advertisement


Skoda Fabia?

Better to wear break pads than gearbox and engine
Gears to go; brakes to slow.

This is interesting, as I'm a bit old school (emphasis on the 'old') and change down to arrive at the roundabout or whatever at about the right speed or stop. Consequently, I don't use brakes much, except to 'clean' them on every outing. Guess there are pros and cons here but I'm not one of the many drivers I see hurtling past, only to slam on anchors at the last minute. Pointless waste of energy, surely. Swings and roundabouts, maybe?
 
Gears to go; brakes to slow.
I can only imagine that the old driving test routine of going down the gearbox was devised in the days of crap brakes. The current police procedure when driving at speed is apparently to stay in top, brake to the speed required, put the clutch in if necessary, then engage the gear you need at that speed and go again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cav
This is interesting, as I'm a bit old school (emphasis on the 'old') and change down to arrive at the roundabout or whatever at about the right speed or stop. Consequently, I don't use brakes much, except to 'clean' them on every outing. Guess there are pros and cons here but I'm not one of the many drivers I see hurtling past, only to slam on anchors at the last minute. Pointless waste of energy, surely. Swings and roundabouts, maybe?
If you are slowing down in one gear, maybe. However if you are downshifting then you are using the clutch as a brake. My clutch has about 2mm of friction material and costs £500 to £1000 to change. Brake pads have about 10 mm of friction material and are £80 fitted. I'll abuse the brakes, thanks.
 
This is interesting, as I'm a bit old school (emphasis on the 'old') and change down to arrive at the roundabout or whatever at about the right speed or stop. Consequently, I don't use brakes much, except to 'clean' them on every outing. Guess there are pros and cons here but I'm not one of the many drivers I see hurtling past, only to slam on anchors at the last minute. Pointless waste of energy, surely. Swings and roundabouts, maybe?
No. You are stressing the most expensive parts of the transmission if you use engine braking (or possibly breaking) to slow down rather than the bits designed for that job - the brakes.
 
I had a non turbo 1.9 diesel Fabia for five years till I rolled it swerving to avoid large deer. it was dreadfully slow, and needed a long run up to overtake a pushbike, but it was reliable and cheap as chips to run, had some issues towards end with electrical s getting water damaged which I gather is a known issue on mk2.
But essentially vw polo at Kia prices.
 
For fuel economy, approach lights/junctions in high gear with foot off accelerator.. Momentum will drive engine and obviate need for engine to 'scavenge' fuel to keep running.
Only disengage clutch/gears at last moment.
If you need to stop from high speed, use brakes rather than gear box..as above. but if you need to stop from high speed, it is probably your own lack of planning...
 
By using the foot brake, you are signalling to road users behind that you are slowing… they’re an ‘attention getter’ that works well.
If you took a standard driving test now and avoided using the brakes, you’d fail, simple as that.
As an example: you are slowing by changing down through the gears when, unexpectedly, the road surface becomes slippery. Result? The driven wheels lock up. If you were using the brakes, ABS would stand a good chance of saving the day. Many more examples are available.
 
Is that the 1.9 diesel which has appeared in everything from Skoda/VW/FIAT etc..through to Vauxhall and Peugeot vans etc? Certainly a good motor.
Two different engines, same displacement. The FIAT 1.9 was used across FIAT and Opel (Vauxhall) cars (GM and FIAT had a partnership from the mid-1990s up to 2004), plus some Peugeot/Citroën vans which had FIAT twins (e.g., Boxer).
The VW 1.9 was used only within Volkswagen Group brands.

Of the two, the FIAT-developed one is the better engine, using the (then) more advanced common-rail injection system; VW still used single injectors at this point. Both are good for over a quarter of a million miles, but the FIAT engine has better power and torque delivery, and is quieter too. As soon as the patents on common-rail expired, VW ditched the PDI engines and made their own common-rail models. Those common-rail engines were the ones that had the dodgy software that was used to cheat on the emissions tests.

The Fabia isn’t a “Polo in different frock” - it’s the other way around. The good thing about a Polo is that it’s a Fabia with better materials in the cabin. The Fabia we’re talking about is a facelift of the Mk1 Fabia, which was the first car to be released on its platform; the Polo followed 18 months later. Staff at Skoda did a lot of the production engineering on this car before start of production to improve quality, fit and finish and reliability, and then ran it for a year to get the final bugs out. Only then was it spun up at VW and Seat facilities. It’s normal for large companies to have a lead plant on models like this, but Skoda is acknowledged as the quality leader within VW Group.

For fuel economy, approach lights/junctions in high gear with foot off accelerator.. Momentum will drive engine and obviate need for engine to 'scavenge' fuel to keep running.
Modern engines with electronic fuel injection cut off the fuel supply when you apply the brake (without the clutch-pedal depressed).

Engine braking is from an era when the mechanical brakes weren’t very effective, and needed all the help they could get. These days, the brake pedal is the most effective way of stopping the car, especially with ABS ensuring you don’t lose the ability to steer.
 
It's not simply a question of slowing the car, though. Good anticipation of road conditions and hazards means the car is likely to be at or close to the correct speed for a situation, well in advance. So, approaching a junction where I will turn, I'll have anticipated and reduced my speed on the approach, so as to minimise the need to waste energy through the brakes. It also makes for smoother progress. Similarly, looking ahead for hazards, I'll be able to adjust the car's speed or road position sooner, needing less time on the brakes. This is not about coasting down to 15mph approaching a junction, but rather about planning so I approach the junction making decent progress, but not wasting kinetic energy (and thus fuel) on unnecessary excessive speed.
 
Not claiming that, but I do at least try. :rolleyes:

The poor drivers are, IME, often those who drive the wheeled equivalent of white goods. They clearly don't care, and it shows.
 
If only I was the perfect driver like everyone else is.

you do know, that everyone on PFM is a driving god, don't you? and that every thread about cars get diverted to the willy waving of "how good a driver i am" or "how much better my car is that yours" (of course my 911 always wins that).

I guess some people are good at everything, and know everything and are members on here
 
Very sensible replies to my question/observation, folks and I've taken note of the pros and cons of changing down and/or using anchors. I guess I do use both sensibly, though am probably a bit light on the braking. Oddly, nobody mentioned the necessity nowadays of removing the surface rust on discs and drums by braking.

I started driving and passed my test in the sixties and my earlier cars were a wee bit crude by comparison with today's ( no heating, radio, 3 speed etc.) My first 'modern' car was a Triumph Herald 1250 in the seventies (great car!).

I am, though, completely baffled by the propensity of drivers presumable sitting on their clutch and footbrake whilst stopped. I don't recall this happening to such an extent some 15 or 20 years ago. The RAC published 7 good reasons covering safety, annoyance to others and mechanical wear why this was a bad habit and I agree, being a handbrake man. I frequently see 9 out of 10 cars (on average) at my local intersection lights with brake (not running) lights on.

I understood that engine braking used no fuel, but somebody above mentioned that this was coupled with braking in many modern cars. New to me; maybe VERY modern cars?
 
Mine has an auto hold, at traffic lights you press the brakes firmly and the brakes brake lights stay on. Think most modern automatics do similar. Press the accelerator and off they come.
 
Whenever I am properly stopped, such as at lights, I engage neutral and put the handbrake on. This is I believe the 'correct' thing to do to prevent annoyance to those behind who have to look at your brake lights. I believe it also minimises wear to the clutch release bearing. It is also safer.
But.. there is another benefit. Whilst others are riding the clutch, hunched over the steering wheel and willing the lights to change.., I am sitting with my hands behind my head.. having a bit of a stretch and a quick look around. Similar actions throughout a journey, or a day..form the basis of 'active relaxation', which contributes hugely to minimising stress and anxiety. And oddly, the lights change for me, at exactly the same time as they do for everyone else. :)
 
Most new cars in the U.K. are autos, and soon most will be EVs. ‘Hand’ brake will be seen as so quaint :)
 


advertisement


Back
Top