Why do you drive an automatic (unless you don't)?

[jason1973tl]

Originally Posted by tumnasgt

DSG transmissions are clutchless autos, and before them there were also automated manuals, which were just manuals operated by a computer (though they weren't very smooth). Honda also has a CVT with a clutch, which would fine as well.

As far as I know, there's nothing stopping car companies from having the torque converter lockup at low speeds, other than a slight added cost in having a stronger lockup clutch. In fact, I hope there is a good reason they don't do this, as otherwise they have been wasting huge amounts of gas for the sake of a little bit of extra profit.

It might be interesting to note that early Chrysler products here in the states before most companies started adding an overdrive to their autos advertised lockup torque converters to save gas. If they aren't using them now I would like to know why. It is possible to buy lockup torque converters for performance applications here as well.

[tumnasgt]

Originally Posted by jason1973tl

It might be interesting to note that early Chrysler products here in the states before most companies started adding an overdrive to their autos advertised lockup torque converters to save gas. If they aren't using them now I would like to know why. It is possible to buy lockup torque converters for performance applications here as well.

Pretty well all cars now have lock up torque converters, it's just that they only lock up in the top gear or two, and only above certain speeds with minimal throttle.

So they don't even have to add parts, only improve the quality of the lockup mechanism so it can handle the added stress of acceleration.

[JacobAziza]

Originally Posted by jason1973tl

An automatic without a torque converter would never work, or they would have one now. The only way I see to make that work is to have a computer use a clutch and change gears and such. It would be a massively complicated system. I am not an auto tech, but I don't see how you could practically make an auto work without a torque converter.

As far as the U.S. is concerned. We are a lazy bunch. I don't know about Europe and the rest of the world, but Americans want to talk/text on their cell phones, play with sat nav,mp3 and various doodads in their cars and generally want driving to be as easy as possible so they can be distracted with other things.

A sequential gearbox (like formula one cars have) could easily be computer controlled, making a torque converter-less automatic. On the other end of the complexity/cost spectrum, you could have a centrifugal clutch, like a go-kart.
I guess neither is very practical.

I agree about the laziness. We need a remote so we don't have to walk 2 feet to change the channel, and we keep bluetooth in our ear at all times so we don't have to reach all the way into our pockets and then hold up a heavy cell phone to our ears.
Soon our cars will drive themselves, and only Luddite purists will still drive their own cars.
Bringing new meaning to the term "automatic"

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by tumnasgt

If that's the case, how did GM manage to sell 90% automatics in Western Europe in '98?

I'd think that number doesn't include their local European branches (Opel / Vauxhal), but just their American branded cars - which would be mainly automatics.

[user removed]

Originally Posted by tumnasgt

DSG transmissions are clutchless autos, and before them there were also automated manuals, which were just manuals operated by a computer (though they weren't very smooth). Honda also has a CVT with a clutch, which would fine as well.

As far as I know, there's nothing stopping car companies from having the torque converter lockup at low speeds, other than a slight added cost in having a stronger lockup clutch. In fact, I hope there is a good reason they don't do this, as otherwise they have been wasting huge amounts of gas for the sake of a little bit of extra profit.

The Torque converter in my CVT equipped Altima locks up at 12 MPH. It will easily accelerate decently without ever passing 1500 RPM. It works more like a clutch than a torque converter. The special fluid used in the CVT helps to minimize slippage between the pulleys and the steel shoe segmented drive belt, which is all steel. They warranty the transmission for 120 k miles.

12 MPH is barely 3 to 4 car lengths from a dead stop.

regards
Mech

[dcb]

Curious, it does take a 3% hit on the hiway, but a couple Qs re: CVT

do you have the option to control the ratio? i.e. a ratio lever?
Can you control lockup?
Does it have a neutral?

[user removed]

It has a manual mode with 6 different ratios.

Not a specific control of lockup, unless I haven't figured it out yet, but no button to disengage. It will disengage if you give it enough accelerator pedal percentage, but it does not do it unless you go far beyond any normal range for best mileage.

You can shift to neutral at any speed with the neutral position on the gear selector and it does unlock the converter when you shift back into drive while you are moving. At 50 MPH if you shift in neutral, then back into drive it will be at 1100 RPM until you apply some throttle, then it will lock up and the revs will rise as you accelerate. The re engagement is perfectly smooth at any reasonable speed, even Interstates at 65 MPH.

I did some low speed (30 MPH average) pulse and engine on glide and was able to get just below 60 MPG, but I would be afraid of shutting the engine off.

It has a bar graph for instant fuel mileage, an average mileage and speed reading, range till empty. these are available by a button on the dash beside the steering wheel.

The transmission fluid is specially designed to provide grip for the CVT's steel belt and the pressure and friction of the cogs on the pulley faces actually changes the viscosity of the fluid to promote traction.

Top gear is about 2200 RPM at 72 MPH, about 3k at 100, but I have never been that fast.
1500 at 50 MPH.

The cruise control does not change the engine RPM around here where the grades are small, just adds or reduces throttle to compensate for the grade changes.

regards
Mech

[star_deceiver]

I drive a stick. Driven many a slush before but there's just no "fun" without the 3rd pedal!!!

And I really don't want to know how much it would cost to replace a clutch (or two) in a DSG.....

[Ang84Indy]

Originally Posted by tumnasgt

Personally, I think that everyone should drive a manual unless they have a physical condition preventing them from doing so, as having to pay some attention to your car makes it harder to text, eat, sleep, drink, talk, and play monopoly with your kids while you drive.

I agree 100%.
First car was manual, and most of the cars I've owned have been manual.

[SentraSE-R]

Arguably, everyone should drive automatics, so they can concentrate on what they should be doing - driving - instead of worrying about which gear to shift to, how lightly to lift the clutch pedal, whether to place their right foot on the brake or gas pedal, etc.