Thanks. i did know that to be honest.I have been driving cars with a manual gearstick for 29 years but never blipped the throttle on the downshift.Unless you are racing i don't think you are going to lose that much speed by not doing it and letting the revs catch up.I sometimes use it as a way to slow the car down too by changing down a gear and letting the clutch off.Not quite so easy in the 370z as the clutch is a bit high sprung and the biting point so small.

I will add i have had the rev match off for a few days and find the car a lot smoother to drive.Especially the first to second gear change.

wtf's with all this confusion driving a AT car... :shakes head:

With my previous cars (Audi Quattro coupe, Eagle Talon TSi and Celica GTS) I always rev matched and used the revs to slowdown the car instead of the brakes. But here I have learned that it is bad for the clutch (could be the reason had to get a new clutch for my Eagle Talon TSi way back when), which is more expensive then new break pads.

The main reason I rev matched, is that I am always in pursuit of the perfect drive (smooth shifts, smooth breaking, etc.) and the only way to make your down shift smooth is to rev match, otherwise the car will lurch.

When I first got the Z, I did not like the automatic rev matching, but only because I did not understand it and did knot how to properly use it. I used to turn it off all the time. But now after a few month of driving, I no longer turn it off and I like it a lot. It gives me those perfect drives more often.

As far the first to second shift, just hold the clutch in a bit longer for a two count, which will allow the S-match to catch up (it works on the upshifts too) and you will have a much smoother shift.

Look up "helper spring mod" in the DIY section to help with the "high sprung" clutch.

I got the Z specifically because it has rev matching. No other car in the price range offers it. The way I see it is that "good" tech is cool. Good being in the the users eye. This is good tech. I almost went with auto because the reviews on here said it was a good auto. Couldn't bring myself to do it. While I don't regret it, I should have at least test driven one.

Cooltoy is right on the money about 1st to 2nd shift. I found that under 3500 rpm requires the "two count." Generally true for 2nd to 3rd as well. Higher revs do not. Around 4500 RPM and above the engine RPM starts to reduce fairly quickly when you begin the shift. Change the shift style with the aggressiveness of the :driving:.

You may find that you don't want the mods.

ok let me explain this to all of u. It is all on the driver on how far he/she likes to put their throttle down, but wile in S-mode it is fixed that the rpms dont go lover than 2000 for example: to an idle of base 650rpm, nismos 700rpm wile S-mode is off. idleing at 2000 rpms means u burn 14.7:1 A/F ratio @ 2000 rpm wile in S-mode rather than base 650rpm, nismos 700rpm wile S-mode is off.

Just for the record i dont drive with S-Mode i just know how it functions and i dont hate it just never found my self using it.

P.S. this car is tuned from the factory to give 14.7:1 a/f ratio till 3200rpm, wich causes torque loss in low rpms, after uprev tune i found it that the engine has much better response when u start 13.7:1 a/f ratio @ 2000rpm.

You mean a video like this that I just took?

http://vid484.photobucket.com/albums...psny1q0e34.mp4

Pretty sure that's SRM allowing it to go below 2,000 RPM. ;)

Theres something in the manual about SRM holding a specific RPM dependent on the speed of the car for like 2 seconds before going back to idle.

if you downshift every single gear with s-mode for every stop or slowing down versus popping it in neutral with no rev matching technique, yea there would be some MPG drop.
depends on how much gas ur blipping. if ur asking if s-mode contributes to any change in timing or throttle response that might affect the MPG, no.

Don't read this as me being confrontational - I'm genuinely curious, because my line of thinking was different from what you've said. How is rev-matching bad for the clutch?

Reason I ask is because I always felt that rev matching would be better for clutch life because you would have more friction on the clutch without rev matching to get the engine speed to match the drivetrain speed.

The other piece of it is this - the way to save gas driving a manual is clutching into neutral and braking when you need to stop. Coast as much as possible. In the Z, for example, with SRM turned on, if you employ a lot of shifting into neutral, you will use more gas because the car will temporarily hold the revs (using the throttle) until the SRM system recognizes you're leaving the car in neutral. In this case, it's better to leave the system turned off. In any other scenario, it's apples and oranges.

bingo

I think you misunderstood. I wanted to say that using the engine revs to slow the car down, instead of the breaks, might be bad for the clutch. Not rev matching.
I used to pull up to a light without using the breaks and just using the engine rpms (and the clutch) to slow me down, down shifting as low the first gear before stopping with the breaks.

i see what you mean. you're talking about wear due to the torsion between clutch and the flywheel while they are engaged, correct? that is a possibility, but I'd think it would be negligible or less stress than while accelerating.

http://benalman.com/code/projects/ja...conset/106.gif You are probably correct.:tup:

But but but what IF say you're cruising on 5th and prepare to stop at a red light. Instead of downshifting you put it in neutral and just use the brakes to slow down? That would save you gas right?

yea in theory it would save gas. because less throttle/gas blipped. Actually, I've done some experiments myself, if I consistently heel toe and downshift vs popping it in neutral, over the course of ~18 gallons of tank u got you will see somewhat noticeable mileage difference maybe ~25 miles or so. but it all depends on how much you're doing it