Quote from The Radness :

I would certainly hope so, but I guess not, otherwisse we wouldn't be having this conversation

Isn't the entire conversation a moot point as those cars would not have it, as they are a recent thing and then only used in the US?

Quote from duke_toaster :

Isn't the entire conversation a moot point as those cars would not have it, as they are a recent thing and then only used in the US?

exactly

Quote from danben7 :

Or pop it into neutral to come to a stop (though this is a bad practice)

Quote from tristancliffe :

There is nothing wrong with coasting, despite what retarded driving instructors (even advanced driving instructors) claim. If you ask them WHY one shouldn't coast they fidget, sweat and avoid the answer, at the very most claiming "because you are not in proper control", which is a cop out, as I coast all the time on the road and remain in absolute control at all times.

The only reason I can imagine it would ever be bad to coast in neutral is if some engine component (turbo?) is in danger of overheating without the water pump moving fast enough. But even then it's just like idling at a light with better airflow, isn't it?

Yes, exactly. Nothing wrong with coasting or idling. Power steering pumps are designed to cope (they can generate enough force to turn static wheels at idle with the brakes applied), so that's not a reason either.

The silly people who think it's dangerous claim that you won't be able to accelerate in an emergency. Considering 99.9% of the population wouldn't even THINK of accelerating in an emergency, and only brake, I don't think that's really an issue either.

They say that if you are coasting to a red light and it turns green then you have to get back in gear to go. Which wastes what? A second? Maybe two? And it's not a race so wasted time doesn't matter. If you were in 5th, and at 15mph when the light changed you'd still have to change gear.

They say don't go down through each gear, because brakes are for slowing, and are cheaper than gears. Obviously they don't understand gearboxes these days are constant mesh. And coasting takes all the load of the gearbox, and saves even more of the tiny wear they are so keen to avoid.

But then they teach steering shuffling - DANGEROUS
They teach you to spend more time looking in your mirror than ahead - DANGEROUS
They teach you to drive REALLY slowly, using no revs and high gears - NOT DANGEROUS, BUT BAD FOR CARS AND THE ENVIRONMENT.

Don't ever listen to your driving instructor from the day you pass you test, because they have not taught you to drive in a safe, economical way. Ever wondered why nobody except learners drives like they're on a driving test? Because it does not work in the real world.

You can get significant fuel-efficiency gains by using a technique called "pulse and glide". You accelerate quickly (but not at WOT as you don't want the engine going into open loop and setting the mixture rich) and then coast in neutral.

As for shifting into first, my '07 Aveo can be tricky to get into first when moving if I don't double clutch, but it's definitely not locked out, and, in fact, the manual specifically says you can shift into first below 20 mph.

Any car I've driven recently (Toyota Hilux, Avensis, Yaris, Peugot 206, 406, Reno Clio) has no problems going into first. I know because I don't really drive on the road much (apart from deserted country back roads :shrug, so I spend my time in 3rd and below...

As for driving as a learner, I find it hilarious when I'm with someone who's not that long driving, and then roars at learners ahead using the driving style they were taught

Quote from tristancliffe :

Possibly because 1st is a numerically higher gear? Would you not expect your revs to rise, and for the syncro rings to 'resist' the change if your engine isn't at the required revs? That's not a lock out - that's not being able to drive.

There is nothing wrong with coasting, despite what retarded driving instructors (even advanced driving instructors) claim. If you ask them WHY one shouldn't coast they fidget, sweat and avoid the answer, at the very most claiming "because you are not in proper control", which is a cop out, as I coast all the time on the road and remain in absolute control at all times.

Coasting does have some dangers. Not the things you mentioned above, I agree, those reasons are stupid. The only reason I'd see it as dangerous is for example, you're coming up to a traffic light, there's a car ahead of you, and a car behind you.
You're in neutral. The car behind you rear ends you.
If you were in gear, there'd be more resistance to the forward motion, and would possibly prevent you from running forward into the car in front of you.

But that's the only situation i ever thought it mattered in.


And yes, my cars from 1990, so 18 years old, and the gearbox is pretty well described above. I had before that a 1997 mitsubishi, which also had the same deal, if you did not rev match, it would cruch, so perhaps there's some truth to this synchro business?

If you're slowing for a traffic light then you have your foot on the brake (probably). This will slow you much more that a puny amount of engine braking from being in gear.

My car is from 1990 too (well, 1991 actually, but it's the same mechanically as the 1989 version). It doesn't crunch.

There is no such thing as a first gear lock out... It's just that most transmissions have a weak first gear syncro.. Why? Because you aren't supposed to be shifting into first at 30+mph... Keep trying, and you won't be able to get it into first even when you are stoped as your syncro will be gone.

Quote from tristancliffe :

My car is from 1990 too (well, 1991 actually, but it's the same mechanically as the 1989 version). It doesn't crunch.

Bottom line, it's a great car to drive! Btw, you should try the 1.8L sometime, it's a whole different world despite it's only 15 more hp