shifting too soon in Type-S deadly?

On Fri, 11 May 2007 13:21:15 +0000 (UTC), Tegger <tegger.RemoveThis@tegger.c0m>
wrote:

>Back in the '80s, the Corvette's forced "skip shift" was originally
>designed to help GM meet CAFE requirements, not EPA mandates. GM
>implemented the skip shift for the first time around 1985.
>
>Maybe it's done for emissions now, but wasn't at the beginning.

Whatever reason it's done for then and now, it sure as hell isn't
because the customers demand it.
--
Dan.
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

Dean Dark <ddrake RemoveThis @comcast.notthis.net> wrote in
news:brb84358s0lkmcd4dh55u2dsq9njrghgfv@4ax.com:

> On 10 May 2007 20:54:53 -0700, ACAR <getoutanpush RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On May 10, 4:48 am, Dean Dark <ddr... RemoveThis @comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Nope, it is not temperature dependent.
>>>
>>> OK, I see now that it's not temperature dependent. But it *is* done
>>> for emissions purposes. And there's a straightforward chip mod. to
>>> defeat it.
>>
>>The point being that GM designed the Corvette to skip gears under
>>light throttle. No trans. damage. And the 1st to 4th feature doesn't
>>interfere with routine driving.
>
> So you think that GM though that a *design* that would force people to
> skip gears would be a neat feature that Corvette drivers would
> *really* like? Hmmmm...
>
> In fact, it's a kludge they had to make late in the game to meet
> regulations. They don't put it that way in the glossy brochure of
> course, they spin it to look like a brilliant design feature that they
> intended all along. And you believed them...
>>
>>> >The Corvette prevents this, as do other high performance cars.
>>>
>>> Only up to a point. I can still abuse a cold engine.
>>
>>Fine. Maybe the OP can figure out your point. If you are implying that
>>you need heavy throttle to defeat the Corvette's 1st to 4th skip shift
>>feature you are incorrect. You don't actually own a Corvette, do you?
>
> I never said I owned a Corvette. They're OK but they're not my cup of
> tea.
>
> What I actually said, if you read for comprehension, is that there's
> an aftermarket chip mod. to defeat the forced shift. It's simple and
> inexpensive, and all self-respecting Corvette owners have installed
> it.

Car and Driver magazine said that was the reason for the skip-gear;to meet
emissions on the EPA tests.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

Dean Dark <ddrake DeleteThis @comcast.notthis.net> wrote in
news:rdf943h6qhleecavgh9fap16ih426mabvf@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 11 May 2007 13:21:15 +0000 (UTC), Tegger <tegger DeleteThis @tegger.c0m>
> wrote:
>
>>Back in the '80s, the Corvette's forced "skip shift" was originally
>>designed to help GM meet CAFE requirements, not EPA mandates. GM
>>implemented the skip shift for the first time around 1985.
>>
>>Maybe it's done for emissions now, but wasn't at the beginning.
>
> Whatever reason it's done for then and now, it sure as hell isn't
> because the customers demand it.



That I believe!!!

--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

On May 11, 2:28 pm, Jim Yanik <jya....TakeThisOut@abuse.gov> wrote:
> Dean Dark <ddr....TakeThisOut@comcast.notthis.net> wrote innews:brb84358s0lkmcd4dh55u2dsq9njrghgfv@4ax.com:
>
>
>
> > On 10 May 2007 20:54:53 -0700, ACAR <getoutanp....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>On May 10, 4:48 am, Dean Dark <ddr....TakeThisOut@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>
> >>> >Nope, it is not temperature dependent.
>
> >>> OK, I see now that it's not temperature dependent. But it *is* done
> >>> for emissions purposes. And there's a straightforward chip mod. to
> >>> defeat it.
>
> >>The point being that GM designed the Corvette to skip gears under
> >>light throttle. No trans. damage. And the 1st to 4th feature doesn't
> >>interfere with routine driving.
>
> > So you think that GM though that a *design* that would force people to
> > skip gears would be a neat feature that Corvette drivers would
> > *really* like? Hmmmm...
>
> > In fact, it's a kludge they had to make late in the game to meet
> > regulations. They don't put it that way in the glossy brochure of
> > course, they spin it to look like a brilliant design feature that they
> > intended all along. And you believed them...
>
> >>> >The Corvette prevents this, as do other high performance cars.
>
> >>> Only up to a point. I can still abuse a cold engine.
>
> >>Fine. Maybe the OP can figure out your point. If you are implying that
> >>you need heavy throttle to defeat the Corvette's 1st to 4th skip shift
> >>feature you are incorrect. You don't actually own a Corvette, do you?
>
> > I never said I owned a Corvette. They're OK but they're not my cup of
> > tea.
>
> > What I actually said, if you read for comprehension, is that there's
> > an aftermarket chip mod. to defeat the forced shift. It's simple and
> > inexpensive, and all self-respecting Corvette owners have installed
> > it.
>
> Car and Driver magazine said that was the reason for the skip-gear;to meet
> emissions on the EPA tests.

those EPA tests wouldn't be related to the gas guzzler tax, would
they?

>
> --
> Jim Yanik
> jyanik
> at
> kua.net
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

On May 11, 7:59 am, Dean Dark <ddr....TakeThisOut@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>
>
> Not catalogs, good quality automotive magazines.

Oh, so you consider those "good quality auto mags" something other
than the same marketing BS as in the glossy brochures?

Unlike you, the car
> maker's glossy brochures and the gee-whiz Chevy bling and hot rod
> magazines do nothing for me.

Don't forget about the full, frontal 2-page spreads!

I'd rather drive my car than read about someone else's car. Maybe
that's why I know how to shift thru its gears.
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

On 11 May 2007 21:45:37 -0700, ACAR <dimndsonmywndshld.RemoveThis@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>> Whatever reason it's done for then and now, it sure as hell isn't
>> because the customers demand it.
>
>But Corvette customers did demand a transmission that wouldn't break
>if you skip shifted it. Maybe Honda customers should do the same.

I don't understand why Corvette customers are happy to drive a car
that *forces* them to skip gears, regardless of whether they "demanded
a transmission that is up to it" or not. It all smells like a kludge
and marketing bullshit/spin to me.

I can't imagine the upmarket performance car makers doing it, or their
buyers tolerating it.
--
Dan.
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

Dean Dark <ddrake RemoveThis @comcast.notthis.net> wrote in
news:a62b43t1lbmf18pmrb5vqq07pced0ohthk@4ax.com:

> On 11 May 2007 21:45:37 -0700, ACAR <dimndsonmywndshld RemoveThis @yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Whatever reason it's done for then and now, it sure as hell isn't
>>> because the customers demand it.
>>
>>But Corvette customers did demand a transmission that wouldn't break
>>if you skip shifted it. Maybe Honda customers should do the same.
>
> I don't understand why Corvette customers are happy to drive a car
> that *forces* them to skip gears, regardless of whether they "demanded
> a transmission that is up to it" or not. It all smells like a kludge
> and marketing bullshit/spin to me.
>
> I can't imagine the upmarket performance car makers doing it, or their
> buyers tolerating it.

I can't see that there's any demand for "skip-shifting" durability.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

On 12 May 2007 17:51:12 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik.TakeThisOut@abuse.gov> wrote:

>>>> Whatever reason it's done for then and now, it sure as hell isn't
>>>> because the customers demand it.
>>>
>>>But Corvette customers did demand a transmission that wouldn't break
>>>if you skip shifted it. Maybe Honda customers should do the same.
>>
>> I don't understand why Corvette customers are happy to drive a car
>> that *forces* them to skip gears, regardless of whether they "demanded
>> a transmission that is up to it" or not. It all smells like a kludge
>> and marketing bullshit/spin to me.
>>
>> I can't imagine the upmarket performance car makers doing it, or their
>> buyers tolerating it.
>
>I can't see that there's any demand for "skip-shifting" durability.

Not from me, that's for sure.

I think that the majority of Corvettes sold have automatic
transmissions. Maybe GM just doesn't care enough about the relatively
few buyers of their product who don't want a torque converter
transmission.
--
Dan.
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

Dean Dark <ddrake DeleteThis @comcast.notthis.net> wrote in
news:1kdc435effk5qp5i97ntjr4aqtohiejjho@4ax.com:

> On 12 May 2007 17:51:12 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik DeleteThis @abuse.gov> wrote:
>
>>>>> Whatever reason it's done for then and now, it sure as hell isn't
>>>>> because the customers demand it.
>>>>
>>>>But Corvette customers did demand a transmission that wouldn't break
>>>>if you skip shifted it. Maybe Honda customers should do the same.
>>>
>>> I don't understand why Corvette customers are happy to drive a car
>>> that *forces* them to skip gears, regardless of whether they "demanded
>>> a transmission that is up to it" or not. It all smells like a kludge
>>> and marketing bullshit/spin to me.
>>>
>>> I can't imagine the upmarket performance car makers doing it, or their
>>> buyers tolerating it.
>>
>>I can't see that there's any demand for "skip-shifting" durability.
>
> Not from me, that's for sure.
>
> I think that the majority of Corvettes sold have automatic
> transmissions. Maybe GM just doesn't care enough about the relatively
> few buyers of their product who don't want a torque converter
> transmission.

these days,very few standard transmissions are sold,less than 1 in
10,IIRC,for all models of cars. I'm worried they may do away with them
altogether,or charge a "premium" for them,make THEM the "option" rather
than the automatic.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

Jim Yanik <jyanik RemoveThis @abuse.gov> wrote in
news:Xns992EBDD14EF01jyanikkuanet@64.209.0.84:

>
> these days,very few standard transmissions are sold,less than 1 in
> 10,IIRC,for all models of cars.



....in North America. Manuals are quite popular in the rest of the world due
to government tax policies.



> I'm worried they may do away with them
> altogether,or charge a "premium" for them,make THEM the "option"
> rather than the automatic.
>



I don't think that's likely to happen. Automatics are a LOT more expensive
to install than manuals, and the automakers already have the manuals on the
shelf.

The only cars where manuals are entirely off the menu are those where sales
would be virtually nil (minivans and SUV's for instance).

--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

ACAR <dimndsonmywndshld.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1178740512.816592.228130
@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:

> Skipping gears when accelerating slowly and done smoothly can't be
> that harmful. Just about everyone I know who has a 5 or 6 speed skips
> gears on a routine basis.
>

When in sixth, does everyone go down all 5 gears? I never did in my RSX.
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

In case anybody's still interested, here is Honda's official word, from the
Jan '06 issue of Honda Service News:

Skip Shifting Is Brutal on Synchronizers

Gear ratios in 6-speed manual trannies are spaced close together so you can
keep the engine speed in its optimum range for max power and acceleration.

Shifting to the next higher or lower gear in a close-ratio tranny causes
small changes in engine speed.

Shifting a close-ratio tranny through its gears by the numbers puts a very
small load on the synchronizers since they only have to make small changes
to the speed of the mainshaft and the clutch disc.

Some drivers, though, like to skip shift so they don’t have to work the
clutch pedal and shift lever as much. They like to accelerate in 1st gear,
then pop it into 3rd gear, then into 5th or 6th. Skip shifting, though, is
really brutal on synchronizers; it puts a higher demand on them than they
were designed to take. Skip shifting can cause premature synchronizer wear
that can cause the gears to grind when you shift up or down.

If you’ve got a vehicle in your shop for repeated damage to the
synchronizers, go for a test-drive with your service client to see if he or
she is guilty of skip shifting. Skip shifting can be an expensive habit to
break. Any repairs due to skip shifting may be reviewed and debited by your
DPSM.

--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly? 

On Tue, 15 May 2007 23:00:09 +0000 (UTC), Tegger <tegger RemoveThis @tegger.c0m>
wrote:

>In case anybody's still interested, here is Honda's official word, from the
>Jan '06 issue of Honda Service News:
>
>Skip Shifting Is Brutal on Synchronizers
>
>Gear ratios in 6-speed manual trannies are spaced close together so you can
>keep the engine speed in its optimum range for max power and acceleration.
>
>Shifting to the next higher or lower gear in a close-ratio tranny causes
>small changes in engine speed.
>
>Shifting a close-ratio tranny through its gears by the numbers puts a very
>small load on the synchronizers since they only have to make small changes
>to the speed of the mainshaft and the clutch disc.
>
>Some drivers, though, like to skip shift so they don’t have to work the
>clutch pedal and shift lever as much. They like to accelerate in 1st gear,
>then pop it into 3rd gear, then into 5th or 6th. Skip shifting, though, is
>really brutal on synchronizers; it puts a higher demand on them than they
>were designed to take. Skip shifting can cause premature synchronizer wear
>that can cause the gears to grind when you shift up or down.
>
>If you’ve got a vehicle in your shop for repeated damage to the
>synchronizers, go for a test-drive with your service client to see if he or
>she is guilty of skip shifting. Skip shifting can be an expensive habit to
>break. Any repairs due to skip shifting may be reviewed and debited by your
>DPSM.


Thanks for doing the research, Tegger.

The moral of the story: if you must skip shift, double clutch. Or
maybe: double clutch it now or double clutch it later.
 >> Stay informed about: shifting too soon in Type-S deadly?