Lancer Evolution X News, Info, Pics, etc... | [ALL THREADS MERGED]
Evolving Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Originally Posted by Killboy
Here's one that will REALLY get under the skin of some of you guys: CVT transmissions will ultimately make all others obsolete.
They will hold the RPM at the perfect point of power production and economy. No more shifting...manually or otherwise.
They will hold the RPM at the perfect point of power production and economy. No more shifting...manually or otherwise.
Yes I can foresee that CVT is the future... I guess driving will become a bit less exciting when CVT is adopted universally.
Originally Posted by DrSmile
CVT will take over... when all cars are mandated to make 200 ft-lbs or less.
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
From: Orange County, CA
Originally Posted by jcnel_evo8
Good thread, and good posts with information. I'm going to give more of a consumer's point of view with a bit of transmission ideas at the side.
Let me start by saying I'm a motorcycle rider, both dirt and street. Having owned a handful of bikes, I think automobiles with manual trannies have been mandated into two clunky areas: 1.) H-pattern shifting and 2.) large single plate clutches.
My question then kind of rolls around why do we keep both religiously, and why does any new solution have to be so complicated, even towards a dual clutch?
The H-pattern I believe has always been used because its pretty easy to manufacture, and allows a user to go find any gear ratio at any time, in any situation. In fact in the olden golden days, you'll find some autos where one must move individual levers for each gear ratio. Even the H-pattern shifter was an upgrade towards that.
Motorcycles, because we can't make our feet do intricate patterns, have only an up / down lever. Under proper training and practise, the user can shift without using the clutch to disengage power from the transmission. The rider releases power momentarily by releasing the throttle to momentarily disengage power from the transmission. The gear selection actuator (i.e. lever) is built with such precision, it gets the transmission to the next gear, within the mechanical characteristic of the motor to come 'back' on power and get the bike accelerating again.
Can you still use the clutch? Yes. Is the transmission built fundamentally different? No. The improvement in technology for a motorcycle tranny is a device (usually a rotating barrel) that mimmics the sequential nature of a regular manual H-pattern tranny. If I were given a car today (EVO) with a lever to my right that provided the same function as motorcycle type shifting, and still had to use a clutch, I'd have absolutely no problem making the transition.
Speaking to the clutch mechanism, and again coming from the motorcycle background, its amazing to see that multiplate designs basically shrink the diameter of the motor / transmission housing, and can be placed in an area to reduce the clutch servicing cost; but, companies that build the public's cars, STILL have not incorporated multiplate designs. By shrinking the "bell housing" mate (if even needed) designers could place the motor closer to the ground, providing a wealth of benefits by lowering the motor's CG. I also believe that multiplate clutches favor more easily produced and better disengage mechansims, so that if the clutching actuation were to be automated, it would be much easier on a multiplate, small diameter design.
Some may claim that a flywheel is necessary for some energy storage applications (i.e. easier off-the-line) but I contest that there are mechanisms already in place, better than a huge spinning mass to get somebody started off of the line. Some of those would be better car handling education, and sensor compensated maneuvers.
My solution right now for a really slick EVO X tranny? Sequential lever actuated shifting mechanism where the current H-pattern shifter is WITH clutch. It believe its a nice KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) solution many EVO enthusiasts would enjoy.
~j.
Let me start by saying I'm a motorcycle rider, both dirt and street. Having owned a handful of bikes, I think automobiles with manual trannies have been mandated into two clunky areas: 1.) H-pattern shifting and 2.) large single plate clutches.
My question then kind of rolls around why do we keep both religiously, and why does any new solution have to be so complicated, even towards a dual clutch?
The H-pattern I believe has always been used because its pretty easy to manufacture, and allows a user to go find any gear ratio at any time, in any situation. In fact in the olden golden days, you'll find some autos where one must move individual levers for each gear ratio. Even the H-pattern shifter was an upgrade towards that.
Motorcycles, because we can't make our feet do intricate patterns, have only an up / down lever. Under proper training and practise, the user can shift without using the clutch to disengage power from the transmission. The rider releases power momentarily by releasing the throttle to momentarily disengage power from the transmission. The gear selection actuator (i.e. lever) is built with such precision, it gets the transmission to the next gear, within the mechanical characteristic of the motor to come 'back' on power and get the bike accelerating again.
Can you still use the clutch? Yes. Is the transmission built fundamentally different? No. The improvement in technology for a motorcycle tranny is a device (usually a rotating barrel) that mimmics the sequential nature of a regular manual H-pattern tranny. If I were given a car today (EVO) with a lever to my right that provided the same function as motorcycle type shifting, and still had to use a clutch, I'd have absolutely no problem making the transition.
Speaking to the clutch mechanism, and again coming from the motorcycle background, its amazing to see that multiplate designs basically shrink the diameter of the motor / transmission housing, and can be placed in an area to reduce the clutch servicing cost; but, companies that build the public's cars, STILL have not incorporated multiplate designs. By shrinking the "bell housing" mate (if even needed) designers could place the motor closer to the ground, providing a wealth of benefits by lowering the motor's CG. I also believe that multiplate clutches favor more easily produced and better disengage mechansims, so that if the clutching actuation were to be automated, it would be much easier on a multiplate, small diameter design.
Some may claim that a flywheel is necessary for some energy storage applications (i.e. easier off-the-line) but I contest that there are mechanisms already in place, better than a huge spinning mass to get somebody started off of the line. Some of those would be better car handling education, and sensor compensated maneuvers.
My solution right now for a really slick EVO X tranny? Sequential lever actuated shifting mechanism where the current H-pattern shifter is WITH clutch. It believe its a nice KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) solution many EVO enthusiasts would enjoy.
~j.
Check this link out: http://www.ikeya-f.co.jp/en/index.html
They do indeed have a few evo applictions. This is basically a shift mechanism that converts your standard H patteren into a sequential shift. Remeber, a sequential gearbox has nothing to do with weather or not you use a clutch. Most open wheel race cars use a sequential shift with a dog box, allowing clutchless upshifts with sequential shifting. But require clutcing for downshifts. This is very much like a motorcycle transmission.
Originally Posted by Killboy
You honestly believe they will never make any progress on making them stronger...or you just don't want to believe it?
Last edited by DrSmile; Mar 3, 2006 at 10:25 AM.
Zeroshift hasn't gone anywhere in 3 years, I don't think it will ever go into production either. There is no real market for a no-clutch transmission, DSG is much more palatable for the consumer.
Evolved Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
From: CNY
^ Conventional Manual Gearbox
^ M3 SMG
^ DSG
^ Zero Shift
And a little history on twin-clutch:
Both Porsche and Audi have used transmissions based on similar principles in racecars during the 1980s. Porsche's vaunted and incredibly successful 956 and 962C race cars benefited from the Porsche Dual Klutch, or PDK, transmission. In 1985, Audi itself used a dual clutch transmission in the Pike's Peak Hillclimb winning Sport quattro S1 rally car.
In both instances, since dual clutch transmissions provide "shift without lift" or uninterrupted power flow to the wheels through all the gears, these transmissions were extremely well suited for keeping the racecars' turbocharged motors "on the boost." Continued here.
Pikes peak
Last edited by FLK; Mar 5, 2006 at 06:01 PM.
Of course those transmissions are specifically built for RACE CARS. Anyone that has a dogbox knows its not useful for commuting. I can't comment on Zeroshift since I've never seen it but I'd bet the shock from going from 7000rpm to 5000rpm in 0.01 seconds is gonna cause all kinds of problems in the engine and drivetrain, including the transmission components.
Originally Posted by x838nwy
tell me again why the lower edge of the windows are chromed?
and what, exactly, is the point of covering the engine with that al plate? If they haven't decided on an engine (or finished designing one) why don't they just not show it?
and can we _please_ keep the steering wheel round?
and what, exactly, is the point of covering the engine with that al plate? If they haven't decided on an engine (or finished designing one) why don't they just not show it?
and can we _please_ keep the steering wheel round?
Aww, im all for the new wheel!
Yeah sequential dog boxes wouldn't go over well with most after 50 miles of road driving. The noise alone would make us all deaf! Racecar Engineering had some great articles on the Zeroshift. They were in fact the first editorial source about the new technology. If my memory is correct, the largest issue with zero shift is that it works great at full throttle but not so well while under partial load. I believe the shifts are quite abrupt and rough at anything BUT full throttle. Someone correct if I'm wrong 
I'll definitely say I was very excited to hear about DSG being a possibility on the new X but after some of the good debate, I may need a test drive first!
I'll definitely say I was very excited to hear about DSG being a possibility on the new X but after some of the good debate, I may need a test drive first!