Their will probably just be a HD model like their is on the GXP now. I don't think anyone should be concerned.

 

"Hydra-matic" GOD! I just wunna shoot myself everytime I hear that word... Billions of dollars and a joint venture of the two top dogs in th auto business and we get another freak'n hydra-matic? ...and a 280 lbs/ft torque maximum? I realize this is for FWD purposes but geez, a lot of FWD cars are alreaddy approaching that #. I hope they don't plan on keeping this around very long...

 

umm...a name is just a name you know. I don't know why you are so focused on the name.

GMs automatic tranmssions have been one of there few bright spots--even car magazines agree. And among the drag racers--the turbo-hydramtic 400 and 350 are bullet proof.

280lbs-ft---is the max of GM S/C 3800 (Grand Prix GTP--or is it GT--for 06?)
But no other GM FWD V6 is that much. Even a low boost 2.8L Turbo could live behind it. I see nothing wrong with it and like oters said--a higher torque capacity one is more then possible.

 

I'm sure it won't be one size fits all. I beefier 6 speed for the V8 car and maybe a wimpier on the the Aveo like cars.

 

And lets not forget the lowly powerglide. I'm sure there will be many improvements on this new trans in the coming yrs.

 

Sorry, but I just can't get over a name of a technology that was new a half century ago that we're still clinging to like the last hope. The name Hydramatic just seems so generic, old, and cheap, I feel like banging my head against the wall every time I hear it. I was really hoping that when they made a big deal out of this new joint operation with Ford that they'd be coming out with something new and innovative...but once again I was let down. We get some old generic POS with 2 more gears...yay... Don't get me wrong, I am glad that they finally decided to hang with the competition...I was just hoping for more. This transmission should be more of a stop gap than something they'll be relying on for some time to come.

...and I dunno if you've read a magazine in the past decade or not, but GM has been getting torn a new one because of their transmissions lately. Having as many as 4 total gears in even their most halo'd of cars is simply unacceptable these days. GM has been behind in the transmission wars for a long time.

I don't know how you CAN'T see anything wrong with the power/torque figure... there are alreaddy many special high performance FWD cars that are that high, what do those cars get? The axe or the old fwd 4-speeds? Or do they just get knocked down a peg in power? Are these cars still going to only have 310 HP 10 years from now too? Most bread and butter cars will be approaching that much power and torque by then... I just don't get it. How can you only have that high of a power rating when you KNOW cars are going to be having more than that soon? Knowing GM this transmission will probably be around for at least the next 15 years, looks like they'll be playing catch up again pretty soon.

 

I don't worry I have read plenty of car magazines. I have about 10--3" binders full of them. Yeah I see what you mean by only 4 gears---but the majority of prasie has been for the excellent opperation of the 4 speed auto.

Only latley has there been crisitsm of the number of gears.

I see what you mean---new product, new name. Its just when a products name has a good track record few companes will totally change the name.

Well I can see hp going up but torque is a little harder to come by--so thats why I see no problem with torque capacity for most of GMs V6's. Unless they are supercharged/turbo (like a 3.6L HF V6) they won't hit that wall in NA form for a long time.

 

the 4 speed transaxle (for RWD it would be a transmission...) that is in the Northstar powered DTS is labled 4T80E. I don't doubt that this transaxle will be replaced by a 6 speed version similar to the 6L80E.

 

Also, I don't understand the hate for "Hydramatic"

That TH350/400 would eat a 4L60/80 for LUNCH on the dragstrip.

 

I kinda like "Hydra-matic". It's certainly very well known-- how many other manufacturer's transmission names can you name? GM's transmissions are still among the very best in terms of quality, if not the number of cogs. But then again, GM's engines generally produce enough torque that they don't need a lot of closely-spaced ratios to keep the engine on boil. Also, I can't think of any other automobile manufacturer besides GM that sells its transmissions to its competitors.

 

bingo

 

Hydramatic is synonomous with GM even though it has evolved over time... much like 'Small Block'.

The new gen ZF 7/8 speed autos sounds technologically scary!

 

I'll take that as your opinion.

I have 8 vehicles with WELL over 100k miles on the original transmission, including an F250 SuperDuty Diesel among them (and we all know that 520 lb-ft of torque shifting into/out of overdrive with 15k lbs behind it is gentle on the gears).
'95 Explorer 4x4 with 227k miles on the original 4R55
'91 Explorer 4x4 with 257k miles on the original A4LD
'89 Mustang LX 5.0 with 221k miles on the original AOD
'94 Town Car with 148k miles on the AODE
I can go on, but don't see the point.

I will be the first to say that GM has had far better performance transmissions for years - especially the automatic units. Ford cuts back on their shift harshness and seems to be content with low stall speeds and lots of slip in the converters - great for smooth, mushy-feeling shifts and soft rides, but not good for performance cars.

Lentech and numerous others have proven without any doubt though, that the AOD and it's later derivatives are just as capable of performance as any other tranny out there when the correct valve bodies and converters are used and bands are adjusted properly. Ford (for some reason unknown to me) just doesn't choose to provide these units in production cars.

In fact, the AOD is a very reliable unit. In stock form, they are notorious for sluggish/mushy shifts, and delayed downshifts when the car is coasting to a stop. But they DO last well when properly serviced.

Bottom line is, if you take care of the equipment, it will take care of you.

I was hoping to see that Ford would impose some new shifting guidlines on this joint-venture that would improve shift quality. The only other benefits I see (for BOTH companies) is the reduced development costs, and the improved amortization of tooling and maintenance - since far more units/year can be used in vehicles for TWO companies instead of only one.

IMO, it was very wise for both companies to do this, and I think they should investigate ways to do it even more - like collapsible steering columns, rear suspension systems, and crash-dampening systems to name a few.
In another thread, we discussed this "joint-venture" approach at length, and I think in the end we all agreed it offers the partners considerable advantages. The things that don't apply are interiors, sheetmetal, and other aspects of a car that make it unique from model-to-model and offer appeal and styling - those things are definitely best left up to the individual carmaker.
I'm all for it.

 

You are complaining about the name?! I know the name can carry a stigma with it, but when its a good stigma I don't see what the problem is. Plus, you are willing to condemn this tranny as just the same as an old "Hydramatic" with 2 or more cogs, but what exactly are you basing that assertion off of? Just because it has the same name? That is nonsense to me.

 

I dont know of anyone that talks about transmissions enough to even know how many gears they have, much more the name of them.