9G Tronic gearbox

[vinnie07]

Hi guys,

apologies if this is a silly question but here goes:

Recently switched from a manual to an auto SLC 17 plate but the mpg isn't getting near what the manual variation I had got, although the auto is supposed to be slightly more efficient.

I believe the issue is I could drive in 6th gear at around 30 mph in my manual whereas even in the Eco dynamic select mode this automatic gearbox only has me in 4th gear.
I understand I can use the paddles just wondered if there was any other obvious setting I'm missing to allow the car to shift up at a lower rev range?

Thanks for reading

[georgeyboy12345]

Don’t believe the hype about modern autos getting better economy than their manual counterparts, it’s just not true.

[vinnie07]

georgeyboy12345 said:

Don’t believe the hype about modern autos getting better economy than their manual counterparts, it’s just not true.

That seems to be ringing true in my case as well never had an auto before, slightly underwhelmed tbh

[ScoobyChris]

I don't really drive for economy, but with my 8-speed ZF, I've noticed that where it really gains over the manual is on motorways where 8th gear is significantly longer than the manual 6th gear and so revs sit 1.5k rpm lower at 70-80mph.

Chris

[Ron240]

vinnie07 said:

I believe the issue is I could drive in 6th gear at around 30 mph in my manual whereas even in the Eco dynamic select mode this automatic gearbox only has me in 4th gear.

First of all I do understand what you are getting at, but I would just like to pick up on this one point...
Yes while you could drive in 6th gear at 30mph with a manual gearbox it doesnt mean that you should, because you absolutely should not!
4th gear is much more appropriate for driving at 30mph.
Look at it this way...if you were to routinely drive in 6th gear at 30mph on a driving test you would fail for improper use of the gears.

Edited by Ron240 on Friday 29th September 13:49

[kambites]

The idea that automatics are significantly more economical than manuals is an artifact of the way the test is performed, but modern autos absolutely should not be significantly less economical that equivalent manuals.

[Leon R]

Ron240 said:

irst of all I do understand what you are getting at, but I would just like to pick up on this one point...
Yes while you could drive in 6th gear at 30mph with a manual gearbox it doesnt mean that you should, because you absolutely should not!
4th gear is much more appropriate for driving at 30mph.
Look at it this way...if you were to routinely drive in 6th gear at 30mph on a driving test you would fail for improper use of the gears.

Edited by Ron240 on Friday 29th September 13:49

Manual cars don’t have 9 gears though.

They have 5 or 6.

[SweptVolume]

Probably my biggest gripe with any and all autos I've driven is their reluctance to let me short shift at low revs. I do get the comment above about not labouring an engine at tickover everywhere, but a ;large torquey unit will happily sit at 1200 rpm on a steady flat section, yet all the autos I've experienced tend to forbit dipping below 1500 rpm.

Weirder still is the 7 speed DSG in my 2019 Leon, which wants over 2000 rpm in first before I can pull second, yet when it's in full auto mode, it's shifting into second when it hits 1500 rpm and is then right down at 1000 rpm.

99.9% of people - my wife included - would wonder why I cared or even what I was talking about, but the control freak in me hates that I have paddles, yet the computer says no.

The other comment about modern autos being better on fuel at higher speeds is also true, due to their additional lower gears.

[Ron240]

Leon R said:

Manual cars don’t have 9 gears though.
They have 5 or 6.

Well yes, of course they do.
You seem to have somehow misinterpreted what I said.

[ilikepeas]

georgeyboy12345 said:

Don’t believe the hype about modern autos getting better economy than their manual counterparts, it’s just not true.

Isn't fuel economy more to do with throttle position?

[vinnie07]

ScoobyChris said:

I don't really drive for economy, but with my 8-speed ZF, I've noticed that where it really gains over the manual is on motorways where 8th gear is significantly longer than the manual 6th gear and so revs sit 1.5k rpm lower at 70-80mph.

Chris

Cheers Scooby Chris that makes total sense, will probably be applicable to this car as well with having more gears was just hoping for a little more around town

[vinnie07]

Ron240 said:

irst of all I do understand what you are getting at, but I would just like to pick up on this one point...
Yes while you could drive in 6th gear at 30mph with a manual gearbox it doesnt mean that you should, because you absolutely should not!
4th gear is much more appropriate for driving at 30mph.
Look at it this way...if you were to routinely drive in 6th gear at 30mph on a driving test you would fail for improper use of the gears.

Edited by Ron240 on Friday 29th September 13:49

Thank you for your response, I understand your point. I suppose it depends on the cars power output to some extent on the previous car I was not havig to put the pedal to the metal or anything to be in the 6th gear at that sort of speed

[vinnie07]

kambites said:

The idea that automatics are significantly more economical than manuals is an artifact of the way the test is performed, but modern autos absolutely should not be significantly less economical that equivalent manuals.

That's sort of what I was hoping for just seems quite a difference up to now for me personal hopefully when do some other drives it evens out more

[vinnie07]

SweptVolume said:

Probably my biggest gripe with any and all autos I've driven is their reluctance to let me short shift at low revs. I do get the comment above about not labouring an engine at tickover everywhere, but a ;large torquey unit will happily sit at 1200 rpm on a steady flat section, yet all the autos I've experienced tend to forbit dipping below 1500 rpm.

Weirder still is the 7 speed DSG in my 2019 Leon, which wants over 2000 rpm in first before I can pull second, yet when it's in full auto mode, it's shifting into second when it hits 1500 rpm and is then right down at 1000 rpm.

99.9% of people - my wife included - would wonder why I cared or even what I was talking about, but the control freak in me hates that I have paddles, yet the computer says no.

The other comment about modern autos being better on fuel at higher speeds is also true, due to their additional lower gears.

Cheers for your response mate. Seems like I'm a little like you in that respect, I hate using paddles ha ha I was just wondering if there was some sort of setting I could alter but it appears not.

[Magnum 475]

vinnie07 said:

SweptVolume said:

Probably my biggest gripe with any and all autos I've driven is their reluctance to let me short shift at low revs. I do get the comment above about not labouring an engine at tickover everywhere, but a ;large torquey unit will happily sit at 1200 rpm on a steady flat section, yet all the autos I've experienced tend to forbit dipping below 1500 rpm.

Weirder still is the 7 speed DSG in my 2019 Leon, which wants over 2000 rpm in first before I can pull second, yet when it's in full auto mode, it's shifting into second when it hits 1500 rpm and is then right down at 1000 rpm.

99.9% of people - my wife included - would wonder why I cared or even what I was talking about, but the control freak in me hates that I have paddles, yet the computer says no.

The other comment about modern autos being better on fuel at higher speeds is also true, due to their additional lower gears.

Cheers for your response mate. Seems like I'm a little like you in that respect, I hate using paddles ha ha I was just wondering if there was some sort of setting I could alter but it appears not.

I've got the ZF8 in mine, and if anything it's all too keen to short-shift. It's a petrol engine, so likes some revs. Stick it in Eco mode, and it will always change well before 2k rpm, and will be in 8th by 50mph, with the engine sitting at < 1200 rpm. It also doesn't want to downshift.

Sports mode is totally different, it will hang on to gears until the redline quite happily, and doesn't want to upshift below 3,000 rpm.

All down to how good the software is in various applications.

[Baldchap]

All down to software and user inputs, but like someone alluded to above, being in 6th at 50% throttle will do worse mpg than being in 4th at 35% throttle to accelerate from the same speed.

For the M6 Vs the A8 (or whatever), the ratios are different across the board, don't compare apples and oranges and expect the same experience. You will potentially be in a different gear at the same roadspeed because the same gear is a different ratio.

[Fastdruid]

georgeyboy12345 said:

Don’t believe the hype about modern autos getting better economy than their manual counterparts, it’s just not true.

It works better on the lab tests where they can use "perfect" gear ratios for each aspect of the test and keep the engine at its most economic while using as little throttle as they can get away with...

kambites said:

The idea that automatics are significantly more economical than manuals is an artifact of the way the test is performed, but modern autos absolutely should not be significantly less economical that equivalent manuals.

But also this... Sure older slush-o-matics with a torque converter would lose a chunk of mpg because of the inefficiencies of the gearbox but a modern DCT with like for like gearing should be exactly the same economy as a manual version.

It could be because you're sitting in a different rev range at cruising speed or maybe something like it's pulling off in 2nd and so you're giving it more throttle to match the acceleration you desire.

[vinnie07]

Magnum 475 said:

I've got the ZF8 in mine, and if anything it's all too keen to short-shift. It's a petrol engine, so likes some revs. Stick it in Eco mode, and it will always change well before 2k rpm, and will be in 8th by 50mph, with the engine sitting at < 1200 rpm. It also doesn't want to downshift.

Sports mode is totally different, it will hang on to gears until the redline quite happily, and doesn't want to upshift below 3,000 rpm.

All down to how good the software is in various applications.

That's good to know, you've got the best of both options there then. With mine even in Eco mode its taking an age to shift up

[vinnie07]

Baldchap said:

All down to software and user inputs, but like someone alluded to above, being in 6th at 50% throttle will do worse mpg than being in 4th at 35% throttle to accelerate from the same speed.

For the M6 Vs the A8 (or whatever), the ratios are different across the board, don't compare apples and oranges and expect the same experience. You will potentially be in a different gear at the same roadspeed because the same gear is a different ratio.

Makes total sense that the gear ratio's would be completely different. I feel I have always drove in a higher gear than most but felt fine as the car wasn't struggling. I am just nit picking and would never of found it an issue it just seems a good 5 mpg worse than the equivalent manual I had on general road driving. Is there any simple software tweak that can be done for the eco mode or will the cost simply outweigh the benefit?

[vinnie07]

Fastdruid said:

But also this... Sure older slush-o-matics with a torque converter would lose a chunk of mpg because of the inefficiencies of the gearbox but a modern DCT with like for like gearing should be exactly the same economy as a manual version.

It could be because you're sitting in a different rev range at cruising speed or maybe something like it's pulling off in 2nd and so you're giving it more throttle to match the acceleration you desire.

Yeahh i had heard great things about modern auto's particularly this 9G one compared to the manual variant that's why I'm so surprised at such a deficit with the mpg return I'm getting. To be honest with the way its changing gears even in eco I'm not having to give a lot of throttle certainly less than I did with the manual at least. Maybe I am nit picking due to the fact the mpg is worse than the manual variant I had ha ha