Neutral bad for Transmission?
#17
Pole Position
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But, I do see your point...
#18
Pole Position
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#21
i was always told this (for manual transmissions): brakes are cheaper and easier to replace than a clutch. don't downshift to stop unless absolutely necessary.
if i did have an auto, i would take VikDiddy's advice and pull up on the e-brake instead of shifting into any neutral. i am sure the tranny usese some soleniods and valves every time you put the shifter into and out of drive... more use eventually = more worn/broken parts.
if i did have an auto, i would take VikDiddy's advice and pull up on the e-brake instead of shifting into any neutral. i am sure the tranny usese some soleniods and valves every time you put the shifter into and out of drive... more use eventually = more worn/broken parts.
#27
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Kansas
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
with modern trannies there is no significant increase in wear associated with putting the gear in N at stop lights. By the way, I don't think any auto tranny requires stepping on the brake to switch between R, N, and D. Shift lock is only for switching out of P (as a result of the infamous but false Audi auto-acceleration in the 80's).
#28
Pole Position
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My last car - a 2004 VW Touareg - required me to have the brake depressed when moving from N to D.
#29
Lexus Champion
Huh I havent tried that. I just peeled out for the first time yesterday and yanked it to the left. Had traction control turned off and I lost control pretty damn easily. I was surprised. I will never do it again as I could feel that costing me money. But I had to try it once, just to know.