6 speed just mean shorter gears.. no reason to have one

 

I think that's my only complaint...it seems 1st is quite a bit too short in these cars. Maybe an extra gear would have helped them to space the gears out a little better....maybe not. The next question is, would we want that in a turbo car where you have a little turbo lag to deal with? Either way, 1st is over too fast IMO.

 

Agreed! You need to realize that GM probably did all kinds of testing to maximize the fuel efficiency with the performance...do you think they just picked the gearing ratios blindly? If there were an advantage for a 6 speed, they would have done it...

 

My only complaint about our transmission is the gap between 1st and 2nd. It feels like shifting from 1st to 3rd sometimes, but I guess when we get to the point of having over 300whp It wont matter anymore. It might actually help with traction.

 

Have you driven in an evo lately? 4000rpm at 80mph.

 

Not completely true on a turbo car you want a slightly longer final drive to build boost. For instance my vette is N/A and nitrous assisted so I put very short 4.10 gearing this is to keep cylinder pressure from nitrous down and multiply torque. When I turbo the car I'm going to go down to a 3.08 to help build boost pressure with the big turbos. Hell lingenfelter steps it down to 2.72 for there twin gt35r setup. The same conce[t a[[lies to the SS/TC only on a smaller scale.

 

V-Dubs are Geared lower though and use the engine itself to govenor the speed of the car, I'm I wrong? My 2000 Jetta 1.8T I used to have in 5th would have the speedometer and RPM sync together it seemed.

 

because it has enough tq to not warrant it.

300-350wtq in a FWD with a 6 speed?
spin all day.

 

Wouldn't it be nice if the 5th or 6th gear was a .60 or the final drive ratio was a ~3.60.
That would put the rpms were I would rather see them on the hwy. Although changing the final drive ratio would slow the 14 mile time.

O well.... thanks the replies.

 

You need a ton of torque to run a OD like that which is why its not so common except on V8's. Not everybody wants to downshift to pass every time.

Whats the point of moving the gears close together? The whole benefit of a flat torque curve is you don't need to put the gears as close together because you wont get stuck outside the power band. Its just another shift between 0-60 or 1/4 mile which would slow the times down.

 

6th gear would've been really nice for highway driving. I commute on the highway everyday and I always wish it were there, but oh well. Just GM trying to save some more money, I guess.

 

^ most ppl already get easily over 30mpg on the highway.

 

I think 5 is just fine. Its geared great and really no need of an overdrive.

 

The first gear is short because the F35 trans is used in Europe to tow things behind the car (which people do a lot over there). Low 1st gear = easier to start off when towing a trailer.

 

Well I understand what you are saying but how do you explain the following.
2008 Cobalt 260 ft lbs @ 2000 rpm.

VS

My previous car (which is for sale) 2001 Camaro V6 3800 5 speed with a 3.23 rear end.
Torque 225 @ 4000 rpm. At ~68 mph it was a 2,000 rpm. (Heavier car but more aerodynamic)

My mom car is a 2007 Saab 2.0T (210 hp)
It has a 6 speed manual tranmssion and it only makes 221 ft lbs of torque @ 2500 rpm.
I don't have any rpms number at this time, she just bought it 2 weeks ago.


I will have to agreee with cost being a large factory and packaging. The saab that the 6 speed manual is a bigger car than the cobalt.

 

And completely undriveable.

The tq curve of the the tc is much broader than the sc...most turbo cars have much taller gearing, because the longer you keep the turbo spooling full boost, the more acceleration.

There is more than power+gearing=fast.

A 6 speed in this car would be retarded, if you look at the timing tables, there is a reason why we rev where we rev at highway speeds

/end thread.

 

Those V6 F-bodies are all about gas mileage and appearance. Its way slower than the Cobalt SS/SC and SS/TC. You would for sure have to downshift to make any type of quick pass in it.

 

qft!

I remember reading about them running the SS/TC at Laguna Seca and remarking that because of the torque (and gearing!) they were able to run most of the track in 3rd gear. All the while beating the other cars in it's class. Many of which I'm sure had to do a lot more shifting.

 

That was a motor trend article where it was faster than an evo x around laguna

 

It was within 1/1000th of a second, I think.

 

The SS/TC was slower, but not by much:
http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cooper_s.html

SS/TC - 1'47.751"
EVO X - 1'47.713"

 

I have no interest in the 6 speed, for many of the same reasons already stated. I have always thought they kept it out so they could have something new to "freshin it up" in 2010.