A8 shift speed considered
The fact is that you can't back up your asinine post that NO A8 transmissions have failed, but only their torque convertors.
That proves you know nothing, but are a big wind bag, throwing out crap that you no nothing about. Throwing out your "facts" about other transmissions(A6, 700R4s, 4Lxx's, etc" you posted isn't proof of anything as we are discussing(except for you who has your head in the sand) the A8 transmission.


do you even see what you are typing? so all your anger boils down to one word, "No." Semantics.
What's wrong? Be honest, anything we can help you with?
I ask because twice now I have clicked at 5500 (approximately-my best post event observance) and ended up bouncing off the rev limiter before it completed the shift. While I know the computer is smart enough to pre-plan the shift command in advance to result in a redline shift, but I'd like doing it myself. Is the computer sending the shift command at 5400 to get a shift at 6500?? Someone should be able to interrogate the TCM to see how far in advance GM starts the shift sequence.
In my opinion a quicker/tighter shift (total time from click to shift complete) would help A8 manual mode shift timing, accuracy and consistency.
I don't actually know the answer to the question, but I know some stuff around the question: when the RPM is sweeping up the computer knows you're going to have to shift in some amount of time... let's say that's 300ms. Maybe that means the trans has to start "preparing" for the shift at 500rpm. Then at 6500, it can execute it really quickly.
But if you're in M, I don't know if it's still proactively getting ready. I think it must be but I don't really know... but if not, it'd be easy to bounce off the rev limiter.
I personally wouldn't use the paddles for WOT upshifts. I'd leave it in D, and in fact I do. Then me and the transmission are on the same page, and in agreement of the goal: the fastest acceleration possible.
Once you start trying to second guess the computer you're probably going to make things worse.
All that is a longwinded way of saying "I use the paddles for early upshifts but never for power shifts".
If you want to be able to power shift a car with paddles, it almost needs to have a linear shift delay like a DCT where you can predict the delay.
Last edited by davepl; Jul 5, 2017 at 07:04 PM.
Ive had both, I prefer the M7 but no question the A8 is better at WOT, especially for repeatable results. If one wants to be a paddle shifter, maybe they should accept the stick.
The fastest way around a road course in a ZO6 is with an A8 in drive. While it lasts, of course.
Hey, does it ever get cold in Germany? I have a suggestion...
Last edited by davepl; Jul 5, 2017 at 09:15 PM.
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Last edited by Maxie2U; Jul 5, 2017 at 10:08 PM.
For (a), shifting the 8L90E can be broken down into two phases:
- Shift preparation
- Shift execution
The car's smart enough that for a WOT shift, it can do the preparation part in advance. That means when it comes to redline, it can do a shift in the much-talked-about "faster than a DCT" speed. But it needs to be able to prepare in advance. When it can "see it coming", the A8 shifts like nobody's business.
That's why when you pull a paddle at an "unexpected" time there's a lag. It then has to do the preparation and the execution on demand, and only the execution is fast - the preparation take up to a second, or so it seems.
I was explaining this to someone and it made me think - the A8 is thus very fast at shifting at the right time and pretty bad at shifting at the wrong time.
Not to be too much of an apologist, but why do we care how fast the trans shifts at the wrong time?
I don't actually paddle-shift (except on the road course, to manage heat) anyway, so it's not a big deal for me, and maybe that's why I don't really care.
Am I missing a scenario where you SHOULD be upshifting and the car can't have anticipated it and therefore you get the laggy paddle shift in a time/place where a crisp shift would have been better?
In other words, the laggy paddle shift - does it even matter beyond bragging rights?
If I want shifts at max power/redline, the A8 does it better than I can do it with an M7
If I want shifts that give me plenty of grunt out of a corner on a track, I can use the paddles and request a shift when the tach hits 4000, and it shifts soon enough, maybe having revved another 500-800rpm.
Downshifts happen in a heart beat.
I am completely happy with the Z06/7 making this sort of accommodation. Tracking a car is not racing a car.
If you are not, it is simple. Get the M7 and enjoy what you like.
I don't actually paddle-shift (except on the road course, to manage heat) anyway, so it's not a big deal for me, and maybe that's why I don't really care.
Am I missing a scenario where you SHOULD be upshifting and the car can't have anticipated it and therefore you get the laggy paddle shift in a time/place where a crisp shift would have been better?
So yes, I do care how fast it shifts at 5,000 RPM for that reason alone.
Secondly, the real issue is the downshift slowness and unpredictability. Particularly when you are downshifting in a trail braking situation or into a corner, it is very slow, unpredictable and impossible to time the shifts. That can unbalance the car at the wrong time.
Third, even if you ignore the need to upshift to manage heat, there are indeed many situations where you need to upshift before redline on track. Let me just list a few that I have personally needed to execute:
1 - Lime Rock Park coming into the downhill turn. That is a turn that you enter at ˜95MPH and exit at about 110MPH. It is faster, safer and less upsetting to the car to execute the upshift before the turn 1,000 RPM early.
2 - Same thing going into the Esses at Watkins Glen and a couple of other tracks.
3 - Lime Rock Park and other tracks with sound limits, typically located at the heavy acceleration areas - in those tracks you need to upshift to be able to play. And you want to upshift without losing a full second of acceleration power.
I could go on and on and on. But, if you are trying to excuse a 1 second delay for upshifts and downshifts as "never really needed" you are on thing ice.
A performance car with a paddle shift automatic NEEDS to respond quickly to shift commands. Anything less than that is sup-par engineering. Ricardo, Porsche, BMW, all managed to do it. Chevy does not have a valid excuse not to do it.
P.S. Having said all of the above, I don't want to leave anyone with the impression that the A8 is unusable or underivable on track. It is not. But you do need to know its limitations and manage it and/or work around them.
Last edited by baron95; Jul 9, 2017 at 04:54 PM.
Last edited by davepl; Jul 9, 2017 at 07:40 PM.
Being a human is about having the human experience. You do realize all this auto and computer talk is you giving away your rights, don't you?

Whether calculated as right by a computer or just simply what I want, the car is going to do what I tell it to do, not the other way around.
So if you can't learn to drive our A8, then get an M7.
So if you can't learn to drive our A8, then get an M7.
Ferrari hasn't used a torque converter yet, but did go the way BMW did 10 years ago with a manual that was clutchless. BMW's was the SMG, Ferrari's was the Valeo. Even built an F40 with a Valeo transmission.
Why BMW and Audi have decided to abandon the DCT, I don't know but both have announced that is happening and in favor of a torque converter A8.
Last edited by pkincy; Aug 21, 2017 at 09:04 PM.
Ferrari hasn't used a torque converter yet, but did go the way BMW did 10 years ago with a manual that was clutchless. BMW's was the SMG, Ferrari's was the Valeo. Even built an F40 with a Valeo transmission.
Why BMW and Audi have decided to abandon the DCT, I don't know but both have announced that is happening and in favor of a torque converter A8.
Its not the A8 itself is bad, it's that it's the wrong application for a Corvette combined with GM using kindergartners to program them coupled with trying to lock the torque converter almost all the time and using the cheapest possible parts possible.
But that's why the Corvette is so inexpensive, right?










Enough said.









