Your favourite gear box?
Discussion
smifffymoto said:
I have driven most,except an auto,and I would say my choice would be the Eaton 12 speed twin splitter.You couldn’t rush and had to ‘drive’ the truck.
Down side was loaded hill starts and then repacking the cab.
Couldn’t rush! It was the fastest gearbox ever, I still miss them .Down side was loaded hill starts and then repacking the cab.
OK, OK, I’ll bite. To resurrect an old PH favourite, it has to be this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM76f7nChSU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM76f7nChSU
leggly said:
smifffymoto said:
I have driven most,except an auto,and I would say my choice would be the Eaton 12 speed twin splitter.You couldn’t rush and had to ‘drive’ the truck.
Down side was loaded hill starts and then repacking the cab.
Couldn’t rush! It was the fastest gearbox ever, I still miss them .Down side was loaded hill starts and then repacking the cab.
smifffymoto said:
leggly said:
smifffymoto said:
I have driven most,except an auto,and I would say my choice would be the Eaton 12 speed twin splitter.You couldn’t rush and had to ‘drive’ the truck.
Down side was loaded hill starts and then repacking the cab.
Couldn’t rush! It was the fastest gearbox ever, I still miss them .Down side was loaded hill starts and then repacking the cab.
Volvo I-Shift , just suberb even on snow and ice . Done most types I think , slam change , twin split , spicer 10 speed ( horrid) , and 12years with Eaton 13/18 speeds in N America . Never wanted an auto for tanker work but I can’t fault the Volvo box , as opposed to the Eaton auto on our Kenworths which are dire .
normalbloke said:
There’s a forum for the Eaton twin split reminiscing....
I can't imagine that many people wish that they still had one. They could be easy enough when you got the hang of them, but they were pretty horrible if you were sat in a vehicle with one and just given the keys.I have driven one, but they were far too old by then and they're all in black and white now. The ETS is most useful for pointing out how it could be, when people complain that the vehicle that they are asked to drive isn't brand new and automatic.
Automatic Volvos (i-Shift) are pretty good road vehicles. If you want to drive off road then a four over four might be better. Plenty of FMXs have i-Drive but the buttons that you need to turn off a lot of the features were optional, and you cant drive through mud when the ECU is constantly interfering.
Renauts use exactly the same gearbox but they arent nearly as good: showing that the software is as important as the engineering.
s p a c e m a n said:
Whatever manual box was in the 1999 daf xf, I could flick that thing through gears like I was in a car. Love the new Scania autos, have been driving a 13 plate slush box MAN for the past week and had forgotten how bad autos could be.
Early versions of the ZF as tronic ( man and daf) were vastly improved by a software re flash. This especially applied to tanker work. As you slowed down for say, a roundabout the box would change down and then if you tried to exploit a gap in the traffic and accelerate the ullage in the tank would catch up. That would alter the weight on the 5th wheel and the truck would be confused not knowing what gear to be in. The update slowed down the gear changes improving the driveability. The box doesn't give much trouble itself, breakdowns are usually wiring related...
t btw that it’s borderline dangerous The Arocs gearbox is'nt that bad itself. It is the software that makes it difficult to drive. I have driven several iterations of the same 8w chassis and each new attempt is a little better: 2015 examples need an email sending to let the transmission know that you intend to pull out, and it is far less of a problem on the latest vehicles.
An even bigger problem is the manufacturer believing that drivers should not be given complete control and no matter what features the vehicle has, it is still going to be a pig to drive off road if the f*cker keeps changing gear and otherwise interfering as you try to keep moving over ground where a four-over-four Scania doesn't even slow down.
edited
An even bigger problem is the manufacturer believing that drivers should not be given complete control and no matter what features the vehicle has, it is still going to be a pig to drive off road if the f*cker keeps changing gear and otherwise interfering as you try to keep moving over ground where a four-over-four Scania doesn't even slow down.
edited
Edited by 944 Man on Wednesday 9th June 18:06
944 Man said:
The Actros gearbox is'nt that bad itself. It is the software that makes it difficult to drive. I have driven several iterations of the same 8w chassis and each new attempt is a little better: 2015 examples need an email sending to let the transmission know that you intend to pull out, and it is far less of a problem on the latest vehicles.
An even bigger problem is the manufacturer believing that drivers should not be given complete control and no matter what features the vehicle has, it is still going to be a pig to drive off road if the f*cker keeps changing gear and otherwise interfering as you try to keep moving over ground where a four-over-four Scania doesn't even slow down.
What I drive today is 19 plate and my god is it awful. At one point today it went from 5th to 7th and then after 20 seconds of thinking back to first. At this point the handbrake was already on. I don’t know who designed the software, but I’d put him in one of the units for a day or two... with some hilly sections for good measure An even bigger problem is the manufacturer believing that drivers should not be given complete control and no matter what features the vehicle has, it is still going to be a pig to drive off road if the f*cker keeps changing gear and otherwise interfering as you try to keep moving over ground where a four-over-four Scania doesn't even slow down.
Gassing Station | Commercial Break | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff