ZF 9-Speed Transmission Is One Gear Away From Drop Handlebars

[RPS]

I found the title an interesting reference in light of cyclists’ obsession with more and more gears. Is there ever too many gears? A niner for a car seems a little much; but then bikes have as many as 33.

http://jalopnik.com/5731567/zf-9+speed-transmission-is-one-gear-away-from-drop-handlebars

And on the subject of news linked back to the 2011 North American International Auto Show, has anyone seen any new and promising bike haulers or nice vehicles for active people?

The Ford C-Max looks very functional for its size although I’m not sure about headroom for bikes when seats are folded down. One future concept that looks interesting for active adults is the KIA KV7 which seems to bridge the difference between a small van and the beloved Element. Apparently KIA doesn’t want to use the words minivan or station wagon to describe this new “box” on wheels.

[dd74]

IMO, gears will be the future of cars, either when driving economically or with performance in mind. Take a 150 hp car and fit it with a close-ratio six, seven or eight speed, and it will outperform other cars with much more horsepower, but fewer gears.

The whole idea is more, closer gears, which lose smaller increments of power between shifts.

This is why the DSG transmission in the VW GTi is thought to be superior to the manual six speed. It is more fuel efficient, loses less power between gears, and shifts faster than what is humanly possible.

I actually predict that within five to ten years, manual transmissions will become increasingly things of the past in the car market. Or, at the very most, they will be order-only options.

[snah]

Isn't Lexus already putting a 7sp auto in the LS?

[rice rocket]

CVTs or planetary gears will win out. Slushboxes are getting too complex.

[dd74]

Isn't Lexus already putting a 7sp auto in the LS?
Yes, and I've seen it in action in that little hot rod four-door Lexus has (I forget the model name). The gearbox is derived from the race track; each downshift blips the throttle to raise the RPMs so that the engine is on boil when the gear change is completed. It takes people many, many laps to learn how to do that with traditional gearboxes.

[Ralph]

Chrysler (Fiat) has announced they will offer an 8 speed auto later in 2011 for N American cars in their 300.

[RPS]

Isn't Lexus already putting a 7sp auto in the LS?
8's

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q4/zf_s_8-speed_automatic_transmission-tech_dept

[RPS]

IMO, gears will be the future of cars, either when driving economically or with performance in mind. Take a 150 hp car and fit it with a close-ratio six, seven or eight speed, and it will outperform other cars with much more horsepower, but fewer gears.

The whole idea is more, closer gears, which lose smaller increments of power between shifts.

Technically justified versus marketing driven? I don’t know. I have one each 4 and 5 speed automatic and the five is indeed better, but if I added 4 more gears (essentially one between each existing gear) it would seem an overkill. It’d be constantly shifting and/or hunting for the perfect gear, and I fear that would annoy me.

Like most things, including the bikes we ride, there is a “blurry” point of diminishing returns not justifying the needed effort. No doubt a 4-speed auto with overdrive is far better than a 3-speed without, but at what point does it become too many gears for other practical reasons? Is 9 really going to be faster and more fuel efficient than 8? And at what cost? There is likely added weight, size, maybe friction, etc…. Isn’t this one of the reasons many refuse to ride triples? Weight and other compromises don’t justify the added improvement. Does a triple with more gears necessarily make a rider faster? Not always. Likewise why would a car be faster if we add more gears than it needs.

I can honestly see justifying more and more gears for vehicles with lower power-to-weight (i.e. – think in terms of semis or old fat and slow riders in mountains) but that hasn’t been the trend for decades. Cars seem to have been getting more powerful, not less.

[bfd]

I actually predict that within five to ten years, manual transmissions will become increasingly things of the past in the car market. Or, at the very most, they will be order-only options.

That's too easy! Currently, manual trannys can be found in mainly small "economy" cars that depend on older technology to keep the cost down. Same with the mid-price "performance" cars like the Subaru WRX/Mitsu Evos.

In the luxury car market, only handful of cars still offer stick shifts - BMW, Porsche and the Corvette are the obvious choices. Can't think of too many others.

I personally prefer a manual as it makes driving more fun. Of course, I commute by bicycle and my BMW is over 21 years old (90 535i, 5spd 126K miles). Good Luck!

[RPS]

I found these pictures of the Ford C-Max interior showing the second and third row seats folded down as needed to haul bikes. It’s hard for me to judge from pictures how high that load platform is relative to floor and/or ceiling. The overall vehicle is not all that tall to start with, and the platform sits on top of the seats, so clearance for bikes “may” be limited for what appears to be a tiny minivan/tall wagon.

[dd74]

All the cars you list that offer manuals, except for the lower-end cars, maintain their automatic cars provide a much better, performance-oriented drive. Sure, there will always be those who like to row their own, and I agree, there is something to be said for driving a traditional manual. But as far as overall utility as a daily driver in a city like L.A., I think being stuck on the freeway with a manual would get tiring day-after-day-after day. And now that technology in automatics, not to mention popularity, has gone far past manuals, it's pretty clear where the manufacturers are going.

As a point, I don't think Ferrari even offers a manual transmission anymore, unless you buy one of their track-oriented limited edition cars.

Look up Hans Stuck at Nürburgring on You Tube, and see how accurately he uses a sequential-shift M3 at speed around the track. I just don't believe he would be as fast with a traditional manual gearbox.

[Ralph]

With regard to auto trans....more gears does not necessarily mean more weight and complexity. With electronics, as opposed to hydralic pressure of the past, you can mix and match more with the existing cogs. 6,7,8, or 9 speed auto trans don't necessarily have more "cogs" in them than 5 speed autos. (Well....I imagine they have a few more parts) They can even incorportate the reverse gear in the forward mix.

It's kinda like how those of us into bicycle gearing know how to get the same gearing many different ways.