Is this a bad thing?

[SIN R G]

I would say look in your owners manual. If this was a good idea it would tell you there. My opinion is it would be harder on your transmission shifting in and out of gear than it would save your brakes..

If this were true then it would also be a good idea to turn your radio off at stop signs because it drains the battery. Thus it is less wear and tear on your alternator because it does not have to charge the battery so much..

[954camaro]

Ya I know for a fact that going down hills is bad on your tranny and other things so don't do that lol

[oldfriend]

Originally Posted by ChrisBlair

When you're stopped, the wheels aren't doing a lot of turning so it's difficult for me to imagine what wear you are avoiding

Brakes pads are wear and tear items. The fact that you stopped does much more to wear them out than the fact that you have remained stopped.

Exactly my point
+ 1

[Mr. iNCREDIBLE]

shifting from neutral to drive when the car is at a complete stop is no more harmful that shifting from park to drive every time you get in the car and start it..

we aren't talking about shifting into neutral and coasting to a light, we are talking about being at a complete stop and then putting the car into neutral while waiting for the light to change, might as well put it in park, it basically accomplishes the same thing.

I would never condone shifting into neutral while the vehicle is moving and coasting, you loose control of the vehicle that way. As for engine braking, if you learn how to drive and watch your high horizon you should be able to determine there is a stale green light or red light ahead of you and take your foot off the gas and the car will slow itself and downshift itself as you coast up to the light under complete control of the vehicle.

idiots that accelerate or maintain their speed then slam the brakes knowing there is a red light or stopped traffic ahead of them are just that idiots, learn how to freaking drive and you won't have a problem.

and the only reason that neutral is even on the car is because the feds mandated back in the 1950s that no automatic transmission would have drive and reverse side by side in the shift pattern because enough stupid people couldn't figure out what damn gear they were in and accidently backed into other drivers, or slammed their vehicles into reverse while moving forward.

[JohnnyBfromPeoria]

My previous car, a '02 Scion xB automatic, had crappy engine/transmission mounts from the day I bought it. I always knocked that thing into neutral at stops to keep from getting the shakes, intensified when the a/c was on. It made it 155,000 miles before I traded it in, running just fine.

John B.

[C586]

Originally Posted by SPARTAN sui

That's good to know, thanks for the information.

I've only done it a few times during the season, must have been a false sense of slowing the vehicle down. I do have proper tires at least, I'd be stranded with my P-Zero AS tires.

Glad I could help. Drive safe out there.

[Trentin24]

I am just saying at higher rpms and I see a stoplight, I am not hitting the brakes, I will shift into neutral, have that slow me down and then apply the brakes. when it turns green I will shift into drive and wait for it to shift until I even apply the throttle. If this was harmful to the car, it wouldn't let us do it. That is why there is a governor, to not hurt the engine. That's why the car says shift denied when you try and shift up at too low of rpms. Or it would tell you something on the DIC. That is just my $0.02, I am not saying it is good or bad for the car. just that it cant be that bad for it.

[C586]

Originally Posted by Trentin24

I am just saying at higher rpms and I see a stoplight, I am not hitting the brakes, I will shift into neutral, have that slow me down and then apply the brakes. when it turns green I will shift into drive and wait for it to shift until I even apply the throttle. If this was harmful to the car, it wouldn't let us do it. That is why there is a governor, to not hurt the engine. That's why the car says shift denied when you try and shift up at too low of rpms. Or it would tell you something on the DIC. That is just my $0.02, I am not saying it is good or bad for the car. just that it cant be that bad for it.

Well your wasting gas and doing unnecessary shifting. Why not just let off the gas. Shifting into neutral isn't even something to be thought of. It makes no sense.

[GYac]

Originally Posted by Cheveey57

If you are slowing to a stop and shift into neutral the car will actually roll faster out of gear.

why would you want to speed up if you are slowing to a stop?!?

[C586]

Originally Posted by GYac

why would you want to speed up if you are slowing to a stop?!?

Unless your going downhill that's not even possible. Unless your cars break the laws of physics.

[Mr. iNCREDIBLE]

Originally Posted by Trentin24

I am just saying at higher rpms and I see a stoplight, I am not hitting the brakes, I will shift into neutral, have that slow me down and then apply the brakes. when it turns green I will shift into drive and wait for it to shift until I even apply the throttle. If this was harmful to the car, it wouldn't let us do it. That is why there is a governor, to not hurt the engine. That's why the car says shift denied when you try and shift up at too low of rpms. Or it would tell you something on the DIC. That is just my $0.02, I am not saying it is good or bad for the car. just that it cant be that bad for it.

going into neutral while the vehicle is moving is not a good idea, aside from the fact you lose control over the vehicle and are in a free coast, according to Title 46 of the Washington State Vehicle Code it is illegal.

additionally dumping the car back into gear while it is moving does put excess wear and tear on the transmission.

taking your foot off the gas accomplishes the exact same thing and the 500 rpm difference between an in gear coast and an out of gear coast isn't going to save you enough money in fuel to offset the possible damage to the transmission over the long term..

you may argue that in a manual people do it by pushing in the clutch and coasting, but a manual is designed for this, and all it takes is matching the rpms and releasing the clutch to regain gear control.

--

but as I said sitting at a red light already at a complete stop and going into neutral isn't going to harm anything, the transmission isn't under load, and the RPM difference between foot on brake stopped and neutral stopped is ZERO, in both cases it is 500rpm.

[GYac]

Originally Posted by C586

Unless your going downhill that's not even possible. Unless your cars break the laws of physics.

I understand that, I was asking him why he would want to speed up, when hes coming to a stop, it doesn't make any sense.

[chef-beavis]

Since everyone is so focused on the mechanics of this and the car, let me provide some bonus insight from the motorcycling world. I see a few problems with doing this.

1. You get busy/distracted while at the light. It drops green. You rev to take off. The person behind you notes the brake lights going off and hears your car rev, and stabs their gas. You just started the next "My baby got rear-ended today." thread with a sad smily face.

2. You are sitting at a light and notice the driver coming behind you will never stop in time. If you car is in the proper gear to move forward you have that option and the reaction time is nearly immediate. Still needing to drop the car into gear could make the difference to getting out of harms way. On a bike, you never remove it from gear at a stop, under normal circumstances. You are also trained to downshift into first (with the clutch in) during a panic stop. The reason for this is all you have to do to move again is dump the clutch and pin it if the car behind you couldn't equall your braking or didn't notice you had stopped.

3. Any time your drive wheels are disconnected from the engine you have given up one of your facets of vehicle control.

I wouldn't do it for the above reasons moreso than any mechanical one.

[Trentin24]

Originally Posted by chef-beavis

Since everyone is so focused on the mechanics of this and the car, let me provide some bonus insight from the motorcycling world. I see a few problems with doing this.

1. You get busy/distracted while at the light. It drops green. You rev to take off. The person behind you notes the brake lights going off and hears your car rev, and stabs their gas. You just started the next "My baby got rear-ended today." thread with a sad smily face.

2. You are sitting at a light and notice the driver coming behind you will never stop in time. If you car is in the proper gear to move forward you have that option and the reaction time is nearly immediate. Still needing to drop the car into gear could make the difference to getting out of harms way. On a bike, you never remove it from gear at a stop, under normal circumstances. You are also trained to downshift into first (with the clutch in) during a panic stop. The reason for this is all you have to do to move again is dump the clutch and pin it if the car behind you couldn't equall your braking or didn't notice you had stopped.

3. Any time your drive wheels are disconnected from the engine you have given up one of your facets of vehicle control.

I wouldn't do it for the above reasons moreso than any mechanical one.

What I was told in drivers Ed is that if you're going to be rear ended and you can't avoid it to put it into neutral that way you go with the impact more and in case you become unconscious your car won't go like it would in drive.