///BHRpowered Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 and once again xedos you think you know how it works and you don't there is only 1 perfect shift point and it changes based on speed, rpm's and load. the automatic will get it everytime, there is no reason for the hold other then to feel cold. I personally can't stand the tiptronic and hold functions, any smart company would take it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt64341 Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 and once again xedos you think you know how it works and you don't there is only 1 perfect shift point and it changes based on speed, rpm's and load. the automatic will get it everytime, there is no reason for the hold other then to feel cold. I personally can't stand the tiptronic and hold functions, any smart company would take it out. Automatic shifting is a compromise, it tries to guess the best gear for the situation. It is perfectly fine for standard driving, but special cases require more interaction from the driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latinopikachu Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
///BHRpowered Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 no saint, your wrong and it boils down to 2 simple things. technology and driver. the driver, even those that think there amazing will not match technology, and technology knows far more about the car then you do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ing-schu@online.no Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Technology knows nothing. It does as it was told to do during software design. Which will always have to be a compromize. Without the Hold feature the Xedos would have been unsuited for our roads. But you probably wouldn't know about real inclines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
///BHRpowered Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 wow...I stand corrected, thats the dumbest thing you've ever said. It knows the car better then you know it, it knows what everything is doing and will shift at the right point. There was once a time where this was not true, but for a decent 2 decades it has not been the case Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ing-schu@online.no Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 You are the case in this matter. Nutcase to be more precise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveSter Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 BHR who designed the programming for the TCM in this car, humans. IMO they did a kind of shitty job. Shift points are calculated by load rpm and speed, there is no perfect shift point. It shifts differently in different conditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginph Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 BHR who designed the programming for the TCM in this car, humans. IMO they did a kind of shitty job. Shift points are calculated by load rpm and speed, there is no perfect shift point. It shifts differently in different conditions. Exactly. If it doesnt have the information of what is gonna happen in 5 secs how can it adjust the shift point. If I am in a highway enterance and need to speed up after the curve I want to keep at lower gear. There is no way a car computer can tell this. Automatic formula, I cant imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
///BHRpowered Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 so by your own logic I'M RIGHT, and YOUR WRONG load, speed, rpm etc, which the car knows better then you and will shift differently each time to max fuel economy, performance, and tranny life. Keep in mind since the mid 90's almost ALL auto's have gotton better mpg then sti...(true sticks) The bottom line is this, the hold was a bad idea, but the tranny and the 2.5 in general were horrible idea's for the millenia, they all go bad and aren't designed for it. The S tranny on the other hand designed for the millenia and the S never have problems Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginph Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 The S tranny on the other hand designed for the millenia and the S never have problems never say never. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ing-schu@online.no Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Clearly a nutcase. The only kind of people who would claim that a 15 % powerloss* conventional auto tranny provides better milage than a 7 % powerloss* manual tranny. *Average numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuto Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 BHR: u will neve cease to awe me. Ur really a stubborn bitch! Auto trannys give way worse mpg versus manual. No wonder all new trannies tend to be DSG like...COZ HUMANS CAN SHIFT! FUCK...you just can't avoid being owned every time you open ur mouth (reminds me of a whore i use to know)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginph Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Maybe he means the new high technology CVT which is superior to milly's auto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt64341 Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 If technology knows better than people do, then why does cruise control not keep the car at an exact speed? It doesn't know that the car is coming to an incline or decline until it is already on it. Humans can see the road ahead. Cruise control works, but when you control the throttle yourself it works better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ing-schu@online.no Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 Exactly, you took this example out of my mouth. This is why driving with cruise control ruins milage big time, granted you aim for eco driving. And Saint, BHR means a tranny like we have. He and I have discussed this earlier. Stubbor'n? Maybe a little Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginph Posted May 20, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 Exactly, you took this example out of my mouth. This is why driving with cruise control ruins milage big time, granted you aim for eco driving. And Saint, BHR means a tranny like we have. He and I have discussed this earlier. Stubbor'n? Maybe a little I am still waiting his response to the subtle CVT transmission being better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troutman Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
///BHRpowered Posted May 20, 2009 Report Share Posted May 20, 2009 no no no, the CVT is utter garbage which I showed yo beyond a shadow of a doubt and everyone agrees on, thats why its only used in low power shit cars. Something you should note, a study came out a few days ago on "why people buy hybrids" the number 4 reason.....number 4(out of 5 choices) was gas savings, the number one reason was, and I quote "It says something about me" ego centered bastards who don't care a dime except about hwat other people think. CVT's are garbage and will be no more then a fade, at best there an annoyance, and when they break it really is cheaper to get a new car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveSter Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 BHR once again you are wrong, CVT transmissions have very little moving or parts with barely any internal friction to wear anything down. This makes the cheaper. Second they are being used right now with a 250hp v6 with no problems, audi has even used them. Next they improve fuel efficiency becuase they car isnt accelerating and decelerating. It also has infinite gear ratios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ing-schu@online.no Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Yup, Audi used a steel belt CVT with their 2,8 V6 engine. Not overwhelmingly well regarded though; the theoretical low internal losses were not evident in real life. It is probably better suited for small cars where it can make a half decent performance. Personally I don't like the way they crank the rpms way up when you drive hard. It may well be effective but sounds weird and annoying, especially with the typically unsmooth fourpot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troutman Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 The Lancer CVT has a 'manual mode' where it simulates a conventional transmission with pre-programmed ratios. Still not ideal for enthusiasts, but seems to excel at the job it is designed to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.