View Poll Results: Are transmissions getting TOO many gears?
Whats a gear? Tran-tran-transmi-mission? Wha what?
0
0%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll
Are transmissions getting TOO many gears?
#23
03-22-2010 | 03:13 PM
Teamspeed Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 969
From: Brooklyn, NY
my cls55 has 5 and ive never had a problem, then again ive never driven the 63 with a 7 speed auto, but on the other hand the 63 is NA and mine is supercharged......... i have a headache already lol
#28
03-22-2010 | 09:41 PM
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,923
From: Venice Beach, CA
It might be boring, but it is the fastest way to change gears, and still have the actual engine act like it does on a MT car. (unlike the CVT)
#29
03-22-2010 | 10:05 PM
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,188
From: Oregon
It's all about the horsepower curve (and therefore the torque curve). For max performance, you need gear ratios that keep the car in its powerband at any speed. In the M5, for example, once you get past 100mph (4th-7th gears), you're basically never getting less than about 450 HP. That's the main reason its top end is so impressive.
By contrast, if you have a big torquey V8 that runs out of puff at 5,000 rpm, you get pretty much the same horsepower from (let's say) 3,000 rpm to 6,000 rpm. In that case, you can have fewer, more widely spaced, gears.
With the sort of power to weight ratio available in contemporary sports cars, the first few gears can be pretty well-spaced, as traction is the issue until you get up to highway speeds (and in some cases, beyond). So, you can have gears 1-2-3 relatively far apart, then 4-5-6-7 closer together for high-speed performance. With ~200mph top speeds, cruising at 60mph in top gear, even if you don't designate it a 'fuel-economy' gear, keeps you in the lower 1/3 of your rev range anyway.
So, if the trend goes to smaller displacement/lower torque/higher rpm for NA engines, 7-8 gear DSG gearboxes will probably become the norm. If we go to torquey low-rpm turbo engines, I don't really see a need to go past 6 gears.
By contrast, if you have a big torquey V8 that runs out of puff at 5,000 rpm, you get pretty much the same horsepower from (let's say) 3,000 rpm to 6,000 rpm. In that case, you can have fewer, more widely spaced, gears.
With the sort of power to weight ratio available in contemporary sports cars, the first few gears can be pretty well-spaced, as traction is the issue until you get up to highway speeds (and in some cases, beyond). So, you can have gears 1-2-3 relatively far apart, then 4-5-6-7 closer together for high-speed performance. With ~200mph top speeds, cruising at 60mph in top gear, even if you don't designate it a 'fuel-economy' gear, keeps you in the lower 1/3 of your rev range anyway.
So, if the trend goes to smaller displacement/lower torque/higher rpm for NA engines, 7-8 gear DSG gearboxes will probably become the norm. If we go to torquey low-rpm turbo engines, I don't really see a need to go past 6 gears.
I will say, a well spaced 6-speed manual box is all I really want.
#30
03-22-2010 | 10:08 PM
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,188
From: Oregon
It's all about the horsepower curve (and therefore the torque curve). For max performance, you need gear ratios that keep the car in its powerband at any speed. In the M5, for example, once you get past 100mph (4th-7th gears), you're basically never getting less than about 450 HP. That's the main reason its top end is so impressive.
By contrast, if you have a big torquey V8 that runs out of puff at 5,000 rpm, you get pretty much the same horsepower from (let's say) 3,000 rpm to 6,000 rpm. In that case, you can have fewer, more widely spaced, gears.
With the sort of power to weight ratio available in contemporary sports cars, the first few gears can be pretty well-spaced, as traction is the issue until you get up to highway speeds (and in some cases, beyond). So, you can have gears 1-2-3 relatively far apart, then 4-5-6-7 closer together for high-speed performance. With ~200mph top speeds, cruising at 60mph in top gear, even if you don't designate it a 'fuel-economy' gear, keeps you in the lower 1/3 of your rev range anyway.
So, if the trend goes to smaller displacement/lower torque/higher rpm for NA engines, 7-8 gear DSG gearboxes will probably become the norm. If we go to torquey low-rpm turbo engines, I don't really see a need to go past 6 gears.
By contrast, if you have a big torquey V8 that runs out of puff at 5,000 rpm, you get pretty much the same horsepower from (let's say) 3,000 rpm to 6,000 rpm. In that case, you can have fewer, more widely spaced, gears.
With the sort of power to weight ratio available in contemporary sports cars, the first few gears can be pretty well-spaced, as traction is the issue until you get up to highway speeds (and in some cases, beyond). So, you can have gears 1-2-3 relatively far apart, then 4-5-6-7 closer together for high-speed performance. With ~200mph top speeds, cruising at 60mph in top gear, even if you don't designate it a 'fuel-economy' gear, keeps you in the lower 1/3 of your rev range anyway.
So, if the trend goes to smaller displacement/lower torque/higher rpm for NA engines, 7-8 gear DSG gearboxes will probably become the norm. If we go to torquey low-rpm turbo engines, I don't really see a need to go past 6 gears.
I will say, a well 6-speed manual box is all I really want.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bookmarks
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)