Whatever stance you take in the automatic versus manual debate, if you haven't done so already, go out and sample a VW or Audi product equipped with the DSG transmission. All the positives – quicker shifts, better fuel economy, geek-cred – far outweigh the negatives and the fact that Porsche, BMW and even Chrysler are looking to develop their own dual-clutch gearbox, should tell you that DSGs are here to stay. Add to the fact that they may also be cheaper to produce and service, it didn't take anymore convincing for Ford and its Swedish arm, Volvo, to decide that they better throw their hat into the game.
WhatCar is reporting that a DSG-like tranny will find its way into Volvo models within the next two years and rumor has it that a high-performance version of the C30 will be one of the first vehicles to come equipped with the new gearbox.
In addition to Volvo's use of the dual-clutch setup, expect to see it carry over into Ford's vehicles as well, much like the migration from slush boxes that VW is in the process of executing.
[Source: What Car?]
Related Links:
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
First Drive: 2009 Kia Borrego
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
John F @ Nov 4th 2006 9:22AM
"Add to the fact that they may also be cheaper to produce and service"
Cheaper to produce and service than what?
"According to CSM Worldwide, an automotive market consultantcy, manufacturers pay anywhere from €300 to €400 ($381 to $509) a unit for low-cost, four-speed automatics. CVTs can cost up to €1,400 ($1780), but dual-clutch transmissions offer a nice middle ground at about €950 ($1208)."
(http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/30/low-cost-dual-clutch-tranny-on-the-way)
Cheaper than CVT, yes, but cheaper than a traditional automatic?
Howard Kerr @ Nov 4th 2006 9:42AM
Thank you John F.
Too often folks make the claim that something is better or cheaper or bigger or....you fill in the blank, but don't say in comparison to what, much less provide figures to back up their claim. I don't see (and you have proven) how a DSG transmission can be cheaper to service and/or produce than a "normal" automatic...since it's MORE complex. Have DSG equipped cars really been around long enough to say they are as RELIABLE as any alternative transmission? My current car, with an automatic transmission, has racked up nearly 153,000 trouble-free miles. Service consists of replacement of the fluid every 18 to 24 months (there is no replaceable filter), as a precaution...I'm sure the manufacturer suggests that the transmission fluid be changed a little less frequently. I suppose I could have bought a new transmission by now for what I have spent in fluid "renewal", but even the DSG will require some servicing too.
G. Snyder @ Nov 4th 2006 10:14AM
Howard - a "DSG" type transmission is not an automatic. I am not even sure it is more complicated than a traditional torque coverter automatic.
kansei @ Nov 4th 2006 11:00AM
Well a DSG is a better automatic than the traditional ones.
It will NEVER replace a true manual gearbox and clutch though.
Gil @ Nov 4th 2006 11:10AM
You people must understand it's not an automatic.
"It will NEVER replace a true manual gearbox and clutch though"
Have you driven one? I'm dead set against automatics and after testdriving a VW with one I'm ready to drop manuals in favor of DSGs
TheChaz @ Nov 4th 2006 12:45PM
"It will NEVER replace a true manual gearbox and clutch though"
I have a feeling you're going to eat those words in a decade or so. Computer-activated clutch pack transmissions have already replaced manuals in many racing series (Formula 1, WRC, Le Mans) simply because they perform faster than a human can and they never miss a shift. They combine everything that is good about a manual - better fuel economy, the involvement of choosing your own gears. With everything that is good about an automatic - easy to drive in auto mode, less distracting, easier to operate in stop and go conditions and wile parking. The one thing you lose is that third pedal and the knowledge that "you're doing it all yourself." The vast majority of the driving public doesn't give a hoot about that, as shown by the dominance of torque-converter automatics.
Maybe they'll "NEVER replace a true manual gearbox and clutch" in your heart, but they sure will in the marketplace.
Lucas @ Nov 4th 2006 12:52PM
Any chance this will migrate over to Mazda? Their product line is just dying for one. At least the Miata, RX-8, and Mazdaspeed 3 should have this as an option.
ocnj179 @ Nov 4th 2006 1:44PM
I would think Mazda would incorporate this DSG-like transmission into their lineup quicker than Ford.
David F @ Nov 4th 2006 2:09PM
I think the claim is DSG will eventually be cheaper than regular automatics. And like others have mentioned in this thread, don't totally write it off till you've tried it.
felix @ Nov 4th 2006 2:50PM
i hope they dont replace manuals, at least not in sports cars. I'll never forget the first time i tried to heel and toe, and realized it was a lot harder than it looked. When i finally got it right it was pure ecstacy. Half the enjoyment of driving a manual is rev matching. Yes DSGs may be 'better' but i highly doubt they're more entertaining. What's the point of going fast if you're not having fun?
CH @ Nov 4th 2006 3:06PM
Ford was actually the first major manufacturer after VW to commit to DCT (=DSG). This was reported over a year ago:
http://bwauto.com/about/in_the_news/files/an091905.pdf
doglet @ Nov 4th 2006 5:59PM
"It will NEVER replace a true manual gearbox and clutch though"
that is a fact, if it doesnt have a clutch pedal then its an automatic. thats just all there is too it. an entertaining car communicates as much as possible to the driver. without the clutch pedal it looses a path of information between the driver and the car.
weither it shifts faster or more efficient (which i highly doubt) or any of that is completly irrelivent to the discussion. dual clutch/paddle shift autos/SMGs all have the same fundamental problem, no clutch pedal.
CrunchyCookie @ Nov 4th 2006 8:07PM
It's not supposed to replace a manual and it never could anyway: stick lovers stick to sticks for the sensory satisfaction of shifting.
It's supposed to replace the automatic -- notice VWs/Audis usually offer a choice between DSG and a manual -- and by incorporating close to 100% of an automatic's convenience and smoothness, it succeeds (VW's at least; not sure about BMW or the others). Consider the marginal benefits in efficiency icing on the cake.
RayRay @ Nov 4th 2006 9:45PM
Does anyone on this blog know how to spell the word lose?
lose
loser
loses
There is only ONE "O" in the word! Looser is what your pants are after you go on a diet. I don't consider myself a spelling nazi but I see this continually here and I just can't take it any more! Sorry to be an ass about it.
Talis @ Nov 5th 2006 3:34AM
I am getting tired of people commenting from the peanut gallery. If you have not driven a vehicle with the DCG, then you do not belong in the comments. I drove an A3 when they first came out and I would have no problem smoking all of you turners when you pop your clutch, and grind your gears.
All in all, the traditional manual gearbox will not be replaced in the near future... At least (I would think) not in my life time. A lot of people thought that when Automatic shifting transmissions started becoming standard (even in your good ol' Chevy), the manual tranny would go the way of the dodo bird. The problem is it didn't and DCG's are simply the next step forward--not a replacement.
Also to those of you who do not know what a DCG is, do some fucking research before you comment. Hell, the name alone should give you a fucking clue! DUAL CLUTCH GEARBOX! The most basic way to explain this kind of technology (which still does not give it enough credit) is to say it is a manual with two clutches that are computer controlled--instead of your foot clutching and your hand shifting, the computer does it for you--but the car STILL clutches and gears are still shifted.
VW has had some hard times before but has also produced some awesome technology! If it were not for Audi taking the proven method of implanting race technology for consumer use, then we would still be stuck with a slow shifting auto with little control over shift points, or a primitive manual which most people do not know how to use.
Howard Kerr @ Nov 5th 2006 8:22AM
"Whatever stance you take in the automatic versus manual debate..."
THIS sentence opened this article, so I based my comments on COMPARING a DSG to an automatic. I haven't looked, is ANY manufacturer offering a DSG for free...as they should be doing for a manual transmission?
As far as the comment "if it has two pedals, it's not a manual transmission..." or words to that effect, you apparently haven't been around long enough to experience VW's FIRST foray into an "automated" manual transmission. Even Chevy was offering a "two pedal" manual transmission in it's late '60s Novas...that obviously wasn't a big seller.
I don't say that DSG is better, or it's an automatic, I DO dispute the claim that it is cheaper and less expensive to service (words taken from this article) than........what? The author doesn't say, so I assumed a MANUAL transmission. IS IT? No one has since posted an answer to that central question, though John F came closest.
Howard Kerr @ Nov 5th 2006 8:24AM
By the way, Volvo absorbed the old Dutch manufacturer DAF, well known for making CVTs...yet no current Volvo has a CVT though curiously, Ford offers one in it's European Fiesta...or used to.
G. Snyder @ Nov 5th 2006 10:28AM
doglet - you are ignorant and do not understand the technology. It is not an "automatic". THAT is a fact.
Corey W. @ Nov 5th 2006 12:36PM
Some of you have driven a DSG and have lost your minds, I'm not sure if it's because you are lazy or never really embraced driving a manual. My wife can drive a manual just fine, no jerks or slipping, but she'll tell you, "I can't do any of the stuff my husband does" If you don't know what you can and can't do in a computer controller DSG transmission compared to a manual, I can't explain it other than you don't fully know how to drive a stick. And think about, even if you're in a manual, with a computer controlled, robotic arm and foot, that control the stick and clutch, at that point it's an automatic!! Get over it, DSG is a "type of" automatic transmission that lets you initiate the gear change. Period.... Again, if the quickest shift is your only concern when drive a manual, you never fully learn to use a manual gearbox.
G. Snyder @ Nov 5th 2006 4:19PM
Corey - you and doglet should have lunch.
"DSG is a "type of" automatic transmission that lets you initiate the gear change. Period."
Not period. The only thing shared between these transmissions and traditional automtics is the concept that you can let the car automatically shift for you (if you choose). The manual selection of gears is executed quite differently. Without a doubt, a traditional manual is more involving overall and would likely reward a driver more (despite yielding inferior performance), but the benefits are tremendous.
Failure to disassociate a DSG, SMG, MM, or (or whatever) from a normal automatic is very foolish and shows a lack of understanding of the technology at play with ANY of the transmissions being discussed. There are plenty of aritcles and technical dissertations available for those who can read - go take a look. Perhaps it will help those of you who are confused on the topic. Period.