Torque: Manual vs Auto Tranny
Thread Starter
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,683
Likes: 144
From: Memphis Tennessee
Torque: Manual vs Auto Tranny
Was chatting with another car-buff this weekend, and we got into the conversation about there being a difference in torque between the manual and auto transmissions. We all know the figures (350 vs 375), but for life of me I could NOT remember the ACTUAL reason for the difference.
Who's got it?
Who's got it?
Administrator
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 368,447
Likes: 24,807
From: In a parallel universe. Currently own 2014 Stingray Coupe.
C7 of the Year - Modified Finalist 2021
MO Events Coordinator
St. Jude Co-Organizer
St. Jude Donor '03 thru '26
NCM Sinkhole Donor
CI 5, 8 & 11 Veteran
But I think that is what the above two are talking about too. Could be wrong though.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,479
Likes: 36
Actually, the engine itself has a different rating. We are not talking RW torque. The LS1 for the manual car is rated at 375 ft/lbs vs 350 ft/lbs for the auto. It could be that the auto LS1 has been slightly detuned to improve driveability and transmission reliability?
Thread Starter
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,683
Likes: 144
From: Memphis Tennessee
Well you all have fallen into the crack I got in this weekend. The posted value for HP and TQ are NOT rear-wheel measurments, rather static engine related figures.
We too could not remember exactly what the difference was......
NEXT ?
We too could not remember exactly what the difference was......
NEXT ?
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Every 2027 Corvette Engine Explained
Joe Kucinski
Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette
Verdad Gallardo
10 Ugly Corvettes That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,866
Likes: 45
From: Tampa Bay, Go BUCS!!!Go Rays!!!Go Lightning!!!
St. Jude Donor '12-'13-'14
Chuck from COW should be able to help out here since he's the apparent king of tuning A4's.
I know on my '03 Yukon one of the HUGE performance killers was the computerized torque management system that was intended to make the transmission last longer. There's a good chance that is what the difference is here as well.
I know on my '03 Yukon one of the HUGE performance killers was the computerized torque management system that was intended to make the transmission last longer. There's a good chance that is what the difference is here as well.
Team Owner
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 43,084
Likes: 33
From: Raleigh / Rolesville NC
Actually, the engine itself has a different rating. We are not talking RW torque. The LS1 for the manual car is rated at 375 ft/lbs vs 350 ft/lbs for the auto. It could be that the auto LS1 has been slightly detuned to improve driveability and transmission reliability?
have seen ATX tuned to 360 ft lbs with better air intake an headers
Thread Starter
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,683
Likes: 144
From: Memphis Tennessee
Race Director
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 11,467
Likes: 8
From: 972 and 405
IDK but, I would guess the difference would be in the tuning of the transmission(A4) itself. While both LS1s make the same power, Chevrolet probably detuned the A4 slightly to be more reliable by not using as much torque.
-Alex
-Alex
Thread Starter
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,683
Likes: 144
From: Memphis Tennessee
All I can think of is just tuning. Nothing else seem accurate.
Former Vendor
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,792
Likes: 255
From: Ossining New York
St. Jude Donor '07-'08-'09-'10-'12-'13-'14
I think what it boils down to is.....
Chuck from COW should be able to help out here since he's the apparent king of tuning A4's.
I know on my '03 Yukon one of the HUGE performance killers was the computerized torque management system that was intended to make the transmission last longer. There's a good chance that is what the difference is here as well.
I know on my '03 Yukon one of the HUGE performance killers was the computerized torque management system that was intended to make the transmission last longer. There's a good chance that is what the difference is here as well.
Or.... The standard trans drivetrain takes less power to turn....
While both system have "mechanical losses" between the flywheel horsepower and the tire contacting the road...The automatics have slightly more loss... It's only a few percent...but it's there.
For instance a standard shift clutch system couples tight when engaged and, assuming NO SLIP, transfers nearly 100% of the engine's torque to the driveshaft.
On the other hand, a torque converter in an automatic, generates tons of heat from the frictional losses in the converter when the fluid is
sheared to propel the car, and WHAT IS HEAT???
Heat is ENERGY LOST. Simple. Automatics generate much more heat than standard shift cars and cost you a bit of power. There are
likely other small losses, but I believe that the largest losses occur in the torque converter.
This is NOT a reason to buy a stick over an Automatic. Some of the fastest cars are automatics and when programmed correctly, they're
MORE fun in my opinion.
That's about the story.
Chuck CoW
Safety Car
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,640
Likes: 83
From: . New York
Was chatting with another car-buff this weekend, and we got into the conversation about there being a difference in torque between the manual and auto transmissions. We all know the figures (350 vs 375), but for life of me I could NOT remember the ACTUAL reason for the difference.
Who's got it?
Who's got it?
But . . .I didnt know about the engines themselves being rated at different HP/Torque ratings at the crank, thats new information to me.....Thanks
Instructor
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
From: Michigan
Flywheel horsepower and torque have nothing to do with what goes behind the engine, this is the number that is advertised. Rear wheel horsepower does care what happens behind the engine.
Auto trans takes power to run so rear wheel horsepower would be down but that is not what is advertised. Weight of drive-train components has no effect on power but they do have an effect on acceleration.
Torque converters actually increase torque at low speeds but overall they are usually slower due to losses with the the spinning parts, pumps, mass. Modern auto transmissions are getting very efficient with many speeds and lock-up torques converters.
I am guessing that the auto trans has some kind of problem with too much torque so the factory has an engine version (it could be just calibration) to limit torque to increase durability. This is very common in the auto industry.
Auto trans takes power to run so rear wheel horsepower would be down but that is not what is advertised. Weight of drive-train components has no effect on power but they do have an effect on acceleration.
Torque converters actually increase torque at low speeds but overall they are usually slower due to losses with the the spinning parts, pumps, mass. Modern auto transmissions are getting very efficient with many speeds and lock-up torques converters.
I am guessing that the auto trans has some kind of problem with too much torque so the factory has an engine version (it could be just calibration) to limit torque to increase durability. This is very common in the auto industry.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,315
Likes: 17
From: Near Jacksonville Fl.