| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:42 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
Here's another idea.
After cleaning and adjusting throttle body, removing and plugging a
vacuum line on the throttle stop, the final adjustment calls for
holding engine speed at 2500 rpm, then releasing the throttle and
checking the engine speed, then loosening a small locknut and
adjusting.
Tachometer was helpful.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steve
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 03, 2005 8:09 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
Agave wrote:
| Quote: | It's more cost effective for the manufacturer to include a tach in all
models where a tach would otherwise be an option.
|
But there are many models that don't offer ANY manual transmission
option AT ALL, and yet they have tachs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Timothy J. Lee
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 03, 2005 11:15 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
In article <432D1CDA.E029CA73@mail.net>, TLittle <mail@mail.net> wrote:
| Quote: | What's the point of the tachometer on a vehicle with an automatic
transmission?
Seriously, based on my understanding of WHY the tachometer exists, why
are there tachs on vehicles with automatic transmissions?
|
It could be to make the driver think that the car is "high end" or "sporty".
I can't think of any other reason why a Ford Taurus, which only comes
with an automatic transmission, comes with a tachometer standard, but
a Ford Focus can be equipped with a manual transmission and no tachometer.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Agave
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:12 am Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Steve wrote:
<blockquote cite="midw8udnQZ_xIMB1NzeRVn-pA@texas.net" type="cite">Agave
wrote: <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">It's more cost effective for the manufacturer
to include a tach in all models where a tach would otherwise be an
option. </blockquote>
<br>
But there are many models that don't offer ANY manual transmission
option AT ALL, and yet they have tachs. <br>
</blockquote>
In keeping with my prior opinion, consider not just a specif model, but
also...<br>
<ul>
<li>"similar" models, for example the Taurus and Sable</li>
<li>as well as the
Canadian, European, and other market varieties</li>
<li>internationalization of auto manufacturers, for example Ford and
Mazda - the Probe and MX-6</li>
<li>cross model pollinization <br>
</li>
<li>a US model may not offer a manual transmission, but an
international market model may</li>
</ul>
I'd argue that very few people actually need a tach, regardless of
transmission type. As others have pointed out, with most new
cars/trucks having rev limiters, a tach is a "nice thing to watch", but
not very useful, as well as how many people and how often does one red
line their engine.<br>
<br>
I think you can blame market research, focus groups, product testing,
grabbing a piece of the after market pie, business decisions (e.g.,
"I'll give you a deal on 10 million fuel gauges, if you buy 3 million
tachometers."), and just the general American mind-set of wanting
things you don't really need for the reasons why there are tachs in
cars with automatic transmissions.<br>
<br>
At this point though, I think most people would notice that they didn't
have a tach...even though they might not have a clue what it does :).
I commend you for noticing just the opposite and questioning the
meaning of things.<br>
<br>
Now, if someone can tell me why people don't use their cruise control,
I'd be interested.<br>
</body>
</html> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John S.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:38 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
Agave wrote:
| Quote: | Steve wrote: Agave wrote:
It's more cost effective for the manufacturer to include a tach in all models where a tach would otherwise be an option.
But there are many models that don't offer ANY manual transmission option AT ALL, and yet they have tachs.
In keeping with my prior opinion, consider not just a specif model, but also...
*"similar" models, for example the Taurus and Sable
*as well as the Canadian, European, and other market varieties
*internationalization of auto manufacturers, for example Ford and Mazda - the Probe and MX-6
*cross model pollinization
*a US model may not offer a manual transmission, but an international market model may I'd argue that very few people actually need a tach, regardless of transmission type. As others have pointed out, with most new cars/trucks having rev limiters, a tach is a "nice thing to watch", but not very useful, as well as how many people and how often does one red line their engine.
I think you can blame market research, focus groups, product testing, grabbing a piece of the after market pie, business decisions (e.g., "I'll give you a deal on 10 million fuel gauges, if you buy 3 million tachometers."), and just the general American mind-set of wanting things you don't really need for the reasons why there are tachs in cars with automatic transmissions.
At this point though, I think most people would notice that they didn't have a tach...even though they might not have a clue what it does :). I commend you for noticing just the opposite and questioning the meaning of things.
Now, if someone can tell me why people don't use their cruise control, I'd be interested.
|
Most drivers push on the gas and the electronic transmission shifts
properly and does what it is supposed to and little attention is given
to shift points. The tach becomes for most people a bit of moving eye
candy as the needle goes up and down betweeen 2,200 and 2,900 rpm in
response to automatic gear changes.
The very limited space available in most cars could be more effectively
used to display a couple of truly useful gauges and a small analog
clock. Most of us really don't need (or know how) to monitor rpm's and
time shifts accordingly. Ditching it may not be so easy because the
tach has become such an automotive fixture that if it were eliminated
it would be seen as step backwards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott Dorsey
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:49 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
John S. <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Most drivers push on the gas and the electronic transmission shifts
properly and does what it is supposed to and little attention is given
to shift points. The tach becomes for most people a bit of moving eye
candy as the needle goes up and down betweeen 2,200 and 2,900 rpm in
response to automatic gear changes.
|
I have never known this to be the case. In fact, I was driving a rented
Chrysler Sebring last week. Found an opening into traffic and punched
the pedal hard. The tachometer whizzed up, as the engine also whizzed
with a sound like a sewing machine out of control... but the car did not
accelerate whatsoever for a good second after the pedal was pressed.
Is this normal? It's been more than a decade since I last drove an
automatic. Do people really put up with this?
| Quote: | The very limited space available in most cars could be more effectively
used to display a couple of truly useful gauges and a small analog
clock. Most of us really don't need (or know how) to monitor rpm's and
time shifts accordingly. Ditching it may not be so easy because the
tach has become such an automotive fixture that if it were eliminated
it would be seen as step backwards.
|
I would agree that oil pressure, temperature, and maybe battery voltage
meters would be more useful than a tach... however we are entering a world
where these things are either being removed or replaced with fake meters
that give only a go/no-go indication because it is feared they will confuse
the driver. Even BMW is now selling cars with temperature gauges that read
cold, hot, and nominal, with no real steps in-between. This is horrifying.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John S.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:12 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
Scott Dorsey wrote:
| Quote: | John S. <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote:
Most drivers push on the gas and the electronic transmission shifts
properly and does what it is supposed to and little attention is given
to shift points. The tach becomes for most people a bit of moving eye
candy as the needle goes up and down betweeen 2,200 and 2,900 rpm in
response to automatic gear changes.
I have never known this to be the case. In fact, I was driving a rented
Chrysler Sebring last week. Found an opening into traffic and punched
the pedal hard. The tachometer whizzed up, as the engine also whizzed
with a sound like a sewing machine out of control... but the car did not
accelerate whatsoever for a good second after the pedal was pressed.
Is this normal? It's been more than a decade since I last drove an
automatic. Do people really put up with this?
|
Can't tell you about that specific car, but it sounds like a mechanical
problem and not one that a tachometer could solve. If it really took a
full second for the car to begin any acceleration at all then there is
a problem with that vehicle. The numerous car's I've driven over the
years have all been responsive when consideration is given to the
engine and size of car involved. A Hertz chevy with a low-end v-6
won't have the same punch as a turbo-charged Volvo S80 T6. Both will
accelerate when the gas is pushed however.
| Quote: |
The very limited space available in most cars could be more effectively
used to display a couple of truly useful gauges and a small analog
clock. Most of us really don't need (or know how) to monitor rpm's and
time shifts accordingly. Ditching it may not be so easy because the
tach has become such an automotive fixture that if it were eliminated
it would be seen as step backwards.
I would agree that oil pressure, temperature, and maybe battery voltage
meters would be more useful than a tach... however we are entering a world
where these things are either being removed or replaced with fake meters
that give only a go/no-go indication because it is feared they will confuse
the driver. Even BMW is now selling cars with temperature gauges that read
cold, hot, and nominal, with no real steps in-between. This is horrifying.
|
I test drove a Mercedes Benz about 4 years ago that had the poorest
design for instrumentation I had ever seen. This car used a series of
digital displays to show trip meter, temperature, etc. Truly a
distracting and potentially dangerous design because you had to work
through a couple of menus to find information that should be available
at a glance while driving down the road.
| Quote: | --scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sharon
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 07, 2005 1:13 am Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
In article <di0ll3$pfr$1@panix2.panix.com>, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:
| Quote: | John S. <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote:
Most drivers push on the gas and the electronic transmission shifts
properly and does what it is supposed to and little attention is given
to shift points. The tach becomes for most people a bit of moving eye
candy as the needle goes up and down betweeen 2,200 and 2,900 rpm in
response to automatic gear changes.
I have never known this to be the case. In fact, I was driving a rented
Chrysler Sebring last week. Found an opening into traffic and punched
the pedal hard. The tachometer whizzed up, as the engine also whizzed
with a sound like a sewing machine out of control... but the car did not
accelerate whatsoever for a good second after the pedal was pressed.
Is this normal? It's been more than a decade since I last drove an
automatic. Do people really put up with this?
|
In my experience most cars with auto trannies do this, although of
course some are better than others. One reason why I hate AT is because of
this. My husband has a Saturn which is an ok car, but it does this. When he's
driving and punches it to get around traffic, I usually can't resist a snicker
along with a comment like "the hamster's running as fast as he can, poor
thing", implying he's got a hamster in a cage instead of a combustion engine.
I'm no perfect driver by any means, but I'm still better at timing my
shifts (in my manual Dakota) than his auto tranny is.
I've also noticed a habit many AT drivers have, of punching it and when
the engine finally shifts, they let off the accelerator and slow down, thus
rendering the whole exercise meaningless.
- Sharon
"Gravity... is a harsh mistress!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike T.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:46 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
| Quote: | I've also noticed a habit many AT drivers have, of punching it and when
the engine finally shifts, they let off the accelerator and slow down,
thus
rendering the whole exercise meaningless.
- Sharon
|
No, that is an improperly designed transmission. I drive a manual tranny
very well. The main thing that annoys ME about automatics is that every
single one of them I've driven (dozens) are designed to shift up WAY too
soon.
You can adjust the upshift point somewhat by nailing the accelerator to the
floor. Even if you do that though, the tranny will STILL upshift too soon.
Or, if you are going slow enough, you could manually shift the auto tranny
down to "2" or "1" until you are ready to let it upshift again. But if you
have to put so much thought and effort into making the tranny shift right,
what's the point of owning an automatic, exactly? The manual tranny is
easier to control, if you HAVE to control it.
My point? Many of these AT drivers you observe, who you thought were
letting off the accelerator, probably were not letting off the accelerator.
More likely, they applied steady pressure to it. It is the *^*(*&#(
automatic tranny that downshifts for about a half-second only to upshift
again, unless the driver takes extraordinary measures to prevent such
foolishness.
Yeah, there are some automatic trannies designed to be shifted often.
Sometimes there's buttons on the shifter or even steering wheel, and
sometimes the shifter itself can be moved into different gears, kind of like
a clutchless manual. Call them manumatics or something. :) What's the
point? Just buy a car with a clutch, so it will do what it's supposed to
do, without having to jump through hoops to make it shift correctly. -Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Gallagher
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 07, 2005 9:47 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 07:52:40 GMT, TLittle <mail@mail.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
.... Seriously, based on my understanding of WHY the tachometer exists, why
are there tachs on vehicles with automatic transmissions?
|
Because It's Cool. There doesn't have to be any other reason! Same
reason passenger cars that can't possibly go fast enough to get
airborn have spoilers.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John S.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:13 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
Mike T. wrote:
| Quote: | I've also noticed a habit many AT drivers have, of punching it and when
the engine finally shifts, they let off the accelerator and slow down,
thus
rendering the whole exercise meaningless.
- Sharon
No, that is an improperly designed transmission. I drive a manual tranny
very well. The main thing that annoys ME about automatics is that every
single one of them I've driven (dozens) are designed to shift up WAY too
soon.
|
Way too soon for...????
| Quote: |
You can adjust the upshift point somewhat by nailing the accelerator to the
floor. Even if you do that though, the tranny will STILL upshift too soon.
Or, if you are going slow enough, you could manually shift the auto tranny
down to "2" or "1" until you are ready to let it upshift again. But if you
have to put so much thought and effort into making the tranny shift right,
what's the point of owning an automatic, exactly? The manual tranny is
easier to control, if you HAVE to control it.
|
Most automatic transmissions are adaptive and will modify shift points
to an extent. If someone wants to play race driver with an automatic
transmission then get one with a Tiptronic-like adaptor. Several
brands have them. In my experience most drivers of manual transmssion
cars really don't know how to maximize milage or performance however
and would be better off with an automatic. Most manual transmission
drivers I've seen either hold their car in too low a gear and waste gas
like crazy or don't know when to downshift. It's a disappearing art
unfortunately.
One more point, many automatic transmission are easy to control. I can
force mine to start in first, second or third gear as needed for
traction, and can hold shifts for downhill driving, etc.
| Quote: |
My point? Many of these AT drivers you observe, who you thought were
letting off the accelerator, probably were not letting off the accelerator.
More likely, they applied steady pressure to it. It is the *^*(*&#(
automatic tranny that downshifts for about a half-second only to upshift
again, unless the driver takes extraordinary measures to prevent such
foolishness.
Yeah, there are some automatic trannies designed to be shifted often.
Sometimes there's buttons on the shifter or even steering wheel, and
sometimes the shifter itself can be moved into different gears, kind of like
a clutchless manual. Call them manumatics or something. :) What's the
point? Just buy a car with a clutch, so it will do what it's supposed to
do, without having to jump through hoops to make it shift correctly. -Dave |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Carroll
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:15 am Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
In article <1128708817.140722.161220@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
John S. <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote:
(snip)
| Quote: | brands have them. In my experience most drivers of manual transmssion
cars really don't know how to maximize milage or performance however
and would be better off with an automatic. Most manual transmission
drivers I've seen either hold their car in too low a gear and waste gas
like crazy or don't know when to downshift. It's a disappearing art
unfortunately.
(snip) |
One thing I wish I had is a torque-speed curve and fuel efficiency map
and whatever for my engine. I don't know where its most efficient
points are, partly because I can't find that information out. Are
there any good sources of this type of advice? My gears are set fairly
close together so I have plenty of choice about RPM, I'm just not
usually sure what the best option is. Normally for just cruising along
at a steady speed I choose a gear that has the engine at between 2,000
and 2,500 RPM, but I'm far from confident that that's a good choice. I
guess it varies from model to model.
-- Mark |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave C.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:10 am Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
"John S." <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1128708817.140722.161220@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
Mike T. wrote:
I've also noticed a habit many AT drivers have, of punching it and
when
the engine finally shifts, they let off the accelerator and slow down,
thus
rendering the whole exercise meaningless.
- Sharon
No, that is an improperly designed transmission. I drive a manual
tranny
very well. The main thing that annoys ME about automatics is that every
single one of them I've driven (dozens) are designed to shift up WAY too
soon.
Way too soon for...????
|
Well I would think that would be obvious. Most automatic trannies upshift
long before the engine enters the powerband. Or worse, the engine will just
barely TOUCH the powerband, and then the tranny upshifts immediately. You
want acceleration with an automatic? Better get out and push. It's even
more annoying driving an automatic on hills. It will downshift properly to
climb a hill, but then upshift again right away, while the car is still
trying to climb the hill. It is bizarre the way an automatic shifts, if you
know how to drive a manual. Yes, there are workarounds, but driving a
manual tranny is actually easier than trying to manually control a
lushbox. -Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John S.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Oct 08, 2005 5:41 am Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
Dave C. wrote:
| Quote: | "John S." <hjsjms@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1128708817.140722.161220@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Mike T. wrote:
I've also noticed a habit many AT drivers have, of punching it and
when
the engine finally shifts, they let off the accelerator and slow down,
thus
rendering the whole exercise meaningless.
- Sharon
No, that is an improperly designed transmission. I drive a manual
tranny
very well. The main thing that annoys ME about automatics is that every
single one of them I've driven (dozens) are designed to shift up WAY too
soon.
Way too soon for...????
Well I would think that would be obvious. Most automatic trannies upshift
long before the engine enters the powerband.
|
Now that is an authoritative sounding but truly misleading statement.
Since the power or torque curve is just that...a curve that begins at
zero, any time the transmission shifts above zero it will be someplace
in the power band. Its a question of where on the curve you want to
shift. In addition to controlling quickly you can accelerate, the
place you select on the curve will also govern how much fuel you burn
and how much wear and stress you place on the engine. You appear to
have little concern about fuel economy and engine longevity - playing
the race driver seems to be your focus.
| Quote: | Or worse, the engine will just
barely TOUCH the powerband, and then the tranny upshifts immediately. You
want acceleration with an automatic? Better get out and push. It's even
more annoying driving an automatic on hills. It will downshift properly to
climb a hill, but then upshift again right away, while the car is still
trying to climb the hill.
|
I have yet to experience that in hundreds of thousands of miles driving
four cars equipped with automatic transmissions.
| Quote: | It is bizarre the way an automatic shifts, if you
know how to drive a manual.
|
Interesting but rather bizarre statement that is not supported by the
real world of driving that I've encountered. I drove numerous stick
shifts before switching to an automatic several cars ago. The
electronically controlled automatic of today does a far better job of
shifting than most drivers I've encountered. Most guys with manual
shift transmissions seem to like keeping the engine in a lower gear
than needed presumably for the imagined race car thrills from hearing
the engine at 4,000 rpm.
Whee...look everyone...I'm a race car driver 'cause I got me a car with
a five speed, tach, spoiler and noisy exhausts to prove it.
Yes, there are workarounds, but driving a
| Quote: | manual tranny is actually easier than trying to manually control a
lushbox.
|
A lushbox...??? A box full of alchoholics maybe???? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave C.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:40 pm Post subject:
Re: Why do cars with automatic transmissions have tachometer |
|
|
| Quote: | One thing I wish I had is a torque-speed curve and fuel efficiency map
and whatever for my engine. I don't know where its most efficient
points are, partly because I can't find that information out. Are
there any good sources of this type of advice? My gears are set fairly
close together so I have plenty of choice about RPM, I'm just not
usually sure what the best option is. Normally for just cruising along
at a steady speed I choose a gear that has the engine at between 2,000
and 2,500 RPM, but I'm far from confident that that's a good choice. I
guess it varies from model to model.
|
A couple of rules of thumb, gathered from various sources that know a lot
more about car engines than I ever will:
Aim for 40-45% of engine redline
Aim for RPM at (60% of RPM at which engine produces maximum horsepower)
In several cars I've done the math on, these two formulas produce results
pretty close to each other. For my own car, it works out to (3200 to
3600RPM) or 3480RPM, depending on which formula I use. Over ten years of
driving this car, I have noticed that maximum fuel economy is achieved at
3500 RPM. Not coincidentally, my engine is most efficient right where it
should be, according to the experts. So use either of the above formulas,
and you should be pretty close to where you want to be. If you can't find
the horsepower/torque curves, you should at least be able to dig up the
manufacturer's published horsepower specs. for the engine, showing (for
example) 150HP @ 5800RPM or whatever your engine produces at X rpm. They
always list this by maximum horsepower RPM, so just multiply that RPM by .6
to get a pretty good estimate of what to aim for.
Unfortunately, it might not be that easy if you own a slushbox. :( But I
gathered from what you wrote that you have a real tranny, so you should be
all set. -Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in