View Single Post
Old 05-02-2004, 10:33   #47
SMHarman
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Services: Cablevision
Posts: 8,305
SMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronze
SMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronze
Re: auto or manual ( spin of from b gates thread )

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulyoung666
worse fuel consumption i would have thought
Historically it used to be due to the fact that the clutch or torque converter was a fluid coupling, wheras a standard clutch has two friction plates, thus when fully engaged the drivetrain and engine are connected an auto box had a fluid turbine style arrangement (I'm not a mechanic - far from it), this required more power and was less efficient.

Small engined cars are now using the CVT auto boxes, these use a direct steel band coupling, in general auto boxes have got much more sophisticated , smaller and efficient and this stuff called computer technology has improved control also.
SMHarman is offline   Reply With Quote