View Single Post
      03-05-2011, 04:11 AM   #81
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,200
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
Well I tried, but I just had to make some counterpoints.
Well as long as we're being more civil I suppose we can continue, despite Bruce's good efforts to get back OT...

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
I agree. And like I and many others have pointed out both now and in past discussions, you can apply the exact same logic for a modern planetary gear box as well. Thus I'll never agree that it makes sense to single out one type of gearbox over another as a justification to use new terminology, nor will I agree that such terminology should be applied selectively depending on the internal workings of the transmission. Logic dictates that you must either apply the new term unilaterally to all modern, computer controlled and highly advanced transmissions with both an automatic and manual mode, or you apply to none of them at all.

By that same token, there's nothing wrong with simply calling a DCT or DSG or PDK a dual clutch gearbox as long as you apply the same level of specificity to all other transmissions. So in that context, you then call BMW's Steptronic (for example) a torque converter planetary gearbox, and you call Mercedes MCT a wet-clutch planetary gearbox. What you cannot do though, logically, is call these latter types automatics, while at the same time refusing to apply that same term to a DCT. It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever to do so.

Not to repeat myself, but I'll say again that I personally am fine with using the traditional term "automatic" instead of coming up with new terms simply because the term automatic has been applied to "automanuals" for years now and I don't expect it will change. If you like your new term better then, great. I just don't agree that the DCT alone is cause to rethink the terminology. Rather, the time to rethink it was long ago. DCT is merely the latest in a series of innovations that break the mold of the automatic transmission.
I disagree. "Modern" automatics are small, evolutionary steps from "traditional" automatics. Using some software and moving a lever on the transmission tunnel to some buttons on the steering wheel is not a revolutionary change over a traditional automatic gearbox. Neither is adding a couple of extra gears. That is pretty much the Steptronic case. A "torque converter planetary gearbox" is both all traditional AND almost all modern automatics. The swap of a torque converter to a clutch on the MCT is, agreed, a larger change, but nothing at all like the jump from a manual to a DCT. Thus on the inside a "modern" auto is still incredibly close to a "traditional" auto.

On the other hand a dual clutch transmission is a very novel and revolutionary design. Two manuals, placed in parallel, with seemingly impossible multiple gears engaged simultaneously, made possible by twin, again concentric clutches and an all hydraulic and computer controlled actuation system with both full automatic and full manual modes. These systems are designed such that human control over the shift forks and pattern would be more or less impossible. They are designed from the ground up with the concept that the shifting will be done by mechatronics. That is revolutionary, not evolutionary (and that is why DCT is also so very different than SMG).

I'm sure you'll disagree...
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote