Jump to content

Build Theme!

Photo

Which Transmission will you like best?


44 replies to this topic

Poll: Which Transmission will you like best? (17 member(s) have cast votes)

Which Transmission will you like to see as standard on GM vehicles?

  1. eAssist - 6-speed Automatic + 15hp Electric + 0.5kWh Battery (8 votes [47.06%])

    Percentage of vote: 47.06%

  2. Posted Image - Conventional 8-Speed Automatic (4 votes [23.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 23.53%

  3. DCT - 6-speed Dual Clutch Automated Manual (5 votes [29.41%])

    Percentage of vote: 29.41%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41

regfootball

    Firing on all sixteen cylinders

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,046 posts

Posted 22 December 2010 - 11:43 AM

from edmunds inside line buick regal test
http://www.insidelin...-and-video.html


What Needs Work (cons):
Weak and noisy engine, transmission tuned for EPA test instead of real-world driving, squishy brake pedal feel.


this is what i mean about GM and some of their recent transmissions............ aside from the 'weak and noisy engine' which I am guessing they are probably overstating a bit......regal could use another 20-40hp on the base version likely.

but oddly, then, it says this....

We can't lay the blame on the Regal's six-speed automatic transmission, which executes smooth, crisp upshifts at 6,500 rpm.


this is why it's so frustrating. If you have the 6 gears and the transmission itself is capable of shifting quickly and smoothly, then why isn't it allowed to perform better?

Meanwhile, the transmission is oblivious to the whole affair, blithely upshifting to 6th gear just as it was programmed to do so the Regal could get its 30 mpg highway rating. It's in no hurry to downshift for part-throttle inputs, never mind that the engine doesn't make any usable power while marooned below 2,000 rpm. Routine traffic maneuvers are a continual stomp-wait-downshift-wait-downshift-OK-ready-go process. Manually shifting doesn't help because of long delays on shift requests.

In 650 miles of mixed driving, the Regal doesn't even approach that magic 30 mpg. Every single tank returns right around 20 mpg.


Edited by regfootball, 22 December 2010 - 11:51 AM.

  • 0

#42

pow

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,367 posts

Posted 22 December 2010 - 01:19 PM

from edmunds inside line buick regal test
http://www.insidelin...-and-video.html




this is what i mean about GM and some of their recent transmissions............ aside from the 'weak and noisy engine' which I am guessing they are probably overstating a bit......regal could use another 20-40hp on the base version likely.

but oddly, then, it says this....



this is why it's so frustrating. If you have the 6 gears and the transmission itself is capable of shifting quickly and smoothly, then why isn't it allowed to perform better?

The base Regal just needs some work. The 2.4L/six-speed combo isn't available on the Insignia, and it's likely that GM could have done a better job tuning and optimizing that powertrain. Its EPA fuel economy isn't that good (19/30, worse than an Equinox with the same powertrain) too. What's interesting is how even a naturally aspirated TSX is quicker than the Regal Turbo.

In my experience with the base Regal, I found the transmission too smooth and sluggish and slushy and would have preferred crisper shifts. The 2.4 Ecotec doesn't exactly make a pleasant noise either.

BTW, if you didn't like the DSG experience in a TDI, give the CC 2.0T a try. That car is responsive and *quick* even with just 200 hp.

Edited by pow, 22 December 2010 - 01:21 PM.

  • 0

#43

Drew Dowdell

    Unimatrix 01

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,180 posts

Posted 22 December 2010 - 01:29 PM

if in 650 miles of driving they're only getting 20mpg out of the Regal, they're doing something wrong. Cory and I positively beat the snot out of that car in the mountains and it still got 21mpg with the A/C running. If you drove like that for 650 miles you'd be arrested and jailed.

Either that or there was a highly excessive amount of idling in traffic. Remember, when you're not going anywhere, all non-hybrids get zero miles per gallon when running.
  • 0

#44

regfootball

    Firing on all sixteen cylinders

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,046 posts

Posted 22 December 2010 - 08:31 PM

Edmunds always getting horrible mpg, and i think they either misreport or do it on purpose.

So to some degree I take it with a bit of a grain of salt. But I think normal everyday mixed driving should not be hard to get 25mpg city and I would expect 30 on a long interstate trip. If it fails to get that, then why settle for a piss pot 4? My Taurus X which weighs 4500+ has AWD and a v6 pretty much gets 20 no matter what i do.

But it is disturbing that the Regal only manages 19/30 when the Malibu is 22/33.

You know Edmunds tests some small cars and only manages 21, 22 mpg for cars that have big highway ratings. When they do mpg testing it should not count the miles they spend driving the tar out of it. They should have a controlled test loop of at least 1000 miles, and none of it should involve anything besides normal driving. Stop and go some, and then extended interstate time.

A/C doesn't mean much to mpg these days IMO. Heavy mpg use is a spike in fuel use and shouldn't decrease your mpg more than 10% IMO.

Another example I can think of, they tested like an EcoBoost Flex or MKS and got like 14/15 in their testing when other sites I know have tested those two vehicles and registered 18, 20, 20+.
  • 0

#45

Drew Dowdell

    Unimatrix 01

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,180 posts

Posted 22 December 2010 - 08:34 PM

Well my daily driving got me 25mpg in the city
  • 0



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users