One thing to consider is that a nice, soft, smooth shift like what you want,
is hell on clutches and other internal transmission parts. If you let out
the clutch like I do on a stick shift, you might get a little jolt. This is
because half-in, half-out is the position that causes the most wear. Also,
the computer has no way of knowing what you are going to do in the next
tenth of a second, like you do. It has no way of knowing what the next
throttle opening position is going to be. For this reason, it is safer to
have it shift gears in the quickest possible manner. Easier to write the
code too.

Earle

"Fred Klingener" <gigabitbucket@brockeng.com> wrote in message
news:smraf.8971$Lv.1006@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net ...
> "Billy Ray" <Billy_Ray@SPAMfuse.net> wrote in message
> news:e81ce$436a3af1$4831b233$30784@FUSE.NET...
>
> > Snip sensible analysis of drive mechanics ...
> > ...
>
> > Why would you not expect a jolt?
>
> Because, when I'm driving a stick shift in 4L and I shift from 2 to 1,
> there's no jolt when I let out the clutch.
>
> I just want the computer to be better than it is. Or than I am. Thazall.
>
> Cheers,
> Fred
>
>
>

 

One thing to consider is that a nice, soft, smooth shift like what you want,
is hell on clutches and other internal transmission parts. If you let out
the clutch like I do on a stick shift, you might get a little jolt. This is
because half-in, half-out is the position that causes the most wear. Also,
the computer has no way of knowing what you are going to do in the next
tenth of a second, like you do. It has no way of knowing what the next
throttle opening position is going to be. For this reason, it is safer to
have it shift gears in the quickest possible manner. Easier to write the
code too.

Earle

"Fred Klingener" <gigabitbucket@brockeng.com> wrote in message
news:smraf.8971$Lv.1006@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net ...
> "Billy Ray" <Billy_Ray@SPAMfuse.net> wrote in message
> news:e81ce$436a3af1$4831b233$30784@FUSE.NET...
>
> > Snip sensible analysis of drive mechanics ...
> > ...
>
> > Why would you not expect a jolt?
>
> Because, when I'm driving a stick shift in 4L and I shift from 2 to 1,
> there's no jolt when I let out the clutch.
>
> I just want the computer to be better than it is. Or than I am. Thazall.
>
> Cheers,
> Fred
>
>
>

 

One thing to consider is that a nice, soft, smooth shift like what you want,
is hell on clutches and other internal transmission parts. If you let out
the clutch like I do on a stick shift, you might get a little jolt. This is
because half-in, half-out is the position that causes the most wear. Also,
the computer has no way of knowing what you are going to do in the next
tenth of a second, like you do. It has no way of knowing what the next
throttle opening position is going to be. For this reason, it is safer to
have it shift gears in the quickest possible manner. Easier to write the
code too.

Earle

"Fred Klingener" <gigabitbucket@brockeng.com> wrote in message
news:smraf.8971$Lv.1006@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net ...
> "Billy Ray" <Billy_Ray@SPAMfuse.net> wrote in message
> news:e81ce$436a3af1$4831b233$30784@FUSE.NET...
>
> > Snip sensible analysis of drive mechanics ...
> > ...
>
> > Why would you not expect a jolt?
>
> Because, when I'm driving a stick shift in 4L and I shift from 2 to 1,
> there's no jolt when I let out the clutch.
>
> I just want the computer to be better than it is. Or than I am. Thazall.
>
> Cheers,
> Fred
>
>
>

 

"Earle Horton" <nurse-nospam-busters@msn.com> wrote in message
news:436a4ad7$1_5@alt.athenanews.com...
> One thing to consider is that a nice, soft, smooth shift like what you
want,
> is hell on clutches and other internal transmission parts.

Doing a manual downshift, I match transmission input speed to its ratioed
output speed while the clutch is disengaged, and I don't slip the clutch.

> ... the clutch like I do on a stick shift, you might get a little jolt.
This is
> because half-in, half-out is the position that causes the most wear.

Agreed.

> Also,
> the computer has no way of knowing what you are going to do in the next
> tenth of a second, like you do.

It actually doesn't care. It just knows I clicked for a lower gear, and it
queued up the request to work on when it gets a chance. It knows the engine
speed, it knows the speeds of all the wheels, and it knows damn well what is
going to happen when it slips its foot off the side of the clutch pedal.

> It has no way of knowing what the next
> throttle opening position is going to be.

Sure it does. It just set it a millisecond or two, and it'll set the next.
If it's interested in what I think, it can read the position of the throttle
pedal, but it can ignore that altogether if it chooses.

> For this reason, it is safer to
> have it shift gears in the quickest possible manner. Easier to write the
> code too.

This, of course, is the crux. The easiest way to write code is to leave it
out.

Thanks everyone for their contributions to this thread. Most of the time,
I'm sorry I started it, but I've learned a lot, and I've collected a lot of
good references.

This is one of the few functional newsgroups left.

Cheers,
Fred

 

"Earle Horton" <nurse-nospam-busters@msn.com> wrote in message
news:436a4ad7$1_5@alt.athenanews.com...
> One thing to consider is that a nice, soft, smooth shift like what you
want,
> is hell on clutches and other internal transmission parts.

Doing a manual downshift, I match transmission input speed to its ratioed
output speed while the clutch is disengaged, and I don't slip the clutch.

> ... the clutch like I do on a stick shift, you might get a little jolt.
This is
> because half-in, half-out is the position that causes the most wear.

Agreed.

> Also,
> the computer has no way of knowing what you are going to do in the next
> tenth of a second, like you do.

It actually doesn't care. It just knows I clicked for a lower gear, and it
queued up the request to work on when it gets a chance. It knows the engine
speed, it knows the speeds of all the wheels, and it knows damn well what is
going to happen when it slips its foot off the side of the clutch pedal.

> It has no way of knowing what the next
> throttle opening position is going to be.

Sure it does. It just set it a millisecond or two, and it'll set the next.
If it's interested in what I think, it can read the position of the throttle
pedal, but it can ignore that altogether if it chooses.

> For this reason, it is safer to
> have it shift gears in the quickest possible manner. Easier to write the
> code too.

This, of course, is the crux. The easiest way to write code is to leave it
out.

Thanks everyone for their contributions to this thread. Most of the time,
I'm sorry I started it, but I've learned a lot, and I've collected a lot of
good references.

This is one of the few functional newsgroups left.

Cheers,
Fred

 

"Earle Horton" <nurse-nospam-busters@msn.com> wrote in message
news:436a4ad7$1_5@alt.athenanews.com...
> One thing to consider is that a nice, soft, smooth shift like what you
want,
> is hell on clutches and other internal transmission parts.

Doing a manual downshift, I match transmission input speed to its ratioed
output speed while the clutch is disengaged, and I don't slip the clutch.

> ... the clutch like I do on a stick shift, you might get a little jolt.
This is
> because half-in, half-out is the position that causes the most wear.

Agreed.

> Also,
> the computer has no way of knowing what you are going to do in the next
> tenth of a second, like you do.

It actually doesn't care. It just knows I clicked for a lower gear, and it
queued up the request to work on when it gets a chance. It knows the engine
speed, it knows the speeds of all the wheels, and it knows damn well what is
going to happen when it slips its foot off the side of the clutch pedal.

> It has no way of knowing what the next
> throttle opening position is going to be.

Sure it does. It just set it a millisecond or two, and it'll set the next.
If it's interested in what I think, it can read the position of the throttle
pedal, but it can ignore that altogether if it chooses.

> For this reason, it is safer to
> have it shift gears in the quickest possible manner. Easier to write the
> code too.

This, of course, is the crux. The easiest way to write code is to leave it
out.

Thanks everyone for their contributions to this thread. Most of the time,
I'm sorry I started it, but I've learned a lot, and I've collected a lot of
good references.

This is one of the few functional newsgroups left.

Cheers,
Fred

 

Thats a good question, I just heard it referred at a "tiptronic"


John

 

Thats a good question, I just heard it referred at a "tiptronic"


John

 

Thats a good question, I just heard it referred at a "tiptronic"


John