197hp to 237 hp?
11-02-2005, 10:24 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a very simple reason Mazda hasn't gone to the "SMG" type transmission - cost. I would expect it to add at least $4-5 k to the price. Check out the costs on BMWs! I don't think many auto enthusiasts would spring for that! Most of those who opt for an auto don't want to be bothered with shifting, and the main reason for the "SMG" type design is its' shifting prowess.
Further, I don't think the lack of the "SMG" style transmission has much to do with patents, as the prototype/concept car for the RX-8 had one! Unless they added a BMW trans to the concept car. The concept car shift lever had reverse, drive (auto shifting), and manual shift positions, with the shifting done by paddles on the steering wheel (used in production with the automatic).
Anyway, the reason the HP in the auto is lower is the rev. limit imposed by current torque converter designs - 7500 RPM. The higher HP generated by the "high power" engine design (the six intake port used on the US manual models), occures above 7500 RPM. Mazda reasoned there was no point in using that engine when they couldn't utilize its' power increase, so they also developed a less expensive to produce four intake port "low power" engine for the auto. That four port engine is also available with a manual gear box (both 5 and 6 speed are offered) for a lower cost option in some countries. Also note that what each country gets is decided by that countrys Mazda distributor/importer. In the US and Canada, that is Mazda North America Operations.
Further, I don't think the lack of the "SMG" style transmission has much to do with patents, as the prototype/concept car for the RX-8 had one! Unless they added a BMW trans to the concept car. The concept car shift lever had reverse, drive (auto shifting), and manual shift positions, with the shifting done by paddles on the steering wheel (used in production with the automatic).
Anyway, the reason the HP in the auto is lower is the rev. limit imposed by current torque converter designs - 7500 RPM. The higher HP generated by the "high power" engine design (the six intake port used on the US manual models), occures above 7500 RPM. Mazda reasoned there was no point in using that engine when they couldn't utilize its' power increase, so they also developed a less expensive to produce four intake port "low power" engine for the auto. That four port engine is also available with a manual gear box (both 5 and 6 speed are offered) for a lower cost option in some countries. Also note that what each country gets is decided by that countrys Mazda distributor/importer. In the US and Canada, that is Mazda North America Operations.
Last edited by RX-8 friend; 11-02-2005 at 10:32 AM.
11-02-2005, 10:40 AM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6speed manual isn't offered for the 4-port in other markets--only 5 speed. An SMG option wouldn't add that much--look at the Toyota SMT in the MR2. It could be done, but it needs development time as I don't believe there is a sequential gearbox already in use in the Ford line up--do they even use one in any Europe only cars? Even Aston Martins use paddle shifted autos--no sequentials, yet (?) at least.
11-02-2005, 04:25 PM
#28
Bummed, but bring on OU!
Bah paint cost $$$ on BMWs, Mazda already has a sequential manual gearbox, albeit one for itty bitty commuter cars. The transmissions aren't that much more complicated than the AT or MT. I'm sure Aisin makes one or three, it's not like Mazda develops their own transmissions.
11-02-2005, 04:56 PM
#29
Oil Injection
SMG type gearboxes can add weight, quite a bit of it, with all the hydraulics and such. The SMG wouldnt really appeal to people who want autos, just to people who want a manual, but would also go for the faster and always 'perfect' shifts the SMG offers. The changes and start/stop are still far less smooth than a regular auto-tranny.
Also in Ike's defense, I always heard of SMG as Sequential M (M for Motorsports) Gearbox. The SMG is a sequential manual gearbox, but thats not what it stands for.
Also in Ike's defense, I always heard of SMG as Sequential M (M for Motorsports) Gearbox. The SMG is a sequential manual gearbox, but thats not what it stands for.
11-02-2005, 10:42 PM
#31
Stuck in a love triangle
Originally Posted by RX-8 friend
Anyway, the reason the HP in the auto is lower is the rev. limit imposed by current torque converter designs - 7500 RPM. The higher HP generated by the "high power" engine design (the six intake port used on the US manual models), occures above 7500 RPM. Mazda reasoned there was no point in using that engine when they couldn't utilize its' power increase, so they also developed a less expensive to produce four intake port "low power" engine for the auto.
The 2006 automatics are going to be mated to the 6 port engine...not the 4 port. Surely you've stumbled upon one of the two hundred 2006 RX8 threads on here and discovered this.
So everyone is now dumber for having read what you just wrote.
Last edited by JeRKy 8 Owner; 11-02-2005 at 11:11 PM.
11-02-2005, 10:53 PM
#32
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by KYLiquid
SMG type gearboxes can add weight, quite a bit of it, with all the hydraulics and such. The SMG wouldnt really appeal to people who want autos, just to people who want a manual, but would also go for the faster and always 'perfect' shifts the SMG offers. The changes and start/stop are still far less smooth than a regular auto-tranny.
Also in Ike's defense, I always heard of SMG as Sequential M (M for Motorsports) Gearbox. The SMG is a sequential manual gearbox, but thats not what it stands for.
Also in Ike's defense, I always heard of SMG as Sequential M (M for Motorsports) Gearbox. The SMG is a sequential manual gearbox, but thats not what it stands for.
11-03-2005, 11:03 AM
#33
Administrator
Originally Posted by JeRKy 8 Owner
Uh...HELLO.
The 2006 automatics are going to be mated to the 6 port engine...not the 4 port. Surely you've stumbled upon one of the two hundred 2006 RX8 threads on here and discovered this.
So everyone is now dumber for having read what you just wrote.
The 2006 automatics are going to be mated to the 6 port engine...not the 4 port. Surely you've stumbled upon one of the two hundred 2006 RX8 threads on here and discovered this.
So everyone is now dumber for having read what you just wrote.
11-03-2005, 03:09 PM
#34
Stuck in a love triangle
I guess you all must have skipped over the the post I made on this thread where I already mentioned that fact:
Originally Posted by JeRKy 8 Owner
I am still disappointed that after all of this time, Mazda still couldn't put together (or find) an automatic transmission for the 2006 RX-8s that could match the 9000 RPM redline of the manual. They should have just trashed the automatic transmission and gone for SMG for 2006.
I mean even though the 2006 ATs are going to have the same engine as the MTs, they're still getting the short end of the stick since the transmission is preventing them from making the full power that the 6 port is capable of. It's great that the automatic will have more power next year, but it's still making less power than it should be.
Good thing I swapped to stick this year.
I mean even though the 2006 ATs are going to have the same engine as the MTs, they're still getting the short end of the stick since the transmission is preventing them from making the full power that the 6 port is capable of. It's great that the automatic will have more power next year, but it's still making less power than it should be.
Good thing I swapped to stick this year.
11-03-2005, 03:26 PM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what exactly were you getting at with your comments then please?
The cars the original question was on are configured as I discussed. The 06 auto will have more power, but will still be lower than the manual - I suspect it has a rev. limiter programmed into it. I also suspect the auto six port engine intake tract is configured to enhance torque at lower RPMs, as they don't have to worry about this change dropping peak HP, as they aren't going up to that RPM (you can usually optimize the intake tract for low end torque or high end HP, but not both). The manual engine intake tract configuration sacrifices a bit of HP (torque) in the 6000-7500 RPM area for better flow above 7000 RPM.
In other words, the 06 auto engine is still "different" than the manual engine. It is still a lower power engine, it's just "better" than the previous one.
The cars the original question was on are configured as I discussed. The 06 auto will have more power, but will still be lower than the manual - I suspect it has a rev. limiter programmed into it. I also suspect the auto six port engine intake tract is configured to enhance torque at lower RPMs, as they don't have to worry about this change dropping peak HP, as they aren't going up to that RPM (you can usually optimize the intake tract for low end torque or high end HP, but not both). The manual engine intake tract configuration sacrifices a bit of HP (torque) in the 6000-7500 RPM area for better flow above 7000 RPM.
In other words, the 06 auto engine is still "different" than the manual engine. It is still a lower power engine, it's just "better" than the previous one.
11-03-2005, 04:25 PM
#36
Administrator
Originally Posted by RX-8 friend
I also suspect the auto six port engine intake tract is configured to enhance torque at lower RPMs, as they don't have to worry about this change dropping peak HP, as they aren't going up to that RPM (you can usually optimize the intake tract for low end torque or high end HP, but not both). The manual engine intake tract configuration sacrifices a bit of HP (torque) in the 6000-7500 RPM area for better flow above 7000 RPM.
In other words, the 06 auto engine is still "different" than the manual engine. It is still a lower power engine, it's just "better" than the previous one.
In other words, the 06 auto engine is still "different" than the manual engine. It is still a lower power engine, it's just "better" than the previous one.
from looking at the intake in person at 7stock(there is a pic of it here soemwhere) and then looking at the one in my car they appear to be the same. the stated T figure is also 159 same as the manual
11-03-2005, 04:57 PM
#37
Bummed, but bring on OU!
Besides, the question was why 197...? So Rx-8friend posted correct information. Though it had been posted earlier in the thread.
Edit: Now that I've thought about it a bit, the 6port auto probably doesn't need a intake tuned for the lower redline, because the 6port isn't going to make any more power down there due to the internals. It's already tuned for optimum low end operation (given it's port configuration) using S-DAIS.
Edit: Now that I've thought about it a bit, the 6port auto probably doesn't need a intake tuned for the lower redline, because the 6port isn't going to make any more power down there due to the internals. It's already tuned for optimum low end operation (given it's port configuration) using S-DAIS.
Last edited by therm8; 11-03-2005 at 05:03 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
