What causes the performance difference between AT and MT of TSX?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-17-2005, 09:56 PM
  #1  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
ignatiuslee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: CA
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What causes the performance difference between AT and MT of TSX?

MT is faster than AT because it has 6 gears in compare to AT's 5?
If they both have the same number of gears, would the performance be closer?
Old 03-17-2005, 10:02 PM
  #2  
Instructor
 
ForceSHO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Age: 48
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
no, its the torque converter ? on at it eats up 10-15%

crap i dont remember what else.. someone here more technical knows
Old 03-17-2005, 10:02 PM
  #3  
Photography Nerd
 
Dan Martin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto
Age: 44
Posts: 21,489
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Gear ratios are one thing, the other would be the standard inefficiencies of an automatic transmission such as the use of a torque converter instead of clutch.

An AT is typically 7-10% less efficient than a MT.
Old 03-17-2005, 10:24 PM
  #4  
Mmmm... tasty.
 
McGriddle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Torque converter.
Old 03-17-2005, 10:34 PM
  #5  
Banned
 
matelot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Bushwhacked Land
Age: 50
Posts: 3,846
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
a trout slap from dzuy
Old 03-17-2005, 11:00 PM
  #6  
04 remembrance
 
iamhomin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not to mention some weight difference.
Old 03-17-2005, 11:10 PM
  #7  
Burning Brakes
 
TSX Cman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
its that lazy robot in your car shifting under your seat.
Old 03-17-2005, 11:56 PM
  #8  
Team Owner
 
jlukja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Long Beach, CA
Age: 61
Posts: 20,558
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
When you say "faster" do you mean 0-60mph? I believe the top speed is the same. The engine output is the same but the AT, because of the torque converter, is less efficient and thus delivers less of the engine output to the tires. The AT is also a little heavier. So, fewer horses pulling a slightly heavier car will result in a slower accelerating vehicle.
Old 03-18-2005, 02:40 AM
  #9  
Intermediate
Thread Starter
 
ignatiuslee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: CA
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yea, I foucus on the 0-60
Old 03-18-2005, 08:02 AM
  #10  
dom
Senior Moderator
 
dom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 47,710
Received 801 Likes on 662 Posts
IB
Old 03-18-2005, 08:16 AM
  #11  
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
 
CGTSX2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beach Cities, CA
Posts: 24,299
Received 378 Likes on 198 Posts
Originally Posted by jlukja
When you say "faster" do you mean 0-60mph? I believe the top speed is the same. The engine output is the same but the AT, because of the torque converter, is less efficient and thus delivers less of the engine output to the tires. The AT is also a little heavier. So, fewer horses pulling a slightly heavier car will result in a slower accelerating vehicle.
Actually, the gear ratios of the AT mean that it has a theoretical top speed significantly higher than the MT.

But if he's talking about quickness, what the other have mentioned pretty much covers it.
Old 03-18-2005, 08:25 AM
  #12  
Moderator Alumnus
 
sauceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Windsor-Quebec corridor
Age: 47
Posts: 7,709
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
CVT > Sequential > MT > AT.

Old 03-18-2005, 08:50 AM
  #13  
Go Giants
 
Whiskers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: PA
Age: 53
Posts: 69,913
Received 1,234 Likes on 823 Posts
The driver.
Old 03-18-2005, 09:49 AM
  #14  
Suzuka Master
 
ClutchPerformer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Age: 43
Posts: 5,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ignatiuslee
MT is faster than AT because it has 6 gears in compare to AT's 5?
If they both have the same number of gears, would the performance be closer?
You're right, it would be *closer* but still not the same. Even with the same number of gears and the same gear ratios, an MT would still be more efficient (faster if you like) because they're simpler mechanically.
Old 03-18-2005, 09:54 AM
  #15  
TSX User
 
TinkyWinky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wouldn't better efficiency (torque conversion) result in better mpg?
Old 03-18-2005, 09:55 AM
  #16  
Suzuka Master
 
ClutchPerformer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Age: 43
Posts: 5,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TinkyWinky
Wouldn't better efficiency (torque conversion) result in better mpg?
Yes. And the MT has the better efficiency and better MPG.
Old 03-18-2005, 10:27 AM
  #17  
TSX User
 
TinkyWinky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Was there a glitch in the Matrix? The last I remember, the 5AT had better highway mpg.

Seems like Acura updated their specs for the TSX.
Old 03-18-2005, 10:31 AM
  #18  
Instructor
 
o_nate's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The 5AT has better highway MPG because of gearing - it has a steeper top gear - so it requires lower RPMs to go the same speed at highway cruising speeds.
Old 03-18-2005, 10:37 AM
  #19  
Troutslap Mod-DUH-rator
 
dzuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 8,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
:troutslap

gearing.
Old 03-18-2005, 12:11 PM
  #20  
Suzuka Master
 
ClutchPerformer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Age: 43
Posts: 5,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TinkyWinky
Was there a glitch in the Matrix? The last I remember, the 5AT had better highway mpg.

Seems like Acura updated their specs for the TSX.
Yes, actually there was.

Seriously, though. Gearing wasn't changed, and the stated MPG numbers have. The only explanation we had at the time it happened was that it was always this way and the previous numbers were preliminary (and wrong).

So basically, the MT's efficiency is able to overcome the AT's (pretty big) gearing advantage.

One more victory for the MT...
Old 03-18-2005, 12:29 PM
  #21  
Photography Nerd
 
Dan Martin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto
Age: 44
Posts: 21,489
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Don't even look at the MPG figures that are posted on the car, they're pretty well meaningless. They just put a car on a dyno and calculate fuel consumption (it's not even directly measured). The calculations don't include aerodynamic resistance so if you put a Civic engine in a H2 they'd end up with the same MPG.
Old 03-18-2005, 01:19 PM
  #22  
TSX User
 
TinkyWinky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But I do believe that the 5AT runs at 2500 rpm @ 70mph, while the 6MT runs at almost 3000 rpm. Would this not suggest that the 5AT has higher highway mpg?
Old 03-18-2005, 03:03 PM
  #23  
Racer
 
AcuraGT-3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Age: 53
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ignatiuslee
MT is faster than AT because it has 6 gears in compare to AT's 5?
If they both have the same number of gears, would the performance be closer?
Old 03-18-2005, 05:05 PM
  #24  
Moderator Alumnus
 
sauceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Windsor-Quebec corridor
Age: 47
Posts: 7,709
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by ClutchPerformer
Yes, actually there was.

Seriously, though. Gearing wasn't changed, and the stated MPG numbers have. The only explanation we had at the time it happened was that it was always this way and the previous numbers were preliminary (and wrong).
Naaaah!

They just decided to revise their numbers when I whipped out a 38.5mpg last year!

Seriously though, has any AT equalled that number yet?
Old 03-22-2005, 10:22 PM
  #25  
8th Gear
 
jonesy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Age: 43
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ok, let's clear a few things up: the driver makes the difference in a 0-60 time run like you're talking about. A "good" shifter should theoretically be able to get a manual transmission car up to 60 faster than the same car with an automatic transmission. This has to do with the different gears (usually taller on an automatic), less efficiency (more mechanical stuff going on with an automatic), and better clutch starts off the line compared to what an automatic's torque converter can handle.

Second: your top speed is not determined solely by your gearing, if it was then yes, the automatic would have a higher top speed. However, it just so happens that that is not the case. The TSX is drag limited, which means it just doesn't have enough horse power to overcome the drag forces generated by going 136 MPH. I don't know which car has a higher top speed mind you, but it's based on what engine speed you're at when you reach top speed, and where that falls in the power curve.

Third: the gas mileage is also based on several things: driving style, air temperature, gasoline quality, and slew of other variables. According to Acura, for the 2005 model year, the AT does get better gas mileage. By my best guess this is because the automatic is not geared as aggressively as the MT. 500 RPM's on the freeway can affect gas mileage and Acura's automatics have become fairly efficient compared to their MT counterparts.
Old 03-23-2005, 07:27 AM
  #26  
Moderator Alumnus
 
sauceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Windsor-Quebec corridor
Age: 47
Posts: 7,709
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
with jonesy about the gas mileage.

The top speed of the 6MT is actually higher than 136mph. I've personally been up to 143, Kurt Bradley's been up to 144, and I know a few other members have been at least that high too.

I suspect that since gearing is a lot taller on the AT, due to the powerband of the engine, the ATs won't make enough power to sustain 140+ mph speeds.
Old 03-23-2005, 10:03 AM
  #27  
8th Gear
 
jonesy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Age: 43
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
when your top speed is drag limited, your top speed will be highly dependent on the wind direction and velocity. If a car can't push through wind faster than 136 MPH but you have a tail wind of 20 MPH, then when your car is going 136, you're still only pushing through wind at 116. The rest of the math is up to you.
Old 03-23-2005, 11:15 AM
  #28  
Suzuka Master
 
ClutchPerformer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Age: 43
Posts: 5,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jonesy
....According to Acura, for the 2005 model year, the AT does get better gas mileage.....


Everything else I agree with, though. Good post.
Old 03-23-2005, 11:37 AM
  #29  
Team Owner
 
jlukja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Long Beach, CA
Age: 61
Posts: 20,558
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by ClutchPerformer


Everything else I agree with, though. Good post.


Originally Posted by Acura.com
GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS


EPA Estimated Fuel Mileage (city/highway)

Manual: 22/31* mpg

Automatic: 21/30* mpg

Fuel Tank Capacity

17.1 US Gallons (65 liters)

Recommended Fuel

Premium unleaded 91 octane or higher**

Minimum Ground Clearance (unloaded)

6.2 in (157.5mm)

Curb Weight

Manual: 3230 lbs (1465 kg)

Automatic: 3318 lbs (1505 kg)

Manual with Navigation System: 3241 lbs (1470 kg)

Automatic with Navigation System: 3329 lbs (1510 kg)

Weight Distribution (% front/rear)

Manual: 60/40

Automatic: 61/39

Headroom (front/rear)

37.8 in (960 mm) / 37.3 in (947 mm)

Legroom (front/rear)

42.4 in (1076 mm) / 34.2 in (868 mm)

Hiproom (front/rear)

54.4 in (1381 mm) / 54.4 in (1382 mm)

Shoulder room (front/rear)

55.4 in (1406 mm) / 53.5 in (1360 mm)

EPA Passenger Volume

91.0 cu. ft.

EPA Cargo Volume

13.0 cu. ft.

* Use for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary.

** Gasoline with an octane number lower than 91 may be used, with reduced performance.
Old 03-23-2005, 11:56 AM
  #30  
dom
Senior Moderator
 
dom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 47,710
Received 801 Likes on 662 Posts
21? I don't think I've ever done as bad as 21. I avg 24 easily. 23 when its really cold
Old 03-23-2005, 11:58 AM
  #31  
Photography Nerd
 
Dan Martin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto
Age: 44
Posts: 21,489
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Those are good ol' EPA numbers. Totally meaningless in reality.
Old 03-23-2005, 01:00 PM
  #32  
8th Gear
 
jonesy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Age: 43
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I apologize for the post, but I have the sticker in front of me and it says 21/30 (yes i have the 6 speed). I also specifically remember the salesperson telling me the automatic got slightly better gas mileage (and the stickers on the automatics did say 22/31). So apparently acura has some confusion with the web page or the sticker printing process.
Old 03-23-2005, 01:09 PM
  #33  
Suzuka Master
 
ClutchPerformer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Age: 43
Posts: 5,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'll take a look at my sticker when I get home (yes I still have it )...
Old 03-23-2005, 01:15 PM
  #34  
8th Gear
 
jonesy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Age: 43
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm curious what other stickers say, is my car special?



Hey, shutup you
Old 03-23-2005, 03:01 PM
  #35  
Team Owner
 
jlukja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Long Beach, CA
Age: 61
Posts: 20,558
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by jonesy
I'm curious what other stickers say, is my car special?



Hey, shutup you
lol, who knew jonesy was schizophrenic?


The mileage numbers changed from 04 to 05. I recall the 04 numbers showed the AT to get better mileage. Maybe they just had some 04 stickers left over?
Old 03-23-2005, 03:13 PM
  #36  
Audi Driving Snob
 
TinkySD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A couple random comments:

The auto tsx 4th gear is a similar ratio to the mt 6th. Cruising on the freeway an auto will be turning significantly lower rpms. The 100lb weight increase is negligible when just cruising. Also, when cruising the at will have it's torque converter "locked up" which eliminates most of the ineffiiency it has compared to a manual. This also lowers power output.

SO i'm not sure why or if acura really did change the mpg claims but I can't see how the auto is less efficient than the manual, at least on the highway.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Yumcha
Automotive News
9
02-25-2020 09:57 AM
cycdaniel
1G TSX Performance Parts & Modifications
8
12-17-2019 10:58 AM
Oakes
Wash & Wax
9
11-12-2015 09:34 PM
JarrettLauderdale
2G CL Dynograph Gallery
5
09-21-2015 07:51 PM
DiamondJoeQuimby
Car Parts for Sale
1
09-10-2015 11:40 AM



Quick Reply: What causes the performance difference between AT and MT of TSX?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:11 AM.