Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views The Future Of The Manual Transmission
5809 messages, Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 12:30 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: nippononly (Jul 02, 2009 11:34 pm) This manual has the same problem a lot of manuals do these days - it needs to be geared taller. If the manual were geared so that it loped along at 2200 rpm at freeway speed, it would pull 29 mpg too. This engine is plenty torquey enough to handle that. Why Subaru and other manufacturers gear their manuals this stupid way these days is beyond me."... I think this really hits the nail on the head (from a consumers point of view) . This is not to discount the almost rabid (some say cult like) Subaru following !!?? I just don't count myself among the faithful.  This is also NOT to vilify Subie engineers choices for the offered products.  To answer another poster, (Elias) the data is there. It is just not presented in such a way as to be easily inspected, compared, graphic 'ed, etc. So for example on a 03 VW Jetta TDI, 2,950 #,  2,800 rpms in 5th gear I'd be trolling for a ticket (in a 65 mph zone) at 90-95 mph, except on I 40 E/W in TX. (GOD bless TX !!) I would also be looking at 48/50 mpg !!?? Don't try this at home  The other way to look at it is 65 mph, I would be looking at 58-60 mpg. (I am not sure of the rpms) A rule of thumb is for every +/-100 #'s a delta (change) of 1-2 mpg. On the VW (www.TDIclub.com) forum there is plenty of information on the .658 /.681 gear (5th gear) swap. Most information points to an 11% RPM drop in 5th gear due to the change. On an engine with a 5,100 redline, 11% drop would be app -500 rpms (561 actual) One can easily do a search on that site. To put this in context, the above 03 VW TDI (Jetta in this example) was put on the European market with bigger injectors (.205) AND a 6 speed manual. What came over to the US market were smaller injectors (.184) and a 5 speed manual. The scuttle butt is the bigger injectors and 6 speed manual can easily clock more speed, torque and more importantly in this example, 1 to 2 mpg better !!!! ??? While I am not complaining of 48/50 and 58-60 in the above scenarios, whats wrong with 50/52 and 60-62 mpg?? 
|
|
|
Replying to: ruking1 (Jul 03, 2009 6:41 am) No, NOT...!! The answer is quite plain and SIMPLE. Multiple gear ratio manuals and automatics MUST give way to CVTs. With a CVT the engine can run, will be free to run, at whatever RPM/throttle opening that PERFECTLY matches, JUST BARELY MATCHES, the requirement of the moment, constant speed on a flat smooth roadbed or climbing a steep pass fully loaded and towing. Put as many gears as you wish in that "box" and your will still NEVER reach the FE and performance capability of a CVT.
|
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Jul 03, 2009 9:42 am)  (and not just your opinion) The old rating was at 26 mpg. The new rated 6 spd manual transmission is at 27 mpg. Anoher question remains what is the premium of the CVT over the 6 spd manual? Again that is nothing new, as one strategy has always been to keep the RPMS the same and select the "correct" gear to keep a preselected and supposedly fuel efficient rpm reading constant. Another that I sometimes do at altitude (aka in the mountains 2k to 7,000ft) is to select a steady mph. I pass many a Subaru doing that. (not that I set out to do that, but a lot of Subaru owners head for the mountains- its kind of a lifestyle mindset) Again what is extremely well hidden is the hp/torque at the so called "crank" and at the rear wheels. The differences (app 11% for the manual and 20% for the automatic) is customarily identified as the parasitic loss or drag. Again the real question: what is it for the CVT. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Jul 03, 2009 9:42 am) And that way, you can have that exciting feeling of driving your motorboat all the time, even when you are on dry land!! All I'm asking for is a taller top gear. Even some 6-speed manuals today are still geared without a proper high-MPG highway cruising gear.
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Jul 03, 2009 9:58 am) 
|
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Jul 03, 2009 9:42 am) Bwaaahaha! CVTs, for those whom like mind numbingly boring cars, they are the perfect answer. For the rest of us, give us a nicely ratioed 6-Speed manual gearbox, complete with a clutch pedal and we'll easily be able get the same fuel economy for any given driving environment, and have more fun while doing it.
|
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Jul 03, 2009 9:42 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jul 03, 2009 10:02 am) Seattle, Livingston MT, Lewistown MT, Everson MT, back to Seattle. Meals at Missoula Crackerbarrel both ways. If it had a manual transmission I would have left it home and taken the train. The nice thing about a CVT is if you want to "stir" it the programmers could give you any number (6 or 9,...more....?) of "fixed" gear ratios you like. In the best of all worlds you would even be able to select each ratio. Then when you get tired of "stirring" you can simply leave the driving to "us', speaking for firmware programmers.
|
|
|
Replying to: shipo (Jul 03, 2009 10:05 am) Not possible, not even close. Not even if/when you're sharp as a tack, let alone a few hours into a 500 mile destination.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views The Future Of The Manual Transmission
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
