infantry

New TSX owner here, I got a simple maybe stupid question about the diffrence trans available . On the At they have a SS mode which seems to me is just a electronic manual . If this is true why is there such a diffrence in peformance ? I have used the SS mode quite often and it feels just like any manual does whithout the clutch work . Any info would be appreciated , Thanks !

evo_to_tsx

first off, the AT is a 5 speed gearbox.. the true manual is a 6 speed.. gear ratio plays a big factor. secondly, the Sequential Shift is controlled and governed by electronics, and whenever you up or downshift, there will always be a delay. I dont know if that answers your question but thats a start
someone else can chime in

Costco

^As stated above the gear ratios are different so the engine power can be used more effectively, plus the manual transmission and its associated components together are lighter than the automatic transmission.

Driving a car with SS and the same car with a clutch is a big difference.

bz268

AT uses the transmission oil to push the gears.
MT pushes the gears physically.

hunterk1

Read up on Torque Converters and the difference will become clear.

mmret

5AT uses a torque converter. This is what allows for some "slip" in the engine / driveline speed (taking gear ratio into account of course). This is also why you don't stall at idle. Basically you have plates, vaguely hemispherical, with fins on the inside, coupled together by a fluid (ATF). The engine fins spin, pushing the fluid, which in turn pushes the driveline fins.

You will of course incur a power loss in the torque converter. Its fairly substantial. It also generates a fair bit of heat (not usually a problem).

Engine/Transmission speed and Driveline speed are not 1:1 here, except when the torque converter "locks", ie the two sections turn at the same speed as they are physically coupled together. The TSX transmission locks up to save gas, basically, as when physically coupled there is negligible power loss.

Shifting manually in SS mode is just telling the computer to move up and down the gears. It also has a bit of idiot-proofing (ie: won't let you downshift into 1st at 100km/h, etc.)

6MT, aside from having 6 speeds instead of 5, uses a clutch which is basically a tooth-less gear. It has a "sticky" surface like sandpaper. You have to push a clutch (duh). Engine and driveline speed are 1:1 when the clutch is engaged. Much lower power loss compared to an unlocked torque converter. Probably about the same with when locked. Requires left leg and right arm muscles.

Not sure about gear ratios but I believe the 5AT is a tad bit taller, even with fewer gears.

infantry

Great Info another challenge to overcome ! Oh well at least I can still destroy the Neons of the world .

amadeus303

iTrader: (2)

Well... as long as it's not an SRT4 lol.

This isn't directed to the OP or anyone in particular... just wanted to add my It puzzles me that some (want to make sure I don't generalize) SS AT users believe that the feel and "experience" of using a sport shift auto is similar to a traditional manny. They're so very different. I can only assume that those blokes have never driven (or can't drive) a stick shift.

CarbonGray Earl

My 2 cents as well....I know your post was well-intentioned, but honestly, I still don't understand why MT owners care. Every positive AT thread has something like this, and I still can't figure out why everyone's personal experience can't be just as valid as yours or any other TSX driver.

I've driven manual for 10+ years in everything from a 1970-something CVCC to a Ferrari 360. I know manuals, my wife probably drives manual better than most of the "hardcore" manual drivers in here, and I still believe the SS AT is pretty good (if not the best) for what it is.

gavinn58

I'd have to agree that the TSX sportshift is pretty good; amongst the quickest shifting ones available in an everyday production car. My wife's IS350 paddle shifters are so slow and worthless I use them in traffic to down shift.

jaehshim

correct. I've tested many many cars sportshift/sequential shift.
i also have Lexus IS in the family , and yes it is worthless, useless. i don't know why they build paddles behind the steering wheel... it's slower than my old 04 Mercedes ML350 SUV.

same goes to BMW E90 3 series sequential and Audi A4 CVT or sequential

amadeus303

iTrader: (2)

CGE - I hear ya (and I'll try not to digress much more from the real purpose of this thread), but my point is summed up in your words. It's "pretty good... for what it is". It's not *like* a manual transmission. You have to shift sequentially, so if I need instant power or pick me up, I can't downshift into 3rd from 5th. My point isn't that the MT is better than an AT, or an AT w/ SS, or an AT w/ paddles... or even a clutchless DSG... so if I've implied that, let me clarify. I just wanted to point out that no matter how you slice the AT, it'll never "be" like a real MT.

gavinn58

If the shifts were quick, then paddle shifters would give you an F1-type feel to the car which would be pretty cool. I'm surprised you don't care for Audi's DSG as I've never driven it but only heard good things about it. One of my co-workers hated BMW's SMG which he drove on the E46 M3.

1Louder

This isn't a criticism of how the TSX SS is implemented, but may be just a criticism of the concept of it in general. I have an AT, and I've played with the SS long enough to know it bores the heck out of me. I can control the gears with the gas petal well enough. In sort, the SS offers no real "fun factor" for me. I was raised on a stick shift, and drove one for the better part of 15 years. There's something about the whole body experience of driving an MT - the coordination of the left foot on the clutch, right hand on the stick, shifting in perfect concert with what you see coming at you. It's more of a whole-driver experience. The SS to me is just an alternative to the the task of shifting up or down.

So the SS is what it is, but I don't think it's anywhere near a suitable alternative to an the MT.

CarbonGray Earl

I am in complete agreement with you. its just that I don't understand why it needs to be brought up. I think that AT owners on this forum should be given some credit in regards to what they know about MT vs. AT. The majority here know that the MT is an essential part of the driving experience, and that an MT does give worlds more control over power (and delivers power more efficiently). There are probably some overzealous AT owners out there somewhere, but I think most of the AT folks on here are level-headed about it.

One thing I will argue though, is that the 5th to 3rd shift happens alot quicker than you would think in the TSX AT, even if it goes 5-4-3. The advantage in having a computer between us in the transmission is that I can input 2 rapid downshifts and let the computer figure out the rest. Usually, in the 5-3 situation it'll skip 4th altogether. Since we don't have to physically ensure its in gear, that 5-3 downshift is pretty consistent and very fast.

waTSX

GenXY2k

i like my SS. not as sharp as manual but good enough to pass some stupid drivers on the road. the best auto/semi-manual trasmission i have driven will probably be the vw/audi DSG. that thing is soooooooooo smooth and fast !!

mrgold35

I don't use SS every day; I really don't see the need during every day commuter driving.

I use SS when I'm cruising in the mountains. SS mode in 3rd gear is perfect to driving on the mountain switchbacks with plenty of hp/tq in the meat of the power band to put a shit eating grin on my face every time. I only switch it back to auto when my wife starts to get a little car sick.

wackura

One of the best parts of driving an MT is pushing down on the clutch and joining up the clutch disk with the fly wheel. If you don't get to do that then I dont see the point of participating all.

CarbonGray Earl

^^Geez, MT owners really like to muddy up a good AT thread. The OP wanted to know the difference between the MT and AT....he's an Iraq vet who would have gotten an MT if it weren't for injuries suffered in service to our country.

If you guys could get over your fixation on MT>AT, maybe you can be constructive.

wackura

Sorry I missed the Iraq vet part. Is that in another thread?

CarbonGray Earl

^^Ya, its the other thread he started.

https://acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39313

Hey, no offense to you MT guys, really. I'm one too, just not for the TSX.

The OP is seeking answers and not bashing one or the other.

lcrazyaznl

iTrader: (1)

Honestly i wish i could drive the car mt all the time but in nyc it sucks traffic is unpredictable these days, and accidents are everywhere. Its a total bitch to be driving a stick here in stop and go traffic. Im sure it handles great but the tsx isn't even great of a car to only be a stricly weekend car, so therefore automatic is more practical for everyday driving.

I'm happy with my at but if i lived else where than nyc then i'd be happy to get a stick and then roam free on the highways with that power.

Unfortantely even if i try to go really early and late these days in nyc traffic suck people don't know how to drive. and thus accidents and stop and go atleast 4 times a week...

wackura

I feel thoroughly shitty finding out that I told an Iraq war vet with a crippled left leg that shifting gears isn't worth the trouble if you can't depress a clutch. If I were faced with such adversity I'd be excited about sports shift as it didn't even exist a few years ago. The vast majority of TSX's are AT so there are a lot more colors to choose from. I got stuck with a color I wouldn't have picked otherwise.

jaehshim

honestly, i would regret if i got an automatic S4 or M3, cars with much higher level in performance.

but i don't regret getting an automatic tsx, compared to manual.

True, manuals are much fun, you really do have more control in cars.

With tsx, however, honestly not much to play around when it's
1.fwd , manual and auto tranny can't really change the car handles in daily road...nor track honestly, downshift + attacking corner may be dfferent, but do we have enough power to feel those each gears, and maybe try oversteering? No.

2. no turbo or high boost kit available except comptech s/c at 5psi and Red Shift motorsports s/c upto 15psi , (with those, it will be still slower than a stock 350Z 0 to 60 and the Red Shift motorsports with stage 3 full psi will only give us burning front wheels)

personally i think TSX is a car that isn't so much different in manual and automatic (again, thinking about the power we re given, the fwd, performance availability...)

Unless we are comparing S4 automatic (no DSG) and manual S4, 07+ VQ35HR Nissan 350Z with 306 hp automatic and manual, automatic Z06 Corvette and that of manual, we can't really say TSX manual is so much fun compared to automatic SS.

DuckDodgers

OK, to answer the data part of the question...the 04-06 both use either the ASU5 6-speed manual or the MTCA 5-speed automatic.

Specs:

6-MT

Type - ASU5 Synchronized, 6-speed forward, 1 reverse

Primary Reduction - Direct 1:1

Gear Ratio - 1st 3.266 2nd 1.880 3rd 1.354 4th 1.027 5th 0.825 6th 0.659 Reverse 3.583

Final Reduction - Single Helical gear, gear ratio 4.764

5-AT

Type - MCTA Electoronically controlled automatic, 5-speed forward, 1 reverse, 3-element torque converter with lock-up clutch

Primary Reduction - Direct 1:1

Gear Ratio - 1st 2.652 2nd 1.517 3rd 1.082 4th 0.773 5th 0.566 Reverse 2.000

Final Reduction - Single helical gear, gear ratio 4.438

OK, so someone step in and bail me out if I screw this up (yea, like I had to say that!)...the rear end ratio means with your AT the driven wheels turn 1 time for every 4.438 turns of the halfshafts, versus every 4.764 with the MT. Of course, to figure out the math, you have to factor in the transmission ratio too.

So, AT in 1st runs 2.652 x 4.438 revs to turn the tire once...or roughly 11.77 revs per rotation AT LOCK-UP. Before lock-up, the fluid in the torque converter is not transmitting 100% of the rotational energy.

The MT, on the other hand, in 1st runs 3.226 x 4.764 revs, or about 15.37 revs per rotation with no converter loss.

OK, lets run this out:
Automatic
1st 11.77
2nd 6.73
3rd 4.80
4th 3.43
5th 2.51

Manual
1st 15.37
2nd 8.96
3rd 6.45
4th 4.89
5th 3.93
6th 3.13

Now, what does that mean. Well, the MT will accelerate better because of the gearing, but will be spinning faster for the same speed, if in the same gear. The gearing allows the engine to accelerate more easily in the MT, overcoming inertia and such.

OK, so why isn't the auto more fuel efficient then? Because of the inefficiency of the torque converter.

Hope this helps...

Da Duck

ChrismanTSX

Good explanation. In fact, the 5AT is slightly more fuel efficient than the 6MT, primarily due to the taller gear ratios/lower revs.

It's not much, but proves your point: for MY2007 (in Canada, so in liters/100km -where lower number are better), www.acura.ca lists the following:

- 6MT City/Highway: 10.8*/7.2*
- 5AT City/Highway: 10.5*/7.0*...

Overtaxed

Well, at least you said so. I don't think many people would have the guts to come back and say they're sorry like that.

1Louder

I wouldn't have bothered with my post either had I known.

Sorry Infantry - wish you the best with your injury and getting that TSX where you want it! Thank you for your sacrifice.

amadeus303

iTrader: (2)

I'm in agreement w/ a lot of pts brought up by everyone here. CGE - your points are well taken on the SS; there's a reason why many race cars aren't created with the traditional stick shift. A human could never shift quicker than a computer. Gavinn58, I actually love the DSG system --- one of the smoothest I've ever driven. However, for me personally, given the choice, I'd get the traditional MT. For me, it's not necessarily the power delivery as it is the "feeling" of rowing my gears.

Again... I just want to clarify that I'm not trying to imply that one choice is superior than the other. People make choices for different reasons. I owned one AT car in my life (because I wanted to make sure my wife or anyone else could drive it if necessary); I had practicality in mind when I purchased that vehicle. For the OP, the MT is not even an option. In retrospect, I can see why my initial comments might have been received the way they were, so I apologize if my post sounded condescending. I will say I'm pleasantly surprised that this thread has remained "under control" for the most part. Usually, we start seeing full-on flame wars at this point...