Originally posted by: wanmichael
I'm not touching these for a few years...they're probably going to have all kinds of "bugs" when they first launch.
I can't imagine how much they'd cost to rebuild after their 150k (or so) service life...5-spd Hondas are already a bit higher than $3000.
I want their DSG. No torque convertor, no pulleys, just a straight mechanical connection, but with two clutches -- one for gears 1,3,5, the other for gears 2,4,6 -- electronically controlled, with the next gear always preselected.Originally posted by: sdifox
Talking of CVT, anyone drive one of the Audi A4 with CVT? My concern with another gear is how responsive that AT can be with so may different gears to grease, so to speak.
Never had a lick of trouble from the leather in my old Lincoln. When I traded it in the leather still looked as good as the day it left the showroom. I've yet to see any problem with leather disintegrating unless the car was abused or neglected, American or otherwise, with the exception of the stitching tearing on 20+ year old Porsche 944 seats.Originally posted by: PAB
However true this may be, I'd like to affirm that in no way does any Detroit automarker use "real" leather.Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Wrong. Leather wears better (wooo, 20 minutes to condition once a year, that's so inconvenient :roll: ) and is infinitely easier to clean. Not only that, but real leather is not cold in the winter like Vinyl is, nor is is unbearable in the summer (my daily has a black leather interior and the seats never have heat problems in the summer).Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Leather (Cloth is INFINITELY superior)
ZV
Almost every car I see after 3 years with GM/Ford/DC "leather" looks like a vinyl dash off a 79 Trans Am. It might be easier to clean, but it's still going to disintigrate.
The number of available gears has nothing whatsoever to do with how smooth the shifts are. Shift smoothness is simply a matter of valving (on older transmissions) or electronic programming.Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
also, 6 speeds are nice, they allow the engine to shift smoother, etc.
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
The number of available gears has nothing whatsoever to do with how smooth the shifts are. Shift smoothness is simply a matter of valving (on older transmissions) or electronic programming.Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
also, 6 speeds are nice, they allow the engine to shift smoother, etc.
ZV
Originally posted by: AgentJean
Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Aren't these 6 speed automatic transmissions going to add about $1,500 to the total price of the car over the price of a four speed? You're going to need to put a LOT of miles on your car for that 4% mileage improvement to pay for itself. Not to mention that these newer transmissions will be more expensive to replace when they break, and they probably will break down more often thanks to all of the extra parts.
Wow, thow in another 1500 bucks and you have the additional cost of a hybird that gets TWICE(2 times) the gas mileage.
Yeah, American car companies are just plain STUPID.
They need to learn from Toyota.
I'll never buy an American(Ford or GM) car.
Originally posted by: AgentJean
Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Aren't these 6 speed automatic transmissions going to add about $1,500 to the total price of the car over the price of a four speed? You're going to need to put a LOT of miles on your car for that 4% mileage improvement to pay for itself. Not to mention that these newer transmissions will be more expensive to replace when they break, and they probably will break down more often thanks to all of the extra parts.
Wow, thow in another 1500 bucks and you have the additional cost of a hybird that gets TWICE(2 times) the gas mileage.
Yeah, American car companies are just plain STUPID.
They need to learn from Toyota.
I'll never buy an American(Ford or GM) car.
I don't think that's due to lack of technology.Originally posted by: Vic
Uhh... maybe because the technology didn't exist then? :roll:Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Good start but what is sad is this should've at least been standard since the Oil embargo of 1973.
4 speed automatics didn't exist until the '80s. 5 speeds were invented in the '90s, and 6 speeds just a few years ago.
Nope, still wrong. I can have a 200 RPM gap between gears and if I sidestep the clutch, it's still going to be very firm.Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
The RPM drops however, cause it to be more noticable in cars, and the 8 spd, has the ratios so close that it hardly drops RPMs when shifing, almost making it into a CVT, but still has gears.Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
The number of available gears has nothing whatsoever to do with how smooth the shifts are. Shift smoothness is simply a matter of valving (on older transmissions) or electronic programming.Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
also, 6 speeds are nice, they allow the engine to shift smoother, etc.
ZV
Originally posted by: virtualgames0
I still remember driving my company's 1990 Mazda MPV. That thing had 3 gears. First gear had to rev up near redline at 5000RPM. Not to mention it couldn't climb uphill even with its V6 engine.
Originally posted by: Perknose
I want their DSG. No torque convertor, no pulleys, just a straight mechanical connection, but with two clutches -- one for gears 1,3,5, the other for gears 2,4,6 -- electronically controlled, with the next gear always preselected.Originally posted by: sdifox
Talking of CVT, anyone drive one of the Audi A4 with CVT? My concern with another gear is how responsive that AT can be with so may different gears to grease, so to speak.
So, when you're in, say, 2nd, 3rd gear is preselected on the 1-3-5 bank. When you row that stick, the clutch on 1-3-5 bank is electronically engaged while simultaneously the clutch on the 2-4-6 band is electronically disengaged.
It's all done faster than any carbon based biped amongst could ever hope to.
Those fiendishly clever Teutons! :thumbsup:
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Originally posted by: sniperruff
pfft. i don't buy anything with less than 8 gears.
So all your vehicles are commercial trucks?
Originally posted by: Eli
Hmmm.... Now I'm interested in hearing this.Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: andylawcc
urrr.. isn't CVT far more efficient?
...and annoying? 😀
The engine note when driving one is VERY weird IMHO.
Does it basically just only change pitch slightly as you climb in speed? :Q Or is it like, backwards? RPMs start high and decrease as you accelerate?
That'd be really weird. Does it at least keep the engine in it's peak powerband?
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Funny thing, Lexus won't let you configure an LS without an options package for an additional $7000 above MSRP.Originally posted by: andylawcc
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
And the LS fails at life, my Focus is better.
hahahahahahahah..... you really know a lot about cars do you.
For $54000 more, the Lexus gets you:
Twice the cylinders
A sequential gearbox
Some run of the mill psuedo-luxury suspension (this is WITHOUT the expensive air-suspension option)
Move the drive wheels to the back
Some fancy-ass computer in between the steering wheel and the actual steering
Significantly worse gas mileage
Some fancy interior trim bits
Leather (Cloth is INFINITELY superior)
An extra CD changer slot
Bluetooth (why?)
A power trunk closer (wow, you're ****** lazy if you need that)
A universal garage door opener
Some lights underneath the rocker panel that lights up the ground when you open the door
A COMPASS
A tire pressure monitoring system
An engine immobilizer
LED lights
SatNav
A backup camera
Heated seats (you don't need this with cloth seats)
Alloy wheels 1 inch bigger
Marginal extra rear legroom
ONE VERY SHINY LEXUS BADGE.
If you're going to sell me a $70,000 car, you need a lot more than THAT to make it worth the extra $60k over a $10,000 used economy car - especially since I could add damn near all of those things to the Focus for less than $5000.
A $70,000 car that gets me relatively little compared to a better looking $10,000 car is VERY low on my spending priorities list. If I'm going to be spending $70k on a car, it had damn well better be more than some Japanese economy car they put on the photocopier and enlarged it to 120%, and then stole some bits and pieces out of Germany's reject bin and installed a hashed up 1st gen V8 engine. For just pocket change more than an LS, you can have a damned BMW M5 - and the BMW is a far better driver's car.
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: andylawcc
urrr.. isn't CVT far more efficient?
They haven't yet developed a really good CVT.
I perfer standard too...but in traffic it's such a pain in the ass.Originally posted by: CVSiN
automatics suck... /thread..
now 6 speed manuals.. thats the way to go!
I will never buy another automatic as long as I live..
Originally posted by: Shivetya
I'll stick with my CVT, infinite gearing FTW.
Its a Murano, Nissan is going to use CVT across the whole line. I can't imagine going back to a regular Automatic transmission after having a CVT