$2500 for brakes and rotors all around on my car. Will downshifting to slow the car save me money over time, or just end up wearing down more expensive transmission and engine parts?
If your pads and rotors cost $2500, then you’re probably driving a Lambourghini or some such and the engine is far more expensive than that.
It’s always cheaper and easier to replace brakes than a clutch.
In theory, the clutch shouldn’t experience any wear if the downshifts are performed correctly: clutch-in, downshift, and then step on the gas a bit to get the revs up so that the clutch doesn’t slip at all when you let it out again.
The reality is that some people are better at this than others. If you’re using the brake at the same time as you’re downshifting, then your right foot is doing double-duty (or if you’re on a motorcycle, it’s your right hand), and it can take some practice to get good at it. I do this on a regular basis; it’s possible my vehicles are a hair’s breadth away from needing a new clutch, but I doubt it. I sold my previous motorcycle (a dry-clutch BMW) with 135,000 miles on it, no clutch issues despite lots of downshifting. My current car (a Maxima) has 100K miles on it, no clutch slippage issues to date.
transmission/engine wear? Minimal. The parts in these items are designed for much heavier loads than are encountered during engine braking; they will barely even notice.
Snailboy has a point. What kind of car are you driving that brakes and rotors cost $2500?
This. The only time you should downshift to slow the car is when descending a steep hill, rather than riding the brakes hard all the way down. Doing it that way is more fuel efficient, reduces wear on the brakes and stops them from overheating. But even then, you aren’t using the engine to decelerate, but to stop it from accelerating.
(Also, don’t be hyper-literal about this tip. I often use a combination of engine and normal braking when descending a hill, with the engine doing most of the work.)
Did you take it to Midas or another chain shop?
Definitely a swingeing price. I recently did front rotors and brakes on my van for a total cost around $140, plus 1.5 hours of messy but not very difficult work.
A friend of mine had the brakes, rotors all around plus one caliper replaced yesterday on her Toyota sedan - cost for labor & materials was right about $220, and it took a mechanically-inclined mutual friend about 4 hours to complete. Shop time, even at over $100 an hour would surely be fewer hours. $2500 seems crazy high.
Downshifting simply to save wear on brakes doesn’t make sense.
Please tell us you inadvertently inserted one to many zeros, or let us know what kind of car you are running.
Is your transmition a manual or auto? I downshift manual all the time and your automatic will do that for you to a much smaller degree. I have an Auto in my F800 Crane truck and I downshift it all the time as I really don’t like adjusting brakes all that much.
I believe overdrive systems are harder on brakes because there is no braking action at all until much manual braking has been done. (that is when OD is used)
When learning to drive a manual, it was a requirement to downshift to 3rd gear before stopping. I think they said engine braking was stronger (but I suspect the real reason for many things during the test is “the test requires it”). I think of downshifting as an alternative if the brakes fail.
They may have said it, but it isn’t so. Decent brakes are typically the equivalent of many hundreds of horsepower.
Not important, as complete brake failure is extremely rare in automobiles. But it can be necessary when descending long, steep hills - without it, brakes may become hot enough to be nearly useless.
As noted earlier, if done correctly I can’t imagine much wear and tear on clutch. Currently, I drive a manual tranmission Challenger, before that a M/T GTO and before that a M/T Firebird. I happen to like shifting and I frequenly do so to reduce speed. Never had to replace a clutch. Anecdotal, perhaps, but true nevertheless.
Even better than downshifting, if you want to save wear and tear on the brakes, is to drive more slowly and don’t run up on stop signs then hit the brakes hard.
If saving brakes is a criteria then get a hybrid. My son drives a Lexus 400h. It has 130K miles on it so he decided to be proactive and replace the brake pads. They were only half worn.
They Toyota hybrid system has a B on the shifter which is specifically for “engine breaking”, but have found that riding the brakes works better. These cars do not engage the pads until you brake hard, they use the electric motor/generator to brake most of the time. The generator starts slowing you down as soon as you take your foot of the gas. Putting it in B causes the generator to come in more, but it also leaves the engine running. The engine will often shut off if are riding the bakes slightly. Also, if your battery fills up in B, the whole car starts to shudder and shake.
I have 110k miles on my car and over 3/4 of my original break pads.
It’s 2012. Who the heck still drives a manual transmission?
What about runaway acceleration?
Someone who enjoys driving a performance car; I just bought a 2012 Mustang, and got a stick for that very reason. (BTW, the topic has generated several flame-filled threads over the past few months, so I’ll drop the subject right now.)
I think I’d avoid that one!