Talk:Non-synchronous transmission

message: This article needs to be moved to a page without the s on the end of transmissions according to WP:NC and to conform with the other transmission articles. But before that we need to clear up this terminology:
What I don't understand is unsynchronous and non-synchronous. When the driver pops the clutch, it won't matter whether the transmission is synchronized or not, because the gears are already engaged within the transmission.
For reference I'll list the components in order: crankshaft, clutch, input shaft, transmission.
In the popping the clutch scenario, the transmission type doesn't matter because the whole driveline after the clutch is already synchronized. When changing gears, double clutch is used to sync the crank with the input shaft while the crank is synced to what the wheels are doing via the accelerator. With synchros, the input shaft doesn't need to be manually synced, so no double clutching is needed.
I think you're confusing unsynchronous with the clutch, therefore unsynchronous and non-synchronous are the same. Unless I'm missing something.... Leedeth 09:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have completed the move as per Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Prefer singular nouns. I have checked for double redirects and there are none. Leedeth 10:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminology and move

message: Don't get discouraged.  Some articles have to go through this phase.  But it's all in the interest of setting everything up.  I swear, it looks like the same guy wrote all these.  Let's figure out how to fix this and every other article we can.  There must be a common mistake we're making.  I think the first thing is that we're adding too many specialized concepts on top of what isn't really explained very well.  Let's just think. Alex T 69.122.62.231 (talk) 02:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article in infancy 

message: I've marked this article for cleanup of it's tone. This primarily because the later sections are quite chatty, e.g. 
:"Most people are familiar with the park, reverse, neutral, and drive positions of their automatic transmission.", 
:"Some people drive a standard or manual transmission. They learn that when they dump or pop the clutch, that the vehicle will lurch or lunge as the clutch plates engage. ". 
Also, this seems written for an audience used to automatic but not manual transmissions, at least in the UK manual gearboxes are the norm and automatics what people may be unfamiliar with. Thryduulf (talk) 19:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You can thank Kevin123 & some of the earlier contributors for infiltrating this article with language that bordered on vandalism . . . introducing words & ideas that didn't belong with this article, and concepts that made it clear they weren't familiar with non-synchronous transmissions.  I'm familiar with them, and this article was intended mainly for commercial truck drivers in the United States, based on the necessary training needed to understand gear patterning in these massive machines.  No other article in Wikipedia that I have seen does this.  The topic should be cleaned up, but not sabotaged.  StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The main body of this article should be about how non-sychronous transmissions are engineered to endure tremendous torque, horsepower, and weight often equal to or exceeding 40 tons, to travel differently than a consumer vehicle.  StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 03:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

text: It was not the intention of this article to include any training commentaries for commercial truck drivers.  The article was originally written as a marvel of the engineering behind non-synchronous transmissions.  StationNT5Bmedia (talk) 03:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone issues 

message: Given that the most common non-synchronous transmission on the road is an Eaton Roadranger, and I believe the same fact to be true of both Rockwell (Meritor) and Mack transmission, there is -- in fact -- a synchronizer present in the transmission which performs a similar function to in a light or medium duty vehicle. Range shifts from lo-hi are synchronized for a smoother 5-6 shift. It's a pin type, mounted in the auxiliary section. Does that mean it's still non-sync, or is it at least worth a footnote? Eaton's operating literature explains it.
On the section on clutch brake, it seems like the wording makes it easy to misunderstand the explanation of being unable to engage a gear with the brake actuated. The only reason it'd prevent a gear from engaging is due to it halting the idle gear+shaft in a position that puts the dog clutch teeth out of alignment with whatever gear it is you want -- letting off a bit just spins the transmission a touch to get them into alignment, even if it's still partially actuated. Clutch brakes actuate with the last 1" of pedal travel, so the section on shifting is accurate - about halfway to the floor is enough to disengage the clutch and break torque to start shifting while moving. However, " float the higher gear into engaging the drive coupling and fly wheel and engaging the clutch plates." -- you're not floating if you're double-clutching, floating a transmission is shifting without using the clutch, but just the throttle or accelerator to break torque on the gear and sync.
184.153.195.171 (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clutch brake, Syncing