Two clutches, thicko. One releasing while the other engages. Can give as near a seamless change as makes no difference.
Two clutches, thicko. One releasing while the other engages. Can give as near a seamless change as makes no difference.
Thanks for not bothering to read what I wrote. Since what you state has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said.
Heavy.
Sorry every auto I have ever driven spends a perceptible time at a lower power to the wheel level while changing gear.
Really nasty if you are accelerating hard out of a corner relying on the torque to control the car against oversteer.
The only way to control ot in older boxes was to left foot brake to fool the gear change system it was going uphill and needed the higher gear maintained a bit longer.
That is also the way to get it to kick down into a corner.
premeshed gears my indeed never 'change' but the transition from one to another is never at full torque.
Nice for him but surprising to be honest. I thought that the defining difference with regard to what you could or couldn't drive was down to the presense or absence of a clutch pedal. I wouldn't like to be around someone who's obtained a manual licence like this when they first jump into a car with a clutch.
Note that you can't even sit your test in a car with an automatic handbrake so it would surprise me greatly that you could jump into a car with a clutch after passing in a clutch-pedalless car.
Tim
Very common on buses built pre world war one in the UK. Much easier to use for Drivers who would have been new to motorised propulsion and easier to use than early non syncromesh gearboxes , no need to maintain a clutch either. Photo of one here that still runs out on occasions.
I thought that as well.
Perhaps it was confusion on the part of the examiner if that technology was new then?
Neil
One of our cars is a clutchless semi-auto, according to the V5 it is an automatic and when I asked DVLA for clarification the stated that a test taken in the car would lead to an auto-only licence and that the car can be driven by someone with an auto only licence. As Tim says the defining characteristic seems to be the absence of a clutch.
bucksvehicle website, and found 2 interesting pages. The "Vans available page" contains 2 Renault automatic transmission vans, and their "extra's page" (dated May 2010) says -
have always been made with manual gearboxes only. This often causes problems for drivers who are only able (or willing) to drive automatic vehicles - whether due to licence entitlement, health and mobility restrictions or personal preference.
that vans can now have automated gearboxes and these are becoming increasingly widespread."
Which is a load of tosh. Ford have always offered the Transit as an auto option to special order.
That's the logical definition to me.
bucksvehicle website, and found 2 interesting pages. The "Vans available page" contains 2 Renault automatic transmission vans, and their "extra's page" (dated May 2010) says -
have always been made with manual gearboxes only. This often causes problems for drivers who are only able (or willing) to drive automatic vehicles - whether due to licence entitlement, health and mobility restrictions or personal preference.
mean that vans can now have automated gearboxes and these are becoming increasingly widespread."
THe important statement is "Automatic van hire is not widely available in the UK" The quote is from a van-hire site and is about hire vehicles rather than the availability of automatics in general.
That may or not be true. But obviously is with that particular hirer.
It's the reasons they gave which are rubbish.
Rather like a customer asking for a product in a shop:-
'We don't stock it as there's no demand. You're the fourth person I've told this to today.'
No; they're making out as if autovans weren't available until recently.
It's 2.4 Ford Trannie "Puma" engine and yes it has good torque spread. I'm happy with engine but having been used to autos I find all this gear changing a PITA. I have a manual Boxer based 2.2 motor caravan with 5 speed box and that is much better to drive.
The Daffodil in particular. ;-)
Derek
Indeed - it's why I don't like autos (although I've never driven a British one, but all the ones here in the US seem to be dreadful, with very slow and lurching changes). Give me a manual where I can predict what it's going to do...
cheers
Jules
Indeed - it's why I don't like autos (although I've never driven a British one, but all the ones here in the US seem to be dreadful, with very slow and lurching changes). Give me a manual where I can predict what it's going to do...
cheers
Jules
In message , Jules Richardson writes
You do have manual override to hold down the gear shift. Also the auto delays the change up if you have your right foot hard down and then it is very quick - it will beat most drivers of manual cars
I believe that is true - my wife has auto-only licence. The daft thing is that if I put her on my (manual) car insurance the premium goes down,
-even though she has no intention of driving it.
You'd change down and floor it on the actual corner in a manual? No? So why do you expect an auto to not cause problems if you do? Besides, I thought you'd have got a car with decent stability control by now. You can do exactly what you want with my 14 year old BMW even in the wet without drama. Although, of course, you don't need to counter oversteer on that...
Every auto I've ever owned has had the ability to lock it in a gear of choice.
Rubbish. Modern autos do reduce the torque on a gearchange, usually by retarding the ignition - older ones didn't. If there were an interruption in the power flow on a change, the engine note would show it.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.