tenz0 Racing

i just read on another forum that the automatic 7 is only a 4 speed and the accel is alot crappier but can do 190 mph top speed... how off is this?

Snook

iTrader: (12)

ummm no
auto top speed I would say is 155 maybe less maybe more??

automatics suck at top end and at everything else mostly

ejmack1

eh, mid range is not bad on an auto.. and I had mine up past 160....

EviLPeNeviL

iTrader: (2)

I thought auto FDs were 3 speeds?

-Dan

dclin

iTrader: (4)

4 forward gears.

Chameleon

Does a different stall converter help?

Chronos

Yeah baby! 3 on the tree!!!

bajaman

They are 4 speed with full lock-up torque converters. Essentially that ALMOST makes it a 5 speed.....

I've had mine to 158 mph.

They run the same speeds at lower rpm than a manual, due to the gearing differences. You have a car with similar speed potentials available at about 1000 rpm lower revs, the auto tranny cars have 7000 rpm redlines as opposed to 8000 in the manuals. All this combines to make them about .5 sec slower to 60 and up to 1 second slower in the 1/4.

The power delivery is different than with a manual, as the car hits full boost with only one momentary transition, there is not the constant boost interruption that you have when shifting.

An automatic FD is no 'dog', that is for sure!

FD-Fever

So... I hear that it doesnt matter if you have a manual, or auto in the Supra's and Z32's ... would the Fd be in that same catorgorie? ...aawwww(please dont hurt me..heehee)

ejmack1

no because we have no torque

tenz0 Racing

alright, but does any have any links to back up this statement? If it was s four speed then wouldnt it have to have a faster top speed? either that or better accel, unless the manual 7's gear box is the same as the auto but they have just added a gear on at the end...

bajaman

You have to understand automatics trannies in general somewhat here to see what we are talking about, but basically across the board in all gears the automatics are numerically lower or "taller". And they have a numerically lower rear end ratio. Remember high ratio equals quicker acceleration and vice versa, all things being equal. The torque converter DOES have a multiplying effect on the torque given to the drivetrain, this is one of the things that allows the car to operate even close to the manual's performance even though the automatic is hampered by the generally taller ratios, and of course the automatic tranny soaks up close to 10% of the total crankshaft horsepower.
And the logic of the automatic tranny's ECU is for some damned reason very conservative, oriented more towards economy than performance. That is where the 'hold' feature comes in handy, when used properly it gives the driver a sort of semi-automatic tranny....think poor man's Tiptronic.....kind of.

The old GM Powerglide automatic was a TWO SPEED transmission, I have seen some old Chevy II and Malibu cars that had high revving 327s in them, and it is ape **** to hear that car seemingly rev forever before shifting into high gear!
The point is, the number of gears is not really the determining factor of performance.

tk5dan

what forums did u hear that the auto can hit 190 stock.

Bluem

AUTOS ARE FOR PUSSIES OR OLD LADIES

bajaman

What an absolutely juvenile remark......

The necessity of shifting makes one a REAL man.....?
How that is!

Quik 93 FD

The advantage with the manual tranny (besides the obvious) is that you dont get flogged with the " Why did you get an automatic, theyre gay" comment all the time. I believe that if its a sports car that it should be a manual, but there are a few acceptions to this as withe everything in life...

gribblet

94 Auto - 40,000

Would have preferred a 5 speed but found a 94 in August of 2000 with 20,300 miles, one owner, excellent service records, perfect condition for $16,000. What with reliability issues, decided to go with the auto.

Not disappointed with acceleration and top speed (only been to 130) but sure is hard to get off the line.

Gribblet