Is Anyone Else a Double-Clutcher??
11-02-2003, 03:48 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Is Anyone Else a Double-Clutcher??
Hi guys,
Before this past summer's driving season began, I was reading on s2ki about how the double-clutch shifting technique -- shifting to neutral (clutch #1), rev matching, then shifting into gear (clutch #2) -- was potentially easier on the synchromesh gearing in our transmissions.
My shifts now take longer than they used to, but it's become almost second nature to me now. I've been using this technique all summer for upshifts and downshifts every time I drive my car. The only advantage I've found is that I can drop the car into first, which the tranny never lets me do without double-clutching. The disadvantage is that I've ground the gears a few times (not badly) when I don't execute the move precisely. I can't decide if this is an overall win.
I know many of our vintage club members have probably driven cars with early versions of (or no) synchromesh when double-clutching was required, so I thought I'd bring up the subject. Is anyone else a double-clutcher, or am I just a throwback madman?
Before this past summer's driving season began, I was reading on s2ki about how the double-clutch shifting technique -- shifting to neutral (clutch #1), rev matching, then shifting into gear (clutch #2) -- was potentially easier on the synchromesh gearing in our transmissions.
My shifts now take longer than they used to, but it's become almost second nature to me now. I've been using this technique all summer for upshifts and downshifts every time I drive my car. The only advantage I've found is that I can drop the car into first, which the tranny never lets me do without double-clutching. The disadvantage is that I've ground the gears a few times (not badly) when I don't execute the move precisely. I can't decide if this is an overall win.
I know many of our vintage club members have probably driven cars with early versions of (or no) synchromesh when double-clutching was required, so I thought I'd bring up the subject. Is anyone else a double-clutcher, or am I just a throwback madman?
11-02-2003, 03:58 PM
#2
I learned to do it on my MGB back in the 70s. Now I do it a lot. I don't think I have to but it just sort of comes naturally.
11-02-2003, 04:01 PM
#3
Thread Starter
Cool, Rob. Was it necessary on the MGB?
I found double-clutching very un-natural at first, but I've grown accustomed to it. What I used to do was the same process except not releasing the clutch... My understanding now is that keeping the clutch depressed the whole time does nothing to get the synchros set up.
I found double-clutching very un-natural at first, but I've grown accustomed to it. What I used to do was the same process except not releasing the clutch... My understanding now is that keeping the clutch depressed the whole time does nothing to get the synchros set up.
11-02-2003, 04:11 PM
#5
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chazmo
Cool, Rob.
Cool, Rob.
11-02-2003, 04:23 PM
#7
Thread Starter
Oh, as far as shifting feeling "automatic," the double-clutching has made me quite deliberate in my shifting this summer, so it hasn't been as second-nature to me as it used to be.
Getting there, though.
Getting there, though.
Trending Topics
11-02-2003, 04:28 PM
#9
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chazmo
11-02-2003, 04:34 PM
#10
Thread Starter
Good point, Rob! I guess I'd like to try a clutchless, sequential manual and see... With the current technology, I know it'd be added weight and cost; so I probably wouldn't want to sacrifice the clutch in the S.
mn, yeah, I guess the big trucks have those straight cut gears and no synchros... Must be nasty as hell if you misshift, eh??
mn, yeah, I guess the big trucks have those straight cut gears and no synchros... Must be nasty as hell if you misshift, eh??