Why so many gears?

[M4cruiser]

E65Ross said:

50bhp is more than enough to get us around in a small car, so do we really need more?

My other half's old Matiz 800cc had 50bhp and it was great.. . . . had a proper 5-speed box as well with reverse in the correct place.

E65Ross said:

If it's an auto, what on earth is wrong with an 8 speed? it does it all for you and you don't feel the changes, so what's the problem?

There was (/is) indeed a Matiz 800cc auto. We looked at one but never drove it.

[M4cruiser]

E65Ross said:

the 8 speed auto is EPIC - have you been in a car or driven a car with it? changes are impercetible so it doesn't bloody matter how many gears it has.

No, but I have driven a CVT, and that was wonderful, so I'll make an exception to my 3-speed rule for that.

But a few years ago when I changed my 3-speed auto for the same make/model (newer) with a 4-speed auto, I never quite liked the new one. It was always in the wrong gear, it seemed to have been designed with economy in mind and I needed to use the manual override a lot - either because it was running away down hill in 4th, or because it wouldn't change down itself to 3rd for motorway acceleration (unless I kicked down).

[E65Ross]

eldar said:

rallycross said:

Cost new
Cost to fix when old
Weight

Economy, performance and of course CO2. A modern 7,8 or 9 speed auto does all 3 better than an old auto or manual.

Rofl about weight as an argument! How much heavier is the ZF 8 speed box over an old 4 speed box and does that weight penalty effect performance or economy in the SLIGHTEST? Oh wait, no it improves it.

Cost new? They're becoming ubiquitous now and they aren't really any more expensive than what old 4 speed boxes were back 25 years ago. Cost to fix when they go wrong? Not sure, they seem reliable so far but time will tell.

All excuses are quite poor considering the huge gains in economy and performance.

[E65Ross]

M4cruiser said:

E65Ross said:

the 8 speed auto is EPIC - have you been in a car or driven a car with it? changes are impercetible so it doesn't bloody matter how many gears it has.

No, but I have driven a CVT, and that was wonderful, so I'll make an exception to my 3-speed rule for that.

But a few years ago when I changed my 3-speed auto for the same make/model (newer) with a 4-speed auto, I never quite liked the new one. It was always in the wrong gear, it seemed to have been designed with economy in mind and I needed to use the manual override a lot - either because it was running away down hill in 4th, or because it wouldn't change down itself to 3rd for motorway acceleration (unless I kicked down).

Newer boxes downshift on downhills for engine braking if required. If going down a steep hill and I dab the brakes even the 5 speed in my last 7 series (and the 6 speed in my current car) downshift to provide engine braking. Plus there's a manual override if needed.

An 8 speed box has more ratios and is superb at guessing which gear to use.

I suggest some of you folk try them before slating them. They're much better than 3 speed autos (having driven cars with 3 speeds all the way to 8)

[Blakewater]

I had a Toyota Auris 1.6 as a courtesy car once. It had six gears and an irritating gearshift indicator that just seemed to tell me to shift up and down at random. 6th gear left the car with absolutely no acceleration whatsoever, so was dangerous even on the motorway. If I hit a slight incline or wanted to get away from someone changing lanes or wavering around it just didn't want to know if it was in 6th.

[ScoobyChris]

morgrp said:

ROSPA actively encourage it on their advanced driver training - Great course incidentally - wish more of my clutch lunching customers would go on it to learn how to drive a car properly - To many people watch vin diesel on the telly and think slamming between gears and dumping the clutch is "good" driving.

Just to clarify, they encourage it such that you're in the right gear for the impending hazard, rather than for "green" reasons. I'll tend to only block shift up the box when I've finished accelerating and am selecting a cruising gear, but going down the box, I'll pretty much always block shift.

As for too many gears, I quite like 6 for a manual as giving the right balance between acceleration and cruising economy, and even in my old 100hp Panda worked surprisingly well. For an auto, I've found it's largely irrelevant how many gears it has as you either leave it in D (in which case it manages everything) or use it in manual where you basically go up the box if you run out of revs, or drop down the box if you want more revs.

Chris

[stain]

An extreme example but the RR Ghost/Wraith has a 600ish bhp motor and about the same in torque and yet it has an 8 speed gearbox. It simply doesn't need it as it hunts around the ratios far too much. 3 gears would do the job.

[mjh64]

Blakewater said:

I had a Toyota Auris 1.6 as a courtesy car once. It had six gears and an irritating gearshift indicator that just seemed to tell me to shift up and down at random. 6th gear left the car with absolutely no acceleration whatsoever, so was dangerous even on the motorway. If I hit a slight incline or wanted to get away from someone changing lanes or wavering around it just didn't want to know if it was in 6th.

Gear shift indication is an EU rule for fuel economy

http://www.interregs.com/spotlight.php?id=114

[otolith]

If you don't need intermediate gears, skip them - whether you have four gears or seven.

[B17NNS]

I'm quite happy with 5 in a manual. An auto, give me as many as you like.

[V8forweekends]

peterbredde said:

Hello all. Let me first point out that this is not a rant or complaint. Just wondering. Why does my car have so many gears?

It is a new Mustang GT (manual) with 6 gears. I guess it's to make use of the power under rapid acceleration. But for everyday driving I find the box doesn't really make sense. Just too many gears. It feels as though I am changing all the time when I don't really see much difference. So I tend to find myself skipping gears, maybe from first to third to fifth, or from second to fourth to fifth or sixth.

Shirley for everyday use the car would be better suited to a five speed? Is there any real benefit to the six gears? Am I doing and damage in skipping gears?

Cheers

My crappy A3 (1.6 fsi) has 6 gears and it's still quite low geared in top - I suspect this is all about getting through emissions, or else VAG was selling so many diesels (which need 6 speed cos they have such a small rev range) they couldn't be bothered with a 5 speed for the petrols. I often skip gears - as for the idea of close ratios to stay in the power band - I'll let you know if I ever find any power.

[GravelBen]

More gears also means a bigger number for the marketing department...

[Lowtimer]

One reason they have a lot more gears than they used to is higher top speeds. Time was when a high powered family saloon would do 110 mph or 120 at a pinch. Nowadays even a mundane mid-range family car has a top speed of 140 mph, and anything big engined is 155 mph plus.

You still need a low bottom gear for the negotiation of steep, narrow multi-storey car-parks and the like. So unless you have very wide gear spacings, you need more gears.

[Mastodon2]

TLandCruiser said:

Out of curiosity how is it taught and what method? how is it incorporated into the driving test?

It's not incorporated into the test in terms of a criteria on which you can get a fault of any sort, it's an additional box at the bottom of the form that they strike through if you don't drive "economically", IE, if you hold onto gears more than they deem necessary, drive in a lower gear when I higher gear would allow a lower engine speed which still providing tractability, accelerating and braking harshly (though this ones might score you observation faults if you aren't anticipating hazards) etc, they'll your sheet as having not driven in an "eco-friendly" fashion. This doesn't affect whether or not you'd pass or fail, but if you are deemed to have not been eco enough in your driving you'll get a short lecture from the examiner about saving fuel and protecting the environment. I've never known anyone get marked as un-economical on their test, mainly because observation and knowing how to use the gears is basic stuff and anyone attempting their test should really be fairly competent at those things, enough to not be making the errors that the DVLA consider to be "un-economical driving".

On the bike test it's pretty redundant. Learner bikes are so quiet and with the examiner following on his bike, once the speeds get up he won't be able to hear the test candidate's bike anyway, so unless he is watching the candidate's left foot very closely and counting the changes, he won't know what gear they're in for much of the test either, even if they were riding a 70mph dual carriageway in 3rd or 4th gear when 6th would be more "eco".

[Zad]

Tuning turbos and diesels (and therefore especially turbodiesels) to get around the emissions regulations has resulted in very peaky engines. The only way to get an engine which is economical and yet with good headline performance figures therefore, is to have lots of gears to make sure the engine revs are as near optimal as possible.

[E65Ross]

Zad said:

Tuning turbos and diesels (and therefore especially turbodiesels) to get around the emissions regulations has resulted in very peaky engines. The only way to get an engine which is economical and yet with good headline performance figures therefore, is to have lots of gears to make sure the engine revs are as near optimal as possible.

Quite the opposite. Have you seen the torque curves of modern turbocharged engines compared to naturally aspirated? The turbo lumps have much flatter torque curves.

[gvij]

My TT has 6 forward gears and I think it is too much. When you boot it in 6th nothing happens as its out of the turbo range. Obviously its to save fuel which is a compromise.
Give me a 5.9l v12 Aston Martin then I wont care how many gears it has!

[Tickle]

gvij said:

My TT has 6 forward gears and I think it is too much. When you boot it in 6th nothing happens as its out of the turbo range.

Drop a cog then?

[xRIEx]

M4cruiser said:

Prepare for a tirade against me, but I can take it. It's just my opinion from an ergonomic point of view. I'm quite strong on ergonomics.

I guess the 6 or 8 speeds are done for economics or dynamics, but ergonomics are (/is) far more important on a road car for an average person.

Forgive me, what effect does it have on ergonomics? The human/machine interface is the same as a 5 (or fewer) ratio 'box and most drivers have the mental capacity to cope, so I don't see the issue.

[peterbredde]

Some interesting views. I can't help feeling that although the 6 gears have a purpose for 0 to 60 times, the car would actually be more enjoyable with 5 for 99% plus of the time. Just saying.