auto versus 6 speed

[hasselbach]

I am tiring of this argument. You like your auto, I like my 6-speed. On paper you auto is a wonderful thing, in the real world it did not work as well as you suggest for me. I have made my point and I'm outta here.

Sometimes the truth is hard to take all at once, I understand. :{ :{ :{



But who said I like my auto? It has the crappiest TC in the world, and the lock up mode sucks. That's what I have said in the past. Does that give you the impression that I like it? Whoa cowboy. . Its still a better than the 6-speed, but with a few decent mods, it will be by far a better choice. How do I know? Because my modded Allison will beat the pants off any 5 or 6 speed in towing, MPG and et, hands down period. .



Elvis has left the building

 

[gsbrockman]

Could someone post some rear wheel horsepower & torque figures from a 325/600 (or 305/555) with AUTO and SIX SPEED from a STOCK engine ? Or is this just additional ******* & moaning :-{} that will serve no purpose ?

Greg

 

[hasselbach]

That's not going to show anything because you make your dyno runs in 1 to 1, locking the converter. Not to many dynos could take a measurement in 1st or 2nd with the converter unlocked due to the extreme amount of torque produced by the lower gears and TC multiplication.



My 04. 5 ran 16. 6, 91 mph at a track 3000 feet in elevation (6000 ft measured air density at the time). My brothers 04. 5 6 speed ran 17. 2, 88 mph the same day (me driving) I can post the slips if those want to see the 60 foot and 1/8 mile times. Our trucks are equal other than I have cloth, he has leather. The auto flat out kills the stick out of the hole, no comparison. Both are 4x4, 4 door, short beds.

 

[KBennett]

I dyno'd my truck (see sig) with about 14K miles. While I was there a guy with a 600 auto showed up with 2K miles on it. Our results were almost identical. I don't know if the 600, the auto, or mileage were the difference. A stock Duramax/Allison was before me (I think it was an '04) and our numbers were almost identical as well.



Maybe they should have unlocked the TC for more power :-laf

 

[hasselbach]

locked, the auto and the stick should be almost identical. Unlocked, the auto will produce more low end, which is why the auto has a 1st gear of 2. 46 whereas the stick is something like 5. 8... under the curve, before lock up the auto will always produce higher torque figures at equal gearing. not hard to comprehend, you just have to expand you thinking a bit.

 

[hasselbach]

In your earlier posts you indicated that the TC is a continuously variable transmission that will change ratios to keep the engine at max torque or max efficiency. Where can I buy it? Maybe in the age of the Jetsons.

No, I didn't say that at all. The TC acts like a variable geared transmission, due to the range of operation that it operates at. Hey, just because you don't have a clue of what the subject is about doesn't mean you have to be cocky :-laf



I used to work hand in hand with 2 major TC companies assisting the development of TCs for both towing and racing applications. B&M in the 80 and 90's and TCI from mid 90 on. I know what I'm talking about, whether you care to learn is up to you. If not, there's another episode of Ozzy on the tube.

 

[EEdmondson]

I didn't know we were talking about drag racing. My 6sp sucks at drag racing, but that's not what I bought it for. How does a 48RE compare to a 6sp towing hills? I'm talking about stock trucks... not something on the drawing board that can't be had or costs big $$$ to mod.

 

[hasselbach]

I didn't know we were talking about drag racing. My 6sp sucks at drag racing, but that's not what I bought it for. How does a 48RE compare to a 6sp towing hills? I'm talking about stock trucks... not something on the drawing board that can't be had or costs big $$$ to mod.

I thought you left? Your back?



You answered your own question. Your inefficient 6 speed needs to have a 5. 8 first gear to do what my auto can do with a 2. 46 first gear. If I can move a given amount of weight faster and quicker with an auto, wouldn't you think that if the torque and horsepower are equal, the vehicle that is able to move faster and quicker is more efficient?

 

[EEdmondson]

No, I didn't say that at all. The TC acts like a variable geared transmission, due to the range of operation that it operates at. Hey, just because you don't have a clue of what the subject is about doesn't mean you have to be cocky :-laf



I used to work hand in hand with 2 major TC companies assisting the development of TCs for both towing and racing applications. B&M in the 80 and 90's and TCI from mid 90 on. I know what I'm talking about, whether you care to learn is up to you. If not, there's another episode of Ozzy on the tube.

I don't doubt your knowlege on the subject and I'm sorry if I come off "cocky". I thought we were having a discussion on auto vs 6sp. You didn't address the wasted power producing heat in that fluid coupling that 2 of us brought up. You know that heat isn't free.

 

[hasselbach]

clutches don't get hot? flywheels don't warp?



remember, you can't create energy, you can only convert it into other things. the TQ will get hot due to the creation of torque through the pressures created inside the converter. its a simple matter of physics. yes, some poorly designed converters don't do squat and get super high temps (principles of fluid shearing against a fixed mass). I've seen some designs recently that have over 3. 5 TC multiplications, but the stress they imposed on the transmission was the limiting factor. With a multiplication figure like that, you could literally have a 2 or 3 speed auto and still be extremely efficient. Look at some super comp cars, they move mass faster with 2 speeds than three or four. We tired a 1 speed auto car in the 90s, and picked up 2 tenths and 5 mph, but the heat was the issue, only because the converter was creating a tremendous amount of torque.

 

[EEdmondson]

I thought you left? Your back?



You answered your own question. Your inefficient 6 speed needs to have a 5. 8 first gear to do what my auto can do with a 2. 46 first gear. If I can move a given amount of weight faster and quicker with an auto, wouldn't you think that if the torque and horsepower are equal, the vehicle that is able to move faster and quicker is more efficient?

No, it just shifts slowly. Put a load on it and see what happens. 1st gear is not needed when empty, it just slows you down.

 

[DPelletier]

Hasselbach,

When my truck is in first gear, popping the clutch almost reverses the rotation of the earth (assuming I'm pointing in the right direction, of course). I don't need any more torque in first gear. You've raised some interesting, yet irrelevant points. The 48RE isn't a CVT, and the heat created in the torque converter DOES represent wasted engine power. The NV-5600 does have more gear selections for towing and does get better mileage. Spare me the fluid dynamics, I am aware of the physics involved due to my misspent youth at University.



Dave

 

[CChase]

remember, you can't create energy, you can only convert it into other things. the TQ will get hot due to the creation of torque through the pressures created inside the converter. its a simple matter of physics.

This horse has been beaten to the point of being unsuitable for dog food..... but, I don't think you get physics. You're statement above contradicts itself.



1) You cannot create torque from nothing, torque comes from the engine



2) TC merely multiplies the torque that is supplied to it by the engine. That is what transmissions do, whether it be an auto, manual or a CVT.



3) Heat is created in the TC by fluid shear, fluid shear requires energy which is taken away from the engine.

 

[PJ]

clutches don't get hot? flywheels don't warp?



remember, you can't create energy, you can only convert it into other things. the TQ will get hot due to the creation of torque through the pressures created inside the converter. its a simple matter of physics. yes, some poorly designed converters don't do squat and get super high temps (principles of fluid shearing against a fixed mass). I've seen some designs recently that have over 3. 5 TC multiplications, but the stress they imposed on the transmission was the limiting factor. With a multiplication figure like that, you could literally have a 2 or 3 speed auto and still be extremely efficient. Look at some super comp cars, they move mass faster with 2 speeds than three or four. We tryed a 1 speed auto car in the 90s, and picked up 2 tenths and 5 mph, but the heat was the issue, only because the converter was creating a tremendous amount of torque.

ONE MORE TIME :-laf :-laf :-laf

 

[hasselbach]

Hasselbach,

When my truck is in first gear, popping the clutch almost reverses the rotation of the earth (assuming I'm pointing in the right direction, of course). I don't need any more torque in first gear. You've raised some interesting, yet irrelevant points. The 48RE isn't a CVT, and the heat created in the torque converter DOES represent wasted engine power. The NV-5600 does have more gear selections for towing and does get better mileage. Spare me the fluid dynamics, I am aware of the physics involved due to my misspent youth at University.



Dave

Popping the clutch releases the stored energy from the 100 lbs flywheel. Points are not irrelevant, just facts, deal with it or be in denial. And yes, a auto is fairly close to a CVT due to the variable TC traits. Heat is caused from not wasted engine hp, but due to fluid shearing and the tranference of energy. . that's like physics 101.

 

[hasselbach]

This horse has been beaten to the point of being unsuitable for dog food..... but, I don't think you get physics. You're statement above contradicts itself.



1) You cannot create torque from nothing, torque comes from the engine







Wrong, torque is multiplied due to the multiplication of pressure against the stator. I can prove to you 100 ft lbs inputted will result in 220 ft lbs output, all due to the multiplication of torque as a result of the fluid flow within the converter. I'd go into even deeper discussing fin angle, blade curvature, stator design etc, but its probably over your head.







2) TC merely multiplies the torque that is supplied to it by the engine. That is what transmissions do, whether it be an auto, manual or a CVT.







Yep, and the TC is the most efficient way to do it, due to the variable design and multiplication properties. Dude, a clutch and flywheel is the Fred Flintstone method. Flywheels only store energy until displaced, then they must be recharged with energy again. TC don't. So which one is more efficient?





3) Heat is created in the TC by fluid shear, fluid shear requires energy which is taken away from the engine.



Hey, if you are able to multiply Torque 2 to 3 times, some energy is expent in doing so, its basic laws of physic. Fluid is also heated due to other principles such as friction, pressures and so forth.

I have a masters in mechanical engineering, and you? Tell you what, spend some time on the internet or read some books other than comics, have some foundation to speak from and then come back to the forum. I am quoting 25 years of actually performing 1000 of tests for my own racing company, and working for other firms as well. You got your basis from ????

 

[RankRam]

hasselbach I'm not interested in getting in an argument or heated discussion, but after reading two pages of this I have one question for you. Have you done any towing with the 48RE? I just don't understand how you can think that 4 gears and your amazing torque converter can out pull the NV5600.



Please note that I used to have a 99 CDT with a five speed and E-Brake and would much prefer it to pulling a sizable load with my 03 48RE equipped Ram.



Thanks

 

[DPelletier]

Hasselbach,

I think you've earned the dubious distinction of being the most arrogant member of the TDR. All that in only 6 weeks! Congrats.

The NV-5600 is a better transmission for towing than a 48RE. That's not my opinion, its a fact. Rankram is right.



Cheers,

Dave

 

[hasselbach]

hasselbach I'm not interested in getting in an argument or heated discussion, but after reading two pages of this I have one question for you. Have you done any towing with the 48RE? I just don't understand how you can think that 4 gears and your amazing torque converter can out pull the NV5600.



Please note that I used to have a 99 CDT with a five speed and E-Brake and would much prefer it to pulling a sizable load with my 03 48RE equipped Ram.



Thanks

ah if a 40 foot, 6 horse trailer that weighs 18K lbs is anything, then yes, I do tow some weight. I've had both, auto and 6 speeds, and yes, the auto pulls better. Sorry, but that's the truth. You guys with your little 5th wheels with the slide outs that maybe tip the scales at 8K lbs are probably fine with the 6 speed...

 

[Matt400]

The only time the computer defuels is in 4 low

And its a darn good thing, I was just looking at the size of the front drive shaft & U joints today on an 04 D-max and just thought to myself... dang, its the same size as the Ranger mini 4x4 I once owned