7-Speed Auto headed Ford's way?

[NickF1011]

http://www.carpoint.com.au/car-review/2535811.aspx

 

Doesn't make any mention of exporting the transmission for other Fords outside Australia, but interesting development nonetheless. Could see its way overseas in my opinion if Ford follows through on its goal of more global chassis/component sharing.

[jpd80]

http://www.carpoint.com.au/car-review/2535811.aspx

 

Doesn't make any mention of exporting the transmission for other Fords outside Australia, but interesting development nonetheless. Could see its way overseas in my opinion if Ford follows through on its goal of more global chassis/component sharing.

 

Quite ingenious, they did the same thing ZF did with the 6HP26 gearbox. By using two Ravegneaux (?) planet carriers, you can fit a 6-speed gearbox into a 4-speed casing.The local 6-speed is about half the price of the ZF currently fitted to the Falcon.

[Hugh]

Quite ingenious, they did the same thing ZF did with the 6HP26 gearbox. By using two Ravegneaux (?) planet carriers, you can fit a 6-speed gearbox into a 4-speed casing.The local 6-speed is about half the price of the ZF currently fitted to the Falcon.

Is that plausible to use temporarly for the 2008 Escape? It'd be nice to have a 6A for the PIP D30.

[03 LS]

What about 2-speed axles? which essentially makes a 4-spd tranmission into a 8-speed drivetrain. I know Visteon and some other suppliers were doing some work with this technology. What's the current status? Was that part of visteon back to Ford now, or sold off?

 

BTW, this is for RWD only, since FWD always build axle into transmission housing, there's no point of having a 2 spd axle, instead of say a 8-spd transaxle.

[sim]

How much more refined would a 7 speed be compared to a 6 speed? There was quite a jump from 3 to 4 then a noticible amount to 5 speed and less again to 6 speed.

 

With my 6 speed i see the following ranges of speed per gear (while not scientific, its about what i see), the first number is the slowest it stays/coasts in that gear, the second is the speed it drops into that gear on a downshift under gentle acceleration, the third is the top of the range on a gentle pull away before downshifting and the fourth is the foot flat to the floor max speed in that gear at 6250rpm before shifting:

1st 0, 0-10, 25mph

2nd 5, 10-20, 40mph

3rd 15, 20-30, 55mph

4th 25, 30-38, 70mph

5th 30, 38-43, 75mph

6th 35, 43-?, ?mph (havent taken it over 80mph so far.

I know these ranges are pre-programmed for the gearbox, however the ranges seem to overlap nicely and because the relative drop in revs is minimal (500+/- rpm), the shift is smooth. The 3 and 4 speed boxes always seemed to be well defined and it was harder to get overlap in the gears of more than a few mph, the shift was quite hard due to the large change in engine speed for each gear. The 5 speed seemed to work well and i think the 6 is great too, but do we need a 7?

 

What makes me ask this question is if any of you are bicyclists you might recall older bikes, my first was a BMX, it only had one gear, great for starting off, but you'd bust a lung going any speed - and sometimes it didnt have a freewheel option, so you could relax going downhill either! Then as you grew up you might get a 3 or 5 speed with one front cog and the rest in the back which made life somewhat easier. From 6 speeds upwards you typically got 2 or more front cogs (3 seems to be the optimal for easy, moderate and flat/hard use) and they kept adding more cogs to the rear axle, last i saw there were 8 back there, giving you 24 theoretical options. Although you might only use 3-4 of the rear gears with one of each of the front ones, making 9-12 real gear options (ie you wouldnt use the largest front and rear cogs, nor smallest front and rear etc). Whilst not exactly the same as car gearboxes due to the fact that typically a larger rear cog was added to the 5 cassette to make 6 and a smaller to the 6 to make a 7, i didnt look, but i would imagine it was one of the other on one end or the other for the 8 as well - meaning the original gear spacing was often similar or only marginally changed, that is you had better power or speed on the two extremes than the older cassette. However the difference between having 7 and 8 gears at the rear is next to nothing, the difference of 5 to 6 was quite a bit and 6 to 7 was somewhat pronounced. There was also the problem of the price of these items, the materials used were often lighter and weaker than the older cassettes to fit into the same space on the axle without throwing the wheel center outside the bike centerline, so being thinner, they broke more often than the older gear sets - it all leads me to ask if we really need 7 gears on a car though?

 

I know there are plenty of heavy duty farm equipments that use a huge range of gears x forward, y reverse with a high and low setting, but they have a range of things to do like plowing, towing, moving from a to b efficiently on a huge variety of ground types, not just drive on the road like most cars do, even most SUV's and probably half the trucks sold in this country as well. So there is a place for this type of system, however i reckon this is going to be a car/road based item.

[silvrsvt]

I know these ranges are pre-programmed for the gearbox, however the ranges seem to overlap nicely and because the relative drop in revs is minimal (500+/- rpm), the shift is smooth. The 3 and 4 speed boxes always seemed to be well defined and it was harder to get overlap in the gears of more than a few mph, the shift was quite hard due to the large change in engine speed for each gear. The 5 speed seemed to work well and i think the 6 is great too, but do we need a 7?

 

Biggest reason I can think of is that you can have really low first and second gears which equate into good acceleration and the 6 and 7 gears could be really high for keeping the engine as close to idle for good MPG/Emissions.

[jpd80]

Biggest reason I can think of is that you can have really low first and second gears which equate into good acceleration and the 6 and 7 gears could be really high for keeping the engine as close to idle for good MPG/Emissions.

 

It also allows you to use something like a 300 Hp Duratec 35 as opposed to a 300 Hp 4.6 3V, the extra gear ratios suplementing the torque deficit.

[sim]

Biggest reason I can think of is that you can have really low first and second gears which equate into good acceleration and the 6 and 7 gears could be really high for keeping the engine as close to idle for good MPG/Emissions.

I feel i already get decent acceleration and my revs are approx 1100 @ 40mph, and around 1600 @ 60mph, i have yet to hit 2000rpm in 6th gear at 80mph+, i'd be practically stalling at highway speeds if the gears were set very much higher!

[jpd80]

I feel i already get decent acceleration and my revs are approx 1100 @ 40mph, and around 1600 @ 60mph, i have yet to hit 2000rpm in 6th gear at 80mph+, i'd be practically stalling at highway speeds if the gears were set very much higher!

 

Think closer ratios. The more gears you have the more the car feels like a stepless transmission

Less fuel enrichment under acceleration and quicker torque converter lock up.

I bet the old powerglide owners couldn't see a need for 4-speeds either.

Edited April 24, 2007 by jpd80

[sim]

Think closer ratios. The more gears you have the more the car feels like a stepless transmission

Less fuel enrichment under acceleration and quicker torque converter lock up.

I bet the old powerglide owners couldn't see a need for 4-speeds either.

I can see what you are saying regarding either smaller differences between gear ratios and possibly larger lower gears and smaller high end gears giving better acceleration and lower revs/better fuel economy, respectively.

 

What i am getting at is a variety of thoughts including:

Can you get too much of a good thing?

Is this being done just because it can be done?

 

As for stepless transmissions, isnt that the idea of the CVT? From what i could tell with a couple of CVT's that i used, its pretty gutless, has poor acceleration and not great mileage at higher speeds - basically not living up to its billing as the solution to this problem. Of course like many it felt kind of weird to drive, but even so, the performance seemed very muted and tame - maybe that was just the cars i was driving with it in.

Edited April 24, 2007 by sim

[suv_guy_19]

I can see what you are saying regarding either smaller differences between gear ratios and possibly larger lower gears and smaller high end gears giving better acceleration and lower revs/better fuel economy, respectively.

 

What i am getting at is a variety of thoughts including:

Can you get too much of a good thing?

Is this being done just because it can be done?

 

As for stepless transmissions, isnt that the idea of the CVT? From what i could tell with a couple of CVT's that i used, its pretty gutless, has poor acceleration and not great mileage at higher speeds - basically not living up to its billing as the solution to this problem. Of course like many it felt kind of weird to drive, but even so, the performance seemed very muted and tame - maybe that was just the cars i was driving with it in.

 

CVTs have better acceleration...because of a lack of steps and more engine racing it only feels slower.

[LincolnFan]

CVTs can barely handle the D30's Torque too...

[ANTAUS]

Would love to know who is the manufacturer for the CVT in the new Lexus LS600Lh with all the torque it must handle...

 

LINK-TCC.com

[jpd80]

As for stepless transmissions, isnt that the idea of the CVT? From what i could tell with a couple of CVT's that i used, its pretty gutless, has poor acceleration and not great mileage at higher speeds - basically not living up to its billing as the solution to this problem. Of course like many it felt kind of weird to drive, but even so, the performance seemed very muted and tame - maybe that was just the cars i was driving with it in.

 

I guess the CVT we get are set for fuel economy, maybe there's an "electronic torque limit" on the engine as well.

On take off in a high horsepower version, I'd expect it would act like a 2- speed powerglide with a high stall converter. The engine would roar to 6,000 rpm while the split pulley gearing would adjust with increasing speed to keep the engine speed constant. Unfortunately single belt CVTs are very torque limited, so perhaps the V8 Lexus has a multi-belt set up.

[LincolnFan]

The LS600h also costs over 100K so it doesn't matter anyway.

[RichardJensen]

Forget all that nonsense. I want to know what the story is with this little nugget:

 

Until recently, this four-speed auto was used by Maserati and is currently exported to Korea for installation in a variety of Ssangyong models.

 

Did Maserati come to market with a 4-speed auto?

[theoldwizard]

Could see its way overseas in my opinion if Ford follows through on its goal of more global chassis/component sharing.

Not Likely ! If this box was manufactured by FoA, maybe.

 

Several new 6 speed RWD are coming as well as the FWD Powershift transmissions. There was talk of adapting Powershift to RWD but it is heavy and expensive.

[NickF1011]

Not Likely ! If this box was manufactured by FoA, maybe.

 

Several new 6 speed RWD are coming as well as the FWD Powershift transmissions. There was talk of adapting Powershift to RWD but it is heavy and expensive.

 

Well, true globalization of platforms can't be limited to just the chassis itself or internal manufacturing. To truly be successful, they need to embrace their global suppliers like ZF. Only then will they really be "global". All depends on manufacturing capacity of the supplier I guess.

[LincolnFan]

What's a Powarshift Tranny?

[theoldwizard]

Well, true globalization of platforms can't be limited to just the chassis itself or internal manufacturing. To truly be successful, they need to embrace their global suppliers like ZF. Only then will they really be "global". All depends on manufacturing capacity of the supplier I guess.

No, it all depends on costs !

 

Ford and ZF got married and divorced over the CVT. I don't expect them to do another big deal with ZF.

[LincolnFan]

ZF still deals with Ford Aussie and Jaguar.

[Edstock]

IIRC, Ford is working with Getrag to produce a 6-speed DSG similar to the Borg-Warner unit that VW uses.

[LincolnFan]

Thought that was Volvo.

[jpd80]

Forget all that nonsense. I want to know what the story is with this little nugget:

Did Maserati come to market with a 4-speed auto?

 

The only one I could find was the Maserati 3200 GT and 3200 GTA. It was supplied as a 4-Speed Auto only.

They were supplied 1998-2001 (2002?)

Edited April 26, 2007 by jpd80

[theoldwizard]

What's a Powershift Tranny?

Powershift is the internal name the Ford-Getrag Dual Clutch used in the new S40

 

The Powershift 175 is scheduled for the B-car and is a cost reduced version of the Volvo tranny.