it seems like there really isn't a physical difference between the two, but double shifting wouldn't exist if that's true. and it just seems like double shifting would take slightly longer, which doesn't make sense in a racing-type situation. so what's the big advantage in rev-matching while having the clutch engaged and the transmission in neutral?
2006-12-11 12:16:00 · 3 answers · asked by rdubya 1 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Other - Cars & Transportation
It's called double clutching, and it's done for downshifting. It lets you spin up the engine side gears so the rim (tooth) speeds match better. This is especially important when the gearbox isn't synchronized because if there's too great a difference in speed, the gears just won't mesh. Synchronizers match the gear rim speeds while they're coming together, but aren't necessarily used in racing transmissions. I had a 3-speed manual without synchronized first gear. There were two ways to get into first gear, bring the car to a near stop or double clutch. For racing, I'd imagine it's only used to get into a lower gear so you can take off coming out of a corner.
2006-12-11 12:49:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
nothing is really diferent, being in neutral and pushing in the clutch achieve the same goal, to disconnect the engine power from the output of the tranny, IE the driveshaft, or front cv shafts
you think too much, time for a hobby
good luck
2006-12-11 20:23:44 · answer #2 · answered by mr wabbit 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
with car in gear and clutch depressed there is pressure on the throwout bearing...in nuetral there is no pressure on the throwout bearing
2006-12-11 20:25:21 · answer #3 · answered by achronicfan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋