Don

I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
down shift.
The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,
but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
better gas mileage, or longer engine life.
Anyone else bugged by this?
Don

Robert Barr

I have no idea what the logic was in determining the downshift points,
but it just seems that they're always wrong. There's also those
conditions where the car will coast -- freewheel -- when there's no
throttle, and sometimes there's a trace of engine braking when I don't
want it.

I don't mind a busy trans, but I agree that the downshifting seems
awkward sometimes.


Don wrote:
> I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
> bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
> It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
> apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
> Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
> down shift.
> The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
> gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,
> but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
> better gas mileage, or longer engine life.
> Anyone else bugged by this?
> Don
>

Robert Barr

I have no idea what the logic was in determining the downshift points,
but it just seems that they're always wrong. There's also those
conditions where the car will coast -- freewheel -- when there's no
throttle, and sometimes there's a trace of engine braking when I don't
want it.

I don't mind a busy trans, but I agree that the downshifting seems
awkward sometimes.


Don wrote:
> I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
> bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
> It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
> apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
> Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
> down shift.
> The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
> gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,
> but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
> better gas mileage, or longer engine life.
> Anyone else bugged by this?
> Don
>

Don

Mine acts very strange.
Sometimes it down shifts, some times it doesn't.
I guess the problem I have with it is the constant revving of the
engine when it down shifts.
I can't believe the engineers planned it that way, mine seems very
excessive, as it even jerks the car, at times, when shifting down.
Taking your foot off the gas on a level road poses no need for a down
shift at say 45-50 mph unless you are using the brakes for some
reason, or maybe going down a hill. Even going down hills, you can't
coast using the brake slightly, without the down shift.
I guess its back to the old road racing days when you slammed it into
second gear to have acceleration coming out of corners.
Don

On Aug 28, 2:42 pm, Robert Barr <n...@for.harvest> wrote:
> I have no idea what the logic was in determining the downshift points,
> but it just seems that they're always wrong. There's also those
> conditions where the car will coast -- freewheel -- when there's no
> throttle, and sometimes there's a trace of engine braking when I don't
> want it.
>
> I don't mind a busy trans, but I agree that the downshifting seems
> awkward sometimes.

Don

Mine acts very strange.
Sometimes it down shifts, some times it doesn't.
I guess the problem I have with it is the constant revving of the
engine when it down shifts.
I can't believe the engineers planned it that way, mine seems very
excessive, as it even jerks the car, at times, when shifting down.
Taking your foot off the gas on a level road poses no need for a down
shift at say 45-50 mph unless you are using the brakes for some
reason, or maybe going down a hill. Even going down hills, you can't
coast using the brake slightly, without the down shift.
I guess its back to the old road racing days when you slammed it into
second gear to have acceleration coming out of corners.
Don

On Aug 28, 2:42 pm, Robert Barr <n...@for.harvest> wrote:
> I have no idea what the logic was in determining the downshift points,
> but it just seems that they're always wrong. There's also those
> conditions where the car will coast -- freewheel -- when there's no
> throttle, and sometimes there's a trace of engine braking when I don't
> want it.
>
> I don't mind a busy trans, but I agree that the downshifting seems
> awkward sometimes.

Al

Don wrote:
> I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
> bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
> It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
> apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
> Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
> down shift.
> The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
> gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,
> but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
> better gas mileage, or longer engine life.
> Anyone else bugged by this?
> Don
>

Look around the lot of the Dealer who told you it is normal and find a
used Civic similar to yours. Ask to test drive it. If it shifts like
yours then maybe it is 'normal'. If not go back to the service manager
and ask him/her to drive their car and then make yours normal like that one.

Al

Don wrote:
> I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
> bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
> It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
> apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
> Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
> down shift.
> The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
> gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,
> but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
> better gas mileage, or longer engine life.
> Anyone else bugged by this?
> Don
>

Look around the lot of the Dealer who told you it is normal and find a
used Civic similar to yours. Ask to test drive it. If it shifts like
yours then maybe it is 'normal'. If not go back to the service manager
and ask him/her to drive their car and then make yours normal like that one.

jim beam

Don wrote:
> Mine acts very strange.
> Sometimes it down shifts, some times it doesn't.
> I guess the problem I have with it is the constant revving of the
> engine when it down shifts.

believe it. it's called "engine braking".


> I can't believe the engineers planned it that way, mine seems very
> excessive, as it even jerks the car, at times, when shifting down.

see above. it's designed that way.


> Taking your foot off the gas on a level road poses no need for a down
> shift at say 45-50 mph unless you are using the brakes for some
> reason, or maybe going down a hill. Even going down hills, you can't
> coast using the brake slightly, without the down shift.
> I guess its back to the old road racing days when you slammed it into
> second gear to have acceleration coming out of corners.
> Don
>
> On Aug 28, 2:42 pm, Robert Barr <n...@for.harvest> wrote:
>> I have no idea what the logic was in determining the downshift points,
>> but it just seems that they're always wrong. There's also those
>> conditions where the car will coast -- freewheel -- when there's no
>> throttle, and sometimes there's a trace of engine braking when I don't
>> want it.
>>
>> I don't mind a busy trans, but I agree that the downshifting seems
>> awkward sometimes.
>
>
>

jim beam

Don wrote:
> Mine acts very strange.
> Sometimes it down shifts, some times it doesn't.
> I guess the problem I have with it is the constant revving of the
> engine when it down shifts.

believe it. it's called "engine braking".


> I can't believe the engineers planned it that way, mine seems very
> excessive, as it even jerks the car, at times, when shifting down.

see above. it's designed that way.


> Taking your foot off the gas on a level road poses no need for a down
> shift at say 45-50 mph unless you are using the brakes for some
> reason, or maybe going down a hill. Even going down hills, you can't
> coast using the brake slightly, without the down shift.
> I guess its back to the old road racing days when you slammed it into
> second gear to have acceleration coming out of corners.
> Don
>
> On Aug 28, 2:42 pm, Robert Barr <n...@for.harvest> wrote:
>> I have no idea what the logic was in determining the downshift points,
>> but it just seems that they're always wrong. There's also those
>> conditions where the car will coast -- freewheel -- when there's no
>> throttle, and sometimes there's a trace of engine braking when I don't
>> want it.
>>
>> I don't mind a busy trans, but I agree that the downshifting seems
>> awkward sometimes.
>
>
>

jim beam

Don wrote:
> I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
> bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
> It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
> apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
> Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
> down shift.
> The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
> gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,

it is - it's supposed to do this.


> but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
> better gas mileage,

believe it. when the throttle is closed and revs exceed ~1500rpm, gas
injection is shut off - momentum keeps the motor turning.

> or longer engine life.

it's not burning gas, so there's no problem with engine life.

> Anyone else bugged by this?

i think you need to go back to driving that 78 mercury.

jim beam

Don wrote:
> I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
> bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
> It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
> apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
> Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
> down shift.
> The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
> gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,

it is - it's supposed to do this.


> but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
> better gas mileage,

believe it. when the throttle is closed and revs exceed ~1500rpm, gas
injection is shut off - momentum keeps the motor turning.

> or longer engine life.

it's not burning gas, so there's no problem with engine life.

> Anyone else bugged by this?

i think you need to go back to driving that 78 mercury.

Enrico Fermi

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:ALqdneuBp6zb90jbnZ2dnUVZ_vOlnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Don wrote:
>> I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
>> bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
>> It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
>> apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
>> Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
>> down shift.
>> The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
>> gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,
>
> it is - it's supposed to do this.
>
>
>> but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
>> better gas mileage,
>
> believe it. when the throttle is closed and revs exceed ~1500rpm, gas
> injection is shut off - momentum keeps the motor turning.
>
>> or longer engine life.
>
> it's not burning gas, so there's no problem with engine life.
>
>> Anyone else bugged by this?
>
> i think you need to go back to driving that 78 mercury.

You got a problem with old Mercs? My '73 Mercury Marquis Brougham, now that
was a car. Mmmmmm, 460, bench seat, funky 2 piece sequential roll down
windows in the driver's and passenger's doors that never worked and barely
attached "energy absorbing" rear bumper. I remember it fondly. I used it
when my '87 MR2 became too impractical; like when it seemed too small or
when I craved that long hood to feel detached from all reality or when I
needed to plop a motorcycle in the trunk. The 460's acceleration surprised
many who chose to race me. I don't think the Marquis weighed much more than
a CRV (maybe a little heavier) but had 12,000 Lb/Ft of torque or so (no
hyperbole!). And that "low polar moment of inertia" safety problem that made
the MR2 "darty" with that annoying "trailing throttle oversteer" certainly
never plagued the Marquis, thank goodness. An itinerant demolition derby
driver drove by the house, saw it in the driveway and begged me to sell it
to him. Who was I to deny him his livelihood? I just wish I still had the
MR2: Best car I ever owned (next to the '69 Nova. Shame they didn't make it
with a Ford 460...)

Enrico Fermi

"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:ALqdneuBp6zb90jbnZ2dnUVZ_vOlnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Don wrote:
>> I have a 2006 Civic with auto trans and am wondering if anyone else is
>> bugged by the way it down shifts all the time.
>> It seems as if every time I take my foot off the gas and "lightly"
>> apply the brake, the tranny down shifts.
>> Sometimes, just taking my foot off the gas causes the tranny to
>> down shift.
>> The down shift is enough to make you think you are going through the
>> gears with a stick shift tranny. The dealer says that this is normal,
>
> it is - it's supposed to do this.
>
>
>> but I really can't believe that revving the motor like that promotes
>> better gas mileage,
>
> believe it. when the throttle is closed and revs exceed ~1500rpm, gas
> injection is shut off - momentum keeps the motor turning.
>
>> or longer engine life.
>
> it's not burning gas, so there's no problem with engine life.
>
>> Anyone else bugged by this?
>
> i think you need to go back to driving that 78 mercury.

You got a problem with old Mercs? My '73 Mercury Marquis Brougham, now that
was a car. Mmmmmm, 460, bench seat, funky 2 piece sequential roll down
windows in the driver's and passenger's doors that never worked and barely
attached "energy absorbing" rear bumper. I remember it fondly. I used it
when my '87 MR2 became too impractical; like when it seemed too small or
when I craved that long hood to feel detached from all reality or when I
needed to plop a motorcycle in the trunk. The 460's acceleration surprised
many who chose to race me. I don't think the Marquis weighed much more than
a CRV (maybe a little heavier) but had 12,000 Lb/Ft of torque or so (no
hyperbole!). And that "low polar moment of inertia" safety problem that made
the MR2 "darty" with that annoying "trailing throttle oversteer" certainly
never plagued the Marquis, thank goodness. An itinerant demolition derby
driver drove by the house, saw it in the driveway and begged me to sell it
to him. Who was I to deny him his livelihood? I just wish I still had the
MR2: Best car I ever owned (next to the '69 Nova. Shame they didn't make it
with a Ford 460...)

Don

I am sorry if you took offense to what I said. I was not aware that no
fuel was being used.
I am just surprised that a mfg. would make a transmission that "revs"
the engine when unnecessary. Also, if the engine is being used as a
brake, then it must be developing compression, and in doing so WILL
cause additional engine wear. (valve train and conn. rods, are being
spun along with alternator, and air cond. compressor)
I still see no reason for a transmission to act as a break on a flat
road, just trying to coast, the logic escapes me....
This is just the first automatic transmission that I have owned,that
has acted this way.
I never owned a 73 Merc, closest thing was a 70 Chevelle, 350 with 4
speed, and a 60 MGB with steering on right side. (shift with left
hand)
Don

Don

I am sorry if you took offense to what I said. I was not aware that no
fuel was being used.
I am just surprised that a mfg. would make a transmission that "revs"
the engine when unnecessary. Also, if the engine is being used as a
brake, then it must be developing compression, and in doing so WILL
cause additional engine wear. (valve train and conn. rods, are being
spun along with alternator, and air cond. compressor)
I still see no reason for a transmission to act as a break on a flat
road, just trying to coast, the logic escapes me....
This is just the first automatic transmission that I have owned,that
has acted this way.
I never owned a 73 Merc, closest thing was a 70 Chevelle, 350 with 4
speed, and a 60 MGB with steering on right side. (shift with left
hand)
Don