fbmphil Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/21/ford-of...earbox-for-201/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Just beat me to posting that.. I wonder what cars other than the Fiesta and Focus will get em?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/21/ford-of...earbox-for-201/ So it's 9% more efficient than the automatic? Sounds like good news for the fiesta crowd. Now I'd like to see one in a focus... preferably with AWD :yup: ...I know, that's kind of a paradox :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Just beat me to posting that.. I wonder what cars other than the Fiesta and Focus will get em?? Only FWD B and C sized cars. Actually, this is will be 2 different transmissions. One for B size and one for C size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Only FWD B and C sized cars. Actually, this is will be 2 different transmissions. One for B size and one for C size. I would think it would make a great tranny for the Fusion and Taurus as well, also for a replacement for the auto trans in the Mustang as soon as they get a RWD version. Why stop at C? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 So it's 9% more efficient than the automatic? Sounds like good news for the fiesta crowd. Now I'd like to see one in a focus... preferably with AWD :yup: ...I know, that's kind of a paradox :lol: An ecoboost 2.5 and AWD with this tranny in the next Focus is the way to go.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 An ecoboost 2.5 and AWD with this tranny in the next Focus is the way to go.. EB 2.5 AWD PowerShift ^ that's exactly how I'm imagining the Focus-SVT... 260-300hp I'd be happy with a 2.0-EB (220-240-ish HP) and a waterfall grille Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pictor Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I know this is a little off topic but after reading through the AB comments you can't help but realize that the perception of Ford is changing rather quickly with the new product blitz. The current ford management team seems to be making all the right moves. If the economy hadn't tanked i believe Ford would be in a good position this year. New technologies like Ecoboost and DSG trannies and world class quality will not go unrewarded by the market place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 ",,,"PowerShift is more efficient, it saves weight, is more durable, more efficient and the unit is sealed for life, requiring no regular maintenance." :happy feet: How much more will it cost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_in_va Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Will it be standard or optional on Fiesta? Since it has the best aspects of manual and automatic I think it should be the only tranny available. That would make it cheaper to build. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 It states, 9% better fuel economy, but compared to what, over the 4speed they compared it with in the previous sentence? I mean, if thats it, its really just 3% better than the new 6 speeds if thats the case. Will there be a unit for RWD? I would figure, thats where Ford needs to extract the most FE from... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 How much more will it cost? The PowerShift for the Fiesta was designed for lightweight and low cost. It has no hydraulics in it (all gears and clutches are moved by electric motors). The weight and cost are likely to be less than a "traditional" 6 speed automatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The PowerShift for the Fiesta was designed for lightweight and low cost. It has no hydraulics in it (all gears and clutches are moved by electric motors). The weight and cost are likely to be less than a "traditional" 6 speed automatic. Nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Will it be standard or optional on Fiesta? Since it has the best aspects of manual and automatic I think it should be the only tranny available. That would make it cheaper to build. Good question ! For now, at least, I think both will be available. It will never be cheaper to build. Heck it has 2 clutches plus electronics ! Fuel Economy is EXCELLENT ! 2+ years ago the PowerShift was as good or BETTER than a manual in some phases of the EPA tests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 It states, 9% better fuel economy, but compared to what, over the 4speed they compared it with in the previous sentence? I mean, if thats it, its really just 3% better than the new 6 speeds if thats the case. Will there be a unit for RWD? I would figure, thats where Ford needs to extract the most FE from... Ford might be underestimating numbers just a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I would think it would make a great tranny for the Fusion and Taurus as well, also for a replacement for the auto trans in the Mustang as soon as they get a RWD version. Why stop at C? Heavier cars really need the torque multiplication of a torque converter to "launch" the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swizco Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Heavier cars really need the torque multiplication of a torque converter to "launch" the car. ...Not to mention a heavier car, or a performance application, would fry its internal clutches. They'd have to go to a wet-clutch design, like the rest of the industry, to safely handle much more torque than the 4 cylinder engines put out. Wet clutches are less efficient, though. Swizco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Heavier cars really need the torque multiplication of a torque converter to "launch" the car. You can have a DSG on a larger car, but for the most part they are found on super cars or cars costing more then 50K+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBV8 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 ...the unit is sealed for life, requiring no regular maintenance." :happy feet: That's basically what they said about the 5r55w in the 02 Explorer (I believe it was supposed to be good to 150,000mls). Hopefully they're right this time... Mine is on it's 3rd. at 70,000 miles. Not to get too off-topic, but what exactly went wrong with that design? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I know this is a little off topic but after reading through the AB comments you can't help but realize that the perception of Ford is changing rather quickly with the new product blitz. The current ford management team seems to be making all the right moves. If the economy hadn't tanked i believe Ford would be in a good position this year. New technologies like Ecoboost and DSG trannies and world class quality will not go unrewarded by the market place. True, but I'm sure if they posted an article that was negative about Ford, you'd see all the doubters come racing out the closet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 That's basically what they said about the 5r55w in the 02 Explorer (I believe it was supposed to be good to 150,000mls). Hopefully they're right this time... Mine is on it's 3rd. at 70,000 miles. Not to get too off-topic, but what exactly went wrong with that design? My parents V6 EB gave up the ghost around the same time My sisters 06 V8 Limited has been pretty good and gets traded in this summer... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 ...Not to mention a heavier car, or a performance application, would fry its internal clutches. More likely spin the tire which would just tel the "throttle by wire" system to shut the throttle. They'd have to go to a wet-clutch design, like the rest of the industry, to safely handle much more torque than the 4 cylinder engines put out. Wet clutches are less efficient, though. I believe the transmission for the C sized car will be wet clutch. I don't buy your statement that wet clutches are "less efficient". Biggest issues are size, weight and heat dissipation (the fluid moves the heat away from the clutches quickly, but what do you do once the fluid starts getting too hot ?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray101988 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 True, but I'm sure if they posted an article that was negative about Ford, you'd see all the doubters come racing out the closet. This is a little off topic, but does anyone know what type of transmission was put in the new SuperDuty? I remember reading an article that said they changed the tranmission a year after they redesigned it to increase fuel economy. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swizco Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I don't buy your statement that wet clutches are "less efficient". Biggest issues are size, weight and heat dissipation (the fluid moves the heat away from the clutches quickly, but what do you do once the fluid starts getting too hot ?) By efficient, I mean two things. First, stronger holding power per unit of size and weight, with which you seem to agree. Second, having parts reciprocating in oil inherently increases drag more than parts reciprocating in air. therefor, dry clutches are inherently more efficient, as they add less parasitic driveline drag. What do you think? Swizco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 My parents V6 EB gave up the ghost around the same time My sisters 06 V8 Limited has been pretty good and gets traded in this summer... If I remember correctly, this is due to the V6 and V8 model Explorers running different trannies. At least the 2nd Gen Explorer with the 4.0L & 5.0L had different trannies. Couldn't say for sure about the 3rd Gen models though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.