Piston Slap: Transmission Talk, Debunked

Sajeev Mehta
by Sajeev Mehta
piston slap transmission talk debunked

Ernest writes:

Hi Sajeev, first of all I enjoy your column very much. The Honda transmission post over in the “New or Used” column raised my interest in something I’ve always been curious about. I have a few questions:

  1. I used to compensate for my lead foot by coasting down slight slopes or towards a red light in neutral (in my automatic.) I used to drive a manual and I understand it can be dangerous to coast down a steep slope because the differential becomes free and so the rear wheels can turn in opposite directions, potentially allowing for a spin.
  2. I stopped the practice in my automatic after learning (from a usenet board years ago) that the multi-plate clutch has very small clearances in N and consequently leads to overheating if allowed to coast. I’ve also heard that you don’t even want to idle at a standstill in N. Is this true? What the heck is N in an automatic intended for anyway, if you’re not supposed to use it?
  3. It was mentioned that you shouldn’t go into reverse without doing a complete stop. Same idea?
  4. Is it better to stress the engine at low rpm in overdrive, or to stress the transmission at high rpm in D4 (or D3 or whatever)?

Sajeev Answers:

Let’s get right to it.

1. I am not an expert in FWD transaxles, but putting a transmission in neutral has no effect on the differential, that’s downstream of the situation. More to the point, the (non limited-slip) differential only spins in different directions when airborne, it’s physically impossible to make one wheel spin the other way on the road, as it is loaded by the inertia provided by the car’s weight and forward momentum. Too bad it doesn’t work that way, though. Would make for a lot of fun on icy roads!

2. That’s all incorrect, unless the vehicle is flat-towed (all four wheels on the ground, like what you see with RV towing) and the engine is not running. Neutral is perfectly safe to run forever, because the running engine activates the transmission’s pump, circulating fluid to everything. Saw that for myself when adding fluid to the freshly-rebuilt gearbox in my daily driver two years ago.

3. Yes, but not for that reason. The load placed on clutches with the violent engagement between forward/reverse causes the problem, the clearances between neutral are irrelevant. Pop the car in neutral while slowing down for the gear change to smooth out and speed up this process. This is a great way to multitask!

4. It’s a difficult answer, mostly because the variables in one’s terrain, transmission shift logic (be it old-school mechanical or today’s electronic stuff) and the amount of cargo come into play. Your answer may be irrelevant to others. What’s the safe bet? Let your modern car do what the engineers intended, the stock transmission shift logic is normally “geared” (sorry) to improving durability. But if you live in Colorado and climb a hill at 1000 rpm in top gear, better override the system for your own sake.

Whew! Off to you, Best and Brightest.

Send your queries to mehta@ttac.com. Spare no details and ask for a speedy resolution if you’re in a hurry.

Join the conversation
2 of 69 comments
  • Steven R Grove Steven R Grove on Nov 11, 2010

    I do not know how to drive an automatic. That is why I drive a manual. No mention of double clutching, heel and toe? Has everyone forgot how to drive a manual.

  • Moparman426W Moparman426W on Nov 15, 2010

    John, you are correct regarding the lockup converter/less heat issue. However when an automatic shifts between gears, up or down, it also builds up heat due to the slippage that takes place during the shifts. And shifting between neutral and drive in an automatic causes wear due to the engagement and disengagement of the clutches, so people that coast downhill in neautral with an automatic better be saving up for a rebuild.

  • Dusterdude @El scotto , I'm aware of the history, I have been in the "working world" for close to 40 years with many of them being in automotive. We have to look at situation in the "big picture". Did UAW make concessions in past ? - yes. Do they deserve an increase now ? -yes . Is their pay increase reasonable given their current compensation package ? Not at all ! By the way - are the automotive CEO's overpaid - definitely! (That is the case in many industries, and a separate topic). As the auto industry slowly but surely moves to EV's , the "big 3" will need to be producing top quality competitive vehicles or they will not survive.
  • Art_Vandelay “We skipped it because we didn’t think anyone would want to steal these things”-Hyundai
  • El scotto Huge lumbering SUV? Check. Unknown name soon to be made popular by Tiktok ilk? Check. Scads of these showing up in school drop-off lines? Check. The only real over/under is if these will have as much cachet as Land Rovers themselves? A bespoken item had to be new at one time. Bonus "accepted by the right kind of people" points if EBFlex or Tassos disapproves.
  • El scotto No, "brothers and sisters" are the core strength of the union. So you'll take less money and less benefits because "my company really needs helped out"? The UAW already did that with two-tier employees and concessions on their last contract.The Big 3 have never, ever locked out the UAW. The Big 3 have agreed to every collective bargaining agreement since WWII. Neither side will change.
  • El scotto Never mind that that F-1 is a bigger circus than EBFlex and Tassos shopping together for their new BDSM outfits and personal lubricants. Also, the F1 rumor mill churns more than EBFlex's mind choosing a new Sharpie to make his next "Free Candy" sign for his white Ram work van. GM will spend a year or two learning how things work in F1. By the third or fourth year GM will have a competitive "F-1 LS" engine. After they win a race or two Ferrari will protest to highest F-1 authorities. Something not mentioned: Will GM get tens of millions of dollars from F-1? Ferrari gets 30 million a year as a participation trophy.