Type S

from the car magazine i read about the 6 speed manual cls.it take 6.3~6.4 secs from 0~60 miles which is almost the same as a auto cls..and even a stock auto cls can do like 6.2 secs.then i realize that manual cls is as fast as 5 speed auto..correct me if i am wrong..and 2003 cls has the same engine ouput of 260 HP,it is unlikely 290 HP which is mentioned by a member here..

nvpscore

It is definately not 290 hp, that would prob be the 2004-5 CL, when they do the redesign. They are sticking with the same engine, just adding LSD and losing VSA for 6 spd manual.

Times are very similar if you know how to utilize the first gear in SS.

Nick

EricL

It isn't that easy to get all of the power to the ground in a FWD car. There is more power getting to the ground (I'll bet on it), but the car is going to lift the front up (due to the weight transfer issues) and the stock tires don't exactly help.

I'm still waiting for my newsstand "fix", but I would be MORE interested in the times the got in the quarter-mile manual times (I am interested to see how the presumed extra shift vs. the better power-to-ground delivery works out in real life)…

StonedCL

iTrader: (1)

DUde once we hit 4th gear the 6speed will be OUT..

vinnydahitman

tru tru... but once you hit 4th gear the 1/4 will be over and so will the race!

StonedCL

iTrader: (1)

Yeah but when u are on the highway and your going 65-70 allready and someone pulls up your screwed....

vinnydahitman

thats not true... 65-70 is just before the meat in 3rd gear... hell up to 80 or so you can still put it into 3rd and run to 110 or so.... that would be ideal if you ask me... hell, if i am going to be racing a faster car 80mph@4900rpm's is where i want to be!!!!!

jdl75

All-
Background for those of you that may not understand why this weight transfer occurs - as Sir Issac noted, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Engineering mechanics dictates that as the wheels spin forward, acting on the mass of the car, the mass of the car will tend to rotate in the opposite direction. I'm not up to posting a sketch at the moment, but (looking at the side of the car) the center of mass of the car is located rearward of the front wheels, probably between the firewall and the dashboard, roughly a foot or so off the floor pan. Draw an imaginary line straight down from the center of mass to the floor pan - this is the lever about which the moment acts. Now, visualize a line connecting the front wheel to the rear wheel, intersecting the vertical line going to the center of mass. This is the system. As the center of mass rotates toward the back of the car, it will push down harder on the rear wheels and unweight the front wheels.

EricL and other engineering savy people-
I've been thinking of this problem on and off for some time now, and I've been looking to bounce a couple ideas off y'all:

1. Use a shorter spring in front and/or taller spring in back. This would reduce the effective length of the moment arm, and seem to cause the car to "squat" into a level position under application of power. I haven't worked through how this would affect handling, but obviously needs to be addressed.

2. Use a stiffer spring in the rear. This would reduce the squat of the rear of the car, keeping weight forward. Again, handling would need to be addressed.

Sanity check?

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Buy a 4WD car, WRX, S4 or another top notch 4w drive....
problem solved..

Oh,.... There is also a kind of suspension braket done for the FWD drag cars just to solve this problem

ThoroDredCLS

I have the latest issues to all (most) car mags and I haven't seen it yet. Plus Acura themselves, from a press release state that whatever the times are for the Auto CLS, the manual 6spd will be 0.5 tics faster. Thats pretty good for me!

I have a question... Will the hand brake still be on a CLS auto?

JZ

If it's already going to be half a second quicker to 60 that puts it at 14.5 in the 1/4 mile conservatively unless the new gearing and having to make that additional shift actually hurt the post 60mph time. Wouldn't that just suck?

typeR

hey let me tell you guys...64 lbs. lighter...8% approx. more hp and torque and twice the contact patch...i donot think you'll have to shift into 4th to complete the 1/4.. if our 3rd takes us to 113 or so i cant imagine the 3rd of this 6mt would be less than capable of 100 mph...BTW 100mph in the 1/4 would be in the 13's....i think 5.9 0-60 and 14.4 1/4......i really want to know if the helicale LSD will fit the suto?????

Nashua_Night_Hawk

according to a simulation programs...Top speed of third is 90MPH.

I guess if you know cut-off rpm, 3rd Overall ratio and final ration and tire's 80" for 1 rotation you can compute the Max MPH for the third easily.
...

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Third ratio is 1.7, final 3.286,... Overall 5.5862.
7200 / 5.5862 = 1289 wheel rpm or 77340 wrph. or 6,187,200"per hr = 97.67 MPH at the cut off....

Repeating again with 6900 redline:

6900 /5.5862 = 1235 wheel rpm or 74111 wrph or 5,928,896" per hr = 93.6 MPH

So 95MPH would a fair number for max MPH for 3rd.....

That is too bad... if the ratio was just 1.6 that would put max 3rd MPH around a 100 MPH.

Or maybe get a 215/60/17 tires....

typeR

6-speed manual transmission** Ratios (:1) (
RSX ) cl-s 6mt
1st 3.266 3.933
2nd 2.130 2.478
3rd 1.517 1.700
4th 1.147 1.250
5th 0.921 0.976
6th 0.738 0.771
Reverse 3.583 4.008
Final Drive 4.388 3.286
auto rsx

1st 2.684
2nd 1.500
3rd 0.984
4th 0.733
5th 0.571
Reverse 2.000
Final Drive 4.562

cl
Automatic / Manual

1st
2.563
2.563 / 3.933

2nd
1.552
1.552 / 2.478

3rd
1.021
1.021 / 1.700

4th
0.653
0.653 / 1.250

5th
0.470
0.470 / 0.976

6th
na
na / 0.771

Reverse
1.846
1.846 / 4.008

Final
4.428
4.428 / 3.286




i think if you look at the camparo as provided by ammerican honda RSX and honda digital news room cl6mt looks like a couple figure are off.not to say the rsx and cl cant have different gear ratios...im sure they do....but not that different ...i think for certain the final drive and reverse of the cl are flip flopped....

fast_daddy_car

Of course that 1/2 second difference is assuming you dont screw up the 1-2 shift, the 2-3 shift, and the possible 3-4 shift.

Now if 3rd will end at about 100, does that leave you with 3 gears of overdrive????? And on the highway to pass someone you would downshift from 6 to 3?

typeR

try you calcs on third gear with 4.008 as final

Nashua_Night_Hawk

4th will end at 129 MPH.
5th will end at 163 MPH (drag limited).

The good thing is that the shifting from 3rd to 4th will drop the rpm from 6900 down to 5073 rpms and therefore the 4 would sill be in VTECH higher-lift range.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

do you want to known how fast you can go in reverse???

typeR

well honestly i wasnt sure the final would effect 3 rd or any individual gear ,but you mentioned the final and overall before your previous post on how fast you can go in 3rd......sorry

Nashua_Night_Hawk

4.008 is the final ratio for the reverse.
3.286 is the final ratio for the forward gears 1-6.

Is it clear now..

typeR

not only is it not clear...i dont think it's correct that was the whole point of my compRING THE RSX I THINK YOU'LL FIND the final is 4.008 and reverse is 3.286

Pull_T

I'll throw out my estimate of .4 - .5 in the 1/4 mile assuming someone good is rowing the gears.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

If the final ratio is 4.008 instead of 3.286 Therfore all speed have to mutiplied by 0.815

so,
1st ends at 34 MPH
2nd tops at 53 MPH
3rd will top at 77 MPH
4th would top at 104 MPH
5th at 132 MPH
6th at 170 MPH.

Now the numbers seems more logical. You could be right.....

typeR

i think so... if you back to page one and look at the rsx auto numbers ...they're right in line with the cl auto...but the rsx 6mt to cl 6 mt they get alittle crazy at the end...the bad new is we will shift 3 times in the quater the good news is we'll stay in the power the hole time...actually a good driver might see a 14.2 remeber 64 lbs lighter+ 5-8% more power to the ground (less loss from manual) and twice the contact patch LSD...

typeR

now here's one more for you....why is the acura site updated on the '03 tl-S and claiming slighly different dimensions(on that i think last years numbers didnt reflect the changes of the refreshed typeS model) and yet still no official info on the much anticipated 6MT cl-S????

Nashua_Night_Hawk

But really, the above numbers are too damn close.... Is this what they call "6-speed close ratio"....

1-5 gears are sapced just 20 MPH aprat... So, you would have to shift each 1.5-2.5 sec..... Too crazy......

scalbert

Not to mention two shifts to get to 60

I think my '83 Cavalier (back many years ago) could make it to 60 with one shift.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

hmmm... usually I rember that the golden rule for the gear box design is that the second should top at 60-65 MPH. It is a global rule among all car makers ( stick shift at least)

Now back to 3.286 ratio
First goes up to 41.71 MPH
2nd tops at 65.03 MPH>>>>>>>>>> as stated by the golden rule.
3rd at 95 MPH
4th at 129 MPH
5th at 163 MPH
6th .......

JZ

How does it look if you use 7200rpm as the redline?

Personally, the only redline on my car is the FUEL CUTOFF!

Using those numbers will it hit the 1/4 mile in third?

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Asuming 7200 rpm 3rd tops at 97 MPH.. so 1/4 time would be 14.4sec If you shift before the finish line you would have to cross to the 4th.... That is for sure...

typeR

hey im not sure where you're getting your figures...and i dont know what's right but i went here...
http://www.hotrodworks.net/hotrodmath/quarter.html
put in 3rd 7200 rpm and our tire diameter which BTWis 25.5,and came up with 97.7....

Nashua_Night_Hawk

I just said in the last post theat 3rd at 7200 rpm would top at 97MPH....

gavriil

According to CarTest, a very nice program that analyzes auto performance here is what we should be looking for in this new car.

Accodring to the Zapata provided ratios on the stick shift here is what the max mph at each gear will be:

1st gear: 41mph at 7000 rpm
2nd gear: 66mph at 7000 rpm
3rd gear: 96mph at 6940 rpm
4th gear: 129mph at 6810 rpm
5th gear: 150.9mph at 6200 rpm

It does not analyze 6th gear although I am sure it would not be higher than 5th gear as far as speed.

I have the cd at 0.34 and I still get this top speed. Interesting!

Acceleration:
30mph: 2.2 secs
40mph: 3.0 secs
50mph: 4.8 secs
60mph: 5.96 secs
70 mph: 8.3 secs
80mph: 10.2 secs
90mph: 12.3 secs
100mph:16.0 secs

Best 0-60mph method was achieved by DUMPING (and not slipping) the clutch at 1700 rpm.


1/4 mile in: 14.65 secs at 96 mph

Best 0-60mph method was achieved by DUMPING the clutch at 1800 rpm.

Top speed of 150.9 mph came after 131.05 seconds and 25,565 feet later.

http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/showt...hlight=cartest

foe

Isnt this what compteck springs do? So would you get a better launch becuase of them.

EricL

No quite -- what is being discussed was and is quite popular with some drag folks. The rear end of the car is jacked was up in the air and reduces the "effective" weight transfer.

I don't know if you seen what I'm talking about, but the cars were generally 1960-1970 Muscle cars that would roam the San Fernando Valley (and other locations). The rear of the car would be so high up in the air, that it became somewhat of a joke (hey, anything can get carried too far...)


BTW -- the stiffer springs will help, provided that they are damped with the "right" shocks too...

NOVAwhiteTypeS

1/4 mile will end in 3rd gear for our SS, and probablly in 3rd or may be even 4th in manual.

also Im sure the acceleration for the stick will be crazy, just look at the gear ratios.

EricL

---------------------------------------------->

I did this calc with bioyuki updated rear end ratio with shifts set for 7200 rpm


I used the tire diameter as 23.6” (the loaded radius * 2) NOT 25.4” (the tire with no load on it)

Ok – now updated with the diff ratio of 3.286 (courtesy of bioyuki – thanks)

<pre>
<font size=+1>

Manual Auto (MPH@7200rpm)
-----------------------------------------

1st 3.933(39) 2.563(45)

2nd 2.478(62) 1.551(73)

3rd 1.700(91) 1.021(112)

4th 1.250(123) 0.653(174)

5th 0.976(158) 0.470(242)

6th 0.771(200)


</font>
</pre>


Final Ratio:
4.428 Auto
3.286 Manual


Comment 1: My calcs assume that the loaded radius of the tire stays constant and that centrifugal force does not change the loaded radius at different speeds. Each tire will have "unique" elastic and materials properties that will change the loaded radius at speed.

Comment 2: My calcs assume that each shift is done at 7200 rpm in every gear.

Comment 3: When I asked gavriil about his program, it seems to support the ability to calc tire expansion properties (tell me if I'm wrong) by putting in the tire size and various coefficients. (I would expect that the tool would need to be tuned with various cars, tires, etc to get it dead on. For example, I don't know if your program had a place to enter flywheel weight and or lighter driveshafts (were applicable) and reduced tire/wheel weight.


IMO, I'm pretty sure that the car will need a shift from 3rd to 4th in the quarter mile (or it will sure be very close as the cars run high terminal velocities for the ETs)

gto2050

AutoWeek estimated .5 second difference in a recent issue. 6.4 Auto and 5.9 6 spd.

gavriil

Eric, agreed.

On another note, if not already mentioned, the 6.3 for the 0-60 mph for the 6speed car was Car and Driver's ESTIMATE. No one has tested the car yet but they all predict a half a second improvement. So since the fastest time that I know for the auto car for the 0-60 was 6.4, then yes, 5.9 is possible. But there were some 6.9s and 6.7s tested for the auto. Bottom line 5.9 is the best estimate with 6.3 being a time that can be reached most of the time by most drivers. Who cares. That is the test where this car will feel faster.

Actually C&D praised the LSD in this 6speed car. They actually wrote that this LSD brings this FWD car the closest ever to a RWD car as far as handling and bridges the gap between FWD and RWD better than anyone ever. They wrote that Honda did their homework with this LSD.