What causes the performance difference between AT and MT of TSX?
#1
Intermediate
Thread Starter
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?
If they both have the same number of gears, would the performance be closer?
#3
Photography Nerd
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.
An AT is typically 7-10% less efficient than a MT.
Trending Topics
#8
Team Owner
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.
#11
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
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.
But if he's talking about quickness, what the other have mentioned pretty much covers it.
#13
Go Giants
The driver.
#14
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?
If they both have the same number of gears, would the performance be closer?
#20
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.
Seems like Acura updated their specs for the TSX.
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...
#21
Photography Nerd
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.
#24
Moderator Alumnus
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).
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).
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?
#25
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.
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.
#26
Moderator Alumnus
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.
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.
#27
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.
#29
Team Owner
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.
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.
#32
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.
#35
Team Owner
Originally Posted by jonesy
I'm curious what other stickers say, is my car special?
Hey, shutup you
Hey, shutup you
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?
#36
Audi Driving Snob
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.
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.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cycdaniel
1G TSX Performance Parts & Modifications
8
12-17-2019 10:58 AM
JarrettLauderdale
2G CL Dynograph Gallery
5
09-21-2015 07:51 PM
DiamondJoeQuimby
Car Parts for Sale
1
09-10-2015 11:40 AM