- By being in neutral you have no engine braking and loosing that extra retardation could be the difference between a near miss and an accident.
Most braking systems (all the braking systems I've ever had, apart from the odd badly adjusted bicycle) are capable of locking up the wheels so the tyres skid.
This limits the effective ""retardation" that can be used.
If you can't use the extra braking torque provided by engine braking, why bother with it?
I'd go further, and say it can be harmful, at least on a special case basis, since I have twice spun a FWD car due, I believe, to lift-off engine braking when going downhill in gear.
This wouldn't normally happen to me since I'd normally be coasting in neutral
- "Should the need to accelerate occur you would be left searching for the correct gear and again this could be the difference between a near miss and an accident."
Could happen, but a lot rarer than the fans of this argument would like to believe. Most people are more likely to accelerate into trouble rather than out of it.
- "Gearbox wear when its not under load is totally negligible"
If you are engine braking, the gearbox is under load, pretty much by definition, and you've reversed the direction of the load, which seems likely to increase wear. Probably not a very important source of wear, but wear nevertheless.
Edited by edlithgow on 12/07/2019 at 14:17
|