From: mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (REAL LIFE?!?!  HA!!)
Subject: Re: FLAME! Only a Manual!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 05:48:43 GMT

Vision@cup.portal.com (Vision - Tester) writes:

>>A question for those who drive automatics: Have you *ever* seen a racing
>>car (F1, Indy, Stock, Rally, etc.) that has an auto transmission?

>Here is a better question:  Do you know WHY they use manuals instead of
>automatics?  Manuals have their advantages when you are racing in circles
>around a track (the car wont shift all of a sudden on you), but more 
>importantly, automatic transmission weigh more.  Hell, those guys running
>racing cars would love to get an automatic transmission they can select
>gears with and have it shift in a split second (even faster than their
>cluthless shifts), but an automatic like that would weigh too much.  It'll
>drag the car down.  So they stay with their manuals.  In their case, an
>automatic will have little advantage, but if it wasnt for the weight factor,
>I bet there would be many automatics out there.

While I am not disputing the weight problems, don't you also have to factor in
the power loss from the torque converter?  Or is there a way to make an auto-
matic without a torque converter?  Would this transmission have a clutch to be
used only for stops and starts?

>but if you have a
>monster muscle car, you dont want a stick shift.  
>Get behind the wheel of a car with REAL power and you will know what I mean.
>Nothing compares to the feel of a HARD automatic shift.  The only way a

With the possible exception of a smooth, perfectly timed double-clutch down-
shift.  This feels sublime when done well on ANY car, even a big manly muscle
car.  The only advantage an automatic gives you, IMHO, is the pride of knowing
that your car doesn't need a stick to kick ass.  But I have this nasty feeling
that the most worked-over, improved, revalved automatic is still going to 
yield less impressive acceleration than a stick shift on the same engine.  You
can't escape the fact that the torque converter eats energy, no matter what
type of engine it's hooked up to.  The only cars that actually BENEFIT from
automatics are turbos, as the auto allows you to keep up boost on launch and
during shifts.

>stick shift will get a similar feel is if you shift without the clutch, and
>even then it doesnt compare.  Try a hard shift with a clutch and you'll just
>hurt your clutch.  Hell, take your 4 cyl (or whatever you have), do a hard
>shift into 2nd and get that tire to squeak.  Now magnify that by 100 and
>you'll understand what it is like to have REAL muscle and an automatic
>together. 

A clutchless shift on a street transmission will be either quite slow or in-
credibly damaging to the transmission, especially the synchros.  The only 
place where a clutchless shift is beneficial speed-wise is on a crash box
with a VERY light flywheel.
Now, a suggestion:
Find a mid-1970's Euro-spec BMW 3.0CSi.  Tip gently into the throttle and slow-
ly release the clutch.  Accelerate moderately to 3000 RPM in first gear.  Stand
on it.  That smoke in your rear-view mirror ain't oil.  Let the tires catch,
accelerate to redline, shift into second.  Stand on it.  Is that smoke again?
I think so.

The only enthusiast cars, IMHO, that should be automatic are turbos.  Now try
this one:
Find a Buick Grand National, or better still a GNX.  Stand on the brake.  Run
the RPM's up to the point where boost just begins to show.  Release the brake
and stand on the throttle.  Not too much smoke.  Keep your foot on the
throttle.  Experience the HARD automatic shift and the jet-like acceleration.
Notice the absence of noise and commotion.  THAT is muscle.

As far as I'm concerned, the power and torque of a HUGE American V-8 make it
the best naturally aspirated engine for an automatic, but a huge American V-8
(or a high-compression cammed German straight-6) will always be at its best
when connected to a manual.

>Oh yeah -- I'm not talking about the automatic transmissions in the cars of
>today.  The auto manufacturers are striving for comfort and smooth shifts,
>which is why today's stick shifts are generally faster than the automatics
>(the automatics just shift too damn slow).  But getting an automatic to shift
>HARD is simply a matter of changing the valve body inside the transmission.
>Without any modifications, I doubt any automatic transmission of today will
>slip the tire (except maybe on launches or when you are in the rain :-) )
> 
-- 
Michael T. Chaffee        |******BOYCOTT COLORADO******|  ______    
mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu | Professional Slapthologist |  \    /     HATE
Member, Universal Life Church, Sect of Loons           |   \  /  can never be
Annoyance Theatre Platinum Member |     Evil Genius    |    \/  a FAMILY VALUE