whats the point of double clutching compared to a regular downshift

>>17748571
Skipping gears.

>>17748571
The point of double clutching is becuase you have a transmission where you have no synchros.

If you have a transmission with synchros then there is not reason to double clutch, just revmatch.

>>17748571
because you're supposed to double clutch, not granny shift

>>17748571
If your car has syncrhos, theres no point in double clutching

>>17748598
>>17748604
isn't the whole point of rev matching to get the engine speed to match the transmission speed which is the purpose of the synchros? Why double clutch anyways if you can rev match in a dog box? or is there a benefit of being in neutral compared to just havnig the clutch fully depressed? from what i understand in both cases the engine is disengaged from the transmission
>>17748590
can't you do that anyways by proper rev matching? when the clutch is fully in, the engine is disengaged right? whats the difference between that and neutral?

ITT: people who don't understand how a gearbox works
>>17748613
The difference between clutching in and having the transmission in neutral is whether the input shaft gets turned by the engine. If you just clutch in, its speed will drop down to 0 within a few seconds, in neutral the input shaft speed matches the engine speed (unless of course you're clutched in in neutral). So if you want to put 0 wear on your synchros or just be a memeshifting faggot, you double clutch.

Rev-matching while clutched in will not reduce wear on your synchros, only your clutch.

>>17748571
No, rev matching does not reduce synchro wear. Please learn how transmissions work

>>17748637
makes sense. Thanks
>>17748689
will do