Didn't BMW's use GM autos for a while. I always thought that GM made much better autos than Ford. I am thinking of the crap *** AOD in the Fox Mustangs.

Of course, most older autos will have trouble living past 150K miles in a performance car anyway.

 

I wonder how well a Camaro would sell if it was a manual 7-speed. That would be crazy.

 

Actualy, the GM Autos are some of the best transmissions out there by far. My old Taurus, that had 3 transmissions before the warranty was up, and then one more for a recall. I would rather have a GM transmission then a Ford or Chrysler. The glass 10 bolts is another story.

 

BMW, Rolls Royce, and Jaguar to name a few that have used HydraMatics.

GM does indeed build the best automatics in the world. Even today they are pretty much the most durable and best shifting slushboxes on the market. The main knock against them is that most still have only four cogs, but that's not been such a hindrance when mated with GM's typically torquey engines.

 

Ok so the $64000 question is whether or not the clutch is controlled by a left foot and a pedal, or is automatically controlled by the vehicle.

I also wonder just what a planetary gearset manual transmission would be like in the long run compared to a synchromesh gearbox.

 

From the way it reads, I would think that this transmission is more automatic then manual. It probably would have no clutch pedal, and might do away with the common transmission flushes that are required for automatics, since it looks like it doesn't have any clutches to control the gear engagement. Especially since it says that the gears are synchronized. The Park gear would be required for when you park and get out of the car. Instead of leaving it in gear or in netrual, like a manual, you would be require to put it into Park to get the key out.

I don't know much about the VW/Audi design, but when I read this I think of Ferrari's clutchless manual that uses a computer to release the clutch. On the GM design I think that the clutch will constantly be engaged so it won't require a computer to control the clutch. I'm thinking more along the lines of the Jerico manuals they use in NASCAR or in Pro Stock. The only difference is that you won't have to use a clutch from a dead stop.

 

No hidden meaning here Al. Just ran across this and a thread about it in a CTS-V forum.

It does have a clutch, BTW. I'm not so sure how I feel about this whole thing though.

 

As long as my wife can drive it (she's not comfortable driving manuals) it makes the prospect owning an M6 Camaro an even more appealing experience.

 

I beg to differ on your GM tranny assessment. Maybe the GM trannys after the TH350 and TH400 that are fragile. Those pre-computer controlled tranny's are practically bulletproof.

 

Erm, what's the point if I still have to bother with bucking and rearing(me operating a manual tranny)? So it has park? Big deal. I don't mind rowing through gears, it's the gay-*** clutch pedal that keeps me away from manuals. I just plain suck with them. lol. I don't see why they couldn't make a manual with an automatically-engaging clutch.

I don't see the deal, here. It is the clutch pedal that keeps people away from manual trannies.

 

It is the clutch pedal that draws me, and many others, to manual trannies.

 

Me too.

 

I still wonder how they do it. Automatics use Hydraulic Pressure to lock clutches which in turn locks the Planetaries in different configurations.

So your basically going to have to Mechanically "Lock" the Planetaries - but it's got Synchros too... Wierd... (Beyond me right now)

 

Me three.


Having been in M3s with the SMG, i'm pretty sure i would NEVER buy a car with one. Manual control of the clutch slippage and RPMs is the whole point of a 'manual' transmission. SMGs are NOT anywhere near as smoth as an automatic, and even fall short of a well driven manual when it comes to just general driving comfort IMO and that's in a >$50K snob mobile.

-It just does not do a good of of smoothing the transition between gears during upshifts, the dead window between gears just isn't dealt with smoothly at all, the computer doesn't seem to understand the concept of staying on the gas and letting off as/after you start pushing the clutch and again on re-engagement to give you that gradual change in acceleration.

-Sure the auto rev matching on downshifts is convenient, except what if you want to drop more than one gear at a time. I frequently am cruising on a backroad in 6th and need/want to go straight to third to pass somebody or just have some fun. That operation takes longer and is much more awkward feeling wit the SMG

-Last but not least, how about good old musclecar tire roasting fun. Dumping the clutch and frying them is way too much fun to give up, and again, including downshifts. The feeling of dumping the clutch into second at 40mph, roasting the tires and getting sideways just can't be beat.


I'm sure SMGs and the like have their place on the road course. For me though, they take ALL the fun out of a manual and offer no benefits that a slushbox can't beat.

 

I agree totally. I'd rather just put the shifter in DRIVE. The only purpose, that I can see for SMG's is it gives guys who have simply no clue as to how to drive a stick....the opportunity to impress their bimbo girlfriends with driving theatrics.