Quote from MadCat360 :

Why do you need engine braking? Engine braking hasn't been helping to stop the car since the switch the disk brakes.

So THAT'S the reason so many people use engine braking IRL then? Cause it makes no difference?

Like Not_Sure said, it gives you the option to brake only the rear of the car. Which also means that you can balance the car more exactly when taking a turn.

And i for one, uses BOTH (omg MadCat360 might say) engine braking and footbrake when driving IRL _AND_ in-game.

If the tires are being fully utilized by the brakes then there is nothing an engine can do to increase that. Unless you're running with excessive front brake bias, in which case shame on you.

There are many, many, many racing drivers out there that just downshift once for a corner. Listen next time you're at a Koni Challenge race or some other series which uses traditional H-pattern gearboxes. Well over half will be downshifting once or skipping 2 or 3 gears at least.

If brake balance is set "properly", engine braking could help in some way.
On this point, threshold values of the braking power and bias are important.
Engine acts as a damper while shifting down.
I use it both in RL and LFS. Its depends to ppl, some may not use it at all.

For the OP; IMHO, (as previously pointed out by few ppl) on XFG, HT cant help make your lap times better since its FWD.

Quote from MadCat360 :

If the tires are being fully utilized by the brakes then there is nothing an engine can do to increase that. Unless you're running with excessive front brake bias, in which case shame on you.

There are many, many, many racing drivers out there that just downshift once for a corner. Listen next time you're at a Koni Challenge race or some other series which uses traditional H-pattern gearboxes. Well over half will be downshifting once or skipping 2 or 3 gears at least.

You got that wrong.

For example I'm taking a bicycle.

You can brake, but when pressing the dynamo against the wheel, it will brake slightly harder.

Quote from MadCat360 :

If the tires are being fully utilized by the brakes then there is nothing an engine can do to increase that.

Quote from BlakjeKaas :

You got that wrong.

For example I'm taking a bicycle.

You can brake, but when pressing the dynamo against the wheel, it will brake slightly harder.

The bold part in the original quote from MadCat is the important bit. If your brakes are strong enough to lock up the tyres then adding engine braking into the mix is not going to help your braking performance. If anything it'll degrade it because the engine braking will only effect the driven wheels, so the bias will be out. If your brakes aren't strong enough to lock up the tyres then adding engine braking into the mix can help the situation.

Quote from BlakjeKaas :

You got that wrong.

For example I'm taking a bicycle.

You can brake, but when pressing the dynamo against the wheel, it will brake slightly harder.

If a brake system causes lockup then there is no need for any other assistance since the tires are already at or beyond maximum. Tires do not magically gain grip because they have an engine pushing on them.

Engine braking was required to help slow the car when drum brakes were used because drum brakes couldn't exceed the tractive limits of the tires at high speed. Since brakes can now exceed the tractive limits of a car at virtually any speed, engine braking is no longer needed. The engine's resistance does the same exact thing as the brakes - it arrests the driveline, and as such it is completely redundant.

Next time you're at a race talk to a tire technition or an engineer. If they're any good, they'll tell you exactly what I'm telling you, as do many books, such as Carrol Smith's "Tune to Win" and "Drive to Win".

From the driver's standpoint, rowing the gearbox can be detrimental to consistency. Do some high-speed braking exercizes in LFS and look at the telemetry. Do a few runs with rowing and heel-toeing, and then a few runs with just threshold braking from 5th or 6th gear. You will probably find that your most consistent and most efficient stopping was done without rowing the gearbox.

Quote from MadCat360 :

snip

Well I, both in LFS and IRL, enginebrake. But i guess most of them who do, just drop the cluth after downshifting.. I dont..

+ Enginebraking dont JUST have to do with helping the brakes. Most of my friends uses enginebraking instead of the regular brakes just to save fuel / brakepads.

How would engine braking save fuel Feffe?

Quote from [DUcK] :

How would engine braking save fuel Feffe?

The only time engine braking can save fuel is in comparison to idle. When you close the throttle the injectors are shut off unless the engine is at idle in which case the required amount of fuel is delivered to keep the engine running.

I guess with carbs the venturi effect will continue to suck some fuel through even when you are completely off the throttle as is the case when engine braking. Not sure if closing the butterfly completely actually results in zero fuel delivery when using carbs.

Engine braking won't give you more grip, I've had to argue that before as well. It won't make your tyres magicaly grip better.

But it gives you two things, both are important in a race car.

One, you can slow down without using the brakes, on some turns this is better because it doesn't generate heat in the brakes and will let you use the brakes harder when you need to without overheating. The less you need to use them, the less they will heat up.

Two, you can balance the brakes yourself, by modulating the throttle you can controll the distrobution of brake force front to back.

I've used engine braking for both of those in real life, My vintage bike has drums, so I need to engine brake wherever I can, but even disk brakes will overheat if you use them too much. I use engine braking to apply most of my light rear braking, the rear drum on my bike is used mostly for hard braking into turns. My front drum gets used for all braking exept where engine braking is the only thing needed to slow down for the turn.

Quote from DragonCommando :

One, you can slow down without using the brakes, on some turns this is better because it doesn't generate heat in the brakes and will let you use the brakes harder when you need to without overheating. The less you need to use them, the less they will heat up.

Sure. There are plenty of corners out there that are taken with just a downshift, like Copse and Bridge at Silverstone (depending on the car).

There is a time and place for engine braking, such as rear brake failure or simply a throttle lift corner, but for your normal 100-0 stop, it's not really required, unless, of course, you have excessive front brake bias in a RWD car.

well, i never used sequential shifter IRL, but in LFS, sequential shifter and automatic clutch is way too FAST compare to what you can do with H-Shifter + automatic clutch .
So when you chosse H-Shifter, you can only be SLOWER than autoclutch + seq shifter.
That's a shame, with H-Shifter you take risks to miss a gear, AND you shift slower ... you got the pain, but no gain.
I mean, seq+autoclutch should simulate the use the H-Gate of the car its simulating, right? So it should NOT be faster than real H-Shifter shifting.

For example, RB4+AS2, I'm 1.5 second faster with seq+autoclutch. Yet , witch H-shifter i can't shift faster.

To answer to OP, H&T can make you faster IF you'are already using manual clutch.. if you compare to autoclutch + seq , you will be slower.

I use engine braking in real life. And I H&T. But I don't bother with the clutch.

Quote from [DUcK] :

How would engine braking save fuel Feffe?

by cutting the fuel? in modern fuelinjected cars the fuel is cut at the instant when the engine starts to slow the car down, when enginebraking that is.

Quote from MagicFr :

So when you chosse H-Shifter, you can only be SLOWER than autoclutch + seq shifter.
That's a shame, with H-Shifter you take risks to miss a gear, AND you shift slower ... you got the pain, but no gain.
I mean, seq+autoclutch should simulate the use the H-Gate of the car its simulating, right? So it should NOT be faster than real H-Shifter shifting.

Do you have proof that it's slower than the "automated h-shifting"? If YOU are slower than the automated box, it's YOUR fault.
I think the automated box is about as fast as a quick "real" shift with a G25. I never get the feeling I'm slower than an opponent because of my manual shifting.
I agree with you on the mis-shifts though, and putting the G25 in reverse is a pain in the arse. But how do you want to account for this?

Quote from Feffe85 :

by cutting the fuel? in modern fuelinjected cars the fuel is cut at the instant when the engine starts to slow the car down, when enginebraking that is.

Sure, but actually you don't save fuel by engine-braking per se but by lifting off the throttle - which is common sense somehow. If you look at it this way, you also save petrol by using your regular brakes.

Quote from Bandit77 :

If you look at it this way, you also save petrol by using your regular brakes.

Actually, no... You're even wasting it, as the amount of energy coming from the fuel that previously propelled you along is now turned into useless heat in the brakes...

Quote from Bandit77 :

Sure, but actually you don't save fuel by engine-braking per se but by lifting off the throttle - which is common sense somehow. If you look at it this way, you also save petrol by using your regular brakes.

if it cuts the fuel when enginebraking, how can u NOT save fuel?
lifting ur foot of the throttle wont CUT the fuel, so it doesnt save as much anyway.

do what i do, heel toe double clutch, not sure if it does anything to the overall time, but it is all about the fun right?

Quote from bbman :

Actually, no... You're even wasting it, as the amount of energy coming from the fuel that previously propelled you along is now turned into useless heat in the brakes...

ok, if you want it this way...
there is always some kind of resistance in a moving system that "wastes" the energy. letting the car roll out and the engine brake it, the the whole engine is part of that resistance. it takes energy to move the pistons up and down. the "energy coming from the fuel that previously propelled you along".
if you wanted to really waste as little as possible (which compared to the two methods already described would be considered as "saving energy/petrol"), you'd have to find the optimal moment to open the clutch, shut down your engine and roll to where you finally want to stop. if you need brakes to stop, you shut down the engine to late. if you don't reach your destination, you shut it down to early.

do we want to continue smart assing?

Quote from Bandit77 :

do we want to continue smart assing?

You just added to my statement rather than contradicting it, refuting yours yourself in the process... I can't see a discussion unfolding on you coming around and agreeing with me, so no...

Quote from Bandit77 :

Do you have proof that it's slower than the "automated h-shifting"? If YOU are slower than the automated box, it's YOUR fault.
I think the automated box is about as fast as a quick "real" shift with a G25. I never get the feeling I'm slower than an opponent because of my manual shifting.
I agree with you on the mis-shifts though, and putting the G25 in reverse is a pain in the arse. But how do you want to account for this?

Proof, yes, replay analyser
Now, G25 is far away from a real H-Shifter, go in real car, and try to shift as fast as the G25, you will not succeed I got the frex GP H-shifter which is closer to real shifter, and it's really slower to shift than G25.
Anyway, i'm not comparing to my or your H-shifter, but to real life shifting. Which, seems to me, way to fast in LFS.
Cheers,

Quote from bbman :

You just added to my statement rather than contradicting it, refuting yours yourself in the process... I can't see a discussion unfolding on you coming around and agreeing with me, so no...

Quote from Bandit77 :

If you look at it this way, you also save petrol by using your regular brakes.

~ "Wenn man es so betrachtet, dann spart man auch Treibstoff, indem man die normalen Bremsen benutzt."

Das impliziert eigentlich, dass man durch Bremsen nicht wirklich Treibstoff spart. Was wolltest du überhaupt widerlegen?
Jetzt sieht es übel danach aus, als hättest du einfach etwas gegen mich sagen müssen, obwohl du eigentlich gar nicht anderer Meinung warst. Und um's ein wenig zu verschleiern, kommt sowas wie "on you coming around and agreeing with me". Jaja, klar. Die mag ich besonders. Immer die gleiche Tour.

Quote from MagicFr :

I got the frex GP H-shifter which is closer to real shifter, and it's really slower to shift than G25.

I see your point. But it's also obvious that if the auto-h-shifting was slowed down, you'd still have opponents using G25s...

Quote :

Anyway, i'm not comparing to my or your H-shifter, but to real life shifting. Which, seems to me, way to fast in LFS.
Cheers,

Sure. But the only way to make shifting TIMES more realistic would be a change in the software, so even if you change gears in 0.2 seconds with your G25 it takes 0.3 or whatever in the game. You can't slow down the hardware. The result would be a mismatch between in-game-gearbox and your controller hardware, which again would lead to an unrealistic experience.
Let's face it: there will always be advantages and disadvantages depending on the input-devices you use.

To get back on topic, H&T WILL reduce your laptimes only according to your level.

The reason : it gives stability to the car under braking.

If you are from beginner to a good average racer, after you practice the technique, you'll probably brake with more stability, AND reduce your brake distance (add the perfect engine braking to your brakes). Moreover, you will know that you are at the proper powerband, which is very good for close racing (let's say you are in a braking duel against a guy fot a medium fast corner with only one downshift, the outcome will be mostly on how short you can brake and what will be your revs when you need to accelerate out).

Quote from Bawbag :

"dpalonso" ie Martin Kronke uses clutch and H-shifter all the time, he's hellova fast in LFS, but more so he still holds records in rFactor using this setup...When he uses the padels etc he is slow because he's not used to it.

That Krönke guy is the shit. I better watch out for him

Quote from tristancliffe :

I use engine braking in real life. And I H&T. But I don't bother with the clutch.

The Dallara F3 is the same as the Lola, right? Meaning it's got the same gearbox? A Lola F3 driver told me they never use the clutch, but they don't left foot brake. I went: what the hell? Why would you right foot brake and heel-toe when you could left foot brake and blip with your right foot? I realize there are space issues, but with racing shoes you should be able to hit the brake and the throttle with both feet. Think about it. 140 MPH is 205 feet per second. If it takes you 0.2 of a second to move your foot from the gas to the brake then that's 40 feet of wasted space and time. It's free time!