Since I drive my car mostly in manual mode, I've been developing a habit of gradual down shifting when I approach a stoplight rather than braking. When I do it right, I barely have to brake at all. I'm kinda addicted to the rev match and I also like to save my brakes from wear and dust .

Do you guys do the same? My only concern is that this introduces additional wear and tear on the transmission, since I'm doing this for every stoplight, and using the trans to slow down. But then again, if this is meant to be driven on the track, then it's purpose built for a lot of paddle activity, right? What do you guys think?

 

No, I don't do this. Brakes are cheap and easy to replace. Gearboxes are not.

 

I second to lobuxracer. Brakes are not as expensive to replace as tranny's. In the long run you might cutting your tranny's lifespan in half.

 

i do use the downshift to slow me, but in the past few months if i do drive the car i tend to use the brakes more. can it cause that much damage if they made it to do that? sometimes i feel why buy a car if i cant drive it! lol! maybe i should just look at my brakes/gearbox and they will always be good!

 

same here, brakes are much cheaper

 

Built for the track more often equates to "needs more maintenance" or "more expensive to repair" and NOT "tolerates more use or abuse"

Brakes = $
Transmission clutch pack = $$$$

 

Should I .......

1.downshift then brake?
or
2.brake then downshift?

Thanks

 

Another negative result using the downshift method is a decrease in MPG. Those little blips of throttle add up.

 

drive it like you stole it, unless you plan on keeping your car longer than 6-8 years it won't matter and the IS-F will last and handle as much abuse as you can throw at it! If you're worried about babying and pampering a 60k high performance vehicle, then you should have bought a honda civic!

 

As other have said brakes are cheaper than transmissions and are there to slow the car down. Do your transmission a favor and use the brakes.

If the car or any parts of it was built or meant for the track Lexus/Toyota would sell it without a warranty. The IS F is a high performance street car, not a track/race car.

 

So what is the point of throttle matching burbles when downshifting?


Don't the rev matched downshifts save wear and tear on the transmission, or does it just sound cool?

 

Interesting... thx for the feedback.

Obviously more usage means more wear... if you don't drive the car you don't ever have to replace the brakes!

I'm more concerned with whether the manual mode F is supposed to be driven this way, and whether it would introduce unintended strain on the tranny to manually downshift when slowing down. Otherwise, what you guys are suggesting is that we should always let the computer auto-downshift even in manual mode, and that there is really no use for the downshift paddle unless you are trying to hold a certain gear for power or for going downhill.

Also, doesn't the same wear/tear logic apply to upshifting? Are we suggesting that driving in manual mode period will strain this tranny? Otherwise, can someone explain the mechanical differences for this tranny that makes downshifting more straining than an upshift?

 

the whole purpose of rev-matching is to decrease wear on the transmission, and allow a lower gear to be selected more easily.

 

Lol... funny... I do the same thing!

 

the brake dust and the high performance pads are more bearable than having to replace a gearbox with constant up and downshifting. sometimes i get into that same mode where i feel like downshifting and barely using the brakes, but from many CL members and those who are experienced with the F and automatic shifting gearboxes--use the brakes!