Re: Magnetti Marelli autoboxes - Another view

["Daegrigg (Don)" <daegrigg@domain.elided>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "C M Smith" <cmsmith@domain.elided>
To: <alfa@domain.elided>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 10:45 PM
Subject: Magnetti Marelli autoboxes


> Someone asked about auto shifting manual boxes. Well, those Euro
> manufacturers are at it again. Take a manual gearbox and clutch and add
> electro hydraulic actuators controlled by a computer and you have an
> automatic transmission that has all the advantages of a manual box.
>
> You need excellent computing power integrated with the engine management
> computer. You need slick high pressure hydraulics with reliable electrical
> controllers. You need an electronic throttle control.
>
> The latest R&T article complains that the Maserati GT with Cambiocorsa
> option is "clunky" on the downshifts when approaching a traffic light (for
> example) and suggests that this is unacceptable. Ha, even skilled drivers
> will be making all manner of noises and stuff as they shift down
> approaching a light, if they still do, which would be wrong anyway
> nowadays. The correct method today is to shift into neutral and use the
> brakes to slow the car. Many, if not most jurisdictions still make
coasting
> in a car illegal, which is totally bone headed. There is absolutely no
> reason to use engine braking nowadays. Anyway, at least the tranny shifts
> down for you, unlike the old type autobox which shifts up!!! If you are in
> manual mode it will hold the gear you were in when you began slowing down.
> Sheesh, sometimes I think the North American car market is the most
> primitive and backward in the world. Wait a minute, it IS!
>
> Magnetti Marelli produces these boxes for FIAT Group, Ferrari and
Maserati.
> BMW has a system. SAAB is still working on their version (they should
> probably go to the major manufacturers on this one) and even Ford uses the
> Magnetti box on the latest Aston. GM/Ford? Daimler Chrysler have no such
> technology. Americans don't really want an automatic that is as tight and
> efficient as a manual box. Plus, the North American market still thinks a
> manual shift automatic makes sense (excuse me? but who thought of that
> stupid idea? all the drawbacks of a manual shift with none of the
> advantages plus all the drawbacks of an autobox... really!)
>
> These new manual automatics are the answer to the sporting driver's
dreams.
> They provide the real answer for the enthusiast who has to drive in real
> traffic. A fully automatic manual type gearbox with a real manual shift
> option. I cannot wait until I can get one here in a car I can afford.
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Michael Smith
> White 1991 164L
> Original owner
> --

Michael,

Interesting observations.  I beg to differ on your statement that the
correct method nowadays is not to use the engine for braking.  Really?  I do
use the engine for braking and control and have since my first Giulietta.
Yes, I know that this is an evergreen discussion topic, but It is also one
of individual preference.  To say simply that one is correct and the other
is not is -- incorrect.

For every justification based on tranny wear, emission controls and the
like, there is a countervailing arguement based on vewhicle control, brake
wear, safety, driver's style, and even the first law of thermodynamics.
Take your pick .  That leaves the other options for -- others,

BTW,  the Porsche auto/maual box comes closest to one I wouldn't mind having
in my car.

Thanks,

Don

> to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
> or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided