Auto Faster? Stick faster?
6th Gear Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,575
From: United States
RE: Auto Faster? Stick faster?
here ya go fella. Little webpage that explains horsepower loss thru the drivetrain.
http://www.superstang.com/horsepower.htm
Click on the "why does an automatic take more power than a manual transmission
BTW, here is part of the artical right above that that pretty much says what we are trying to tell you:
The Ford 357 produced 371 horsepower on the engine dyno at 5,000 RPM. On a 1990 Mustang that came stock with an AOD and a 3.27 8" rearend (more efficient than the 9") the rear wheel horsepower is typically 180 hp. That represents a loss of 45 horsepower given the rated 225 flywheel horsepower on that vehicle. Using this 45 horsepower and even giving it another 5 for the 9" rearend the 357 would have produced 321 peak horsepower on the chassis dyno. Well, it didn't! Even after removing all the factors that could have contributed to extra power loss in the vehicle (removing the belt powered cooling fan) the chassis dyno only showed 283 hp. In fact over the entire power curve the difference between the engine dyno and the chassis dyno was 24%. This provides more evidence that the power loss through common drivetrain remains a percentage even as power is increased rather than remaining a static loss value.
The Buick 455 produced 329hp and made 280 through the drivetrain at 4,500 RPM. The average drivetrain horsepower loss in this vehicle was 18.3%. This can be accounted for by the fact that the 4 speed Muncie is more efficient (require less power to accelerate) as well as the 12 bolt rearend being more efficient than the 9".
http://www.superstang.com/horsepower.htm
Click on the "why does an automatic take more power than a manual transmission
BTW, here is part of the artical right above that that pretty much says what we are trying to tell you:
The Ford 357 produced 371 horsepower on the engine dyno at 5,000 RPM. On a 1990 Mustang that came stock with an AOD and a 3.27 8" rearend (more efficient than the 9") the rear wheel horsepower is typically 180 hp. That represents a loss of 45 horsepower given the rated 225 flywheel horsepower on that vehicle. Using this 45 horsepower and even giving it another 5 for the 9" rearend the 357 would have produced 321 peak horsepower on the chassis dyno. Well, it didn't! Even after removing all the factors that could have contributed to extra power loss in the vehicle (removing the belt powered cooling fan) the chassis dyno only showed 283 hp. In fact over the entire power curve the difference between the engine dyno and the chassis dyno was 24%. This provides more evidence that the power loss through common drivetrain remains a percentage even as power is increased rather than remaining a static loss value.
The Buick 455 produced 329hp and made 280 through the drivetrain at 4,500 RPM. The average drivetrain horsepower loss in this vehicle was 18.3%. This can be accounted for by the fact that the 4 speed Muncie is more efficient (require less power to accelerate) as well as the 12 bolt rearend being more efficient than the 9".
I ♥ Acer
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,913
From:
RE: Auto Faster? Stick faster?
[sm=bustedsign.gif][sm=bounceybounce.gif][sm=funnypostabove.gif][sm=gears.gif][sm=groupwave.gif][sm=icon_ladiesman.gif][sm=icon_rtfm.gif][sm=itsok.gif][sm=laughat.gif][sm=massbounce.gif][sm=owned.gif][sm=shootshoot.gif][sm=teetertooter.gif][sm=ttiwwp.gif][sm=why.gif]
Thread Starter
1st Gear Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 96
From:
RE: Auto Faster? Stick faster?
Dang Ill read that novel later tonight. From first glance it looks like they are talking about old cars but Ill take a closer look tonight. Pro stock???? not sure what that thread is all about. Anyway fun thread.....Talk to all you shifty peopl later.
ORIGINAL: 2000GT4.6
here ya go fella. Little webpage that explains horsepower loss thru the drivetrain.
http://www.superstang.com/horsepower.htm
Click on the "why does an automatic take more power than a manual transmission
BTW, here is part of the artical right above that that pretty much says what we are trying to tell you:
The Ford 357 produced 371 horsepower on the engine dyno at 5,000 RPM. On a 1990 Mustang that came stock with an AOD and a 3.27 8" rearend (more efficient than the 9") the rear wheel horsepower is typically 180 hp. That represents a loss of 45 horsepower given the rated 225 flywheel horsepower on that vehicle. Using this 45 horsepower and even giving it another 5 for the 9" rearend the 357 would have produced 321 peak horsepower on the chassis dyno. Well, it didn't! Even after removing all the factors that could have contributed to extra power loss in the vehicle (removing the belt powered cooling fan) the chassis dyno only showed 283 hp. In fact over the entire power curve the difference between the engine dyno and the chassis dyno was 24%. This provides more evidence that the power loss through common drivetrain remains a percentage even as power is increased rather than remaining a static loss value.
The Buick 455 produced 329hp and made 280 through the drivetrain at 4,500 RPM. The average drivetrain horsepower loss in this vehicle was 18.3%. This can be accounted for by the fact that the 4 speed Muncie is more efficient (require less power to accelerate) as well as the 12 bolt rearend being more efficient than the 9".
here ya go fella. Little webpage that explains horsepower loss thru the drivetrain.
http://www.superstang.com/horsepower.htm
Click on the "why does an automatic take more power than a manual transmission
BTW, here is part of the artical right above that that pretty much says what we are trying to tell you:
The Ford 357 produced 371 horsepower on the engine dyno at 5,000 RPM. On a 1990 Mustang that came stock with an AOD and a 3.27 8" rearend (more efficient than the 9") the rear wheel horsepower is typically 180 hp. That represents a loss of 45 horsepower given the rated 225 flywheel horsepower on that vehicle. Using this 45 horsepower and even giving it another 5 for the 9" rearend the 357 would have produced 321 peak horsepower on the chassis dyno. Well, it didn't! Even after removing all the factors that could have contributed to extra power loss in the vehicle (removing the belt powered cooling fan) the chassis dyno only showed 283 hp. In fact over the entire power curve the difference between the engine dyno and the chassis dyno was 24%. This provides more evidence that the power loss through common drivetrain remains a percentage even as power is increased rather than remaining a static loss value.
The Buick 455 produced 329hp and made 280 through the drivetrain at 4,500 RPM. The average drivetrain horsepower loss in this vehicle was 18.3%. This can be accounted for by the fact that the 4 speed Muncie is more efficient (require less power to accelerate) as well as the 12 bolt rearend being more efficient than the 9".
3rd Gear Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 947
From:
RE: Auto Faster? Stick faster?
I think the best part of that article is this.
HP loss in auto vs stick is mostly related to the converter slip (there is always some slip in a normal converter). However, even with a mechanically locked up converter, in the planetary gear system used in autos, there are more gear meshes occurring, which increases HP losses since each gear mesh results in a HP loss (relates back to statement 1). And don't forgot, in an auto, you have direct pumping losses from the oil pump (you don't have this in a manual trans). And the higher the line pressure, or fluid flow rate, the greater the pumping losses.
Gentleman's Relish
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,189
From: AZ
RE: Auto Faster? Stick faster?
ORIGINAL: 2k5pony
You have 2 identical stock cars built in the last 10 years except one is Auto and I one is stick...Once again let me reittarate Identical. Both cars are functioning as they should. Which car is faster in the 1/4 mile? I think the answer is obvious lets see what everyone else thinks........
You have 2 identical stock cars built in the last 10 years except one is Auto and I one is stick...Once again let me reittarate Identical. Both cars are functioning as they should. Which car is faster in the 1/4 mile? I think the answer is obvious lets see what everyone else thinks........
Newer computers can reprogram themselves for your driving habits and even for situations. In most cases when you read car review from 10 years ago...or even 7, magazines showed tested ETA times for autos that were slower than their manual transmission counterparts (all things stock and identical) This was due to converters that were one-size-fits-all vane sizing and sloppy gears. These days however they've come to admit and show that the automatics, with sometimes as many as 7 gears, (new AMG Mercedes) and smart trannies than can be programmed on the fly (2005 BMW M5) can launch better than and even beat a good driver using a manual tranny.
Even new low-tech cars use at least 4 sometimes 5 gears in auto trannies and are programmed to keep the car in its power band can keep up with their manual cousins. I haven't tested the new Mustangs or stick vs auto but I bet it's be pretty close in a straight line. Take into account the curves though and it's another story...Autos still suffer from 'hunting' for the right gear when driving situations change in the blink of an eye. They're getting better, but I would still drive a stick and decide for myself what is best.
1st Gear Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 147
RE: Auto Faster? Stick faster?
This is by far the stupidest post i have ever read in here. Some one has a auto 05 and thinks hes special. Thats all this useless thread is based on. Yes autos are catching up to sticks. There is always gonna be a way to correct human error, but it still dosnt make that auto as much fun as a stick.
5th Gear Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,985
From: PEI, Canada
RE: Auto Faster? Stick faster?
you dont deserve an 05, you LOSE power through an auto tranny, its just how it is. and what do you mean the computer wins when shifting. how come when you drive an auto it may chrip at takeoff but not in any of the other gears?! its called POWERSHIFTING, sticks can do it! autos cant!
3rd Gear Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 947
From:
RE: Auto Faster? Stick faster?
Like I said. He alredys had his mind made up before he started this. He just wants to ridicule (sp) anyone who dissagrees. No matter how much we try to show him the right answer I doubt that he will ever conceed this point. Like the guy on Mythbusters says. "I reject your reality and substitute my own". Pretty much the same thing going on here.
Thanks for the back up. I was hoping that others would come to help my efforts to prove him wrong. Even if he doesn't listen
Thanks for the back up. I was hoping that others would come to help my efforts to prove him wrong. Even if he doesn't listen