10 speed automatic cost

[minjitta]

No, because it doesn't change where peak power happens.

However, what it does mean is that the RPM's have the potential to not drop as far (due to closer ratios) so that we're actually producing peak power longer...

Let's just say that a 2018 GT with the A10 still makes it's peak stock power at 6,500 RPM. The transmission hits that, and shifts, however instead of dropping waaay down below peak, and then having to climb back up...it only drops say..800 RPM, so in a WOT blast you're right back at peak power fast.

That's what the A10 can do..keep you at peak power longer..which means it's gonna pull like a son of a bitch.

work great with FI

Sponsored

 

[BlackGT]

has anyone heard what the final overdrive ratio will be with the new 10 speed?

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

has anyone heard what the final overdrive ratio will be with the new 10 speed?

I'm guessing it will vary depending on the engine. A naturally aspirated 5.0L can cruise at highway speeds at a much lower engine speed than a twin turbo 3.5L, so using the same ratio would be asinine.

 

[daytripper]

Fixed. Because there is no good CVT and I'd rather have an actual auto over one.

I have a '14 Juke that I use for driving in bad weather or taking the dog to the vet etc. The cvt is one of the reasons I bought it. I live in the mountains and regular autos are constantly shifting up or down. The Juke stays in the power band constantly.I love it. It also is pretty fast.

 

[scoggy_doogan]

I have a '14 Juke that I use for driving in bad weather or taking the dog to the vet etc. The cvt is one of the reasons I bought it. I live in the mountains and regular autos are constantly shifting up or down. The Juke stays in the power band constantly.I love it. It also is pretty fast.

Nissan seems to make one of the better CVTs. I drove a 2016 Maxima before deciding on the Mustang and was surprised that it didn't feel completely numb.

 

[thet33]

Nissan seems to make one of the better CVTs.

Tell that to Altima owners. My gf had one and it was crap. Nothing but problems from day month 1. Went to the forums at it was the general consensus.

 

[NoVaGT]

A naturally aspirated 5.0L can cruise at highway speeds at a much lower engine speed than a twin turbo 3.5L, so using the same ratio would be asinine.

Modern turbo motors are low-RPM torque monsters. A naturally aspirated 5.0 Coyote motor is not a low-RPM motor. A modern turbo motor will do quite a bit better cruising at freeway speeds/low-RPMs than a Coyote will. A modern turbo motor could handle a lower final-drive ration better than a Coyote.

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

Modern turbo motors are low-RPM torque monsters. A naturally aspirated 5.0 Coyote motor is not a low-RPM motor. A modern turbo motor will do quite a bit better cruising at freeway speeds/low-RPMs than a Coyote will. A modern turbo motor could handle a lower final-drive ration better than a Coyote.

Modern or otherwise, no turbo engine is a torque monster at minimum throttle. By it's very nature, the potential energy which a turbo allows is limited by the energy which drives it. At full throttle, this energy compounds, but at a minimal sustained load, it's actually lower than it's naturally aspirated counterpart.

Check this article out and you will get an idea of just how illusive ideal conditions for boost can be at low RPMs. Even at those ideal conditions, the ecoboost could only match the full throttle torque of the coyote at 1250-1500rpm. Without sufficient load, it's not even in the ballpark.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/0...ter-ecoboost-v6-and-5-0-liter-v8-engines.html

 

[1320']

I'd expect a final drive ratio in the 2.82-3.09 range for an A10 Coyote.

 

[NoVaGT]

Modern or otherwise, no turbo engine is a torque monster at minimum throttle. By it's very nature, the potential energy which a turbo allows is limited by the energy which drives it. At full throttle, this energy compounds, but at a minimal sustained load, it's actually lower than it's naturally aspirated counterpart.

Check this article out and you will get an idea of just how illusive ideal conditions for boost can be at low RPMs. Even at those ideal conditions, the ecoboost could only match the full throttle torque of the coyote at 1250-1500rpm. Without sufficient load, it's not even in the ballpark.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/0...ter-ecoboost-v6-and-5-0-liter-v8-engines.html

What I got from that article, is that there were testing issues. Oh, and that the 3.5 EB engine developed a huge amount more torque than the 5.0 NA. But what I get from actually driving my Coyotes for the last 5 years, is that these engines are all about RPMs.

 

[Petroleum Jesus]

What I got from that article, is that there were testing issues. Oh, and that the 3.5 EB engine developed a huge amount more torque than the 5.0 NA. But what I get from actually driving my Coyotes for the last 5 years, is that these engines are all about RPMs.

There were Minor tuning issues with the dyno, but a majority of the 6 hours spent were trying to simulate a load which would allow the turbos to spool up under 2k rpm without overheating the catalytic converters. The results are not attainable in actual driving conditions.

The graph below displays the actual torque curve in red. The "steady state" (or manipulated) curve is in black. As you can see, even under full throttle, the actual torque curve of the Ecoboost from 1000-1500rpm isn't even close to the Coyote, and that's at full throttle where the turbo has the highest torque potential. At partial throttle, that differential is considerably wider, as the turbo's don't have a compounding pressure differential.

 

[NoVaGT]

There were Minor tuning issues with the dyno, but a majority of the 6 hours spent were trying to simulate a load which would allow the turbos to spool up under 2k rpm without overheating the catalytic converters. The results are not attainable in actual driving conditions.

The graph below displays the actual torque curve in red. The "steady state" (or manipulated) curve is in black. As you can see, even under full throttle, the actual torque curve of the Ecoboost from 1000-1500rpm isn't even close to the Coyote, and that's at full throttle where the turbo has the highest torque potential. At partial throttle, that differential is considerably wider, as the turbo's don't have a compounding pressure differential.

Yes, I read that. But what that article says and real-world results are, are two different things. Dyno-results are just that......dyno-results. These in particular are quite tainted in my eye.

Owners of modern turbo motors rave about them, including when they're towing on the highway.

 

[c-rizzle]

Does a 10 speed automatic inherently reduce the RPM shift points? So no more high revs if I punch it? That wouldn't be any fun.

It only reduces the RPMs if you're not trying to accelerate.

It actually does the opposite if you're wide open throttle, first gear is lower so you hit high rpms faster, gears are closer so when you go up to the next gear your RPMs only drop a little, and its like that for each gear until you reach your desired speed.

Now if you just barely have the gas pedal pressed, then it can keep the RPMs in the lowest range for best MPG.

And if you're some where in the middle you'll get that middle performance more targeted too.

Understand ?

 

[thet33]

Anybody see this article?
http://www.motortrend.com/news/peeking-inside-the-gmford-transverse-nine-speed-automatic/

Sponsored