Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I don't know what most supercars these days use buy I can't think of many of the top of my head using DSG, but there must be some.

The Veyron is the only one so far.

VAG (who own Bugatti) were the first company to use it in a road car- The Audi TT.

Although the gearbox in the Veyron was developed in conjunction with Riccardo. Over 50,000 man hours worth of development, apparently.

  • Replies 143
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

conventional autos, and CVTs are VERY different to DSG guys.

I don't know what most supercars these days use buy I can't think of many of the top of my head using DSG, but there must be some.

The difference is simple , tiptronics are autos ( with a torque converter and yes you can change your own gears ) DSG'S are manuals with a clutch but you dont have a clutch pedal , it engages automaticaly , you can change your own gears and can also be used as an auto. Its the way things will go in the future because you have the best of both worlds .

Personaly I can live with a DSG and or a manual but NOT with an autospastic.... I have one right now actualy .... autos suck ...

Props on taking the plunge and signing your name on the dotted line for the new GTR Jash.

I'm sure I speak for everyone here when I say we'll be awaiting your cars arrival with apprehension.

Hope you've got a good camera. :)

DSG'S are manuals with a clutch but you dont have a clutch pedal , it engages automaticaly , you can change your own gears and can also be used as an auto

The difference is a bit more profound than that.

Some M-series Beemers, Ferraris and Lambos have used computer clutch controlled semi-auto gearboxes for ages now- But DSG is a twin clutch setup, that pre-engages the next gear up or down depending on the driving style. The control computer disengages one clutch while engaging the alternate clutch as soon as the other one has stopped driving the input shaft. So you have a near seamless gearshift, and almost no idle-time in the power transmission.

The difference is simple , tiptronics are autos ( with a torque converter and yes you can change your own gears ) DSG'S are manuals with a clutch but you dont have a clutch pedal , it engages automaticaly , you can change your own gears and can also be used as an auto. Its the way things will go in the future because you have the best of both worlds .

Personaly I can live with a DSG and or a manual but NOT with an autospastic.... I have one right now actualy .... autos suck ...

lol, that's exactly what i've been saying... CVT not good. conventional auto not good. DSG very good. DSG is completely different like I said, mainly in that the next gear is already engaged so shifts can be ultra fast.

why does everyone seem to think I have something against DSG?!?! all along I've been saying DSG is excellent and I hope that is what it has.

The difference is a bit more profound than that.

Some M-series Beemers, Ferraris and Lambos have used computer clutch controlled semi-auto gearboxes for ages now- But DSG is a twin clutch setup, that pre-engages the next gear up or down depending on the driving style. The control computer disengages one clutch while engaging the alternate clutch as soon as the other one has stopped driving the input shaft. So you have a near seamless gearshift, and almost no idle-time in the power transmission.

Well I didn't want to go in the final detail , I wanted to say that they are a manual box with a normal hard coupling , unlike autos that have a torque converter coupling that eats power. These boxes are the way of the future , they are the death of the manual box as we know it now and in my opinion the death of the normal auto as we know it today.

Autos use a lot more fuel than manuals in stop start traffic because of the dreaded torque converter .

DSG ( direct shift gearbox) is the latest of these type of boxes , yes they use 2 wet type clutches one does 3 gears ( 1,3,5 ) and the other does the other 3. The next gear is pre engaged so its very quick change in auto mode but if you want to change it yourself it can be slow when the computer doesn't know when you are going to change, especialy on the down change .

Contary to what people think DSG is developed and built by Borg Warner ( for VW) not developed and built by VW .They will be building them for other car makers as well so you will see heaps more very soon. Getrag is another trany builder that will be building these ( twin clutch boxes), actualy they already have , that could be the one in the new GTR . The new BMs have these getrag boxes in 7 speed , I think they call them DCT.

The BMW SMG and the Ferrari use a different type of box its slower to change gears and both BMW and Ferrari are going the DSG (type) boxes already.

The new evo 10 has a DSG box as well, not sure if its made by Getrag or Brg Warner but its the same set up.

The only uincertainty about these type of boxes is durability but i'm sure they will be made durable and made to hold heaps of torque . They are a little heavier than a normal manual box with the same strength and same amout of gears and cost a little more to make as well. Of course car makers will charge a lot more for them for now anyway..

oh and DSG have been around for at least 30 years that I know of. porsche used them in racing cars back in the day and I'm sure there were plenty of others too.

regardless of how quick the DSG shifts

its just not the same .......

Its not a bad thing. I'm quicker everywhere with an manually changed tip auto, and the best part of a DSG is if you cant be bothered with changing you just snick it into D for Drift and away you go.

My OTP read 140 plus on roads - thats well over 150...

Jash

my goodness people, this is a car competing against the worlds best, and you're going to right it off because you can't row with a 6 speed??? :w00t: you'll NEVER be able to shift as quick as these boxes, EVER!

what's an OTP c-red?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
    • @GTSBoy out of the cubic mile of crude oil we burn each year, I wonder how much of that is actually used for providing petrol and diesel.   From memory the figure for cars in Australia, is that they only add up to about 2 to 3% of our CO2 production. Which means something else here is burning a shit tonne of stuff to make CO2, and we're not really straight up burning oil everywhere, so our CO2 production is coming from elsewhere too.   Also we should totally just run thermal energy from deep in the ground. That way we can start to cool the inside of the planet and reverse global warming (PS, this last paragraph is a total piss take)
    • As somebody who works in the energy sector and lives in a subzero climate, i'm convinced EV's will never be the bulk of our transport.  EV battery and vehicle companies over here have been going bankrupt on a weekly basis the last year. 
    • With all the rust on those R32s, how can it even support all the extra weight requirements. Probably end up handling as well as a 1990s Ford Falcon Taxi.
    • Yes...but look at the numbers. There is a tiny tiny fraction of the number of Joules available, compared to what is used/needed. Just because things are "possible" doesn't make them meaningful.
×
×
  • Create New...