[jb_camaro_2ss]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

1st, you shouldn't be using your engine for braking, that's what pads are for and they are cheap, it's been covered many time by those with automotive knowledge, the car guys, etc.

2nd, are you out of your mind? You need to drive a low-compression turbo engine if you think that this doesn't have a massive amount of engine braking available. Those turbo engines have very low compression due to the turbo providing a significant amount of compression and with that and the small displacement, they just don't slow down. It's not even close.

1st, I don't think anyone is purposely engine braking all the time to avoid applying brakes. I was simply responding to the OP's post. Also, some degree of engine braking is inevitable unless you apply the brakes immediately after each time you let off the throttle, or never go on a spirited drive with repetitive shifting and high revs. I will continue to roll off the throttle to maintain my speed going down a hill instead of riding the brakes, despite what the car guys you speak of say. I will report back when my transmission or engine gives out on me.

2nd, this car doesn't have massive amount of engine braking in comparison to the manual cars I've owned or driven previously, or at least what I expected. There will always be cars out there with more or less of something than my current car. I haven't driven everything out there, but that doesn't change my comparison of what I've driven up to this point.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by ember1205

There is nothing wrong with engine braking and will do ZERO HARM to your engine. The reason that engine braking is shunned is because people don't rev match on the downshift and it causes unnecessary wear on the clutch. If you rev match either manually or with ARM, there is no reason at all to avoid engine braking when slowing / stopping.

This. Obviously, don't clutch brake the car since, yes, the clutch is more expensive to replace than brakes, but otherwise there is nothing wrong with engine braking in daily driving.

Originally Posted by Silent_H_

Ah that makes sense, my bad. One sports (sporty?) car that has really bad rev hang is the WRX. Most people put a different tune on them to remove that as it truly ruins the car in my opinion.

Glad to hear that maybe the Camaro doesn't have any!

WRX counts as sporty but yeah, you can tune the rev hang out on most cars with a tuner.

The Camaro doesn't have it, though I suppose the 1~4 skip shift on the V8 M6 models could be just as annoying for some.

Sent from toaster or something

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by jb_camaro_2ss

1st, I don't think anyone is purposely engine braking all the time to avoid applying brakes. I was simply responding to the OP's post. Also, some degree of engine braking is inevitable unless you apply the brakes immediately after each time you let off the throttle, or never go on a spirited drive with repetitive shifting and high revs. I will continue to roll off the throttle to maintain my speed going down a hill instead of riding the brakes, despite what the car guys you speak of say. I will report back when my transmission or engine gives out on me.

2nd, this car doesn't have massive amount of engine braking in comparison to the manual cars I've owned or driven previously, or at least what I expected. There will always be cars out there with more or less of something than my current car. I haven't driven everything out there, but that doesn't change my comparison of what I've driven up to this point.

Wait... This car has brakes?

I feel that there's quite a bit of braking from the engine in this car, but it's offset by weighing close to two full tons with a tank of gas and at least a driver on board. In the end, it's still a push/pull between the engine trying hard to slow down a heavy car.

Like you, I've also owned other manuals that felt like the engine braking "did more", but the car in question was also 1,000 lbs lighter.

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

The Camaro doesn't have it, though I suppose the 1~4 skip shift on the V8 M6 models could be just as annoying for some.

Generally, the 1-4 skip never occurs for me because I get off of the line and go. In heavy traffic where I'm not first in line at the light, not only does the 1-4 skip sometimes occur, but dropping into 4 at very slow speeds is simply untenable.

What I've found myself doing as an adaptation is allowing the 1-4 to try and guide me but instead reacting as soon as I feel it to either swing up into 3rd instead or purposefully pushing the shifter to the right at slow speeds to come back and drop into second instead of trying to go direct.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by ember1205

Generally, the 1-4 skip never occurs for me because I get off of the line and go. In heavy traffic where I'm not first in line at the light, not only does the 1-4 skip sometimes occur, but dropping into 4 at very slow speeds is simply untenable.

What I've found myself doing as an adaptation is allowing the 1-4 to try and guide me but instead reacting as soon as I feel it to either swing up into 3rd instead or purposefully pushing the shifter to the right at slow speeds to come back and drop into second instead of trying to go direct.

When you’ve been driving nothing but manuals for 25 years, you develop your shifting habits that you don’t even think about. Then when you get your first car with CAGS while you still drive another car without it on a daily basis, you want to rip the damn transmission out of the car.

Installing the CAGS eliminator is the best $15 I ever spent in my entire life. Seriously.

[jb_camaro_2ss]

Originally Posted by ember1205

Wait... This car has brakes?

I feel that there's quite a bit of braking from the engine in this car, but it's offset by weighing close to two full tons with a tank of gas and at least a driver on board. In the end, it's still a push/pull between the engine trying hard to slow down a heavy car.

Like you, I've also owned other manuals that felt like the engine braking "did more", but the car in question was also 1,000 lbs lighter.

You make a really good point. This car is on the heavier side, so the weight definitely should be a factor.

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

When you’ve been driving nothing but manuals for 25 years, you develop your shifting habits that you don’t even think about. Then when you get your first car with CAGS while you still drive another car without it on a daily basis, you want to rip the damn transmission out of the car.

Installing the CAGS eliminator is the best $15 I ever spent in my entire life. Seriously.

If I were regularly driving in heavier traffic, I would probably do the same thing. 99.99% of the time, my way of driving avoids CAGS entirely so I'm able to work around it pretty simply the couple of times it comes up.

[zaimer]

Originally Posted by ember1205

There is nothing wrong with engine braking and will do ZERO HARM to your engine. The reason that engine braking is shunned is because people don't rev match on the downshift and it causes unnecessary wear on the clutch. If you rev match either manually or with ARM, there is no reason at all to avoid engine braking when slowing / stopping.

Yes. When I saw the anti-engine braking reply, I was like "well, I might as well exit the thread now before I start an argument" . There is nothing wrong with engine braking if done properly. I've done it with all of my manual cars, and also my various motorcycles I've had over the years. My current bike (1043 cc sport bike) has enough engine braking that I literally almost never use the brakes except when coming to a complete stop. Its so strong that I have to be giving it fuel or the bike slows down rapidly; there is no coasting without having the throttle on.

I feel the Camaro has a fair amount of engine braking. As others have said, there is some heft to the car. I also ALWAYS drive in track mode (there are other modes?? lol), if that matters.

[IceGoaliePaul]

Nothing wrong with engine braking. When you engine brake your kinetic energy goes into compressing air which produces heat which then gets absorbed by the water jacket. An engine can absorb and expel a tremendous amount of heat, far more than you can generate with engine braking.

I have noticed if you watch the fuel consumption that when you let off the gas it takes several seconds before it goes into fuel cutoff and you actually feel the deceleration begin. I wonder if it is just the ECU just assuming you are going to shift? I wonder if it goes into cutoff sooner if you brake at the same time.

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by IceGoaliePaul

Nothing wrong with engine braking. When you engine brake your kinetic energy goes into compressing air which produces heat which then gets absorbed by the water jacket. An engine can absorb and expel a tremendous amount of heat, far more than you can generate with engine braking.

I have noticed if you watch the fuel consumption that when you let off the gas it takes several seconds before it goes into fuel cutoff and you actually feel the deceleration begin. I wonder if it is just the ECU just assuming you are going to shift? I wonder if it goes into cutoff sooner if you brake at the same time.

Every car I have ever owned reads too high in the estimated MPG compared to calculated, and I suspect that there are some limitations to how quickly the change in fuel flow is sensed and reported along with some shoddy programming.

[PnCRedJwl2SS]

I engine brake with my A8 in manual mode all the time. The engine sounds glorious when downshifting while slowing down. I'm careful not to downshift from above 2500-3000 RPM or below gear M2, though I'm sure the transmission could handle it just fine.

If you are not doing this, I can't imagine you're enjoying manual mode much!

[hep4186]

Thanks for all the comments. I understand the car is heavy and there is a fair amount of engine braking. I was talking about the delay between letting off the gas and when the braking begins. I have Borla Type S mufflers and is is very easy to hear when the car goes into compression. The delay is significantly less in track mode compared to sport or tour. I have the 6M and rev match mostly on my own since that is what I do in my BMW Z4M. Guess I'm comparing the 3200 pound 3.2L Z4 with the 3900 pound 6.2L Camaro. My uneducated mind was expecting the 6.2L engine to make up for the 700 pound weight difference.
No worries, just want to make sure there was nothing wrong with my car. We do have some significant hills here in Utah so coming down a hill in a lower gear definitely saves brake heating.

I have warped brakes in a SUV before so am cautious about overheating the rotors. By the way, I have had really good results with SP Performance drilled and slotted rotors and metallic pads on my Mazda CX9 and now my Acura MDX.