Acura TSX Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
1,003 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Came across this on TOVTEC, seems to be a rumour with some relevance to TSX?

2005 RSX info from "Speed" Magazine

Date: April 30, 2004 11:05
Submitted by: Jeff
Source: RC
Credibility Rating: 6

This information is a little dated by now, but if you're like us and you missed it when it was fresh, it's of potential interest. Speed is a special "one-shot" magazine that was recently published by Road & Track (it apparently hit newsstands in March). One of our readers spotted an interesting blurb about the upcoming refresh for the 2005 RSX.

The blurb basically states that the RSX front and rear clips have been redesigned so the car will conform more closely to the "family look". The retouched photo (sourced from a PR photo of a 2001 Integra Type R) shows a front end that resembles the Accord Coupe or S2000. The taillights are said to have been restyled to be long and rectangular, hanging over a thick bumper, so it looks more like past Integras. 18" wheels are said to be a possibility as well. From a drivetrain standpoint, the engine is said to remain largely the same, but there is reportedly a new 6-speed clutchless manual transmission for the car. Also interesting to note is that this new transmission is said to have been developed for a "future Acura TSX". In the photo below you can see a comparison of their image (inset) to the original PR photo:
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
5,757 Posts
I'd wait and see what comes out. If this is true then I would be all over it. Right now, I'll just stick to my 6 speed manual with clutch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
954 Posts
How is a 6-speed clutchless manual different than the sportshift?
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
1,003 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
Larch is almost correct, the primarily difference has to do with the clutch.

The big difference between automatic and manual transmissions is how they transfer power from the engine. Obviously, a manual transmission has a clutch, while an automatic has a torque converter to provide fluid coupling.

Torque converters are oil-filled and use hydraulics to transfer the power. An impeller, located in the crankshaft sends oil into a turbine, which is connected to an input shaft going to the transmission. This oil transfers motion from the crankshaft to the input shaft without a mechanical connection. Without needing to "break" a mechanical connection, you can stop with an automatic transmission and not need to manually disengage the clutch.

The oil works it way through the turbine and is redirected through another set of fins called a stator. The stator keeps “used” oil from dragging against the torque converter and increases the torque converters’ efficiency.

While efficient, there is "parasatic" loss of power through the torque converter. Also, a torque converter creates a lot of heat. To eliminate the heat and increase its efficiency, most manufacturers are adding a clutch to the torque converter. The clutch applies once the car is cruising down the road to create a direct mechanical connection between the engine and tranny. This eliminates slipping and reduces operating temperature.

Some early cars used a "semi-automatic" transmission, that still needed manual shifting but didn't have a clutch pedal. Those were based on manual trannys but used vacuum and electric controls to work the clutch. Other versions were more similar to automatics, but without the governor to automatically force a shift.

My suspicion is this newest version may be based on the old semi-automatic style tranny but uses newer, state of the art electronics to enable better control and reliability.
 

·
Orangeblood
Joined
·
136 Posts
Hip is, as usual correct. One interesting facet of AT's is that the torque converter inherently slips. That means that first gear in a typical AT is much much higher than in an MT. Until the advent of the lockup torque converter in the late 70's, in which the torque converter locked up in a high gear, ATs were 2 or 3 speed and let the torque converter do all the low-gear work with slippage.

These lockup torque converters enable the 4 and 5 speed AT's with the other gear or two being high, overdrive-type gears that are engaged and shortly thereafter locked up.

Most racing cars use a sequential manual transmission, which eliminates the H or HH pattern of the conventional shifter: you have one lever that you move up for the next highest gear and down for the next lowest. To downshift two, you go down twice. Most of these I believe use a clutch like conventional manual transmissions. However, the gearset design and the inherency of the1-2-3-4-5-4-3-2-1 shift pattern (you cant go from 1 to 4 without going through 2 and 3), combined with the drivers' skill at rev matching, means that these drivers rarely use the clutch and rarely lift throttle to shift, and do no harm to the tranny in the meantime.

With a sequential gearbox, I THINK, revs are matched automatically and shifts delayed slighly to let this happen, and no clutch is used at all or very small ones between the gears and the output shafts are employed to allow a bit of slip (not really analogous to a conventional clutch).
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
1,003 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Thanks Mark for the acknowledgement, your knowledge is pretty impressive! :bowdown1:
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
10,086 Posts
Actually.....although I don't know even 1% of what Hip and Mark know about transmissions, I think you both missed the point of the question!!!!!!

He asked about a "clutchless" MT, which is (I understand) a new kind of MT that is supposedly coming out in some cars -- maybe already did but I don't think so.

If I'm wrong, which of course is eminently possible, sorry in advance!
(Maybe I'm the one missing the point.....)
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
1,003 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
larchmont said:
Actually.....although I don't know even 1% of what Hip and Mark know about transmissions, I think you both missed the point of the question!!!!!!

He asked about a "clutchless" MT, which is (I understand) a new kind of MT that is supposedly coming out in some cars -- maybe already did but I don't think so.

If I'm wrong, which of course is eminently possible, sorry in advance!
(Maybe I'm the one missing the point.....)

Possibly you missed the answer within all the tech stuff?

The question was "how is a 6-speed clutchless manual different than the sportshift?

To which my response was some early cars used a "semi-automatic" transmission, that still needed manual shifting but didn't have a clutch pedal. Those were based on manual trannys but used vacuum and electric controls to work the clutch.

My suspicion is this newest version may be based on the old semi-automatic style tranny but uses newer, state of the art electronics to enable better control and reliability.

So to clarify, I believe a 6-speed clutchless manual will be more analogous to a manual transsmission (no torque converter) than to the current sportshift which is based on an automatic (with torque converter).

It's a matter of design and operating efficiency.

Does that help?
 

·
Orangeblood
Joined
·
136 Posts
Yep. The oddball thing about the clutchless manual is that you will have to shift (when doing it manually) 1-2-3-4-5-6 and back down. In most circumstances, not that odd, but in certain circumstances, I think non-race drivers will be somewhat befuddled by not being able to drop from 6th to 4th to really rip arse (they will but will have to do it with two bumps to the paddle or stick).

These sequential transmission do operate in a fully automatic mode, as well.

Some interesting descriptions, and a pretty good technical resource can be found here http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_school/tech_index.htm. Pretty complete and accurate and reasonbly easy to understand (from a technical standpoint and considering the author apparently speaks/writes English as a second language).
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
10,086 Posts
hip said:
Possibly you missed the answer within all the tech stuff?.....
So to clarify, I believe a 6-speed clutchless manual will be more analogous to a manual transsmission (no torque converter) than to the current sportshift which is based on an automatic (with torque converter)......
Yes, I'm sure I missed a lot in there!

And, no big deal, he can probably tease out the answer he wanted from what you said. But me, I don't know enough to separate it out. In fact, I probably shouldn't be reading this thread at all. (There, I said it so you don't have to.) :D

But if this were a class, and I were giving the grades :D you'd only get like an A- because you confused the issue with stuff that he didn't ask about. :D

Us anal people, you see.....when someone asks what's the difference between "this" and "that," we just get confused if you bring in other stuff. If someone asks, what's the difference between a Mini and a TSX, I'm not going to start talking about an RSX and saying that the RSX is the Acura that's really closer to the Mini, even though that's true. I'd just talk about the difference between a Mini and a TSX, because that's what he asked.

Larchmont, who is both stupider and not as stupid as he seems. :D
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
1,003 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Larch,

As for being "both stupider and not as stupid as he seems," I believe we will be the judge of that? :slap:

I think you're being too hard on... yourself (sorry, couldn't resist)

Even though I kid you alot, you do bring a lot of interesting viewpoints and insight to this forum. You should never stop reading threads because you don't understand, ask questions... that's how we learn!

All kidding aside, you raise some valid points, communication is really difficult in this medium. Not only are you speaking to a wide variety of individuals, personalities, various levels of intellect and backgrounds but you don't have the ability to see physical traits like facial expressions, body language, etc. It's tough to know who knows what or how they are reacting to what you say?

And if I get too technical, then by all means, let me know. I guess after having worked in a very technical world for so long, I sometimes regress back into "engineer-speak?"

As for "confusing the issue with stuff that he didn't ask about," in this case it's difficult to answer the question without explaining basic differences.

Based on what I interpreted from sjlee's question, I ASSumed (probably incorrectly), that he wasn't too up on the fundamental differences? So I tried to answer in a way that was both educational and informative.

Since I only scored an A-, I need to do a better job? :reading:
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
10,086 Posts
hip said:
Larch,

As for being "both stupider and not as stupid as he seems," I believe we will be the judge of that? :slap:.....
Well, I think I can safely say I was at least half right. :D

About what SJLee was asking: Since I remember a lot of his other posts, I was assuming the opposite -- that he IS up on the fundamentals, and therefore that he was asking just what he said, very specifically. But we won't know until he gets done celebrating his birthday. :D



Benjamin Disraeli, who was Prime Minister of England a long time ago but still was the kind of guy who would have gotten banned from internet forums, got mad one time and said that half of the members of Parliament were asses. (Actually he got mad a lot of times, but I think he said this thing just once.) :D
And this made the Parliament mad, and they demanded that he take it back.
So he said I'm sorry, I take it back -- half of the members of Parliament are not asses.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
954 Posts
Okay, as Larch said, I'm back from celebrating. :)

Anyway, thanks for the technical answers Mark and Hip, but as Larch said, I think both of you went a little too far in your explanation. I just wanted to know what the difference would be in layman terms... didn't need the engineering lesson. :)

In any case, it sounds like this is the answer...

"So to clarify, I believe a 6-speed clutchless manual will be more analogous to a manual transsmission (no torque converter) than to the current sportshift which is based on an automatic (with torque converter)."

So, if I understand correctly, with a clutchless manual transmission, you will still have to shift like you would normally do on a manual, just no clutch to operate.

FWIW, I think automatics with the manual shift feature (i.e. sportshift) is really just a gimmick. I've never seen any better acceleration numbers with someone using sportshift versus someone just flooring the gas pedal... however, a car with a manual tranny usually will accelerate faster than an identical car fitted with an automatic tranny.

I've driven a BMW 318ti, a Dodge Stratus ES and a TL Type-S... all using their version of "sportshift". Never felt any different than just driving in "D"... just more work to do. Actually, sportshift feels the same as if I would shift an automatic manually (i.e. put it into first gear, then push the gear shifter into second, then into third, then into Drive).

I'd be curious to see what driving a clutchless manual would be like. Since I'm not an F1 driver nor do I have access to a Ferrari, I guess I'll have to wait until Acura comes out with it. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
sjlee said:
Okay, as Larch said, I'm back from celebrating. :)
FWIW, I think automatics with the manual shift feature (i.e. sportshift) is really just a gimmick. I've never seen any better acceleration numbers with someone using sportshift versus someone just flooring the gas pedal... however, a car with a manual tranny usually will accelerate faster than an identical car fitted with an automatic tranny.
True, in full-throttle acceleration, an optimally programmed AT will wait until redline to shift, therefore, producing the exact same results as a driver controlling the SS, also shifting at redline.

However, at anything less than full throttle, the AT short shifts and tends to select the highest available gear. This may not be approrpriate for upcoming conditions i.e. approaching a turn, when the driver may want to preselect the gear to accelerate out. The AT car will make the turn in too high a gear, requiring the driver to mash the throttle to prompt a downshift. The SS is about the driver selecting the proper gear in dynamic situations and not off-the-line acceleration.

MT will always be much efficient at transmitting power than AT because there is no torque converter, which actually has slip in the drivetrain. MT are usually lighter as well.
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
10,086 Posts
Actually I think I have to raise Hip's grade to A :D because it looks like the main answer for SJ was some of the stuff that had seemed to be off the subject.
I guess you can't always just take the question literally!
 

·
Donating TSXCLUB Member
Joined
·
11 Posts
BMW has this available in the new 5 and 6 series, Ferrari has been using it for a while, though ferarri uses pattle shifters, the "clutchless" Manual Tranny, is pritty much a 6 speed stick, the complete H Format and everything, that you have to shift to move, but no clutch petal for the driver to use, kinda takes some of the fun outta driving a stick, but there faster and unfortinutly stick's are goin outta style, perfect thing would be the "sportshift" w/ a clutch, so the driver could clutch when they want, and just slap it into AT mode, no clutch required when they dont, prob not possible, but would be great
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
954 Posts
MemRheins said:
but there faster and unfortinutly stick's are goin outta style
Going out of style? You're kidding right? More and more car models are getting a MT available.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top