http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2...nsmission.html

Multi-Speed Transmission Patent
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2015/0099603.html

 

I will only give a damn when there are three-speeds in reverse.

Otherwise, having an X amount of forward gears is not revolutionary.

 

When you start to have that many different gears on one transmission, where is the point of diminishing returns where you might as well go to a CVT with an infinite number of ratios?

 

that was my thinking too.. of course, CVTs are not ready yet to replace real AT's, no matter how much better they can be these days.

 

I agree. Why not create a revolutionary CVT instead of this?

 

This strikes me as having 11 gears only so you can brag that you have more than the competition.

 

How many gears is too many? It seems we have had this discussion before, perhaps when the CEO of ZF stated that 9 gears is the limit before you hit diminishing returns.

It would be nice to have CVTs but it is much, much easier to add planetary gearsets to create ever more forward gears than it is to improve the CVT. The current mechanical CVT (belt and pulley) can only handle (it would seem) about 270 lb.ft / 370 Nm of torque (the Nissan VQ35 engine's peak torque); any more torque and the CVT is likely to slip and lose efficiency.

And although this article did not state what vehicle Ford would use this 11-speed transmission in, I gather that they intend to use it in their trucks, where high torque is important, making the CVT a non-viable option.

And again, although it is not stated, but making a 11-speed transmission does NOT necessarily mean that the spacing between gears is smaller; it could very well mean that Ford provides a greater spread between low gears and high gears: extra low 1st- and 2nd-gears and extra tall 10th- and 11th-gears. This would be particularly well suited to using smaller engines (turbocharged V6s in place of V8s) in Ford trucks: extra low gears on the low end to provide more torque, and extra tall high gears to keep engine speed down on the highway.

 

Most sizable work-trucks, though, already have a dozen or more gears. They need them just to get all of that mass rolling, or for navigating steep hills.

 

I guess if the Lincoln Continental can have 34 speakers the Ford Raptor can have an 11-speed transmission. Too much is never enough!

 

I wonder what the EPA will be on the F150. Should be interesting...

 

Yea. You can make the best iron to remove wrinkles or you make wrinkle free clothing.

 

The problem has been with a CVT is that it requires a rather large hydraulic pump - which in turn saps the efficiency of the transmission, negating its economic advantages over a conventional 5 or 6 speed automatic. AutoManuals have appeared over the past two years that are able to take advantage of computers to coordinate engine and transmission in throttle actuation, gear selection and clutch operation, basically putting a set of actuators on a fairly conventional clutch and gearbox. It's pretty cool technology designed to keep the engine running in that sweet spot, but still shows some rough edges when asked to creep or perform tasks outside the normal performance envelope.

In operation, it works like some of the earliest two-speed "automatic" transmissions of the late '40's and early '50's that were mechanically operated by governors. Throttle down to move away from a stop, then at about 15-18 mph, "lift to shift" - get off the gas and wait for that "CLACK" from under the floorboard that said you were now in high gear.

Thankfully AMT's are a lot more sophisticated now. Here's a test drive of a Suzuki Celerio, a small 4-door as currently sold in India that uses the Asin AMT, basically an Asin manual transmission with a set of actuators and a special function that allows it to creep without exacting too much wear on the clutch without needing a torque converter.

Transmission demo starts at about 3:25

 

First time i hear that CVT's have efficiency problems, they are very efficient in real life and in tests, as we can see by new CVTs in group tests and government data.

We had SMT in Toyota's in Europe, and it is not optimal solution... Toyota, owner of Aisin, is offering them only on cars where rock bottom price is needed (currently Aygo only)... lots of long life both performance and reliability issues.

 

.....yet, many of the highest-MPG vehicles use CVTs.

 

I disagree. For small cars, CTVs are more than ready to replace ATs. Mine has simulated shift when giving harder starts. When I want to conserve, the CTV never moves past 1300rpm with a linear acceleration. I'm currently averaging 36 mpg.