Archives

Since Johnf514 is around, I though it would not be a bad idea to ask about 5-speed care. There are times I don't press the clutch in enough and get some grinding. Of course, that is to be avoided. Sometimes I'll skip a gear - that also needs to be done with care.

My 1988 CRX HF needed it's transmission replaced at 110,000 miles. My Insight is at 99,000 miles.

Hey hey! My speciality!

When it comes to caring about your stick, many of the FE recommendations made for hypermiling also apply to standard shift driving. Easy on the throttle, low(er) RPM starts, not (over)revving in neutral, etc.

To rid yourself of some of that pesky grinding, I strongly suggest fully depressing the clutch each time you shift. While it may be a pain, it will lengthen the life of your drivetrain (although on an '88 CRX, I'd say you're good).

If the gears still grind after fully depressing the clutch, you may have worn synchros (not surprisingly on an older car). In that case, double-clutching will help on the particular gear that is grinding. Let me break it down:

Let's say 3rd gear is grinding.
In 2nd at 20 MPH and 2000 RPMs, shifting to 3rd
1. Clutch in and hold
2. 2nd to neutral
3. Clutch out, rev to roughly 1500 RPMs
4. Clutch in and shift to 3rd
5. Clutch out as the revs fall to roughly 1300 RPMs

This technique synchronizes the synchros with the input shaft; in essence, you are doing their job for them (as they cannot preform it anymore).

Skipping a gear is perfectly alright - as long as the RPM for the gear you end up in is above idle (700-900 RPMs). Lugging the engine hard can actually decrease fuel economy and puts unnecessary stress on the motor and drivetrain.

Another thing to know: many stick drivers simply shift to neutral on a downhill and coast, thinking they are saving fuel. This is incorrect, as the engine must idle to keep itself running. Instead, as you are starting the downhill, upshift a gear (or two, depending on the decline of the hill [the steeper the downhill, the less gears you should upshift]). Keeping the car in gear in most fuel-injected vehicles allows the engine to run without feeding the cylinders precious fuel. As long as you keep your foot off the gas, no fuel is being used because the wheels (connected in gear to the engine) are keeping the motor alive. As long as you stay above idle speed, you'll see no fuel loss.

While the same doesn't exactly apply to carbed engines, I strongly suggest getting into this habit, as keeping the car in gear at all times prevents a sudden loss of engine power, and therefore, a sudden loss in power brakes, steering, and other vital components.

I just reread your post again. Were both vehicles sticks? I'm surprised that the entire transmission required replacing, if that is the case. Was it just the clutch, or the entire system?

Both the 1988 CRX HF and 2000 Insight are 5-speeds. On the CRX, I paid $600 to replace the transmission.

Hi John:

___We have some disagreement in terms of real world FE savings with a NICE-On vs. ICE breaking. In terms of FE, ICE breaking vs. a NICE-On depends on the speed you are traveling as an ICE while engine breaking w/ injectors isolated even in top gear just before injector opening at just above idle RPM can destroy momentum faster then the gas is being burned at idle or especially to reaccelerate back up to a target speed lost due to ICE-breaking. More importantly, why not FAS anyway …

___Back on topic. I am interested in your thoughts about manual transmission fluid(s). The Insight’s MT is so slick and smooth you can hardly tell the stick is attached to anything. I took the Ranger out last night after 2,000 + miles of Insight driving last week and what a difference. I always felt the Ranger was a decent shifter but its like lifting weights when compared to the Insight. It never really crossed my mind until last night anyway. With that, Dan uses Mobil1 0W-20 in his Del Sol’s MT and not only does it perform admirably (solid engagements, smooth shifting, and with an absolute minimal mechanical drag), it is a slick shifter and setup for even better FE then stock. What can I do to help the Ranger with its FE and receive a lighter feel without sacrificing longevity vs. how she is currently lubricated using her OEM fluid(s)? I do tow a 5,000 # + dual axle landscape trailer with her at very slow speeds around the subdivision as well as backing that same trailer up a relatively steep drive so a heavier weight oil may be necessary? While towing however, I am extremely gentle on pushing both the ICE and the MT given the far over limit cap I am requiring her to pull and after all, she is a fine hypermiling vehicle in her own right. Anyway, a thought or two would be greatly appreciated …

___Thanks in advance

___Wayne

Let's say 3rd gear is grinding.
In 2nd at 20 MPH and 2000 RPMs, shifting to 3rd
1. Clutch in and hold
2. 2nd to neutral
3. Clutch out, rev to roughly 1500 RPMs
4. Clutch in and shift to 3rd
5. Clutch out as the revs fall to roughly 1300 RPMs


even though wayne might bug at me for not shifting fast (i'm sorry i just can't do it to fast enough to keep the car smooth, my revs take too long to drop!) But this is what I do well I do both and was wondering if there was a difference between:

1. rev to 3000 in 1st gear
2. clutch in
3. wait... wait... wait.... rev drops to 2000
4. slide the shifter from 1st to 2nd
5. let off clutch immediately

if done correctly, my revs should be at 2000 so there should be no jerking or motion felt between the shift. Smooth but as I wait wait wait I lose a few km/h (say 2 or 3) since technically I'm coasting while holding in the clutch for a few seconds.

Do you think there would be less wear if I instead?

1. rev to 3000 in 1st gear
2. clutch in
3. slide the shifter to N
4. clutch out
5. wait... wait.... (one less wait if you noticed) rev drops to 2000
6. clutch in & at the same time slide the shifter to 2nd (should be smooth if you predicted revs correctly. Like the shifter is welcoming the gear!)
7. clutch out immediatley

Sorry Wayne I just want to perserve my tranny and clutch since I'm still mastering bump starting. Recently Dan gave me a quote that I'm going to try very soon, "Either my engine is at load or off."

I blame my flywheel though, my revs like to hover from the rpms that was at previously before attemping to drop, that hover gets a little longer as I climb up the gears too! Cars like the 240 SX did not take a moment to pause like that and revs drops immediately... I wonder what gives?

Hi Phil:

___I was a little harsh ... Aggressive FAS'ing in the flats of Illinois is what we use to maximize FE. Dan hit's 3rd before the end of his uphill drive. I hit third after a slow ICE-Off Glide on the road at the bottom of my drive to maybe 200 feet out. You are way to high in the RPM band for both longevity and FE. Pull it down and shift fast and smooth. Just a bit above idle to a bit above idle. 1,500 is the max I usually run ... Just like we have discussed in chat a number of times. Pop - Pop - Pop - FAS. The 2 - 3,000 RPM + engagements are crazy high for around town driving imho and would not be a good omen for reliability either. If you are P&G'ing, a 2,100 - 2,400 RPM shift point might suffice but that is only pulled out of the tool box when the conditions are just right.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Hi John:

___We have some disagreement in terms of real world FE savings with a NICE-On vs. ICE breaking. In terms of FE, ICE breaking vs. a NICE-On depends on the speed you are traveling as an ICE while engine breaking w/ injectors isolated even in top gear just before injector opening at just above idle RPM can destroy momentum faster then the gas is being burned at idle or especially to reaccelerate back up to a target speed lost due to ICE-breaking. More importantly, why not FAS anyway …


Very good point. Never thought of it that way, and with the ability to bump-start, like you said, why not FAS?


___Back on topic. I am interested in your thoughts about manual transmission fluid(s).


Since you mentioned you do some towing in the Ranger, I'd consider sticking with the same transmission fluid you're working with now. While a lighter viscoscity may yield slightly higher MPGs, it isn't worth possible damage and replacement costs for a new transmission. That heavier fluid protects the gears under towing loads, while the hybrid is literally without load and can run on a much lighter oil.


___Thanks in advance

___Wayne

Anytime. :)

Hi John:

___Thank you for the reply and an excellent one at that ;)

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Wayne I run M-1 ATF in my Ranger. It still shifts like a old F-350. But is is quiter.

but wayne needs to tow, not just cruise with the ranger yes?

Delta, might I just say that I don't know what happened to your crx's tranny, but that is extremely nontypical of manual honda transmissions of the time. Those transmissions are known to go 100s of thousands without problems, heck, I'm sticking one in my car with 190k on it already, and I'm doing so without worry. Later transmissions are known to grind 3rd when driven hard, but judging by your style I would not worry about the insight tranny, things could only have gotten better.

Hopefully I'm not making an ass of myself, but I feel responsible to stand up for my car/tranny/honda's ability to make a good transmission in general.

No problem, SVOboy.

BTW, Welcome. :)

Hopefully my grease monkey knowledge comes in handy. I'm kind of looking forward to rebuilding my hf tranny, wish it had a problem, :p

Thanks for the welcome.

Delta, might I just say that I don't know what happened to your crx's tranny, but that is extremely nontypical of manual honda transmissions of the time. Those transmissions are known to go 100s of thousands without problems, heck, I'm sticking one in my car with 190k on it already, and I'm doing so without worry. Later transmissions are known to grind 3rd when driven hard, but judging by your style I would not worry about the insight tranny, things could only have gotten better.

Hopefully I'm not making an ass of myself, but I feel responsible to stand up for my car/tranny/honda's ability to make a good transmission in general.

Same experience for me. I drove my 85 CRX HF for 275k miles before trading it for a 26" TV and a 286, 40MHZ computer in 1990. I put in one clutch at about 180k and that was the only maint I ever did. Never changed the tranny fluid either.:o

Same experience for me. I drove my 85 CRX HF for 275k miles before trading it for a 26" TV and a 286, 40MHZ computer in 1990. I put in one clutch at about 180k and that was the only maint I ever did. Never changed the tranny fluid either.:o

Amazing what those electronics were worth back them. :p