I drive fast because the car feel "slow"

[brianhj]

Good stuff

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ls1ac

Ok flame away. Maybe definitions have changed but double clutching had been letting the clutch reengage while in NEUTRAL to spin the gears up to a matching rpm to engage in the lower gear. This required pushing the clutch down twice for each shift, hence the term double clutching. This was necessary in old transitions without synchromesh. They were fondly called crash boxes. As shifting up or down required gear speed matching. To day we use rev-matching to do the same thing. Simply pressing the accelerator with the clutch pressed before engaging the next gear will do the same in a modern trans. Rev matching is NOT double clutching.
While were at it, toe heal usually means blipping the throttle (or rev matching) while under breaking. Originally the pedals were far enough apart and required a large movement of the pedals so you put your heal on the brake and your toe on the gas, now the pedal spacing and the throw allows the use the sides of your foot. This is needed to down shift (usually on a track) where hard breaking and down shifting is need at the same time. Usually coming into a corner, it is seldom used on the street unless practicing for the track.
Why do I care and how do I know, first I am old and second I still run old cars like my 1932 MG-J2, it has a crash box, (no syncros) and third I still love my time on the track as an instructor and a driver.
This is only offered as a FYI.

I am with you. Have never once felt the need to double clutch this car. Not tracking mind you so can't comment on that circumstance but street driving just doesn't call for it.

[Ultramaroon]

It's ok. I'm super picky about the internals. The difference will be apparent after 100K miles. I plan on driving it for at least twice that distance.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by ls1ac

Ok flame away. Maybe definitions have changed but double clutching had been letting the clutch reengage while in NEUTRAL to spin the gears up to a matching rpm to engage in the lower gear. This required pushing the clutch down twice for each shift, hence the term double clutching. This was necessary in old transitions without synchromesh. They were fondly called crash boxes. As shifting up or down required gear speed matching. To day we use rev-matching to do the same thing. Simply pressing the accelerator with the clutch pressed before engaging the next gear will do the same in a modern trans. Rev matching is NOT double clutching.

Ultramaroon was 100% talking about double clutching, and the rev match was implied because lol 6 > 3 gear change. And I 100% agree with your post.

I typically double clutch my downshifts if I'm not in a hurry because the gearbox agrees with it very well. Without it there's a resistance, a hesitation of the synchros doing their job, very much a good thing, but when you nail the double clutch the gear lever literally falls into place as if you could blow it into gear like you're blowing out birthday candles. Oddly enough when I'm running around over 5k rpm on track the gearbox shows almost no hesitation, responds very willingly to roughness, but when I'm casually driving around town it seems to be much more responsive to the double clutch, you have to know how to drive your car in a way that makes you happy.

And sometimes such as with a cold gearbox second gear in this car is next to impossible to engage even with liberal amounts of gas pedal in neutral to get the transmission up to speed, there has been more than a few mornings when I give up and just coast hoping I don't have to bang it into gear and ease it back into first.

Honda released official info on the S2000 blaming several gearbox failures on skip shifting putting unnecessary load on the synchros, double clutching is absolutely viable in terms of prolonging the life of the gearbox.

Whether or not that's necessary will remain to be seen, we'll find out in 5-10 years time if any gearboxes are failing at the 60k-100k-200k mark. It absolutely falls into the category of personal preference at this point but it doesn't hurt to be aware of it.

Sources:
Honda Service News HSN106-01
This document is difficult if not impossible to find but it's been quoted and saved on forums a few times over like here:
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthrea...1#post65001641


Post #12 and #7 are both good.
http://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/1026...t__p__22594371

[humdizzle]

Originally Posted by brianhj

That's what I don't get about the whole "it's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow." I disagree. I think it's great to drive a fast car (big engine) at low speeds with all that low-end torque. Unless you're tracking how often do you get to drive a slow car "fast"?

Originally Posted by brianhj

And by the time you're out of the torque dip it's time to stop accelerating because you're driving at the speed limit

so you never break the speed limit or something???

it sucks driving a fast car car slow because the car is so capable that you as the driver feel like you aren't doing anything at normal-ish speeds. And when you do start driving it at 70-80% of what it can do you are going so fast that 1) you are gonna get cocky,push it even harder, and likely die or 2) go to jail.

When i'm pushing the FRS im doing maybe 15-20 over the limit. When i push it a bit more than what it likes it gives a nice progressive slide. ill take that or a ticket any day over the above two scenarios.

[brianhj]

Yes I drive over the limit. I'm saying it's fun as hell having a lot of torque to play with at lower speeds in a fast car .

[humdizzle]

so what would be your ideal 'fast car'.

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Ultramaroon was 100% talking about double clutching, and the rev match was implied because lol 6 > 3 gear change. And I 100% agree with your post.

Yes. Thank you. I struggle with striking a balance between explaining myself well enough versus sounding condescending. With this forum, my first, I am learning I tend to err on the vague side.
@ls1ac et al, fwiw, I agree double clutching is absolutely unnecessary. I do it simply out of respect for the machine when circumstances permit. I went to the track for the first time last summer and was very pleasantly surprised with how well the whole package responded to 8/10 driving.

(8/10 because keeping it real)

[paulca]

The only time I have ever had to double clutch anything is when stationary and the box gets stuck trying for first, you feel it go in the first notch but not the second. It's likely if you have floored the clutch out of good habit before starting the car, but don't lift it again before selecting 1st. Chances are as soon as you lift the clutch it will pop in anyway, but better; pulling it back out of gear, lifting the clutch for a moment and then retrying works a charm. It happens on bikes too. I believe the shaft spins down and the synchros end up in a funny place where without rotation of the box they can't allow engagement. Sometimes on the bike I have just let the clutch out to the bite point and it pops into 1st.

Speaking of bikes, a lot of folks say you shouldn't shift into 1st while moving as 1st doesn't have a syncro, which is why bikes thump into 1st and the whole bike lurches. Personally I ignore this advice for practicality sakes, slowing into traffic going 5-10mph needs 1st gear on a lot of bikes or you will under-rev and shudder the engine. The trick is to do it quickly. If you push it out of 2nd into neutral, delay for a second or two them when you go to push it into first you will get the dreaded dogs clicking and grinding then a horrible CLACK sound as they catch. This is where a double clutching might help.

As to shifting in the car, I just use the syncros with some sympathy. ie. NOT shoving it into gear like a bear, but offering it to the gear and letting it suck it in almost. Seems to work fine, even for 6th to 2nd. 2nd to 6th is a little more 'tender' if you don't let the revs fall first and requires a gentle approach, too much pressure and you'll push past the syncro and grind it.

[Ultramaroon]

Bike transmissions are sequential crash boxes. I don't remember the proper nomenclature offhand but they have no syncros. Completely different animal. Neutral is no more than a wider spot in between gears and an extra detent in the drum. Skip it unless you're at a complete stop.