shifting without using clutch?

[kflagg]

This has probably been covered a million times,but is there any damage caused by long term or short term upshifting by preloading the shift lever and not using the clutch? Just wondering everybody's thought on it.Also should you only do it when at a good rate of speed with the rev's up or can it be done at any speed and will it hurt to do it all the time in town ect. on the upshift.Went for a good ride today out in the country pretty much my normal ride and didn't use the clutch much and gained a good 1.5 closer to 2 miles per gallon by doing so.Thanks again.

keith

 

[MidnightBusainSD]

varies when i'm in town i usually clutch but out on the highway and at the drag strip i never clutch might clutch on down shifts though

 

[Turbo-Torch]

This has probably been covered a million times[/QUOTE]

How right you are and that's where the search function on this board along with incredible search engines like GOOGLE come in handy.

A quick search will show you the subject has been beat to death 10 million times over and the end results are opinions that vary as much as the answers to "which brand oil is the best" "should I use motorcycle oil only" "should I use synthetic oil" and "does my bike need high octane gas".

What I'm saying is there is not going to be a yes/no answer to your question.  Read all the opinions from the past and make a decision.  If your tranny fails within a year or two you'll know you made the wrong decision.

Went for a good ride today out in the country pretty much my normal ride and didn't use the clutch much and gained a good 1.5 closer to 2 miles per gallon by doing so[/QUOTE]

Uh sorry but no.  I can go out and ride the same route everyday for a year and my gas mileage will be different everytime due to outdoor temperature, wind conditions, tire pressure and just what kind of mood I'm in which dictates how far I twist the throttle.



<!--EDIT|Turbo-Torch
Reason for Edit: None given...|1099167014 -->

 

[ralnsplder]

There is really no harm in it. I have a frend that has about 21k iles on his bike and only uses the clutch to start and stop. hehas never had a problem. I never used it on my gixxer 750 and never had a problem either. It is up to you if you want to use it or not. Every car, truck, motorcycle, 18 wheeler will shift without a clutch in the correct RPM. Hell most truck drivers don't use the clutch either. if you are in the correct rpm range it will slip in nice and easy with no damage. if you tryto force it into gear you might run into a problem later down the road

Just my .02

 

[Narcissus]

Yes.... I mean No..... I mean... AAAAAGGGGHHHhhhh....

 

[MidnightBusainSD]

Hey nar nice to see you lurking around still haven't seen you post in some time

 

[Narcissus]

Been busy putting my life back together.

Something about a wall and a fall........ and you know those horsemen aren't any help...

 

[Henryace1]

Narc glad to see your still with us... I don't use my clutch when up-shifting. I didn't use it on my "96" GSXR-1100, "00" Busa and I'm not using it on my "04" Busa. No problems this far...

 

[Tufbusa]

The purpose of the clutch is to unload the trany while you shift. Unloading the tranny with the throttle serves the same purpose. No harm! I think most everybody does it now and then.

 

[eynlai]

I never intentionally did it myself. I did it by accident a couple of times during a left lean into a turn. Didn't feel or hear anything horrible. But I would like to say this: If you're not sure, then stay on the safe side and use the clutch. What's your gain so far? 1.5 to 2 per tank of gas? Is that really worth it to damage your bike? Not saying it would. Unless you have a bike you can test it out on for a very long term.

that's just mi 2 cents

 

[Aughtsix]

Hell most truck drivers don't use the clutch either.

Class 8 tractors common to this country use non-syncromesh transmissions. Does your Busa?


Keith - to answer your question, I honestly don't know if there's long-term damage caused by clutchless shifting on a motorcycle. I have anecdotal evidence that there is, but in my 30+ riding years I've never been into a bike tranny - probably because I ALWAYS use the clutch to shift.

Uncle Bob stories and anecdotes aside, it's my opinion that modern motorcycles are marvels of engineering and are, generally, overbuilt. This means that Billy Squidly can buy a new bike, shift without a clutch for a couple of years, sell his bike outright or trade it for a new one and, probably in all honesty, say that he's never had a transmission problem caused by floating gears.

However, the poor unsuspecting bastard that buys Billy's bike more than likely won't be so fortunate.

I find it intuitive to use a clutch to shift a syncronized transmission because, regardless any other reasoning, I'm in the process of meshing two parts whose rotational speed is out of sync.

Also, so called 'unloading' via throttle is a misnomer, in my opinion, because it's only unloading the current gear/dog combination - it does absolutely nothing to separate, or unload, the engine and its part of the transmission from the rest of the drivetrain and its part of the transmission or to cushion the collision of the parts whose rotational speed is out of sync. There's a lot of rotational mass there, and only a few small parts to withstand the shock load. Using a clutch greatly lessens the shock load.

Race teams get away with clutchless shifting because the bikes are specifically modified to withstand it, and they're torn down constantly. You people who shift without a clutch - have you modified your bikes to withstand clutchless shifting? Do you tear your bike down constantly to make sure it's in top shape? In fact, when was the last time you split your cases to verify that there's no damage caused by shifting without a clutch??

Yet it's amazing how often the subject of metal in the oil comes up...

Lastly, I often hear about undercutting in connection with this topic. The information I've read suggests that undercutting doesn't enable transmissions to withstand clutchless shifting, but rather, undercutting enables the dogs and selected gears to remain locked together under power.

At least this is all to the best of my understanding.

I guess I'd ask you a question Keith: How long do you plan on keeping your bike?

Steve

 

[Revlis]

Ummm, Been doing it for years off and on, If you do it right, there is no more harm than with shifting while using the clutch. I don't recommend downshifting without only because it's much more difficult to get right. But there is little abuse involved in a properly executed clutchless up shift. Note I said little, but you can fug a transmission just as easily with sloppy clutched shifts as well. The Best advice for long tranny life is do not Mickey Mouse around with your shifts. Shift like you mean it with or without the Clutch.

The Busa Transmission is indeed a NON-Synchromesh Tranny I believe. It's a Sequential, Constant Mesh design. Meaning all your gears are meshed all the time and spinning at the same rate. So assuming you "Unload" or "Coast" as you shifty you really can produce a non violent, perfectly matched shift.. Assuming of course at least a small degree of mechanical sympathy and an understanding of road speed VS Gear VS Throttle Blip.

 

[Revlis]

Maybe I should say "Aren't Motorcycle Tranny's all Non-Synchromesh?" Because really I am not certain accept that I have never had to wait for a synchro to catch up...

 

[ralnsplder]

Hell most truck drivers don't use the clutch either.

Class 8 tractors common to this country use non-syncromesh transmissions.  Does your Busa?


Keith - to answer your question, I honestly don't know if there's long-term damage caused by clutchless shifting on a motorcycle.  I have anecdotal evidence that there is, but in my 30+ riding years I've never been into a bike tranny - probably because I ALWAYS use the clutch to shift.

Uncle Bob stories and anecdotes aside, it's my opinion that modern motorcycles are marvels of engineering and are, generally, overbuilt.  This means that Billy Squidly can buy a new bike, shift without a clutch for a couple of years, sell his bike outright or trade it for a new one and, probably in all honesty, say that he's never had a transmission problem caused by floating gears.

However, the poor unsuspecting bastard that buys Billy's bike more than likely won't be so fortunate.

I find it intuitive to use a clutch to shift a syncronized transmission because, regardless any other reasoning, I'm in the process of meshing two parts whose rotational speed is out of sync.  

Also, so called 'unloading' via throttle is a misnomer, in my opinion, because it's only unloading the current gear/dog combination - it does absolutely nothing to separate, or unload, the engine and its part of the transmission from the rest of the drivetrain and its part of the transmission or to cushion the collision of the parts whose rotational speed is out of sync.  There's a lot of rotational mass there, and only a few small parts to withstand the shock load.  Using a clutch greatly lessens the shock load.

Race teams get away with clutchless shifting because the bikes are specifically modified to withstand it, and they're torn down constantly.  You people who shift without a clutch - have you modified your bikes to withstand clutchless shifting?  Do you tear your bike down constantly to make sure it's in top shape?  In fact, when was the last time you split your cases to verify that there's no damage caused by shifting without a clutch??

Yet it's amazing how often the subject of metal in the oil comes up...

Lastly, I often hear about undercutting in connection with this topic.  The information I've read suggests that undercutting doesn't enable transmissions to withstand clutchless shifting, but rather, undercutting enables the dogs and selected gears to remain locked together under power.

At least this is all to the best of my understanding.

I guess I'd ask you a question Keith:  How long do you plan on keeping your bike?

Steve

so what, after 40 yrs of riding your bike you might have a tranny problem?? I mean what is your time frame for a bike that has been clutchless shifted? I have never seen a bike that had probelms due to not useing the clutch. If the bike is slipping into gear without making a sound, how is there damage being done? If you are trying to convience people that there is damage, where is the proof? Maany people on here say they have done it for years and not had a problem. I haven't seen one say that they did it and something broke.

Alot of us have been riding bikes for a long time too, but riding a bike doesn't make someone an expert on fixing it.

I have been clutchless shifting for years and I have yet to have to get into my tranny, should I say it is because I don't use a clutch??

I mean come one unless there is proof, how can you say it isn't safe when so many professional people say it is safe. I mean do you actually shift your bike when recmmended? if notyou could be hurting your engine in that snese too.

All I'm saying is lets see some proof.

 

[kflagg]

Sorry guy's didn't mean to stir up a hornet's nest by starting this topic.I appreciate everyone's reply's and have taken a little bit away from each post.I was just kinda curious what everyone thought on the subject.I know when i shift without the clutch it "feels" extreamly smooth and effortless when it engages in the next gear.Couldn't see how something so smooth could cause damage but,that is why i asked for everyone's opinion.Thanks again for all the great info.

kf

 

[Aughtsix]

Ummm,   Been doing it for years off and on, If you do it right, there is no more harm than with shifting while using the clutch.

Whoa Nelly - Rev, have you ever been inside one of the trannys on which you've habitually shifted without using the clutch? See, that's the whole problem I have with the clutchless guys - I don't think they honestly know if it does any extra damage - I think they just hope it doesn't.

The Busa Transmission is indeed a NON-Synchromesh Tranny I believe.  It's a Sequential, Constant Mesh design. [/QUOTE]

I thought it's neither syncroed or non-syncroed - it's sort of a whole different system. Someone like JohnnyCheese could probably give us the definitive answer on this.

Now, these next two statements, placed together, confuse me:
 I don't recommend downshifting without only because it's much more difficult to get right.[/QUOTE] Meaning all your gears are meshed all the time and spinning at the same rate. [/QUOTE]

If all the gears are meshed and rotating at the same speed, why would a clutchless downshift be any different than a clutchless upshift? And how could different gearsets with different ratios be all spinning at the same rate?

To the best of my understanding, yes all the gears are meshed - but so are a car tranny's - but because the gearsets are different ratios the 'engine' side (like the primary shaft in a car tranny) and the 'drivetrain' side (like the secondary shaft in a car tranny) are spinning at different speeds, consequently the shift dogs must release and engage different gearsets and different rotational speeds. But like I said, I've never been inside a bike tranny. Someone like Johnny will hopefully step in and clear this up.

Waiting for the light to be turned on...

Steve

 

[Relsek]

Ummm,   Been doing it for years off and on, If you do it right, there is no more harm than with shifting while using the clutch.

Whoa Nelly - Rev, have you ever been inside one of the trannys on which you've habitually shifted without using the clutch?  See, that's the whole problem I have with the clutchless guys - I don't think they honestly know if it does any extra damage - I think they just hope it doesn't.

The Busa Transmission is indeed a NON-Synchromesh Tranny I believe.  It's a Sequential, Constant Mesh design.

I thought it's neither syncroed or non-syncroed - it's sort of a whole different system.  Someone like JohnnyCheese could probably give us the definitive answer on this.  

Now, these next two statements, placed together, confuse me:
 I don't recommend downshifting without only because it's much more difficult to get right.[/QUOTE] Meaning all your gears are meshed all the time and spinning at the same rate. [/QUOTE]

If all the gears are meshed and rotating at the same speed, why would a clutchless downshift be any different than a clutchless upshift?  And how could different gearsets with different ratios be all spinning at the same rate?  

To the best of my understanding, yes all the gears are meshed - but so are a car tranny's - but because the gearsets are different ratios the 'engine' side (like the primary shaft in a car tranny) and the 'drivetrain' side (like the secondary shaft in a car tranny) are spinning at different speeds, consequently the shift dogs must release and engage different gearsets and different rotational speeds.  But like I said, I've never been inside a bike tranny.  Someone like Johnny will hopefully step in and clear this up.

Waiting for the light to be turned on...

Steve[/QUOTE]
Steve, I guess the religious thread died, and you aren't getting your argument fix?

 

[Aughtsix]

Alot of us have been riding bikes for a long time too, but riding a bike doesn't make someone an expert on fixing it.

I agree completely - years of doing something doesn't mean you know what you're doing is, or isn't, harmful. This is exactly my point.

I have been clutchless shifting for years and I have yet to have to get into my tranny, should I say it is because I don't use a clutch?? [/QUOTE]

Let me ask you - how long do you usually keep a bike? Two years? Three years? Four years? If you have a bike with, say, 50,000 or more miles of clutchless shifting on it, without a tranny problem -or- finding little bits of metal in your oil, then by all means keep doing what you're doing.

I have never seen a bike that had probelms due to not useing the clutch. [/QUOTE]

I have - this is the anecdotal evidence I mentioned earlier. The reason I buy new motorcycles almost exclusively is that I've had several friends who've bought used bikes only to have, interestingly enough, tranny problems. Then, when taken to a mechanic - not a dealer - they've been asked whether they bought the bike new or used, asked whether or not they use a clutch and told their bike has been subjected to abuse. Every one of them have been sportbikes purchased from younger guys - guys who undoubtedly tell their friends that they've never had a tranny problem caused by shifting without a clutch.

Secondly, years ago I bought a '92 FZR1000. While the tranny never failed - I didn't keep the bike that long - it never shifted very well and would more than occassionally pop out of gear. I suspect - though I don't know for sure - that the bike had been habitually shifted without a clutch.

This is anecdotal evidence, admittedly, but it's anecdotal evidence that hits very close to home.

If the bike is slipping into gear without making a sound, how is there damage being done? [/QUOTE]

Are you seriously trying to suggest that, since you can't hear any crashing, clashing and grinding over the scream of your 4 into 1, airbox mods and wind turbulence, that there can't be damage occurring??

If you are trying to convience people that there is damage, where is the proof? [/QUOTE]

IF. I'm not. What I am suggesting is that, in my opinion, it's not worth the gamble given that probably a fraction of a percent of people who clutchless shift have split their cases to verify that there isn't damage. See, that's the other side of the coin you're flipping onto the table - If you are trying to convince people that there is no damage, where is the proof?

I mean come one unless there is proof, how can you say it isn't safe when so many professional people say it is safe. [/QUOTE]

I've read as many professionals advising to use a clutch as I've read saying it's acceptable to not. Again, I don't know either way - it's a guess and a gamble. But, for my peace of mind while I own the bike, and for the future owner of the bike, I always use the clutch when I shift - up and down.

All I'm saying is lets see some proof. [/QUOTE]

And I agree with you, let's see some proof!

Steve

 

[Aughtsix]

Steve, I guess the religious thread died, and you aren't getting your argument fix?

Why Kevin, you wanna start something??

Heck man, I have opinions too, just like you. Should I jump your tree every time you voice an opinion??

 

[Relsek]

Steve, I guess the religious thread died, and you aren't getting your argument fix?

Why Kevin, you wanna start something??  

Heck man, I have opinions too, just like you.  Should I jump your tree every time you voice an opinion??  

I've done my good deed for the day.