mkoesel Moderator Rep 6238 Posts 18,800



Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Canton, MI

1) iTrader: (

Drives: No BMW for now





As for his question about why the DCT had to gain weight to support more torque while the 6MT was able to shed weight under the same operating conditions - it's a good point.  I suppose the older 6MT may have just been that overbuilt and happened to be ripe for optimization with lighter materials and more efficient design.  Not sure if the DCT is already using the same optimizations (not all of which would necessarily even apply given that it's a totally different beast).  If it is not then perhaps it would have been too costly to do so. 



Quote: CanAutM3 Originally Posted by .  It was 44lb (20kg) on the E9X.



As Mkoesel mentions, the 6MT weight was reduced by 26lb.  It also seems the new DCT got heavier by 18lb . 



EDIT: I think I just got what you meant, the weight penalty of DCT increased by 45lb (from +44lb to +89lb).  Sorry, slow morning for me It is actually +89lb (40kg) for the DCT.  It was 44lb (20kg) on the E9X.As Mkoesel mentions, the 6MT weight was reduced by 26lb.  It also seems the new DCT got heavier by 18lbEDIT: I think I just got what you meant, the weight penalty of DCT increased by 45lb (from +44lb to +89lb).  Sorry, slow morning for me Yep, it's a bummer. As for his question about why the DCT had to gain weight to support more torque while the 6MT was able to shed weight under the same operating conditions - it's a good point.  I suppose the older 6MT may have just been that overbuilt and happened to be ripe for optimization with lighter materials and more efficient design.  Not sure if the DCT is already using the same optimizations (not all of which would necessarily even apply given that it's a totally different beast).  If it is not then perhaps it would have been too costly to do so.