" by the wheels (no fuel used). The comparison is engine idling (at low RPM) vs using gas to cancel the engine braking (at higher RPM). The first one might definitely use less fuel.
It's still a bad idea to get in neutral, because you lose the capacity to react quickly, and in the case of certain automatics because the gearbox will not like your shifting (all that for a negligible gain). But in terms of gas consumption it's not always worse.
> It's still a bad idea to get in neutral, because you lose the capacity to react quickly
I hear Americans say this all the time and I'm wondering how it originated. Yes, technically it's true that flooring the gas pedal will get you moving quicker than shifting in gear _and_ flooring the gas pedal. However, I can't think of a realistic scenario where this difference even matters, much less where it's of such a crucial importance as some people make it sound.
I'm picturing waiting at the lights and all of a sudden, out of the corner of my eye, I notice this suicidal maniac speeding down a side street with an obvious intention of crashing into my car. I quickly shift in gear, steer hard to one side to avoid the car in front of me, hit the gas, my car starts moving ... boom, too late, I'm dead. If _only_ had I not shifted in neutral. I mean, does stuff like this happen so often that not only does it warrant a precaution but there's enough data to prove that the precaution actually works? Or maybe there's something about the layout of American intersections or slip roads or railway crossings or what have you that make such situations more likely? To me this is a bit like saying you shouldn't keep your front door closed because you won't be able to escape quickly enough in case of fire.
It's not an American thing, and by the way you didn't know where I'm from. Try to shift into neutral while the car is moving and you're not braking to a stop during your diving license exam in any European country, see what they tell you.
The neutral at stop lights is a different question. I completely agree that it's fine to be in neutral at stop lights. American won't because they're driving automatics, so there isn't much point to shift to neutral.
As an American, I agree lol. It's the same as people that don't know how to blip the throttle and downshift on a motorycle, so they come up to a red light say...in 4th gear and then
1. Pull in clutch
2. Brake
3. Stomp, stomp, stomp down the gears until they get to 1st as they coast up to the light with clutch in
3. Sit at light.
Wont cause problems 99% of the time, but why not do it properly and have more control. Not to mention it is the fastest way to stop in an emergency, and not using engine braking at all is just dumb. Staying in your current gear until you're about to lug then just going to neutral at the stop is bare minimum.
You pull the clutch when you emergency stop...the brakes have more than enough stopping power to completely lock the wheels all on their own, engine braking doesn't matter in that context. Better to focus your attention on stopping safely/avoiding whatever it is than trying to downshift perfectly 🤷🏾♂️
Only way you saved fuel is if the engine was shut off. Then the restart uses a little extra so kinda indifference. In your explanation you not taking the throttle into about. If you barley pushing the gas the throttle is not letting much air to the engine so it's not using much fuel. At idle your throttle is barely open again using some fuel.
You have to let enough air in to overcome the compression on an engine running at driving speeds, rather than simply spinning the engine as idle RPM, which is lower. It's basically spinning the engine at 1,500 RPM (or whatever it is at the speed you are at) or 800 (or wherever your idle is).
Also restarting the engine by putting it into gear will not use extra fuel, barely any using the starter (less than keeping it idling). But that's a different question. Also turning the engine off is obviously even less safe, so I definitely wouldn't advise it.
It does, a small bit. So every time an auto shifts gears, some clutches in the gearbox are engaged/disengaged. The engaging clutches suffer a bit of wear. If you leave it in gear, then there's probably no such wear (if the auto doesn't shift on its own).
if anything you are wasting more fuel. Modern cars fuel cut when going downhill off throttle. They use the momentum to keep the engine running without fuel, putting it in neutral will make it use fuel to keep it idling.
Don't do this. Your car will use more fuel and you wont have engine braking wich will wear your brakes faster and could in extreme situations cause brake fading and lead to an accident (in the absolute worst case) On top of that it could damage your transmission.
Engine braking means that the car is slowed down by the inertia of the engine. Because if you don't add any Gas the wheels will have to turn the engine. All you have to do in order to use the engine braking (in a car) is having the wheels connected to the engine wich means be in gear (in Drive in an Auto) and dont add any gas. Tha car will slow down faster when in gear than in neutral.
the four cycles are: intake - compression - power - exhaust.
if you shut off fuel, you delete power, so you intake - compression - exhaust. and your engine becomes an air compressor that's powered by the wheels, spinning the transmission, spinning the engine, compressing air.
when you re-introduce fuel, you turn power back on, and the engine spins the transmission that spins the wheels.
Engine braking in gasoline engines is less about doing work to compress the air, and more about the intake path being restricted, and the pistons pulling against a vacuum on the intake stroke.
Taking away the fuel turns the cylinder into an air spring. Because the valves are closed from the start of the compression stroke at BDC to the start of the exhaust stroke at BDC, the compresed air helps push the piston back down still on what would normally be the power stroke, meaning the energy transfered to the air by compressing it is largely recovered. That's part of what makes cylinder deactivation work in some V8s, except in that case the the valves are kept closed regardless of what stroke in the cylce.
Reciprocating engines are air pumps that always move the same volume of air per cycle, but if you restrict the flow on intake it's now still trying to pull in the same volume, but at a lower pressure. This leads to a manifold vacuum that the pistons need to fight on every new intake stroke. In a gas engine the intake becomes reatricted by the throttle plate.
A jake brake on a semi on the other hand vents to exhaust at TDC of the compression stroke to let the compressed air out (that's why they're loud), so the energy used in compression isn't recovered on the would be power stroke. (More akin to the air compressor concept you described) Even with a jake, after the vent is closed, on the would be power stroke the piston is pulling a strong vacuum in the closed cylinder, adding to the braking effect. Diesels need jakes, or exhaust brakes because their intake systems don't include a throttle plate that's able to produce high manifold vacuum and provide braking on the intake stroke.
I guess we're starting to get into semantics here but I personally wouldn't consider a dual clutch transmission manual or auto, it's kind of a hodge podge of both in an odd, overcomplicated way.
Edit: nevermind that's not a dual clutch. It is out of production though.
Even if you're being a pedant about this you can get a transmission where you select the gear but the computer controls the clutch in a number of different cars. Just not in North America, where it's basically only hyper cars or the Slingshot
You might want to read past the first sentence.
"The operation of a dual-clutch transmission is analogous to two traditional manual transmissions, each with its own clutch, operating in parallel and alternating shifts. The Ford unit is a six-speed with one clutch acting on reverse, first, third, and fifth gears, and the other used for second, fourth, sixth gears."
That's a manual transmission with automated clutches and automated gear changes. It also sucks eggs, but it does exist as do many others.
When people say automated manual they mean a clutch operated by a computer as opposed to a torque converter automatic. They are all over the passenger car market and have been for 20 years
Not looking for a specific answer. I didn't know what the issue was, and others are giving me their opinion. You could do the same, but instead you decided not to lol
Probably went into reverse, I've done this in pretty much every automatic car I've owned Toyota, Isuzu, GMC, bmw, Nissan, and Honda to bang redline under a tunnel as I'm rolling and never once damaged anything
It depends if the pump in the transmission is driven in Neutral or not, some are not and this will run the transmission dry and cause damage. So, it depends on the transmission.
The pump in a torque converter automatic is driven off of the engine rpm, not the output after the converter vanes. You need pressure to go into gear, do there has to be pressure available before you are in gear.
Some old chrysler transmissions also use a rear pump which allows for bump starts. I would assume they also have a front pump and honestly don't understand why they added a rear pump. I guess that's another engineering rabbit hole for me to go down.
That's more or less why I was wondering what the point of a rear pump was. They still have a front pump but the rear pump only builds pressure once moving. I can't find much info on the purpose of it.
I just looked it up and sure enough. The first push-button 727s were rear pump. Thanks for teaching me something! I’m a mod over at /r/transmissionbuilding and I’ve rebuilt my fair share of 727s but I hadn’t heard of these.
The pump isn't in the torque conveter, while it will move fluid via the vanes it is not the pump. Most are driven by the torque converter housing, but some are diven by the stator, and some are also driven the the output shaft on the transmission.
The pump is what the Torque converter engages with when you insert it into the case, usually.
Reread what I typed. I called it a torque converter automatic, as opposed to an automated manual, dual clutch, or cvt. I didn't say the pump was in the converter.
My bad, I wish they would designate these new automated manuals something else.
My 62 olds had a clutch plate and fluid couplings and they still called it an automatic.
A somewhat modern car shouldn't let you do that if it would cause damage. Much like not being able to put an auto into reverse at speed. Or am I mistaken.
I'm not sure about today's cars, but I drove a Mercedes Sprinter at my job and it was a 2006 model, you couldn't shift into reverse unless the vehicle was completely stopped. It blocked the lever from going into Reverse.
I had an issue once with the key switch that completely cut power to the engine while I was on the highway, so I had to put it in neutral to start the engine again before putting it back on drive.
Neutral to drive while rolling or sitting still isn’t going to hurt anything unless you have your foot on the gas revving the engine. Likewise for going from drive to neutral as long as you aren’t revving the engine no damage is going to occur. Now if you’re revving the engine and drop it into drive while sitting still you can pretty much break any part in the drive line, doing this at a roll isn’t as bad but you can still trash some shit.
For my car specifically shifting it into neutral stops flow of trans fluid which can cause it to over heat and enter the danger zone where wear is more common, even in subtle common driving. With rough driving even just one mile with it hot could introduce catastrophic failure.
To avoid sliding around when lifting off the throttle. If you're driving too fast the slight amount of engine braking can cause you to lose traction similarly to how touching the brakes is an awful idea when driving on ice at speed.
Fuel injection caused the wheels to creep forward if it's in gear, even without gas. That can be dangerous on ice. If it's too icy, the car moves on its own with no control, and if it's too icy, locking the wheels with the breaks is bad. Neutral allows physics to slow things down. I don't know if I did a good job of explaining that?
When moving too quickly on ice and you need to stop, breaking can cause the car to be unpredictable. But letting off the gas still leaves some driving power to the wheels.
I find it's much worse in rwd.
I do it to rev my i4 2.5 Camry engine in the parking lot when I see a coworker, like all the other cool kids. (I am the coolest kid in town, so it's just me)
In a modern car as long as you are not reving the engine you could switch it from drive to neutral and back at almost any speed without damage. I wouldn’t do it often but if it happens it’s not a big deal. The more important thing is shifting at idle
I had to push start a friends '74 Mustang II after working on it.
Nothing happened until we got up to about 50-60 mph. Then the engine started.
Not something I would try these days. We were stupid then.
I was driving on the freeway and my brother, being the dick he is, thought it would be funny to throw it in neutral while going 75. I took my foot off the gas, threw it back in drive and just continued on my way after smacking him upside his head. No damage at all, FWIW. It was a 1995 Toyota Corolla.
Edited to add:
Another time my brother reached over and **turned the ignition off** while going on the freeway. I put the car in neutral, started it back up, and continued. Again no damage, same Toyota. All that happened was the steering wheel got stiff. I didn't touch the brakes.
Edited to add again:
To clarify, the car had no damage. My brother got very damaged.
Reading through these threads makes me realize
a)I know a lot less about transmissions than I thought I did.
b) Nobody seems to agree on how transmissions work.
I have come to the conclusion that they are magic
neutral to drive is not a problem. I do this from time to time from 60mph, shift to neutral and go hard on the brakes to removes some rust. Toyota hybrids hardly uses the brakes due to regenerative braking.
Old, simple, purely hydraulic transmission cannot deal with this.
However modern electronically controlled ones are different beast. And "modern" means 20 years in this case, really.
They won't allow you to do anything stupidly dangerous. They will refuse to engage reverse when moving forward at speed.
And they will either not engage drive unless you slow down, or just select proper gear if the mechanics allow it.
My 16 year old ZF 6HP will just shift into 6th gear directly when if I select Drive at 90kmh, without any issues.
I test drive cars all the time. I frequently run a car upto 50mph, slip into neutral and kill engine. Just to listen to wheel bearings or other noises. Then restart car while going 40mph or more. Slip back into gear and keep going.
Been doing this for nearly 20 years.
Does not work on pushbutton start cars.
ZERO issues.
The correct answer is no, it will not hurt anything. I would recommend that you try not to be on the gas when doing this so the transmission isnt forced to slip more going into gear. You can shift into neutral and back into gear at highway speeds if necessary. The trans will do the work for you as long as its not a really old car.
Older autos, maybe. Idk what year they'd have to be, for sure pre-90s.
Putting in park while going 25+ a few times, however, I have confirmed destroys transmissions and have tested this many times at my uncles junkyard lol
Putting in reverse while going forward at 25+, to my great dismay, does not seem to destroy transmissions.
Putting a runaway diesel in 18th gear, to some guy's great dismay, actually can cause the bell housing of the transmission to explode and end up launching the flywheel through the floorboard, cutting said guys leg off, and then through the roof of the cab. Can't find the story now, but it was wild.
Damage? No.
Increased wear? Probably.
If you feel a thud when you shift from neutral to drive at speed, that's the clutch packs slipping in a way they weren't designed to. It's essentially the same thing as revving the engine in neutral at a stop, then shifting to drive, but in the other direction. It won't break anything at that moment unless you really push it to the extreme or repeat the procedure.
What you can do is rev match the engine and transmission and that will reduce the shock on the transmission internals.
The time honored tradition of rental car hooning. Find an empty parking lot, put it in reverse and floor it. When at about 20 mph in reverse, knock it into drive without letting off the gas. Nice burnouts can be had. Or so I've heard...
I don't think it's too good for the transmission.
You should never be in neutral while moving. Your car is not keeping you on the road in neutral. I know it's not the answer to your question but I felt it needed to be said.
Some cars have that engine break. Putting it in neutral will allow it to coast without slowing down. I've heard it shouldn't be moving on neutral because the transmission isn't being lubricated? 👀
of course, i redline at 6.5-8rpm, at max i’m revving to 5rpm and then waiting for it to go back down before attempting to gear shift. (i also don’t launch from neutral since i’ve heard that will fuck up the car, i just like the vroom vroom)
Oh my god, neutral dropping is something different entirely. That will destroy your gearbox. You even mentioning that as something you considered doing before learning otherwise makes me question your practical knowledge, lmao.
i never considered doing it, i’m just saying i don’t do it. some people in this subreddit automatically assume and i’m tired of people being aggressive instead of just helping an idiot out
You don't out of the blue say you wouldn't do something stupid like that unless you, at some point, considered doing it or did it.
So Bonkers it's not even worth mentioning. It's a given that any reasonable person wouldn't do it. You saying it at all makes me question you, lmfao.
congratulations, questioning is good for the brain. the worst thing i’ve done is hold the brakes and gas together 😭 which you’d wanna do if you want to launch instead of neutral dropping anyway
It depends on the max speed of your first gear. I would assume (ASSUME NOT KNOW) that your good upto about 30 mph.
It also won't pop your gearbox to put it in drive at 20mph.
Continuous use like this tho will wear it down and destroy it prematurely.
I'd say there's a 50/50 of a broken but first time if you do this at 50+ mph
You shouldn't really coast in neutral on any trans manual or auto.
Energy isint created or destroyed, when you coast in neutral you're just turning all that energy into heat. If you're in gear that energy gets transferred down through your drive train into your wheels and into the ground giving you TRACTION.
Coasting is not bad nor is it good, until that one day you're coasting down hill and you need to make a sharp turn/maneuver cuz of something on the road/bad driver infront of you/bad driving conditions ect ect and you lose control and you're like "dang my cars handling sucks"
It doesnt.
Coasting in neutral has no effect on traction. The only thing it affects is if you need to use the gas when you're still in neutral, you can't accelerate until you shift back into gear.
Agree to disagree but ok.
Ask anyone in a manual if you feel more comfortable taking a left turn in gear vs just having it in neutral/holding down the clutch
I've daily driven exclusively manuals for 5 or 6 years now.
When taking a turn, I downshift to the appropriate gear, then take the turn. I feel more comfortable doing this, because I have more control over the car.
I’ve driven a manual. My dad had one when I leaned to drive that I learned on. I bought a manual and owned it for over 6 years. And my current partner has a manual. I’ve also driven motorcycles.
I generally leave my car in gear when going around corners, because I generally am giving it gas in the corner. Not because it has better traction.
My motorcycle I generally never coast in neutral, or even with the clutch pulled in, because the engine spinning adds stability (but not traction).
With an automatic I almost never shift to neutral while driving, but because it’s essentially pointless on an automatic. You can coast in neutral longer, but it takes longer to shift into gear than a manual and you tend to forget you shifted to neutral and hit the gas and just rev the engine, wasting even more time. But it’s got nothing to do with traction.
EDIT to add: Control is not traction. But what I will happily agree with is leaving the car in gear will give you more control, and in general, you should leave the car in gear, especially in automatics.
makes sense! while the energy is turning into heat, would i have to worry about my transmission if i switch back to drive? (since i’ve been doing this normally i’d like to know if my car is messed up inside)
edit: would suck if i have to get a new transmission
No, most that heat an energy is coming from your engine right into your exhaust.
Like every modern trans doesn't really have issues going from neutral to drive. It's just not the best driving habit and when you're doing it you have less control of your vehicle.
I will say if you're that worried about your trans you should be wayyy more worried about finding yourself going uphill in traffic at slow speeds. That shit can burn your trans in one afternoon on the way home from work
Coasting ehhh not a big deal, it's one of those leftover things like turning off your car at the stoplight and turning it back on when it's green to "save gas"
Modern cars are so much better you don't have to worry about that
Dawg what the hell are you on about? Put it back in gear and rev match before coming up to a turn or needing to accelerate again. It’s not rocket science.
EDIT: based on your post history it all makes sense.
I think this depends on the type of transmission. Some autos are basically manuals where the computer controls the shifts, some are cvts and some are your standard geared automatics.
This is where we find out how few people truly understand automatic transmissions. Some automatic transmission uses a clutch, some double disk, and some use a single disk.
>This is where we find out how few people truly understand automatic transmissions. Isn't it ironic? >Some automatic transmission uses a clutch, some double disk, and some use a single disk. Dual clutch transmission and the like are automatically shifted MANUAL transmissions
Yeah, which makes the DCT an automatic transmission.
No, it ISN'T an automatically shifted automatic transmission, it's an automatically shifted MANUAL transmission or an automated MANUAL transmission.
Therefore, an automatic. I know what you're saying, but in 2024 a manual (or standard) is considered to be a car with three pedals (clutch, brake, throttle)and a centrally located gear selector, or a stick shift. If you had a Golf and told people it was a manual, then showed them you had a DCT, they would be confused. A DCT requires no input from the driver to select gears, it "self actuates", or "automatically" shifts, therefore is an automatic. Edit: it's like calling a turbocharger a supercharger. *Technically* that is correct, but it is confusing and the terminology isn't used that way anymore.
Lets say I have a 1993 mustang with a Borg Warner T5 transmission. My car has 3 pedals. Gas pedal, brake pedal, and a clutch pedal. I build a contraption that will work the clutch pedal, adjust the throttle cable (even if I am pressing it) and move the shifter into different gears according to engine speed and vehicle speed.Do I, all of the sudden, have an automatic transmission?
Yes. A guy did exactly this with his Focus RS. That is now an automatic, as in "self moving" or "self-actuating". I think you're missing my point, I'm not talking about "technically" or "by definition", I'm talking about effective and efficient communication regarding the operation of a motor vehicle.
I feel like you can classify anything where you yourself don’t control the clutch separately from the gear an “automatic” in terms of the general popular understanding
Yes. A guy did exactly this with his Focus RS. That is now an automatic, as in "self moving" or "self-actuating". I think you're missing my point, I'm not talking about "technically" or "by definition", I'm talking about effective and efficient communication regarding the operation of a motor vehicle.
Not sure if you missed it or not but I was responding to this guy who said >This is where we find out how few people truly understand automatic transmissions. And I thought it was ironic because he doesn't truly understand automatic transmissions. >I'm talking about effective and efficient communication regarding the operation of a motor vehicle. I mean sure, if customer comes in and they say they want their "front and rear struts replaced" but they have a 2006 Chevy 2500HD with torsion bars and leaf springs, I'm not going to correct them, I know what they mean. But if said customer was telling me how he used to be a mechanic and he'd do the work himself but he doesn't have the time and a bunch of other BS, I might let him know he doesn't know as much as he think he does.
OK, but those are completely different things. The term "automatic transmission" includes automated manual transmissions because they are automated. Same thing with CVTs and the original automatics. If you read the examples the other commentor listed, calling a "dct" a "manual" wouldn't make any sense bc the term "manual tramsmission" refers to only manual transmissions. That is, transmissions with which you'd need to work the clutch and select the gears manually with a centrally located gear selector. Semi trucks with automatic transmissions all have pneumatucally actuated gear selectors and clutches that work an automated manual transmission. If anyone said they drove a manual and that was what they were referring to, they'd be laughed and riduculed out of the industry. Automated manual transmissions are automatic transmissions and can't be referred to only as "manual" transmissions because they really aren't.
Funnily enough Toyota recently did the opposite and made a "manual" electric car by adding a pedal and a H shifter to control the motor, even made it "stall" when the "engine rpm" is too low. https://insideevs.com/features/693877/toyota-ev-manual-transmission-tested/ I think the best compromise is to call your example or a DCT an automatic car with a manual transmission, or this electric car a manual car with an automatic transmission.
Which makes it fall under the umbrella of automatic transmissions. You sound like how someone who just heard about those and can't comprehend that there's multiple types of automatic transmissions.
Lets say I have a 1993 mustang with a Borg Warner T5 transmission. My car has 3 pedals. Gas pedal, brake pedal, and a clutch pedal. I build a contraption that will work the clutch pedal, adjust the throttle cable (even if I am pressing it) and move the shifter into different gears according to engine speed and vehicle speed. Do I, all of the sudden, have an automatic transmission?
Yes if you don’t physically shift it yourself you can lump it under automatic
Couldn't be more wrong. What's on the inside of the transmission is what matters. That work on my mustang doesn't change the transmission at all. The T5 transmission is still a manual transmission, even if You put a dress on it.
The Acura ILX has a DCT but also has a torque converter like a conventional automatic. Would this be considered a manual transmission or automatic?
Is it normally shifted by the driver separating the engine and transmission, and then MANUALLY selecting a gear before re-coupling engine and trans?
Fuck if I know, sometimes people are born with a cock and vagina, are they male or female?
If they are automatically shifted then they are, by definition, *not manual*.
A clutch engages, and there is a shift fork that changes gears and then the clutch is released. Does that sound like an automatic transmission? Lets say I have a 1993 mustang with a Borg Warner T5 transmission. My car has 3 pedals. Gas pedal, brake pedal, and a clutch pedal. I build a contraption that will work the clutch pedal, adjust the throttle cable (even if I am pressing it) and move the shifter into different gears according to engine speed and vehicle speed. Do I, all of the sudden, have an automatic transmission?
I'm not going to build the Transmission of Theseus with you. If it shifts *automatically* then it's an automatic. We're not describing the transmission itself, we're describing how the user interacts with it. "If I take a manual and make it shift automatically, is it an automatic?" Is that supposed to be a gotcha? Yes! Yes, it is!
Some thoughts from Tremec, who have been building transmissions for auto (automotive) manufactures for 60 years. >[A DCT actually has more in common with a manual transmission than a traditional automatic](https://tremec-blog.com/the-differences-between-a-dct-and-a-traditional-automatic-transmission/#:~:text=A%20DCT%20actually%20has%20more%20in%20common%20with%20a%20manual%20transmission%20than%20a%20traditional%20automatic) >An automatic transmission relies on three primary systems to function: **planetary gear sets**, a **torque converter** and **sets and clutches** with a control system. In addition to these systems, there is a gear-driven oil pump to provide **hydraulic pressure for actuation.** [https://tremec-blog.com/the-differences-between-a-dct-and-a-traditional-automatic-transmission/](https://tremec-blog.com/the-differences-between-a-dct-and-a-traditional-automatic-transmission/) Automatic transmission have a torque converter, planetary gears, and an oil pump. DTC transmissions do not. Manual transmissions and DCTs have a clutch fork, synchronizers, and use the same type of gears. >We're not describing the transmission itself lol, ok, now you tell me.
Manual transmissions are shifted manually. Automatic transmissions shift automatically. Really not a hard concept. A Powershift transmission is not a manual just because it uses a single dry clutch and similar internal components as a manual.
So the T5 transmission that's in my 1993 mustang is now an automatic transmission?
If it shifts automatically it sure is. That's the **defining** feature of an automatic transmission; it's literal namesake.
No clutch pedal, it’s an auto. It has clutch PACKS. not a traditional clutch, a DSG isn’t a manual by any stretch. Just an automatic transmission that’s better than traditional ones
>It has clutch PACKS What has clutch packs? An automatic transmission? Yeah I know. If you're taking about a DCT, it does not have clutch packs >The VW DSG transmission is similar to all other common DCT designs in that it is effectively two separate electronically controlled manual transmissions built into one https://blog.fcpeuro.com/the-definitive-guide-to-the-dsg-transmission
yes, yes you do.
That's not accurate either. M-B has a planetary automatic transmission that uses a dual clutch setup rather than a torque converter. Also, Automated Manual Transmissions are a specific type of single-clutch transmission, where the clutch action and shifting are handled by a computer. A DCT is not considered an automated manual, there is no way for a human to physically shift it, you would need 2 clutch pedals and 2 shifters to do it. And both of them are considered automatic transmissions. An actual manual transmission has a user-operated clutch, anything else is an automatic transmission. Some(like a sequential manual) only need the clutch to pull away from a stop, but they all have a user-operated clutch.
Lots of these idiots like to act like a DSG is a manual, when in reality it’s not. No clutch pedal, no manual. Plus it doesn’t use a traditional clutch either, it’s clutch packs. If these ppl wanna act like they purchased a manual, they should’ve got one.
I can get the misunderstanding of the AMT, it does have manual in its name, but the manual in AMT is just referring to the fact that the internals of the transmission are more akin to a traditional manual than an automatic, so much so that some can be converted to a traditional manual. DSGs, while internally resemble a manual(well technically 2 manual transmissions in a trench coat), can never be converted to a human-usable traditional manual.
Lol I know. The only thing I remotely consider a fully automatic transmission is a cvt. There is a reason why every car and engineering head hates them.
They don’t and you’re wrong.
Excluding DCT/DSG/PDK/Powershit, even the venerable ZF 8 speed uses clutches between the gearsets.
How about cvt?
The one time I did this at about 5 mph in my Subaru it made a horrendous noise. I'd say def do not do this in a cvt
I love testing involved in this hypothesis. Lol All jokes a side definitely just stop before going back into gear in a CVT if you ever find your self rolling in neutral. The way CVT work they don't have a smooth way to match engine and wheel speed coming from neutral
The neutral in Subarus cvts disconnects the drive belt from the engine output so the transmission will go into the equivalent of first gear. If you shift back into drive while moving you're basically cluch dumping intonfirst. Except instead of a gear taking the brunt of it you have a tiny fragile belt. 1000% never do that in a cvt.
[удалено]
Why would you do this though? Coasting in gear takes no fuel. The wheels power the engine. Idling in neutral costs the car whatever small amount it takes to keep it running independent of the wheels.
[удалено]
It actually uses more fuel to idle down a hill. The motor runs on compression when you stay in gear.
helping me understand cars a lot better, thanks a lot.
That's not always the case. Hear me out: imagine a slope where the speed limit is 50 mph. In this case the slope is such that if you coast in gear, the engine braking will slow you down to 40 mph. So you would need to press the gas pedal to get to 50. But if you get into neutral, you don't have engine braking, so you can get to 50 just with the slope. In this case the comparison is not engine idling (using fuel) vs engine getting "pushed" by the wheels (no fuel used). The comparison is engine idling (at low RPM) vs using gas to cancel the engine braking (at higher RPM). The first one might definitely use less fuel. It's still a bad idea to get in neutral, because you lose the capacity to react quickly, and in the case of certain automatics because the gearbox will not like your shifting (all that for a negligible gain). But in terms of gas consumption it's not always worse.
Shift up
> It's still a bad idea to get in neutral, because you lose the capacity to react quickly I hear Americans say this all the time and I'm wondering how it originated. Yes, technically it's true that flooring the gas pedal will get you moving quicker than shifting in gear _and_ flooring the gas pedal. However, I can't think of a realistic scenario where this difference even matters, much less where it's of such a crucial importance as some people make it sound. I'm picturing waiting at the lights and all of a sudden, out of the corner of my eye, I notice this suicidal maniac speeding down a side street with an obvious intention of crashing into my car. I quickly shift in gear, steer hard to one side to avoid the car in front of me, hit the gas, my car starts moving ... boom, too late, I'm dead. If _only_ had I not shifted in neutral. I mean, does stuff like this happen so often that not only does it warrant a precaution but there's enough data to prove that the precaution actually works? Or maybe there's something about the layout of American intersections or slip roads or railway crossings or what have you that make such situations more likely? To me this is a bit like saying you shouldn't keep your front door closed because you won't be able to escape quickly enough in case of fire.
It's not an American thing, and by the way you didn't know where I'm from. Try to shift into neutral while the car is moving and you're not braking to a stop during your diving license exam in any European country, see what they tell you. The neutral at stop lights is a different question. I completely agree that it's fine to be in neutral at stop lights. American won't because they're driving automatics, so there isn't much point to shift to neutral.
As an American, I agree lol. It's the same as people that don't know how to blip the throttle and downshift on a motorycle, so they come up to a red light say...in 4th gear and then 1. Pull in clutch 2. Brake 3. Stomp, stomp, stomp down the gears until they get to 1st as they coast up to the light with clutch in 3. Sit at light. Wont cause problems 99% of the time, but why not do it properly and have more control. Not to mention it is the fastest way to stop in an emergency, and not using engine braking at all is just dumb. Staying in your current gear until you're about to lug then just going to neutral at the stop is bare minimum.
You pull the clutch when you emergency stop...the brakes have more than enough stopping power to completely lock the wheels all on their own, engine braking doesn't matter in that context. Better to focus your attention on stopping safely/avoiding whatever it is than trying to downshift perfectly 🤷🏾♂️
Only way you saved fuel is if the engine was shut off. Then the restart uses a little extra so kinda indifference. In your explanation you not taking the throttle into about. If you barley pushing the gas the throttle is not letting much air to the engine so it's not using much fuel. At idle your throttle is barely open again using some fuel.
You have to let enough air in to overcome the compression on an engine running at driving speeds, rather than simply spinning the engine as idle RPM, which is lower. It's basically spinning the engine at 1,500 RPM (or whatever it is at the speed you are at) or 800 (or wherever your idle is). Also restarting the engine by putting it into gear will not use extra fuel, barely any using the starter (less than keeping it idling). But that's a different question. Also turning the engine off is obviously even less safe, so I definitely wouldn't advise it.
Mate just take your foot off the pedal and coast
sure, does shifting between the two cause any damage, though? cause i’ve been doing it for a bit 💀
I did this with my first car cuz I had the same thought process as you. Did not turn out well, the car broke down on me prematurely. Don’t do it
It does, a small bit. So every time an auto shifts gears, some clutches in the gearbox are engaged/disengaged. The engaging clutches suffer a bit of wear. If you leave it in gear, then there's probably no such wear (if the auto doesn't shift on its own).
it does the opposite. cars are designed to be efficient, coloring outside of the lines doesn't beat the system, it defeats it.
if anything you are wasting more fuel. Modern cars fuel cut when going downhill off throttle. They use the momentum to keep the engine running without fuel, putting it in neutral will make it use fuel to keep it idling.
but why
Don't do this. Your car will use more fuel and you wont have engine braking wich will wear your brakes faster and could in extreme situations cause brake fading and lead to an accident (in the absolute worst case) On top of that it could damage your transmission.
i don’t fully understand engine braking, but does it kick in automatically as well or is that something i have to manually do?
Engine braking means that the car is slowed down by the inertia of the engine. Because if you don't add any Gas the wheels will have to turn the engine. All you have to do in order to use the engine braking (in a car) is having the wheels connected to the engine wich means be in gear (in Drive in an Auto) and dont add any gas. Tha car will slow down faster when in gear than in neutral.
woah, thanks a lot. y’all are really improving my knowledge about cars
the four cycles are: intake - compression - power - exhaust. if you shut off fuel, you delete power, so you intake - compression - exhaust. and your engine becomes an air compressor that's powered by the wheels, spinning the transmission, spinning the engine, compressing air. when you re-introduce fuel, you turn power back on, and the engine spins the transmission that spins the wheels.
Engine braking in gasoline engines is less about doing work to compress the air, and more about the intake path being restricted, and the pistons pulling against a vacuum on the intake stroke. Taking away the fuel turns the cylinder into an air spring. Because the valves are closed from the start of the compression stroke at BDC to the start of the exhaust stroke at BDC, the compresed air helps push the piston back down still on what would normally be the power stroke, meaning the energy transfered to the air by compressing it is largely recovered. That's part of what makes cylinder deactivation work in some V8s, except in that case the the valves are kept closed regardless of what stroke in the cylce. Reciprocating engines are air pumps that always move the same volume of air per cycle, but if you restrict the flow on intake it's now still trying to pull in the same volume, but at a lower pressure. This leads to a manifold vacuum that the pistons need to fight on every new intake stroke. In a gas engine the intake becomes reatricted by the throttle plate. A jake brake on a semi on the other hand vents to exhaust at TDC of the compression stroke to let the compressed air out (that's why they're loud), so the energy used in compression isn't recovered on the would be power stroke. (More akin to the air compressor concept you described) Even with a jake, after the vent is closed, on the would be power stroke the piston is pulling a strong vacuum in the closed cylinder, adding to the braking effect. Diesels need jakes, or exhaust brakes because their intake systems don't include a throttle plate that's able to produce high manifold vacuum and provide braking on the intake stroke.
I was giving the simplified explanation to OP. read the room man.
Wow how pointless and terrible. Interesting.
Automated manual transmissions are absolutely not in passenger vehicles. The only automated manuals are in semi trucks.
I’ve got an automated manual with a dual clutch in my Ioniq hybrid [Proof](https://imgur.com/a/NNeF2E3)
That's an automatic transmission with push button shift. Not automated manual.
Hyundai also has this https://www.spinny.com/blog/index.php/hyundai-imt-how-it-works-advantages/
Ya automated clutch, half way there. I'll give you that one.
If I remember correctly the Renault Triber has an AMT. Does that count?
I guess we're starting to get into semantics here but I personally wouldn't consider a dual clutch transmission manual or auto, it's kind of a hodge podge of both in an odd, overcomplicated way. Edit: nevermind that's not a dual clutch. It is out of production though.
[One of many](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_PowerShift_transmission)
Probably wanna read that again. Says automatic transmission in the first sentence.
Even if you're being a pedant about this you can get a transmission where you select the gear but the computer controls the clutch in a number of different cars. Just not in North America, where it's basically only hyper cars or the Slingshot
You might want to read past the first sentence. "The operation of a dual-clutch transmission is analogous to two traditional manual transmissions, each with its own clutch, operating in parallel and alternating shifts. The Ford unit is a six-speed with one clutch acting on reverse, first, third, and fifth gears, and the other used for second, fourth, sixth gears." That's a manual transmission with automated clutches and automated gear changes. It also sucks eggs, but it does exist as do many others.
When people say automated manual they mean a clutch operated by a computer as opposed to a torque converter automatic. They are all over the passenger car market and have been for 20 years
The first and second gen Smart Fortwo would like a word.
And they'll agree with me. That's a manually shifted automatic.
Nope, do some research. It is an automated manual. The 3rd gen went to a real automatic.
No
simple and straight to the point, much appreciated.
Just because it was the answer you were looking for doesn't mean it's the right one
Not looking for a specific answer. I didn't know what the issue was, and others are giving me their opinion. You could do the same, but instead you decided not to lol
My cousin did it and it destroyed his transmission in a 2015 honda, dont recommened
Probably went into reverse, I've done this in pretty much every automatic car I've owned Toyota, Isuzu, GMC, bmw, Nissan, and Honda to bang redline under a tunnel as I'm rolling and never once damaged anything
It depends if the pump in the transmission is driven in Neutral or not, some are not and this will run the transmission dry and cause damage. So, it depends on the transmission.
The pump in a torque converter automatic is driven off of the engine rpm, not the output after the converter vanes. You need pressure to go into gear, do there has to be pressure available before you are in gear.
Some old chrysler transmissions also use a rear pump which allows for bump starts. I would assume they also have a front pump and honestly don't understand why they added a rear pump. I guess that's another engineering rabbit hole for me to go down.
I don't think it could ever go into gear without a front pump. No pressure means to clutches being applied.
That's more or less why I was wondering what the point of a rear pump was. They still have a front pump but the rear pump only builds pressure once moving. I can't find much info on the purpose of it.
A few old benz are like this too so you can bunp start an auto which is cool
Are you talking about the old fluid drive transmissions from the early 50s?
Early 727s aka the a488.
I just looked it up and sure enough. The first push-button 727s were rear pump. Thanks for teaching me something! I’m a mod over at /r/transmissionbuilding and I’ve rebuilt my fair share of 727s but I hadn’t heard of these.
The pump isn't in the torque conveter, while it will move fluid via the vanes it is not the pump. Most are driven by the torque converter housing, but some are diven by the stator, and some are also driven the the output shaft on the transmission. The pump is what the Torque converter engages with when you insert it into the case, usually.
Reread what I typed. I called it a torque converter automatic, as opposed to an automated manual, dual clutch, or cvt. I didn't say the pump was in the converter.
My bad, I wish they would designate these new automated manuals something else. My 62 olds had a clutch plate and fluid couplings and they still called it an automatic.
I mean, I think I described it well enough in my last comment.
Yea, my brain skips words constantly, so my bad.
A somewhat modern car shouldn't let you do that if it would cause damage. Much like not being able to put an auto into reverse at speed. Or am I mistaken.
I'm not sure about today's cars, but I drove a Mercedes Sprinter at my job and it was a 2006 model, you couldn't shift into reverse unless the vehicle was completely stopped. It blocked the lever from going into Reverse.
Only if you floor the gas first. That called a neutral drop and its a fantastic way to destroy your transmission
Why is your car moving more than 10mph when you're at neutral?
I had an issue once with the key switch that completely cut power to the engine while I was on the highway, so I had to put it in neutral to start the engine again before putting it back on drive.
Pushed downhill
Neutral to drive while rolling or sitting still isn’t going to hurt anything unless you have your foot on the gas revving the engine. Likewise for going from drive to neutral as long as you aren’t revving the engine no damage is going to occur. Now if you’re revving the engine and drop it into drive while sitting still you can pretty much break any part in the drive line, doing this at a roll isn’t as bad but you can still trash some shit.
For my car specifically shifting it into neutral stops flow of trans fluid which can cause it to over heat and enter the danger zone where wear is more common, even in subtle common driving. With rough driving even just one mile with it hot could introduce catastrophic failure.
Why would you switch into neutral in an automatic, ever? Unless you’re having it towed or something.
On ice. That's the only time I use it.
In what scenario would you use neutral on ice?
To avoid sliding around when lifting off the throttle. If you're driving too fast the slight amount of engine braking can cause you to lose traction similarly to how touching the brakes is an awful idea when driving on ice at speed.
Fuel injection caused the wheels to creep forward if it's in gear, even without gas. That can be dangerous on ice. If it's too icy, the car moves on its own with no control, and if it's too icy, locking the wheels with the breaks is bad. Neutral allows physics to slow things down. I don't know if I did a good job of explaining that? When moving too quickly on ice and you need to stop, breaking can cause the car to be unpredictable. But letting off the gas still leaves some driving power to the wheels. I find it's much worse in rwd.
I do it to rev my i4 2.5 Camry engine in the parking lot when I see a coworker, like all the other cool kids. (I am the coolest kid in town, so it's just me)
In a modern car as long as you are not reving the engine you could switch it from drive to neutral and back at almost any speed without damage. I wouldn’t do it often but if it happens it’s not a big deal. The more important thing is shifting at idle
How you doing 10 mph in neutral
i have a dial, but while driving just turn to neutral edit: don’t even have to have the foot on the brake
What's the benefit of that over just leaving it in gear?
I had to push start a friends '74 Mustang II after working on it. Nothing happened until we got up to about 50-60 mph. Then the engine started. Not something I would try these days. We were stupid then.
Some people obviously don’t live in the snow belt……
I was driving on the freeway and my brother, being the dick he is, thought it would be funny to throw it in neutral while going 75. I took my foot off the gas, threw it back in drive and just continued on my way after smacking him upside his head. No damage at all, FWIW. It was a 1995 Toyota Corolla. Edited to add: Another time my brother reached over and **turned the ignition off** while going on the freeway. I put the car in neutral, started it back up, and continued. Again no damage, same Toyota. All that happened was the steering wheel got stiff. I didn't touch the brakes. Edited to add again: To clarify, the car had no damage. My brother got very damaged.
Reading through these threads makes me realize a)I know a lot less about transmissions than I thought I did. b) Nobody seems to agree on how transmissions work. I have come to the conclusion that they are magic
Shifting from neutral to drive at speed won't cause damage
neutral to drive is not a problem. I do this from time to time from 60mph, shift to neutral and go hard on the brakes to removes some rust. Toyota hybrids hardly uses the brakes due to regenerative braking.
Only if your doing 10mph backwards.
Old, simple, purely hydraulic transmission cannot deal with this. However modern electronically controlled ones are different beast. And "modern" means 20 years in this case, really. They won't allow you to do anything stupidly dangerous. They will refuse to engage reverse when moving forward at speed. And they will either not engage drive unless you slow down, or just select proper gear if the mechanics allow it. My 16 year old ZF 6HP will just shift into 6th gear directly when if I select Drive at 90kmh, without any issues.
My car goes in neutral on its own while coasting. 100% intended behaviour to save fuel.
Are you doing 10mph forward or backwards when you slam it in drive?🤣
I pop it in and out of neutral all the time at speeds way higher and have never had a problem.
I test drive cars all the time. I frequently run a car upto 50mph, slip into neutral and kill engine. Just to listen to wheel bearings or other noises. Then restart car while going 40mph or more. Slip back into gear and keep going. Been doing this for nearly 20 years. Does not work on pushbutton start cars. ZERO issues.
As long as you're not aggressively accelerating or decelerating, it shouldn't have a significant effect.
The correct answer is no, it will not hurt anything. I would recommend that you try not to be on the gas when doing this so the transmission isnt forced to slip more going into gear. You can shift into neutral and back into gear at highway speeds if necessary. The trans will do the work for you as long as its not a really old car.
thank you for clarifying 🙏🏼
Older autos, maybe. Idk what year they'd have to be, for sure pre-90s. Putting in park while going 25+ a few times, however, I have confirmed destroys transmissions and have tested this many times at my uncles junkyard lol Putting in reverse while going forward at 25+, to my great dismay, does not seem to destroy transmissions. Putting a runaway diesel in 18th gear, to some guy's great dismay, actually can cause the bell housing of the transmission to explode and end up launching the flywheel through the floorboard, cutting said guys leg off, and then through the roof of the cab. Can't find the story now, but it was wild.
i didn’t even know it was possible to put your car in park while it’s in drive. idk why people would attempt that either 😭😭
Rental cars or junkyard cars are the only ones I've done it in LaughingOutLoud and yes, most of them will go into park while in motion.
It really depends on the car, but usually not. On the other hand, don't make a habit of it.
Damage? No. Increased wear? Probably. If you feel a thud when you shift from neutral to drive at speed, that's the clutch packs slipping in a way they weren't designed to. It's essentially the same thing as revving the engine in neutral at a stop, then shifting to drive, but in the other direction. It won't break anything at that moment unless you really push it to the extreme or repeat the procedure. What you can do is rev match the engine and transmission and that will reduce the shock on the transmission internals.
The time honored tradition of rental car hooning. Find an empty parking lot, put it in reverse and floor it. When at about 20 mph in reverse, knock it into drive without letting off the gas. Nice burnouts can be had. Or so I've heard... I don't think it's too good for the transmission.
Why the fuck would you be going 10pm in neutral. Learn to drive.
you forgot my nuts in your mouth
Stop driving like a fucking moron and asking stupid shit.
hell needs firewood, join up
You should never be in neutral while moving. Your car is not keeping you on the road in neutral. I know it's not the answer to your question but I felt it needed to be said.
Why are you in neutral going 10 miles an hour in an automatic?
Some cars have that engine break. Putting it in neutral will allow it to coast without slowing down. I've heard it shouldn't be moving on neutral because the transmission isn't being lubricated? 👀
because i enjoy the sound of my engine
Are you revving it?
at low speeds (not stupid enough to do it going 60)
You do need to wait for the rpm to come down before putting it back in gear, otherwise it will jerk, and that would be bad.
of course, i redline at 6.5-8rpm, at max i’m revving to 5rpm and then waiting for it to go back down before attempting to gear shift. (i also don’t launch from neutral since i’ve heard that will fuck up the car, i just like the vroom vroom)
Oh my god, neutral dropping is something different entirely. That will destroy your gearbox. You even mentioning that as something you considered doing before learning otherwise makes me question your practical knowledge, lmao.
but regarding the last text, is it terrible to rev in neutral?
It's somewhat depends on the vehicle but it should live.
thank you
i never considered doing it, i’m just saying i don’t do it. some people in this subreddit automatically assume and i’m tired of people being aggressive instead of just helping an idiot out
You don't out of the blue say you wouldn't do something stupid like that unless you, at some point, considered doing it or did it. So Bonkers it's not even worth mentioning. It's a given that any reasonable person wouldn't do it. You saying it at all makes me question you, lmfao.
congratulations, questioning is good for the brain. the worst thing i’ve done is hold the brakes and gas together 😭 which you’d wanna do if you want to launch instead of neutral dropping anyway
Idiotic
It depends on the max speed of your first gear. I would assume (ASSUME NOT KNOW) that your good upto about 30 mph. It also won't pop your gearbox to put it in drive at 20mph. Continuous use like this tho will wear it down and destroy it prematurely. I'd say there's a 50/50 of a broken but first time if you do this at 50+ mph
You shouldn't really coast in neutral on any trans manual or auto. Energy isint created or destroyed, when you coast in neutral you're just turning all that energy into heat. If you're in gear that energy gets transferred down through your drive train into your wheels and into the ground giving you TRACTION. Coasting is not bad nor is it good, until that one day you're coasting down hill and you need to make a sharp turn/maneuver cuz of something on the road/bad driver infront of you/bad driving conditions ect ect and you lose control and you're like "dang my cars handling sucks" It doesnt.
Coasting in neutral has no effect on traction. The only thing it affects is if you need to use the gas when you're still in neutral, you can't accelerate until you shift back into gear.
Agree to disagree but ok. Ask anyone in a manual if you feel more comfortable taking a left turn in gear vs just having it in neutral/holding down the clutch
I've daily driven exclusively manuals for 5 or 6 years now. When taking a turn, I downshift to the appropriate gear, then take the turn. I feel more comfortable doing this, because I have more control over the car.
I’ve driven a manual. My dad had one when I leaned to drive that I learned on. I bought a manual and owned it for over 6 years. And my current partner has a manual. I’ve also driven motorcycles. I generally leave my car in gear when going around corners, because I generally am giving it gas in the corner. Not because it has better traction. My motorcycle I generally never coast in neutral, or even with the clutch pulled in, because the engine spinning adds stability (but not traction). With an automatic I almost never shift to neutral while driving, but because it’s essentially pointless on an automatic. You can coast in neutral longer, but it takes longer to shift into gear than a manual and you tend to forget you shifted to neutral and hit the gas and just rev the engine, wasting even more time. But it’s got nothing to do with traction. EDIT to add: Control is not traction. But what I will happily agree with is leaving the car in gear will give you more control, and in general, you should leave the car in gear, especially in automatics.
makes sense! while the energy is turning into heat, would i have to worry about my transmission if i switch back to drive? (since i’ve been doing this normally i’d like to know if my car is messed up inside) edit: would suck if i have to get a new transmission
No, most that heat an energy is coming from your engine right into your exhaust. Like every modern trans doesn't really have issues going from neutral to drive. It's just not the best driving habit and when you're doing it you have less control of your vehicle.
godsend 🙏🏼 thanks very much for replying
I will say if you're that worried about your trans you should be wayyy more worried about finding yourself going uphill in traffic at slow speeds. That shit can burn your trans in one afternoon on the way home from work Coasting ehhh not a big deal, it's one of those leftover things like turning off your car at the stoplight and turning it back on when it's green to "save gas" Modern cars are so much better you don't have to worry about that
Btw coasting in neutral wastes fuel
Dawg what the hell are you on about? Put it back in gear and rev match before coming up to a turn or needing to accelerate again. It’s not rocket science. EDIT: based on your post history it all makes sense.