Good post (all of it). I continue to enjoy the discussion. I did ask the mods to move all of this to another thread which has obviosuly not been done. Seems a bit odd as they are usually quite responsive to reports made with the "!". Maybe you should report yourself as well!
The only part I will reply to is this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel
But what about this notion of a "disservice"? Here you are missing the bigger picture. The fact is, categorization can take place over a number of different properties or attributes. Our debate boils down to whether the set of all transmissions can be partioned over the properties "automatic" or "manual".
|
Absolutely, there is no debate that transmissions
can be characterized by only 2 attributes. It is not that your convention is wrong or incorrect. However, the question is
should they be? What you seem to miss about my point is that the range of the entire set of relevant attributes for actual transmissions simply yields such a wide variation in those attributes, that I simply insist there is indeed such a disservice.
Let's take the most obvious example, in your scheme a DCT (not necessarily the M-DCT, just any dual clutch unit) can be called an automatic. Let's compare a very traditional automatic (say shifter on the tunnel, planetary gears and torque converter) to the DCT. An appropriate set of attributes might be the feel (subtleties of smoothness, jerk, shift feel, shift speeds, feel during launch, etc.), user interface, performance, sound and internal construction - really anything you can experience about the two transmissions. Are any of these experiences going to be similar between the two units? Certainly to an enthusiast they won't be and that is key to me. But also, even to anyone mildly observant about their vehicle, they will not be similar. In fact the
only thing similar about them is that they both can select ratios automatically, your key differentiator.
This is about as clear of a "disservice" as I can describe. This is again why journalists and manufacturers typically do refer to dual clutch units as such and CVTs as such. It would only be foolish for me to argue that these two transmissions can not select their own ratios obviously they can.
Let's look to another automotive area for inspiration and relevance. Is the only important thing about an engine its number of cylinders? Is it being gasoline or diesel powered, is it 2 cycle or 4 cycle, is it NA or FI, V or inline, electric or hybrid? Most people absolutely care about more than one of these characteristics, especially in such a broad range of ICEs (and non ICEs). Claiming that we only need to describe gasoline vs. diesel is not entirely dissimilar to your scheme for transmissions!