Some shifting technique concerns

[wai]

I'm not saying any of this is required on the road but it is one of the joys of driving a manual (I was forced to learn with my first car since the syncro in 2nd was worn out)

But did you learn to do it in an XM Ford Falcon with "3 on the tree" and no synchro on 1st at all

[gldgti]

I was tempted to move this thread (because its in the WRONG SECTION ), but its in a section that hardly sees any traffic so I'll let it fester a while

The rodshift 020 gearboxes (mk1-3 and some 4's) are lovely to change without the clutch (up and downshifts) as long as you are careful with the accelerator. I cant say the same for the later cable shift boxes, which seem to take a lot more skill to clutchless shift.

With respect to clutch wear - downshifting technique will have next to no impact on the life of a clutch as it really is the difference between the torque required to accelerate the vehicle vs the torque required to accelerate the engine a bit, and those 2 values are orders of magnitude apart.

How you use the clutch to accelerate from a standstill and during upshifts (particularly in the lower gears) will determine 99% of the clutch wear.

As you might imagine, utilising the minimum speed differential between the driven plate and the clutch disk to affect torque transfer is the best way to minimise wear (e.g. take off without revviing the engine high).

Its not good for the gearbox, but in an older diesel (pre PD and CR with emissions controls, i.e. VE pump diesels) you can basically takeoff at idle without using any accelerator and in short order, with practice. This would prolong the life of the friction surface for sure, but its bad for gearbox bearings and its also bad for the shock springs in the clutch plate (very 'lumpy' torque transmission).

I agree with sentiments regarding looking after your gearbox aswell, but I do find amusing the old backyard mechanics logic that tyres are easier to replace than clutches