Light-Duty Vehicle Technology 

Cost Analysis, Advanced 8-Speed 

Transmissions

Revised Final Report
NOTICE

This technical report does not necessarily represent final EPA decisions or 

positions. It is intended to present technical analysis of issues using data 

that are currently available. The purpose in the release of such reports is to 

facilitate the exchange of technical information and to inform the public of 

technical developments.

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Prepared for EPA by

FEV, Inc.

EPA Contract No. EP-C-07-069

Work Assignment No. 3-3

Light-Duty Vehicle Technology 

Cost Analysis, Advanced 8-Speed 

Transmissions 

Revised Final Report

EPA-420-R-13-007

April 2013
 

i 

 

Report FEV 07-069-303 

Light-Duty Vehicle Technology Cost Analysis, 

Advanced 8-Speed Transmissions

Contract No. EP-C-07-069 

Work Assignment 3-3 

Prepared for: 

Brian Nelson

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 

2000 Traverwood Dr. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105 

Submitted by: 

Greg Kolwich 

FEV, Inc. 

4554 Glenmeade Lane 

Auburn Hills, MI 48326 

April 12, 2013 
Analysis Report FEV 07-069-303

April 22, 2013

Summary Page ii

ii

Updates to “Light-Dutry Vehicle Technology Cost Analysis, Advanced 8-Speed 

Transmissions” 

The overall goal of this study was to provide accurate technology assessments through highly 

detailed and transparent cost analysis methodologies that compare and contrast differences and 

similarities between these transmission systems. Based on that goal, FEV is hereby issuing an 

update to the previously released report dated 10/3/11. Minor revisions have been made to some 

of the electronic hardware and controls to more accurately account for all components as well as 

including required communication and feedback loops between these components with both 

high-side and low-side electronic drivers. These updates are described below and are comprised 

of refinements in cost analysis results obtained as well as detailing the electronic control system 

differentials between the compared transmissions. This is done in an added table detailing the 

various solenoids, valves, sensors, wiring and various drivers that differentiate each unit. 

x Revision to List of Tables on page iii due to inclusion of new Table 2-1 in report body. 

Electronic Hardware Comparison 

x This is done with the addition of a detailed paragraph and Table (2-1) on page 2-13 that 

detail a direct side-by-side comparison of the two transmission variations being studied. 

x This is done with the addition of a detailed paragraph and Table (2-3) on page 2-20 that 

detail a direct side-by-side comparison of the two transmission variations being studied. 

Updates to Previous Text Descriptions and Tables in the Report Body 

x Update Table ES-1 on page 1-1 due to the new cost differentials related to the insertion of 

electronic controls costs in the various transmission systems. 

x Revision to text at the top of page 2-12 identifying the cost differential to the net 

incremental direct manufacturing cost. 

x Revision to text at the top of page 2-13 describing the cost differential to the net 

incremental direct manufacturing cost. 

x Update Table 2-2 on page 2-14 due to the insertion of electronic controls costs. 

x Revision to text at the top of page 2-19 describing the cost differential to the net 

incremental direct manufacturing cost. 

x Update Table 2-4 on page 2-21 due to the insertion of electronic controls costs. 

FEV Inc Page 1 of 1 20Mar13 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

i 

CONTENTS 

Section Page 

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 1-1

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-2

1.1 Objectives............................................................................................................. 1-2

1.2 Study Methodology .............................................................................................. 1-2

1.3 Manufacturing Assumptions ................................................................................. 1-5

1.4 Subsystem Categorization ..................................................................................... 1-8

2 Case Study Results......................................................................................................... 2-9

2.1 Case Study #1005 Results ....................................................................................2-10

2.1.1 6-Speed AT Hardware Overview – Baseline Technology 

Configuration ......................................................................................................2-10

2.1.2 8-Speed AT Hardware Overview – New Technology 

Configuration ......................................................................................................2-11

2.1.3 Net Incremental Direct Manufacturing Cost Impact (AT 

Analysis) 2-12

2.2 Case Study #1202 Results ....................................................................................2-15

2.2.1 6-Speed DCT Hardware Overview – Baseline Technology 

Configuration ......................................................................................................2-15

2.2.2 8-Speed DCT Hardware Overview – Baseline Technology 

Configuration ......................................................................................................2-16

2.2.3 Net Incremental Direct Manufacturing Cost Impact (DCT 

Analysis) 2-18

3 Glossary of Terms .........................................................................................................3-21
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

ii

 LIST OF FIGURES 

Number Page 

Figure 1-1: Cost Analysis Process Flow Steps and Document Interaction ................................ 1-4

Figure 2-1: Illustration of ZF 6HP28 RWD Transmission...................................................... 2-10

Figure 2-2: Illustration of ZF 8HP70 RWD Transmission...................................................... 2-11

Figure 2-3: ZF Automatic Transmission Weight and Torque Comparison Data ..................... 2-11

Figure 2-4: Illustration of the Volkswagen DQ250 Wet Dual Clutch Transmission ............... 2-15

Figure 2-5: Cross-sectional illustration of the Volkswagen 6-Speed DCT .............................. 2-16

Figure 2-6: 8-Speed Wet DCT Concept Illustration ............................................................... 2-17
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

iii

LIST OF TABLES 

Number Page 

Table ES- 1 New Technology Configurations Incremental Unit Cost Impact ........................... 1-1 

Table 1-1: Summary of Universal Cost Analysis Assumptions Applied to All Case Studies .... 1-6

Table 1-2: Transmission System, Subsystem and Sub-Subsystem Classification ..................... 1-8

Table 2-1: System Electronic Hardware & Controls Comparison Matrix ............................... 2-13

Table 2-2: System Cost Model Analysis Template Illustrating the Incremental Subsystem Costs 

Roll Up for an 8-Speed AT compared to a 6-Speed AT ......................................................... 2-14

Table 2-3: System Electronic Hardware & Controls Comparison Matrix ............................... 2-19

Table 2-4: System Cost Model Analysis Template Illustrating the Incremental Subsystem Costs 

Roll Up for an 8-Speed DCT compared to a 6-Speed DCT .................................................... 2-20
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

1-1 

Light-Duty Vehicle Technology Cost Analysis, Advanced 8-Speed 

Transmissions

Executive Summary 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracted with FEV, Inc. to 

determine the incremental direct manufacturing costs for a set of advanced, light-duty 

vehicle technologies. The technologies selected are on the leading edge for reducing 

emissions of greenhouse gases in the future, primarily in the form of tailpipe carbon 

dioxide (CO2). 

This report, the fourth in a series of reports, addresses the direct incremental 

manufacturing cost of two (2) new powertrain configurations, relative to two (2) existing 

baseline configurations, with comparable driver performance metrics. The complete 

costing methodology used in the analysis of these configurations, as well as the pilot case 

study, is described in “Light-Duty Technology Cost Analysis Pilot Study (EPA-420-R09-020).” 

The two (2) new powertrain technology configurations analyzed are: 

x A next generation ZF 8-speed automatic transmission, compared to a ZF 6-speed, 

Lepelletier concept-based, automatic transmission 

x A 6-speed wet dual clutch transmission (DCT), compared to an 8-speed wet dual 

clutch transmission (DCT) 

The results for the two (2) case studies are shown below in Table ES-1. 

Table ES-1: New Technology Configurations Incremental Unit Cost Impact 

Case Study 

Reference 

Number 

Technology 

Definition Vehicle Class Base Technology 

New 

Technology 

Incremental 

Unit Cost 

1005 8-Speed AT 

replacing a 6-Speed 

AT 

Large Truck Passenger 

or Commercial Vehicle 

with Strong Towing 

Capabilities 

CS# B1005 

6-Speed AT 

CS# N1005 

8-Speed AT 

+ $74.81 

1202 8-Speed DCT 

Replacing a 6-Speed 

DCT 

Mid to Large Size Car, 

Passenger 4-6 

CS# B1202 

6-Speed Wet 

DCT 

CS# N1202 

8-Speed 

Wet DCT 

+ $217.65 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

1-2

1 Introduction 

1.1 Objectives 

The objective of this work assignment was to determine the incremental direct 

manufacturing costs for two (2) new advanced light-duty vehicle transmission technology 

configurations using the costing methodology, databases, and supporting worksheets 

developed in the previously concluded pilot study (Light-Duty Technology Cost Analysis 

Pilot Study [EPA-420-R-09-020]). 

1.2 Study Methodology 

The first report published, “Light-Duty Technology Cost Analysis Pilot Study (EPA-420-

R-09-020),” covers in great detail the overall costing methodology used to calculate an 

incremental cost delta between various technology configurations. In summary, the 

costing methodology is heavily based on teardowns of both new and baseline technology 

configurations having similar driver performance metrics. Only components identified as 

being different, within the selected new and baseline technology configurations, as a 

result of the new technology adaptation are evaluated for cost. Component costs are 

calculated using a ground-up costing methodology analogous to that employed in the 

automotive industry. All incremental costs for the new technology are calculated and 

presented using transparent cost models consisting of eight (8) core cost elements: 

material, labor, manufacturing overhead/burden, end item scrap, SG&A (selling general 

and administrative), profit, ED&T (engineering, design, and testing), and packaging. 

Information on how additional associated manufacturing fixed and variable cost elements 

(e.g., shipping, tooling, OEM indirect costs) are accounted for within the cost analysis are 

also discussed in the initial report (EPA-420-R-09-020). 

Listed below, with the aid of Figure 1-1, is a high level summary of the ten (10) major 

steps taken during the cost analysis process. For additional information concerning the 

terminology used within the ten (10) steps, please reference the glossary of terms found 

at the end of this report. 

Step 1: Using the Powertrain-Vehicle Class Summary Matrix (P-VCSM), a technology 

is selected for cost analysis. 

Step 2: Existing vehicle models are identified for teardown to provide the basis for 

detailed incremental cost calculations. 

Step 3: Pre-teardown Comparison Bills of Materials (CBOM) are developed, covering 

hardware that exists in the new and base technology configurations. These high level 

CBOM’s are informed by the team’s understanding of the new and base technologies and 

serve to identify the major systems and components targeted for teardown.

Step 4: Phase 1 (high level) teardown is conducted for all subsystems identified in Step 

3 and the assemblies that comprise them. Using Design Profit® software, all high level 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

1-3

processes (e.g., assembly process of the high pressure fuel pump onto the cylinder head 

assembly) are mapped during the disassembly. 

Step 5: A cross functional team (CFT) reviews all the data generated from the high level 

teardown and identifies which components and assumptions should be carried forward 

into the cost analysis. The CBOMs are updated to reflect the CFT input. 

Step 6: Phase 2 (component/assembly level) teardowns are initiated, based on the 

updated CBOM’s. Components and assemblies are disassembled, and processes and 

operations are mapped in full detail. The process mapping generates key process 

information for the quote worksheets. Several databases containing critical costing 

information provide support to the mapping process. 

Step 7: Manufacturing Assumption and Quote Summary (MAQS) worksheets are 

generated for all parts undergoing the cost analysis. The MAQS details all cost elements 

making up the final unit costs: material, labor, burden, end item scrap, SG&A, profit, 

ED&T, and packaging. 

Step 8: Parts with high or unexpected cost results are subjected to a marketplace crosscheck, such as comparison with supplier price quotes or wider consultation with 

company and industry resources (i.e., subject matter experts) beyond the CFT. 

Step 9: All costs calculated in the MAQS worksheets are automatically inputted into the 

Subsystem Cost Model Analysis Templates (CMAT). The Subsystem CMAT is used to 

display and roll up all the differential costs associated with a subsystem. All parts in a 

subsystem that are identified for costing in the CBOM are entered into the Subsystem 

CMAT. Also both the base and new technology configurations are included in the same 

CMAT to facilitate differential cost analysis. 

Step 10: The final step in the process is creating the System CMAT which rolls up all the 

subsystem differential costs to establish a final system unit cost. The System CMAT, 

similar in function to the subsystem CMAT, is the document used to display and roll-up 

all the subsystem costs associated within a system as defined by the CBOM. Within the 

scope of this cost analysis, the System CMAT provides the bottom line incremental unit 

cost between the base and new technology configurations under evaluation 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

1-4

 

Figure 1-1: Cost Analysis Process Flow Steps and Document Interaction 

. 

1. Technology 

Selection 

Powertrain Vehicle 

Class Summary Matrix 

(P-VCSM) 

2. Hardware 

Selection 

Powertrain Package 

Proforma 

3A. Generate Bill of 

Materials – Phase 1 

Comparison Bill of 

Materials (C-BOM)

Databases (Material, Labor, Manufacturing 

Overhead, Mark-up, & Packaging) 

5. Cross Functional 

Team (CFT)

Reviews 

7. Generate 

Manufacturing 

Assumption and 

Quote Summary 

(MAQS) 

Worksheets 

9. Subsystem Cost 

Roll Up 

Subsystem Cost Model 

Analysis Template

(Subsystem CMAT) 

10. System Cost 

Roll Up 

System Cost Model 

Analysis Template

(System CMAT) 

4. System/Subsystem 

Disassembly and 

Process Mapping – 

Phase 1 

(Design Profit®) 

6. Component/ 

Assembly 

Disassembly & 

Process Mapping – 

Phase 2 

(Design Profit®)

3B. Update Bill of Materials – Phase 2 

Comparison Bill of Materials (C-BOM)

8. Market Place 

Cross-check 

Process Flow 

Manual & Automated 

Document Links 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

1-5

1.3 Manufacturing Assumptions 

When conducting the cost analysis for the various technology configurations, a number 

of assumptions are made in order to establish a consistent framework for all costing. The 

assumptions can be broken into universal and specific case study assumptions. 

The universal assumptions apply to all technology configurations under analysis. Listed 

in Table 1-1 are the fundamental assumptions. 

The specific case study assumptions are those unique to a given technology 

configuration. These include volume assumptions, weekly operation assumptions (days, 

shifts, hours, etc.), packaging assumptions, and Tier 1 in-house manufacturing versus 

Tier 2/3 purchase part assumptions. Details on the case study specific assumptions can 

be found in the individual MAQS worksheets. 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

1-6

Table 1-1: Summary of Universal Cost Analysis Assumptions Applied to All Case 

Studies 

Item Description Universal Case Study Assumptions

1 Incremental Direct Manufacturing Costs 

A. Incremental Direct manufacturing cost is the incremental 

difference in cost of components and assembly, to the OEM, between 

the new technology configuration and the baseline technology 

configuration. 

B. This value does not include Indirect OEM costs associated with 

adopting the new technology configuration (e.g. tooling, corporate 

overhead, corporate R&D, etc).

2

Incremental Indirect OEM Costs are not 

handled within the scope of this cost 

analysis

A. Indirect Costs are handled through the application of "Indirect 

Cost Multipliers" (ICMs) which are not included as part of this 

analysis. The ICM covers items such as .....

a. OEM corporate overhead (sales, marketing, warranty, etc)

b. OEM engineering, design and testing costs (internal & external)

c. OEM owned tooling

B. Reference EPA report EPA-420-R-09-003, February 2009, 

"Automobile Industry Retail Price Equivalent and Indirect Cost 

Multiplier" for additional details on the develop and application of 

ICM factors.

3 Product/Technology Maturity Level

A. Mature technology assumption, as defined within this analysis, 

includes the following: 

a. Well developed product design

b. High production volume

c. Products in service for several years at high volumes

c. Significant market place competition 

B. Mature Technology assumption establishes a consistent framework 

for costing. For example, a defined range of acceptable mark-up 

rates.

a. End-item-scrap 0.3-0.7%

b. SG&A/Corporate Overhead 6-7%

c. Profit 4-8%

d. ED&T (Engineering, Design and Testing) 0-6%

C. The technology maturity assumption does not include allowances 

for product learning. Application of a learning curve to the 

calculated incremental direct manufacturing cost is handled outside 

the scope of this analysis. 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

1-7

Item Description Universal Case Study Assumptions

4

Selected Manufacturing Processes and 

Operations

A. All operations and processes are based on existing 

standard/mainstream Industrial practices.

B. No additional allowance is included in the incremental direct 

manufacturing cost for manufacturing learning. Application of a 

learning curve to the developed incremental direct manufacturing cost 

is handled outside the scope of this analysis. 

5 Annual Capacity Planning Volume 450,000 Units

6 Supplier Manufacturing Location North America (USA or Canada)

7 OEM Manufacturing Location North America (USA or Canada)

8

Manufacturing Cost Structure Timeframe 

( e.g. Material Costs, Labor Rates, 

Manufacturing Overhead Rates)

2009/2010 Production Year Rates

9 Packaging Costs

A. Calculated on all Tier One (T1) supplier level components.

B. For Tier 2/3 (T2/T3) supplier level components, packaging costs 

are included in T1 mark-up of incoming T2/T3 incoming goods.

10 Shipping and Handling 

A. T1 supplier shipping costs covered through application of the 

Indirect Cost Multiplier (ICM) discussed above.

B. T2/T3 to T1 supplier shipping costs are accounted for via T1 markup on incoming T2/T3 goods.

11 Intellectual Property (IP) Cost 

Considerations

Where applicable IP costs are included in the analysis. Based on the 

assumption that the technology has reached maturity, sufficient 

competition would exist suggesting alternative design paths to achieve 

similar function and performance metrics would be available 

minimizing any IP cost penalty. 

12 Material Cost Reductions (MCRs) on 

analyzed hardware

Only incorporated on those components where it was evident that the 

component design and/or selected manufacturing process was chosen 

due to actual low production volumes (e.g. design choice made to 

accept high piece price to minimize tooling expense). Under this 

scenario, assumptions where made, and cost analyzed assuming high 

production volumes. 

13 Operating and End-of Life Costs No new, or modified, maintenance or end-of-life costs, were identified 

in the analysis.

14 Stranded Capital or ED&T expenses

No stranded capital or non-recovered ED&T expenses were 

considered within the scope of this analysis. It was assumed the 

integration of new technology would be planned and phased in 

minimizing non-recoverable expenses.
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

1-8

1.4 Subsystem Categorization 

As with the first case study analysis, a design based classification system was used to 

group the various components and assemblies making up the technology configurations. 

In general, every vehicle system (e.g., engine system, transmission system, etc) is made 

up of several subsystems levels (e.g., the transmission system includes a case subsystem, 

geartrain subsystem, internal clutch subsystem, launch clutch subsystem, oil pump and 

filter subsystem, etc.), which, in turn, is made up of several sub-subsystem levels (e.g., 

the geartrain subsystem includes the following sub-subsystems: input shaft, output shaft, 

transfer shaft, planetary gear, etc). The sub-subsystem is the smallest classification level 

in which all components and assemblies are binned. 

Table 1-2 provides an overview of the major subsystems and sub-subsystems included for 

each system evaluated within this analysis. In Section 2, Case Study Results, costs are 

presented for both transmission evaluations using these design subsystem categorizations. 

 Table 1-2: Transmission System, Subsystem and Sub-Subsystem Classification 

Subsystem Sub-Subsystem 

Externally Mounted Component Lift Eye, Vent Cap, Bracket, Bolting 

Case(s) Transaxle Case, Transaxle Housing, Covers, Bearing Race, 

Plug, Actuator 

Gear Train 

Input Shaft, Output Shaft, Transfer Shaft, Sun Gear, 

Planetary Gear, Ring Gear, Counter Gear, Differential 

Gear, Bearing (Roller, Needle) 

Internal Clutch Sprag Clutch, Clutch & Brake Hub, Disc and Plate, Piston, 

Snap Ring, Bearing (Roller, Needle), Synchronizer 

Launch Clutch Torque Converter, Clutch Assembly, Flexplate, Flywheel 

Oil Pump and Filter Oil pump, Cover, Oil Filter, Oil Cooler, Oil Squirter, 

Pipes/Tubes 

Mechanical Control Valve Body Assembly, Mechanical Controls (e.g., Shift 

Forks), Sealing Elements, Bearing Elements, Plugs & Cups 

Electrical Control Controller, Solenoid, Sensor, Switches, Wiring Harness 

Park Mechanism Rod/Shaft/Pin, Spring, Pawl, Bracket, Bolt 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-9

2 Case Study Results 

The incremental direct manufacturing cost impact for the 6-speed to 8-speed automatic 

transmission (AT) comparison and the 6-speed to 8-speed wet dual clutch transmission 

(DCT) are shown above in Table ES-1.

Within Section 2.0, for each case study, a brief description of the performance attributes 

of both the baseline and new technology configurations are provided. In addition a high 

level overview of key hardware content is included for each technology evaluated. 

In the 6-speed DCT to 8-speed DCT analysis, no 8-speed DCT hardware was available at 

the time of the analysis. Using the 6-speed DCT as the foundation, the FEV team made 

some basic assumptions on how the 6-speed DCT could be modified to produce an 8-

speed variant. The assumptions can be found in the respective section. 

Following the system performance and hardware overviews for each case study, the 

increment direct manufacturing cost impact is summarized at a subsystem level in a 

system Cost Model Analysis Template (CMAT). 

Because each case study consists of a large quantity of component and assembly 

Manufacturing and Assumption Quote Summary (MAQS) worksheets, hard copies were 

not included as part of this report. However, electronic copies of the MAQS worksheets, 

as well as all other supporting case study documents (e.g., Subsystem CMATs, System 

CMATs), can be accessed at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/publications.htm
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-10

2.1 Case Study #1005 Results 

Case Study #1005 analyzed the direct incremental manufacturing cost for updating from 

a ZF 6-speed, Lepelletier concept, automatic transmission to a next generation 8-speed 

automatic transmission. 

2.1.1 6-Speed AT Hardware Overview – Baseline Technology Configuration 

Figure 2-1: Illustration of ZF 6HP28 RWD Transmission 

The 6-speed automatic transmission selected for the baseline analysis was the ZF 6HP28 

RWD transmission (second generation of ZF 6HP26). This transmission is/has been used 

in various applications including the BMW Series 3 Coupe and the X5 SUV in the 2007-

2012 timeframe. The ZF 6-Speed transmission incorporates a Lepelletier AT gearing 

configuration which utilizes a single planetary gear set along with a Ravigneaux gear set. 

The use of a Lepelletier configuration allowed ZF to add an additional gear without 

sacrificing size, weight and part content over the existing 5-speed AT. In fact the 6-speed 

AT weighs approximately 12% less, and has 29% fewer parts, than its predecessor. 

(Source: SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-0596). Listed below are a few design parameters 

for the 6-speed AT. 

x Total of five (5) shift elements, two (2) open shift elements per gear 

x Three (3) clutches and two (2) brakes 

x Full planetary gear set and a Ravigneaux gear set 

x The total weight of the transmission, including Automatic Transmission Fluid 

(ATF), is approximately 92.5kg. The maximum output torque rating is 650 

Nm. 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-11

2.1.2 8-Speed AT Hardware Overview – New Technology Configuration 

 

Figure 2-2: Illustration of ZF 8HP70 RWD Transmission 

The ZF 8-speed automatic transmission (AT), the successor to the ZF 6-speed AT, was 

selected for the analysis representing the new advance technology configuration. The ZF 

8-speed RWD transmission (8HP70) (Figure 2-2) was a complete redesign of the 

existing Lepelletier-based 6-speed transmission family, which originally launched in the 

2001 timeframe. The implementation of a revolutionary gearing system, consisting of 4 

planetary gear sets, controlled by an equivalent number of shift elements as compared to 

the ZF 6-speed AT, supports a net 6% overall fuel economy improvement relative to its 

predecessor. In addition to maintaining the same overall installation dimensions, the new 

8-speed transmission has a higher torque to weight ratio as shown below in Figure 2-3. 

(Source: ZF Published Document “The Freedom to Exceed Limits”, 

http://www.zf.com/media/media/en/document/corporate_2/products_3/innovation_1/8hp_1/8HP_de_2007s.pdf) 

Figure 2-3: ZF Automatic Transmission Weight and Torque Comparison Data 

 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-12

Design parameters for the 8-speed AT, for comparison to the ZF 6-speed AT, are 

presented below. 

x Five (5) shift elements, two (2) open shift elements per gear. 

x Three (3) disk clutches and two (2) brakes 

x Four (4) planetary gear sets. 

x Lost torque is reduced by 33% compared to a 6-speed. 

x Gear set efficiency exceeds 98% 

x The total weight of the transmission (as measured), including ATF, is 89kg. 

The maximum output torque rating is 700 N*m 

2.1.3 Net Incremental Direct Manufacturing Cost Impact (AT Analysis) 

As discussed in the initial report (EPA-420-R-09-020), the costing methodology employs 

an exclusion approach to costing. Following completion of the comparison bill of 

materials (CBOMs), the cross functional team began the process of analyzing the 

differences between hardware on the six (6) and eight (8) speed automatic transmissions. 

A component function and design analysis was performed, eliminating many parts and 

components from further costing analysis. A baseline cost from which an incremental 

cost for the 8-speed was established. The majority of incremental cost increase of the 8-

speed over the 6-speed was associated with the additional gearing. 

It was obvious from the transmission teardown assessment that in addition to ZF’s goal 

for improving overall performance with their new 8-speed automatic transmission 

relative to the 6-speed predecessor, ZF also focused on optimizing cost and weight. In 

regard to the 6-speed automatic transmission, many of innovative ideas implemented into 

the 8-speed automatic could have been incorporated into a new 6-speed if it were to be 

redesigned. The most obvious new technology advance (NTA) would be adopting a 

similar drum and carrier system, which would conceivably have the same benefits 

(compact packaging, streamlined and less costly to assemble) recognized by the 8-speed 

automatic. As part of this analysis, no additional work was conducted to determine what 

the financial impact would be on the 6-speed automatic by employing some of these new 

technology advances and material cost reduction concepts. The net incremental direct 

manufacturing cost shown below is solely based on the physical hardware evaluated. 

Table 2-22 shows the net incremental direct manufacturing cost between the 8- and 6-

speed automatic transmissions. In evaluating the physical hardware, the 6-speed 

automatic was analyzed to be less expensive to manufacture by approximately $75. Note 

that when the 8-speed transmission was redesigned, several other functional and 

performance updates not driven by the added gear ratios were incorporated (e.g., 

modified hydraulic control strategy, spool valve material, friction discs, as well as a 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-13

newly-developed torque converter). These modifications were not estimated in the 

analysis since they are independent of the gear ratio addition and modifications. 

As shown in Table 2-22 many of the transmission subsystems where deemed cost 

neutral. Much of the cost analysis work was focused on the cost difference in the gear 

train and internal clutch subsystems. An internal clutch subsystem cost save of $12.56 

was calculated for the 8-speed AT. However the 8-speed AT gear train subsystem 

increased in cost by $74.40 resulting in a net incremental direct manufacturing cost of 

$+74.81. 

Also shown in Table 2-2, a differential exist between the electronic hardware and 

controls in the two transmission systems. Differences including Gear Selecting Solenoids 

and Sensors as well as wiring harnesses and communication drivers can be clearly 

identified in Table 2-1 below. These components and controls account for an additional 

cost differential of $12.97 contributing to the net incremental direct manufacturing cost 

of $+74.81. 

Table 2-1: System Electronic Hardware & Controls Comparison Matrix 

Transmission Input Shaft Speed Sensor

Cost Neutral

Transmission Input Shaft Speed Sensor

Cost Neutral

Output Shaft Speed Sensor Cost Neutral Output Shaft Speed Sensor Cost Neutral

Shift Solenoid Valve MV-1 Cost Neutral Solenoid Valve On/Off Cost Neutral

Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-1 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral Solenoid Valve 1 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral

Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-2 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral Solenoid Valve 2 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral

Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-3 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral Solenoid Valve 3 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral

Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-4 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral Solenoid Valve 4 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral

Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-5 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral Solenoid Valve 5 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral

Shift Solenoid Valve EDS-6 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral Solenoid Valve 6 Pressure Reg. Cost Neutral

Solenoid Valve 7 Pressure Reg. Cost

AFT Temperature Sensor Cost Neutral AFT Temperature Sensor Cost Neutral

Gearshift Selector Position Sensor Cost Neutral Gearshift Selector Position Sensor Cost Neutral

Hall Sensor Cost Neutral Hall Sensor Cost Neutral

Transmission Control Unit Distribution Cost Neutral Transmission Control Unit Distribution Cost

6-Speed AT

Device Description

Device 

Captured In 

MAQS

8-Speed AT

Device Description

Device 

Captured In 

MAQS
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-14

Table 2-2: System Cost Model Analysis Template Illustrating the Incremental Subsystem 

Costs Roll Up for an 8-Speed AT compared to a 6-Speed AT 

Material Labor Burden End Item 

Scrap SG&A Profit ED&TR&D

02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

1 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

2 02 CASE(S): $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

3 03 GEAR TRAIN: $ 49.58 $ 40.81 $ 92.84 $ 183.24 $ 0.92 $ 12.08 $ 11.11 $ 4.59 $ 28.70 $ - $ 211.94

4 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES: $ 75.79 $ 27.13 $ 78.47 $ 181.39 $ 1.34 $ 12.69 $ 11.51 $ 4.58 $ 30.12 $ - $ 211.50

5 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

6 06 OIL PUMP & FILTER: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

7 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

8 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: $ 9.37 $ 0.04 $ 0.31 $ 9.72 $ 0.10 $ 1.36 $ 1.26 $ 0.52 $ 3.25 $ - $ 12.97

9 09 PARK MECHANISM: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

10 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ 134.74 $ 67.98 $ 171.63 $ 374.35 $ 2.37 $ 26.13 $ 23.88 $ 9.69 $ 62.06 $ - $ 436.41

Material Labor Burden End Item 

Scrap SG&A Profit ED&TR&D

02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

1 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

2 02 CASE(S): $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

3 03 GEAR TRAIN: $ 35.12 $ 21.57 $ 62.26 $ 118.95 $ 0.60 $ 7.81 $ 7.19 $ 2.98 $ 18.58 $ - $ 137.53

4 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES: $ 81.76 $ 31.27 $ 80.85 $ 193.87 $ 0.97 $ 12.68 $ 11.69 $ 4.85 $ 30.19 $ - $ 224.07

5 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

6 06 OIL PUMP & FILTER: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

7 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

8 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

9 09 PARK MECHANISM: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

10 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ 116.88 $ 52.84 $ 143.11 $ 312.83 $ 1.57 $ 20.49 $ 18.88 $ 7.83 $ 48.77 $ - $ 361.60

Material Labor Burden End Item 

Scrap SG&A Profit ED&TR&D

02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

1 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

2 02 CASE(S): $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

3 03 GEAR TRAIN: $ 14.46 $ 19.24 $ 30.58 $ 64.28 $ 0.33 $ 4.27 $ 3.92 $ 1.61 $ 10.12 $ - $ 74.40

4 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES: $ (5.97) $ (4.13) $ (2.38) $ (12.49) $ 0.36 $ 0.01 $ (0.18) $ (0.27) $ (0.08) $ - $ (12.56)

5 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

6 06 OIL PUMP & FILTER: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

7 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

8 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: $ 9.37 $ 0.04 $ 0.31 $ 9.72 $ 0.10 $ 1.36 $ 1.26 $ 0.52 $ 3.25 $ - $ 12.97

9 09 PARK MECHANISM: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

10 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ -$ $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ 17.86 $ 15.15 $ 28.51 $ 61.52 $ 0.79 $ 5.64 $ 5.00 $ 1.86 $ 13.29 $ - $ 74.81

Total Markup 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Total 

Packaging 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Net 

Component/ 

Assembly 

Cost Impact to 

OEM

SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP

Item

Subsystem

Sub-Subsystem Description

Manufacturing Total 

Manufacturing 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Markup

Total Markup 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Total 

Packaging 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Net 

Component/ 

Assembly 

Cost Impact to 

OEM

SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP

SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION INCREMENTAL COST TO UPGRADE TO NEW TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE

Net 

Component/ 

Assembly 

Cost Impact to 

OEM

SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP

SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION BASE TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COST INFORMATION

6 Speed ZF Automatic Transmission

Item

Subsystem

Sub-Subsystem Description

Manufacturing Total 

Manufacturing 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Markup

SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION NEW TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COST INFORMATION

8 Speed ZF Automatic Transmission

Item

Subsystem

Sub-Subsystem Description

Manufacturing Total 

Manufacturing 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Markup

Total Markup 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Total 

Packaging 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-15

2.2 Case Study #1202 Results 

Case Study #1202 analyzed the direct incremental manufacturing cost for updating from 

a 6-speed, wet dual clutch transmission (DCT) to an 8-speed, wet DCT. 

2.2.1 6-Speed DCT Hardware Overview – Baseline Technology Configuration 

Figure 2-4: Illustration of the Volkswagen DQ250 Wet Dual Clutch Transmission 

The baseline technology configuration selected for the analysis was the Volkswagen 

(VW) 6-speed, wet, dual clutch transmission (DCT); model number DQ250. Other 

industry naming conventions for this technology configuration include twin-clutch 

gearbox or dual shift gearbox (DSG). The basic components of the DCT include a twin 

clutch pack assembly driving two (2) coaxial input shafts. Power from the engine is 

transmitted to the input shafts through a dual-mass flywheel which is connected in series 

to the twin-clutch pack. Each input shaft, dependent on the selected gear, is designed to 

mesh with one (1) of two (2) output shafts. Upon reverse gear selection, there is an 

intermediate shaft which engages with both input shaft one (1) and output shaft two (2). 

There are four (4) shift forks, two (2) on each output shaft, hydraulically activated into 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-16

one of two positions from their neutral home position. The controls for the DCT, which 

include the hydraulic controls, electronic controls, and various sensors and actuators, are 

integrated into a single module VW refers to as a Mechatronic unit. The total weight of 

the transmission module, including the dual-mass flywheel, is approximately 94 kg. The 

maximum output torque rating for the DQ250 transmission is 350Nm.

2.2.2 8-Speed DCT Hardware Overview – Baseline Technology Configuration 

At the time of the study, there were no 8-speed DCTs available in the market to support 

the cost analysis. Therefore a modified approach was taken for this case study. Using 

the 6-speed wet DCT as the foundation, the FEV team developed some basic assumptions 

on how the 6-speed DCT could be modified to produce an 8-speed variant. Using the 6-

speed parts and some concept sketches, the team created a bill of material for the 8-speed 

DCT. The 8-speed DCT is only a simple concept of what an 8-speed DCT may look like 

at a high level; providing sufficient information to develop an incremental direct 

manufacturing cost. 

Figure 2-5 provides a cross-section view of the baseline 6-speed wet DCT. 

(Source: Audi Service Training Manual, 6-speed twin-clutch gearbox 02E S tronic)

Figure 2-5: Cross-sectional illustration of the Volkswagen 6-Speed DCT 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-17

For the 8-speed DCT concept, the input, output and reverse drive shafts were extended 

between the 3rd and 4th gear such that a 7th and 8th synchronized gear set could be added 

in (ReferenceError! Reference source not found.). In addition to the added synchronized 

gear sets, associated components such as shift forks, hydraulic cylinders and pistons, fork 

detents, solenoids and hydraulic control valves were added to the BOM. These 

components are not shown in Error! Reference source not found. below. Further, 

additional considerations for modifying the front and rear cases, valve body, channel 

plate, input shafts, output shafts and pump shaft were included in the assumptions.

Figure 2-6: 8-Speed Wet DCT Concept Illustration 

Additional assumptions made by the DCT evaluation team while developing the 8-speed 

DCT concept included the following: 

x The addition of the 7th an 8th gear to the 6-speed DCT does provide fuel efficiency 

savings 

x Engine torque and transmission capacity are matched 

x The target vehicle(s) can accommodate the additional length of the transmission 

8th 

7th 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-18

x Additional length of output shafts do not cause shaft bending issues which lead to 

NVH problems 

x Additional length of the reverse shaft does not cause shaft bending issues 

x Center distances of the output shafts within the transmission cases will not be the 

same for six and eight speed DCT transmissions 

x Output shaft diameters and splines configurations will change to accommodate the 

seventh and eighth gears 

x Change gear internal diameters and splines will all change to accommodate the 

seventh and eighth gears 

x Bearing supports for the output shafts ends will need to be adequately sized to 

support the torques and loads 

x All input and output change gear outside diameters will change and the resulting 

ratios and number of teeth will fit into the launch through overdrive ratio 

requirements 

x Final drive ratios for the output driven gear and the two drive gears will change to 

accommodate the eight forward and one reverse gear ratios 

x The schematics show a separate synchronizer assembly for both the 7th and 8th 

change gears 

x The schematics shown with this report are only intended to represent the 

additional and modified components required to go from a six-speed to an eightspeed DCT. 

x These transmission schematics do not represent a fully functional design of an 

eight-speed DCT 

2.2.3 Net Incremental Direct Manufacturing Cost Impact (DCT Analysis) 

Table 2-44 shows the net incremental, direct manufacturing cost between the 6-speed 

wet DCT and 8-speed wet DCT. In the evaluation, the 8-speed wet DCT was analyzed to 

be more expensive to manufacture by approximately $217. The major cost increment of 

the 8-speed DCT was the additional content in the mechanical controls subsystem at 

$106.15 Included in this add cost are the 7th and 8th gear synchronizers, hubs, shift fork 

assemblies, spool valves and solenoids. Modifications to the valve body to accommodate 

the additional function and hardware for the 7th and 8th gear set addition was also 

included in this subsystem. 

The next largest contributor to the added cost was the gear train subsystem at $64.04. 

Included in this subsystem were the additional 7th and 8th input and output gears plus the 

additional modification to both input and output shafts and the reverse shaft. 

Modifications to the case accounted for the majority of remaining costs contributing 

$20.85 to the net incremental direct manufacturing cost. 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-19

Also shown in Table 2-4, a differential exists between the electronic hardware and 

controls in the two transmission systems. Differences including Gear Selecting Solenoids 

and Sensors as well as wiring harnesses and communication drivers can be clearly 

identified in Table 2-3. These components and controls account for an additional cost 

differential of $19.50 contributing to the net incremental direct manufacturing cost of 

$+217.65. 

Table 2-3: System Electronic Hardware & Controls Comparison Matrix 

Gearbox Input Speed Sensor (G182) Cost Neutral Gearbox Input Speed Sensor (G182) Cost Neutral

Multi Plate Clutch Oil Temperature Sender (G509) Cost Neutral Multi Plate Clutch Oil Temperature Sender (G509) Cost Neutral

Drive Shaft 1 Speed Sensor (G501) Cost Neutral Drive Shaft 1 Speed Sensor (G501) Cost Neutral

Drive Shaft 2 Speed Sensor (G502) Cost Neutral Drive Shaft 2 Speed Sensor (G502) Cost Neutral

Gearbox Output Speed Sensor (G195) Cost Neutral Gearbox Output Speed Sensor (G195) Cost Neutral

Gearbox Output Direction Sensor (G196) Cost Neutral Gearbox Output Direction Sensor (G196) Cost Neutral

Automatic Gearbox Hydraulic Pressure Sender -1- 

(G193) Cost Neutral

Automatic Gearbox Hydraulic Pressure 

Sender -1- (G193) Cost Neutral

Automatic Gearbox Hydraulic Pressure Sender -2- 

(G194) Cost Neutral

Automatic Gearbox Hydraulic Pressure 

Sender -2- (G194) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 1 (N88) Cost Neutral Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 1 (N88) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 2 (N89) Cost Neutral Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 2 (N89) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 3 (N90) Cost Neutral Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 3 (N90) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 4 (N91) Cost Neutral Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 4 (N91) Cost Neutral

Multiplexer Solenoid Valve (N92) Cost Neutral Multiplexer Solenoid Valve (N92) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 5 (7,8 Gear) Cost

Gear Selector Solenoid Valve 6 (7,8 Gear) Cost

Electrical Pressure Control Valve 1 (N215) Cost Neutral Electrical Pressure Control Valve 1 (N215) Cost Neutral

Electrical Pressure Control Valve 2 (N216) Cost Neutral Electrical Pressure Control Valve 2 (N216) Cost Neutral

Electrical Pressure Control Valve 3 (N217) Cost Neutral Electrical Pressure Control Valve 3 (N217) Cost Neutral

Electrical Pressure Control Valve 4 (N218) Cost Neutral Electrical Pressure Control Valve 4 (N218) Cost Neutral

Electrical Pressure Control Valve 5 (N233) Cost Neutral Electrical Pressure Control Valve 5 (N233) Cost Neutral

Electrical Pressure Control Valve 6 (N371) Cost Neutral Electrical Pressure Control Valve 6 (N371) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Travel Sensor -1- (G487) Cost Neutral Gear Selector Travel Sensor -1- (G487) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Travel Sensor -2- (G488) Cost Neutral Gear Selector Travel Sensor -2- (G488) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Travel Sensor -3- (G489) Cost Neutral Gear Selector Travel Sensor -3- (G489) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Travel Sensor -4- (G490) Cost Neutral Gear Selector Travel Sensor -4- (G490) Cost Neutral

Gear Selector Travel Sensor -5- (7,8 Gear) Cost

Mechatronic Control Unit Cost Neutral Mechatronic Control Unit Cost

Mechatronic Control Unit - Wiring Harness Cost Neutral Mechatronic Control Unit - Wiring Harness Cost

6-Speed DCT

Device Description

Device 

Captured In 

MAQS

8-Speed DCT

Device Description

Device 

Captured In 

MAQS
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

2-20

Table 2-4: System Cost Model Analysis Template Illustrating the Incremental Subsystem 

Costs Roll Up for an 8-Speed DCT compared to a 6-Speed DCT 

Material Labor Burden End Item 

Scrap SG&A Profit ED&TR&D

02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

1 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

2 02 CASE(S): $ 5.50 $ 1.19 $ 14.17 $ 20.85 $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ 20.85

3 03 GEAR TRAIN: $ 20.23 $ 5.58 $ 38.23 $ 64.04 $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ 64.04

4 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

5 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

6 06 OIL PUMP & FILTER: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

7 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS: $ 47.26 $ 12.23 $ 36.26 $ 95.75 $ 0.33 $ 4.50 $ 4.04 $ 1.53 $ 10.40 $ - $ 106.15

8 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: (Combined w/ Mechnical Controls) $ 15.91 $ 0.10 $ 0.88 $ 16.89 $ 0.08 $ 1.10 $ 1.01 $ 0.42 $ 2.62 $ - $ 19.50

9 09 PARK MECHANISM: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

10 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: $ 1.82 $ 2.78 $ 2.50 $ 7.10 $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ 7.10

$ 90.73 $ 21.87 $ 92.03 $ 204.63 $ 0.42 $ 5.59 $ 5.05 $ 1.95 $ 13.02 $ - $ 217.65

Material Labor Burden End Item 

Scrap SG&A Profit ED&TR&D

02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

1 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

2 02 CASE(S): $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

3 03 GEAR TRAIN: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

4 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

5 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

6 06 OIL PUMP & FILTER: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

7 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

8 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: (Combined w/ Mechnical Controls) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

9 09 PARK MECHANISM: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

10 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

$ - $ - - $ $ - $ -$ - - $ -$ $ - $ - $ -

Material Labor Burden End Item 

Scrap SG&A Profit ED&TR&D

02 TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

1 01 EXTERNAL COMPONENTS: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

2 02 CASE(S): $ 5.50 $ 1.19 $ 14.17 $ 20.85 $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ 20.85

3 03 GEAR TRAIN: $ 20.23 $ 5.58 $ 38.23 $ 64.04 $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ 64.04

4 04 INTERNAL CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

5 05 LAUNCH CLUTCHES: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

6 06 OIL PUMP & FILTER: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

7 07 MECHANICAL CONTROLS: $ 47.26 $ 12.23 $ 36.26 $ 95.75 $ 0.33 $ 4.50 $ 4.04 $ 1.53 $ 10.40 $ - $ 106.15

8 08 ELECTRICAL CONTROLS: (Combined w/ Mechnical Controls) $ 15.91 $ 0.10 $ 0.88 $ 16.89 $ 0.08 $ 1.10 $ 1.01 $ 0.42 $ 2.62 $ - $ 19.50

9 09 PARK MECHANISM: $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ -

10 10 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS: $ 1.82 $ 2.78 $ 2.50 $ 7.10 $ - $ - $ - -$ $ - $ - $ 7.10

$ 90.73 $ 21.87 $ 92.03 $ 204.63 $ 0.42 $ 5.59 $ 5.05 $ 1.95 $ 13.02 $ - $ 217.65

Total Markup 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Total 

Packaging 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Net 

Component/ 

Assembly 

Cost Impact to 

OEM

SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP

Item

Subsystem

Sub-Subsystem Description

Manufacturing Total 

Manufacturing 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Markup

Total Markup 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Total 

Packaging 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Net 

Component/ 

Assembly 

Cost Impact to 

OEM

SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP

SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION INCREMENTAL COST TO UPGRADE TO NEW TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE

Net 

Component/ 

Assembly 

Cost Impact to 

OEM

SUBSYSTEM ROLL-UP

SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION BASE TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COST INFORMATION

6 Speed Wet DCT

Item

Subsystem

Sub-Subsystem Description

Manufacturing Total 

Manufacturing 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Markup

SYSTEM & SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION NEW TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COST INFORMATION

8-Speed Wet DCT

Item

Subsystem

Sub-Subsystem Description

Manufacturing Total 

Manufacturing 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Markup

Total Markup 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)

Total 

Packaging 

Cost 

(Component/ 

Assembly)
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

3-21

3 Glossary of Terms 

Assembly: generally refers to a group of interdependent components joined together to 

perform a defined function (e.g., turbocharger assembly, high pressure fuel pump 

assembly, high pressure fuel injector assembly). 

Buy: is the terminology used to identify those components or assemblies as ones in 

which a manufacturer would purchase versus manufacture. All parts designated as a 

“buy” part, within the analysis, only have a net component cost presented. Typically 

these types of parts are considered commodity purchase parts having industry established 

pricing. 

CBOM (Comparison Bill of Materials): is a system bill of materials, identifying all the 

subsystems, assemblies, and components associated with the technology configurations 

under evaluation. The CBOM records all the high level details of the technology 

configurations under study, identifies those items which have cost implications as a result 

of the new versus base technology differences, documents the study assumptions, and is 

the primary document for capturing input from the cross functional team. 

Component: is the lowest level part within the cost analysis. An assembly is typically 

made up of several components acting together to perform a function (e.g., the turbine 

wheel in a turbocharger assembly). However, in some cases a component can act 

independently performing a function within a sub-subsystem or subsystem (e.g., exhaust 

manifold within the exhaust subsystem). 

Cost Estimating Models: are cost estimating tools, external to the Design Profit® 

software, used to calculate operation and process parameters for primary manufacturing 

processes (e.g., injection molding, die casting, metal stamping, forging). Key 

information calculated from the costing estimating tools (e.g., cycle times, raw material 

usage, equipment size) is inputted into the Lean Design® process maps supporting the 

cost analysis. The Excel base cost estimating models are developed and validated by 

Munro & Associates. 

Costing Databases: refer to the five (5) core databases which contain all the cost rates 

for the analysis. The material database lists all the materials used throughout the analysis 

along with the estimated price/pound for each. The labor database captures various 

automotive, direct labor, manufacturing jobs (supplier and OEM), along with the 

associated mean hourly labor rates. The manufacturing overhead rate database contains 

the cost/hour for the various pieces of manufacturing equipment assumed in the analysis. 

A mark-up database assigns a percentage of mark-up for each of the four (4) main markup categories (i.e., end-item scrap, SG&A, profit, and ED&T), based on the industry, 

supplier size, and complexity classification. The fifth database, the packaging database, 

contains packaging options and costs for each case.

Lean Design® (a module within the Design Profit® software): is used to create 

detailed process flow charts/process maps. Lean Design® uses a series of standardized 

symbols, each base symbol representing a group of similar manufacturing procedures 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

3-22

(e.g., fastening, material modifications, inspection). For each group, a Lean Design® 

library/database exists containing standardized operations along with the associated 

manufacturing information and specifications for each operation. The information and 

specifications are used to generate a net operation cycle time. Each operation on a 

process flow chart is represented by a base symbol, operation description, and operation 

time, all linked to a Lean Design® library/database. 

Make: is the terminology used to identify those components or assemblies as ones in 

which a manufacturer would produce internally versus purchase. All parts designated as 

a “make” part, within the analysis, are costed in full detail. 

MAQS (Manufacturing Assumption and Quote Summary) Worksheet: is the 

standardized template used in the analysis to calculate the mass production 

manufacturing cost, including supplier mark-up, for each system, subsystem and 

assembly quoted in the analysis. Every component and assembly costed in the analysis 

will have a MAQS worksheet. The worksheet is based on a standard OEM (original 

equipment manufacturer) quote sheet modified for improved costing transparency and 

flexibility in sensitivity studies. The main feeder documents to the MAQS worksheets 

are process maps and the costing databases. 

MCRs (Material Cost Reductions): is a process employed to identify and capture 

potential design and/or manufacturing optimization ideas with the hardware under 

evaluation. These savings could potentially reduce or increase the differential costs 

between the new and base technology configurations, depending on whether an MCR 

idea is for the new or the base technology. 

Net Component/Assembly Cost Impact to OEM: is defined as the net manufacturing 

cost impact per unit, to the OEM, for a defined component, assembly, subsystem or 

system. For components produced by the supplier base, the net manufacturing cost 

impact to the OEM includes total manufacturing costs (material, labor, and 

manufacturing overhead), mark-up (end-item scrap costs, selling, general and 

administrative costs, profit, and engineering design and testing costs) and packaging 

costs. For OEM internally manufactured components, the net manufacturing cost impact 

to the OEM includes total manufacturing costs and packaging costs; mark-up costs are 

addressed through the application of an indirect cost multiplier. 

NTAs (New Technology Advances): is a process employed to identify and capture 

alternative advance technology ideas which could be substituted for some of the existing 

hardware under evaluation. These advanced technologies, through improved function 

and performance, and/or cost reductions, could help increase the overall value of the 

technology configuration. 

Powertrain Package Proforma: is a summary worksheet comparing the key physical 

and performance attributes of the technology under study with those of the corresponding 

base configuration. 
Report FEV 07-069-303 

April 12, 2013

3-23

Process Maps: are detailed process flow charts used to capture the operations and 

processes, and associated key manufacturing variables, involved in manufacturing 

products at any level (e.g., vehicle, system, subsystem, assembly, component). 

P-VCSM (Powertrain–Vehicle Class Summary Matrix): records the technologies 

being evaluated, the applicable vehicle classes for each technology, and key parameters 

for vehicles or vehicle systems that have been selected to represent the new technology 

and baseline configurations in each vehicle class to be costed. 

Quote: refers to the analytical process of establishing a cost for a component or 

assembly.

Sub-subsystem: refers to a group of interdependent assemblies and/or components, 

required to create a functioning sub-subsystem. For example, the air induction subsystem 

contains several sub-subsystems including the following: turbocharging, heat exchangers, 

and pipes, hoses and ducting.

Subsystem: refers to a group of interdependent sub-subsystems, assemblies and/or 

components, required to create a functioning subsystem. For example, the engine system 

contains several subsystems including the following: crank drive subsystem, cylinder 

block subsystem, cylinder head subsystem, fuel induction subsystem, and air induction 

subsystem. 

Subsystem CMAT (Cost Model Analysis Templates): is the document used to display 

and roll up all the sub-subsystem, assembly and component incremental costs associated 

with a subsystem (e.g., fuel induction, air induction, exhaust), as defined by the 

Comparison Bill of Material (CBOM). 

Surrogate part: refers to a part similar in fit, form and function as the part required for 

the cost analysis. Surrogate parts are sometimes used in the cost analysis when actual 

parts are unavailable. The cost of a surrogate part is considered equivalent to the cost of 

the actual part. 

System: refers to a group of interdependent subsystems, sub-subsystems, assemblies 

and/or components, working together to create a vehicle primary function (e.g., engine 

system, transmission system, brake system, fuel system, suspension system). 

System CMAT (Cost Model Analysis Template): is the document used to display and 

roll up all the subsystem incremental costs associated with a system (e.g., engine, 

transmission, steering), as defined by the CBOMs.