View Poll Results: What did YOU choose?
6MT
140
53.64%
5AT
121
46.36%
Voters: 261. You may not vote on this poll
6MT or 5AT
09-13-2007 | 07:19 PM
#167
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: New York
Torque multiplication does not occur when the torque converter is locked up. The torque converter will lock up at about 3k when it stalls, or about 4k via ECU command. After it is locked up, it is similar to an engaged clutch. There is no torque multiplication in higher gears unless your torque converter is not locked, which means you will be losing power overall. Prove otherwise and I'll thank you for teaching me how a torque converter works.
The clutch drop from a dig is not that much better than the high stall converter. They are both designed to get the engine RPMs high before engaging the drive wheels. Both are valid approaches. The AT's torque multiplication will help cancel out the MT launch. I agree that a hard core launch on the MT is beyond what the AT can deal with, but for most aggressive launches it will compare well.
The trap times all end at barely above 100mph. Like I said, at this point in the "race" the 6MT has just selected 4th gear at 99mph and is at a 21% advantage in torque at the wheels as soon as the 5AT hits 106 and selects the much longer 4th. At 102mph, the 5AT is nearing redline in 3rd with a locked up torque converter providing no multiplication. If let the race continue for a little longer the 6MT will make plenty good use of that 21% 4th gear advantage.
I stand by my comment that the 6MT will easily win 60-95. I picked 95 because both cars are in 3rd up until that point and the 6MT has a 6% advantage in torque at the wheels.
The discussion is fun, as it makes me think about cars and physics, both of which I really love. But... it's pretty moot. It comes down to feel and what you prefer. I don't like how a AT feels off-throttle. I don't like having to ride the brake down a hill. I don't like the manual downshift taking longer than it should sometimes and somtimes mysteriously revmatching incorrectly. I _prefer_ to deal w/ the 6MT.
The 6MT is faster though, period. The math doesn't work any other way. You will have to prove to me that the 5AT torque converter somehow multiplies torque while locked up (?!?) to make me think otherwise... the gears are shorter and all else is equal. No way the 5AT is the same.
The clutch drop from a dig is not that much better than the high stall converter. They are both designed to get the engine RPMs high before engaging the drive wheels. Both are valid approaches. The AT's torque multiplication will help cancel out the MT launch. I agree that a hard core launch on the MT is beyond what the AT can deal with, but for most aggressive launches it will compare well.
The trap times all end at barely above 100mph. Like I said, at this point in the "race" the 6MT has just selected 4th gear at 99mph and is at a 21% advantage in torque at the wheels as soon as the 5AT hits 106 and selects the much longer 4th. At 102mph, the 5AT is nearing redline in 3rd with a locked up torque converter providing no multiplication. If let the race continue for a little longer the 6MT will make plenty good use of that 21% 4th gear advantage.
I stand by my comment that the 6MT will easily win 60-95. I picked 95 because both cars are in 3rd up until that point and the 6MT has a 6% advantage in torque at the wheels.
The discussion is fun, as it makes me think about cars and physics, both of which I really love. But... it's pretty moot. It comes down to feel and what you prefer. I don't like how a AT feels off-throttle. I don't like having to ride the brake down a hill. I don't like the manual downshift taking longer than it should sometimes and somtimes mysteriously revmatching incorrectly. I _prefer_ to deal w/ the 6MT.
The 6MT is faster though, period. The math doesn't work any other way. You will have to prove to me that the 5AT torque converter somehow multiplies torque while locked up (?!?) to make me think otherwise... the gears are shorter and all else is equal. No way the 5AT is the same.
09-13-2007 | 07:19 PM
#168
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 442
Likes: 2
From: Santa Clara, CA
All you're promoting is a pissing contest that won't get anywhere as can be seen with 12+ pages of arguing and bickering.
Solution: drive both transmissions yourself and get a first-hand experience. Hell, time yourself if it floats your boat. Compare and contrast. Problem solved.
In the end, the driver is the performance factor.
Solution: drive both transmissions yourself and get a first-hand experience. Hell, time yourself if it floats your boat. Compare and contrast. Problem solved.
In the end, the driver is the performance factor.
09-13-2007 | 07:22 PM
#169
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: New York
All you're promoting is a pissing contest that won't get anywhere as can be seen with 12+ pages of arguing and bickering.
Solution: drive both transmissions yourself and get a first-hand experience. Hell, time yourself if it floats your boat. Compare and contrast. Problem solved.
In the end, the driver is the performance factor.
Solution: drive both transmissions yourself and get a first-hand experience. Hell, time yourself if it floats your boat. Compare and contrast. Problem solved.
In the end, the driver is the performance factor.
09-13-2007 | 07:40 PM
#170
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 262
Likes: 2
From: MD
Well for my first manual car, and 20 days of ownership not being able to race the car with the manual, I LOVE FREAKING MANUAL. Had to rub that in. I go to work in traffic, and come home in traffic. Those little bit of spirts that allow met to get on the gas and clutch is so freaking enjoyable. Until they put neutral and reverse to be selected by the (fake F1) paddle shifters, I will not go back to auto ever again unless I have some kind of DSG, or AMG BEAST.
09-13-2007 | 08:11 PM
#171
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
Well for my first manual car, and 20 days of ownership not being able to race the car with the manual, I LOVE FREAKING MANUAL. Had to rub that in. I go to work in traffic, and come home in traffic. Those little bit of spirts that allow met to get on the gas and clutch is so freaking enjoyable. Until they put neutral and reverse to be selected by the (fake F1) paddle shifters, I will not go back to auto ever again unless I have some kind of DSG, or AMG BEAST.
09-13-2007 | 09:28 PM
#173
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver, BC
Regarding the magazine/calculator racing going on in some of the posts of this thread -- we shouldn't need this anymore should we? the G37 is out, many of you guys have it already. When are some of you guys gonna meet up at the strip and get this debate hammered out?
09-13-2007 | 11:04 PM
#174
Torque multiplication does not occur when the torque converter is locked up. The torque converter will lock up at about 3k when it stalls, or about 4k via ECU command. After it is locked up, it is similar to an engaged clutch. There is no torque multiplication in higher gears unless your torque converter is not locked, which means you will be losing power overall. Prove otherwise and I'll thank you for teaching me how a torque converter works.
The clutch drop from a dig is not that much better than the high stall converter. They are both designed to get the engine RPMs high before engaging the drive wheels. Both are valid approaches. The AT's torque multiplication will help cancel out the MT launch. I agree that a hard core launch on the MT is beyond what the AT can deal with, but for most aggressive launches it will compare well.
The trap times all end at barely above 100mph. Like I said, at this point in the "race" the 6MT has just selected 4th gear at 99mph and is at a 21% advantage in torque at the wheels as soon as the 5AT hits 106 and selects the much longer 4th. At 102mph, the 5AT is nearing redline in 3rd with a locked up torque converter providing no multiplication. If let the race continue for a little longer the 6MT will make plenty good use of that 21% 4th gear advantage.
I stand by my comment that the 6MT will easily win 60-95. I picked 95 because both cars are in 3rd up until that point and the 6MT has a 6% advantage in torque at the wheels.
The discussion is fun, as it makes me think about cars and physics, both of which I really love. But... it's pretty moot. It comes down to feel and what you prefer. I don't like how a AT feels off-throttle. I don't like having to ride the brake down a hill. I don't like the manual downshift taking longer than it should sometimes and somtimes mysteriously revmatching incorrectly. I _prefer_ to deal w/ the 6MT.
The 6MT is faster though, period. The math doesn't work any other way. You will have to prove to me that the 5AT torque converter somehow multiplies torque while locked up (?!?) to make me think otherwise... the gears are shorter and all else is equal. No way the 5AT is the same.
The clutch drop from a dig is not that much better than the high stall converter. They are both designed to get the engine RPMs high before engaging the drive wheels. Both are valid approaches. The AT's torque multiplication will help cancel out the MT launch. I agree that a hard core launch on the MT is beyond what the AT can deal with, but for most aggressive launches it will compare well.
The trap times all end at barely above 100mph. Like I said, at this point in the "race" the 6MT has just selected 4th gear at 99mph and is at a 21% advantage in torque at the wheels as soon as the 5AT hits 106 and selects the much longer 4th. At 102mph, the 5AT is nearing redline in 3rd with a locked up torque converter providing no multiplication. If let the race continue for a little longer the 6MT will make plenty good use of that 21% 4th gear advantage.
I stand by my comment that the 6MT will easily win 60-95. I picked 95 because both cars are in 3rd up until that point and the 6MT has a 6% advantage in torque at the wheels.
The discussion is fun, as it makes me think about cars and physics, both of which I really love. But... it's pretty moot. It comes down to feel and what you prefer. I don't like how a AT feels off-throttle. I don't like having to ride the brake down a hill. I don't like the manual downshift taking longer than it should sometimes and somtimes mysteriously revmatching incorrectly. I _prefer_ to deal w/ the 6MT.
The 6MT is faster though, period. The math doesn't work any other way. You will have to prove to me that the 5AT torque converter somehow multiplies torque while locked up (?!?) to make me think otherwise... the gears are shorter and all else is equal. No way the 5AT is the same.
It is my understanding that the TC in the G does not automatically lockup so quickly in 3rd gear. There was also an article that was comparing the 335 to the G37. It said that the 335 kept the TC locked most of the time and indicated that the G37 did not depending on the load. Not all torque converters lock up the same. In fact the G37 includes a "new calibration and modified torque converter characteristics" even vs the Sedan. I cant say for sure exactly how the TC in the G works but that is the only explanation for the 5AT to produce the numbers that is has (in 3rd gear). The mere fact that is rev matching downshifting into 3rd gear from higher speeds is indication that it is not always locked up in higher gears. This has been the case in both the Sedan and now the coupe. If the 6MT were truly that much faster, we would see it by now from results in at least the Sedan- its been out for a while.
The conditions of both tests that I posted are were good conditions and about the same (humidity temperature etc) so there is no reason for me to think that we will see sugnificantly better better times from the 6MT. All of the major magazines have all produced their stats.
You keep saying that the 6MT leaves the 5AT in 3rd gear. However you have already confirmed that the 6MT is in 4th gear at the quarter mile mark which is basicaly reaching that mark at the same time as the 5AT. By your logic of there being a significant difference of 60 - 95 because of 3rd gear the 6MT should be much quicker to the quarter mile mark even if the trap speeds are the same. You can't say that it is not apples to apples when there have been multiple tests producing the same or extremely similar results. Granted there may be some slight differences based on conditions- and they are indicated in the results- but even with the differences in conditions they very similar results with no "significant" difference.
In response to your implication that I am misinforming to "feel better" about my decision, and that you are calling me out PHALEESE!!!!
(and I thought our discussion was pretty civil up until that point) let me just respond by saying that it was you who presented baseless information with your "annihilation" comment and that the 6MT was "much faster" and with your highly sophisticated butt dyno ("feels faster"). And your latest response sums things up with "I don't care if the numbers don't show it YET". When they do then come find me. I will admit I was wrong.In closing I say see you at the track.
Last edited by KAHBOOM; 09-13-2007 at 11:07 PM.
09-13-2007 | 11:11 PM
#175
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
=)
The calling out was not directed at you but in general that fellow seemed to think it was a problem for us to discuss and debate. I have a good deal of respect for you, Kahboom.
Now.. as to TC multiplication. I think you are wrong about your claim that there is torque multiplication happening in the TC at speeds above "launch" speeds.
So, I'll go read up on TC torque multiplication and get back to you. If I prove to you that it is not happening, and it's the "only" explanation for the numbers... then what? Will you at least accept the possibility that the 6mt numbers are low/slow so far and maybe that's why the 5AT looks so quick by comparison?
The calling out was not directed at you but in general that fellow seemed to think it was a problem for us to discuss and debate. I have a good deal of respect for you, Kahboom.
Now.. as to TC multiplication. I think you are wrong about your claim that there is torque multiplication happening in the TC at speeds above "launch" speeds.
So, I'll go read up on TC torque multiplication and get back to you. If I prove to you that it is not happening, and it's the "only" explanation for the numbers... then what? Will you at least accept the possibility that the 6mt numbers are low/slow so far and maybe that's why the 5AT looks so quick by comparison?
Well if you don't beleive the actual numbers that have been posted and supported by by multiple tests and if you think that the 6MT is going to produce significantly better numbers than what has been posted thus far then I say you are the one misinforming the group on this public forum.
It is my understanding that the TC in the G does not automatically lockup so quickly in 3rd gear. There was also an article that was comparing the 335 to the G37. It said that the 335 kept the TC locked most of the time and indicated that the G37 did not depending on the load. Not all torque converters lock up the same. In fact the G37 includes a "new calibration and modified torque converter characteristics" even vs the Sedan. I cant say for sure exactly how the TC in the G works but that is the only explanation for the 5AT to produce the numbers that is has (in 3rd gear). The mere fact that is rev matching downshifting into 3rd gear from higher speeds is indication that it is not always locked up in higher gears. This has been the case in both the Sedan and now the coupe. If the 6MT were truly that much faster, we would see it by now from results in at least the Sedan- its been out for a while.
The conditions of both tests that I posted are were good conditions and about the same (humidity temperature etc) so there is no reason for me to think that we will see sugnificantly better better times from the 6MT. All of the major magazines have all produced their stats.
You keep saying that the 6MT leaves the 5AT in 3rd gear. However you have already confirmed that the 6MT is in 4th gear at the quarter mile mark which is basicaly reaching that mark at the same time as the 5AT. By your logic of there being a significant difference of 60 - 95 because of 3rd gear the 6MT should be much quicker to the quarter mile mark even if the trap speeds are the same. You can't say that it is not apples to apples when there have been multiple tests producing the same or extremely similar results. Granted there may be some slight differences based on conditions- and they are indicated in the results- but even with the differences in conditions they very similar results with no "significant" difference.
In response to your implication that I am misinforming to "feel better" about my decision, and that you are calling me out PHALEESE!!!! (and I thought our discussion was pretty civil up until that point) let me just respond by saying that it was you who presented baseless information with your "annihilation" comment and that the 6MT was "much faster" and with your highly sophisticated butt dyno ("feels faster"). And your latest response sums things up with "I don't care if the numbers don't show it YET". When they do then come find me. I will admit I was wrong.
In closing I say see you at the track.
It is my understanding that the TC in the G does not automatically lockup so quickly in 3rd gear. There was also an article that was comparing the 335 to the G37. It said that the 335 kept the TC locked most of the time and indicated that the G37 did not depending on the load. Not all torque converters lock up the same. In fact the G37 includes a "new calibration and modified torque converter characteristics" even vs the Sedan. I cant say for sure exactly how the TC in the G works but that is the only explanation for the 5AT to produce the numbers that is has (in 3rd gear). The mere fact that is rev matching downshifting into 3rd gear from higher speeds is indication that it is not always locked up in higher gears. This has been the case in both the Sedan and now the coupe. If the 6MT were truly that much faster, we would see it by now from results in at least the Sedan- its been out for a while.
The conditions of both tests that I posted are were good conditions and about the same (humidity temperature etc) so there is no reason for me to think that we will see sugnificantly better better times from the 6MT. All of the major magazines have all produced their stats.
You keep saying that the 6MT leaves the 5AT in 3rd gear. However you have already confirmed that the 6MT is in 4th gear at the quarter mile mark which is basicaly reaching that mark at the same time as the 5AT. By your logic of there being a significant difference of 60 - 95 because of 3rd gear the 6MT should be much quicker to the quarter mile mark even if the trap speeds are the same. You can't say that it is not apples to apples when there have been multiple tests producing the same or extremely similar results. Granted there may be some slight differences based on conditions- and they are indicated in the results- but even with the differences in conditions they very similar results with no "significant" difference.
In response to your implication that I am misinforming to "feel better" about my decision, and that you are calling me out PHALEESE!!!!
(and I thought our discussion was pretty civil up until that point) let me just respond by saying that it was you who presented baseless information with your "annihilation" comment and that the 6MT was "much faster" and with your highly sophisticated butt dyno ("feels faster"). And your latest response sums things up with "I don't care if the numbers don't show it YET". When they do then come find me. I will admit I was wrong.In closing I say see you at the track.
Last edited by mal_TX; 09-13-2007 at 11:20 PM.
09-13-2007 | 11:14 PM
#176
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
I'm not claiming this is conclusive because it is only two minutes of research on How Stuff Works, but:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/torque-converter4.htm
"In addition to the very important job of allowing your car come to a complete stop without stalling the engine, the torque converter actually gives your car more torque when you accelerate out of a stop. Modern torque converters can multiply the torque of the engine by two to three times. This effect only happens when the engine is turning much faster than the transmission."
When would the engine turn much faster than the transmission, and when would it not?
And, in response to recent criticism about some supposed bickering... to the original poster -- anytime you want me to shut up you just let me know. I don't have any personal stake in this discussion so the minute it stops being of any benefit you tell me and I will go elsewhere
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/torque-converter4.htm
"In addition to the very important job of allowing your car come to a complete stop without stalling the engine, the torque converter actually gives your car more torque when you accelerate out of a stop. Modern torque converters can multiply the torque of the engine by two to three times. This effect only happens when the engine is turning much faster than the transmission."
When would the engine turn much faster than the transmission, and when would it not?
And, in response to recent criticism about some supposed bickering... to the original poster -- anytime you want me to shut up you just let me know. I don't have any personal stake in this discussion so the minute it stops being of any benefit you tell me and I will go elsewhere
Last edited by mal_TX; 09-13-2007 at 11:18 PM.
09-13-2007 | 11:26 PM
#178
=)
The calling out was not directed at you but in general that fellow seemed to think it was a problem for us to discuss and debate. I have a good deal of respect for you, Kahboom.
Now.. as to TC multiplication. I think you are wrong about your claim that there is torque multiplication happening in the TC at speeds above "launch" speeds.
So, I'll go read up on TC torque multiplication and get back to you. If I prove to you that it is not happening, and it's the "only" explanation for the numbers... then what? Will you at least accept the possibility that the 6mt numbers are low/slow so far and maybe that's why the 5AT looks so quick by comparison?
The calling out was not directed at you but in general that fellow seemed to think it was a problem for us to discuss and debate. I have a good deal of respect for you, Kahboom.
Now.. as to TC multiplication. I think you are wrong about your claim that there is torque multiplication happening in the TC at speeds above "launch" speeds.
So, I'll go read up on TC torque multiplication and get back to you. If I prove to you that it is not happening, and it's the "only" explanation for the numbers... then what? Will you at least accept the possibility that the 6mt numbers are low/slow so far and maybe that's why the 5AT looks so quick by comparison?
hey there are always the possibilities that ther could be faster times awaiting to be reported.... I will respond to your other comments later... I just wanted to quickly apologize for lashing back when I wrongfully thought you were disrespecting me