Why is AT less efficient? - Page 2 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-26-2007, 08:06 PM   #11
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 55
Country: United States
With the 4T65E-HD (4-sp automatic) I can control shift point, TC lock-up, and other parameters with my tuner.
I am sure there are ways to adjust settings on most electronically controller automatics.
For the older automatics (example: 92-95 Civics) has anyone tried changing gears to lower the highway cruising RPMs?
__________________

GasSavers_Lincoln is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2007, 08:17 PM   #12
Supporting Member
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,779
Country: United States
diamondlarry -

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondlarry View Post
I'm REALLY glad I have a manual.
My brain just ain't working right. I thought you meant manual as in Haynes or Chilton or something.

CarloSW2
__________________

__________________
Old School SW2 EPA ... New School Civic EPA :

What's your EPA MPG? http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp
cfg83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2007, 10:34 PM   #13
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,978
Country: United States
Speaking of Manual

I located the shop manual and noted that I can override the TC engagement through manually engaging 1 or both of the 2 TC lockup sensors via 5V power. Judging by the schematics, it may bypass the VSS and TPS to make the final decision to lock up through the switch override -- I'd just have to be mindful of speeds and coolant temps to prevent further damage to the trans. Of the 3 settings of full, partial, or zero lockup, one sensor allows partial, and the other engages full and uses the Hill/Fuzzy-Logic adaptive computer for shifting (argh). So, during the colder months, perhaps 2 toggles could manually engage these at lower TPS settings once the speed allows. Purely theory.

I'll tell ya, that 50-page section on the automatic transmission looks more complicated than open-heart surgery. Sheesh.

If you're stuck with an auto, I reccommend finding a shop manual that describes exactly what parameters the transmission requires. Further inspection could perhaps find a way to take control of that vicious dictator: the Transmission Control Module.

RH77

RH77
__________________
rh77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2007, 02:02 AM   #14
Registered Member
 
caprice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 114
Country: United States
Wow thanks for all the responces! I could swap in a Camero 6 speed transmission. I've had two 5 speed manual cars before. On both, I notice if I short shift, I can get better than the EPA highway milage, in the city. I have a 700r4 transmission in my caprice, I would have trade in the newer electrically controlled one and program differnt shift points.
__________________
David
85 Chevrolet. 30 MPG or bust!
caprice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2007, 04:36 AM   #15
Registered Member
 
skewbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 771
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by caprice View Post
Wow thanks for all the responces! I could swap in a Camero 6 speed transmission. I've had two 5 speed manual cars before. On both, I notice if I short shift, I can get better than the EPA highway milage, in the city. I have a 700r4 transmission in my caprice, I would have trade in the newer electrically controlled one and program differnt shift points.
A camaro 6 speed will cost you more than a metro
__________________
Standard Disclaimer
skewbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2007, 01:24 PM   #16
Supporting Member
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,779
Country: United States
caprice -

Quote:
Originally Posted by caprice View Post
Wow thanks for all the responces! I could swap in a Camero 6 speed transmission. I've had two 5 speed manual cars before. On both, I notice if I short shift, I can get better than the EPA highway milage, in the city. I have a 700r4 transmission in my caprice, I would have trade in the newer electrically controlled one and program differnt shift points.
I googled "camaro 6th speed manual gear ratios" and found this :

1996 CHEVROLET CAMARO
http://www.media.gm.com/ca/gm/en/pro...996Camaro.html
Quote:
(Paraphrased from URL)
TRANSMISSION : 6-speed manual w/overdrive
Gear Ratios:
1st 2.66
2nd 1.78
3rd 1.30
4th 1.00
5th 0.74
6th 0.50
Reverse 2.90
CarloSW2
__________________
Old School SW2 EPA ... New School Civic EPA :

What's your EPA MPG? http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp
cfg83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2007, 02:28 AM   #17
Registered Member
 
caprice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 114
Country: United States
and with my gear ratio and tire size, at 75 MPH the engine would be turning 1500 RPM 50 MPH is 1000 RPM. With the low end torque of a 5.7 liter engine, I'd have no problem If I want a little passing power, I could just down shift.
http://www.f-body.org/gears/
__________________
David
85 Chevrolet. 30 MPG or bust!
caprice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2007, 02:51 AM   #18
Registered Member
 
caprice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 114
Country: United States
It would be cool driving a huge car with a manual short throw shifter. Like the one in Underworld.
__________________
David
85 Chevrolet. 30 MPG or bust!
caprice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2007, 08:09 AM   #19
Registered Member
 
brucepick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 722
Country: United States
Location: Connecticut
synthetic tranny fluid?

How about synthetic transmission fluid?
I've seen some posts elsewhere saying that's definitely the way to go.

Any benefits to FE, or just that it lasts longer and probably protects the tranny better?
__________________
Currently getting +/- 50 mpg in fall weather. EPA is 31/39 so not too shabby. WAI, fuel cutoff switch, full belly pan, smooth wheel covers.

Now driving '97 Civic HX; tires ~ 50 psi. '89 Volvo 240 = semi-retired.
brucepick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2007, 08:14 AM   #20
Registered Member
 
MetroMPG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,223
Country: United States
From a FE perspective, the main benefit of synthetics is their cold performance (viscosity). They don't thicken as much as mineral fluids as temps drop.

People who live in a year-round warm climate would probably see no FE benefit from synthetic use.

Note that no major synthetic brand claims fuel economy improvements with their use.
__________________

MetroMPG is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kickstarter - Video Series on Better MPG andyrobo General Fuel Topics 3 03-29-2013 08:49 AM
Making Fuelly more "Shoping" friendly Mashurst Fuelly Web Support and Community News 3 07-16-2010 01:46 AM
Potential Savings Per Fuel-up Suggestion Razinhell Fuelly Web Support and Community News 4 10-30-2009 08:03 AM
Basic Stats poorboymeyer Fuelly Web Support and Community News 2 09-22-2009 09:19 AM
New cars don't get along with fuelly mlocklear Fuelly Web Support and Community News 5 06-13-2009 04:27 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.