------------->>> not exactly Ted, what i mean is some kind of thingy that would reduce the flow of petro to the fuel injectors, which would, yes, reduce performance, but increase mpg...........like a "governor", govna!
Personal atacks seem to be the norm in newsgroups too. You've helped me before in this forum and I had you in good consideration. Now this repeated lack of civility from you really disappoints me.
So the wheels wouldn't turn the engine in an automatic? I don't think so.
Yeah, right. The engine, that air-pump, stops pumping air...
Not when the engine is dead and not turning.
BTW, have you taken your Ritalin today?
It does in my cars...
Sorry to tell you Neo you are wrong and Ian is right.
Brian
You know how an automatic works don't you? The Torque Converter is the only thing that provides a direct linkage to the engine and the tranny. The flywheel is attached to one half of the TCC and the tranny is attached to the other part. A torque converter is a type of fluid coupling, which allows the engine to spin somewhat independently of the transmission. Even though the turbine changes the direction of the fluid and flings it out the back, the fluid still ends up moving in the direction that the turbine is spinning because the turbine is spinning faster in one direction than the fluid is being pumped in the other direction. If you were standing in the back of a pickup moving at 60 mph, and you threw a ball out the back of that pickup at 40 mph, the ball would still be going forward at 20 mph. This is similar to what happens in the turbine: The fluid is being flung out the back in one direction, but not as fast as it was going to start with in the other direction.
At these speeds, the fluid actually strikes the back sides of the stator blades, causing the stator to freewheel on its one-way clutch so it doesn't hinder the fluid moving through it.
And only cars that have a lock-up clutch in their TC do the 2 halves go the same speed acting as a clutch would in a manual tranny.
So..let's see..if there's no direct linkage from the tranny to the engine then I suppose that the engine wouldn't have to keep going if the car is coasting if it died. The parts of the tranny would keep going though. I'd like to see you push start an automatic since that is basically what you are saying can be done.
Last time I checked vacuum was created by differences in air pressure. A vacuum exists in an area where the pressure is lower than the atmosphere outside of it. Reducing the pressure inside of something causes suction. When you drink soda through a straw, the atmospheric pressure in the air pushes down on your soda and pushes it up into your mouth. The same principal applies to your engine. When the piston travels down in the cylinder it lowers the atmospheric pressure in the cylinder and forms a vacuum. This vacuum is used to draw in the air and fuel mixture for combustion. The vacuum created in your engine not only pulls the fuel into the combustion chamber, it also serves many other functions.
Matched only by your repeated (apparently) lack of knowledge on the subjects we are talking about.
Well, you think wrong. "If" we talking about an engine that has stalled, then no, the automatics in this day and age will not turn the engine. If you are talking about "engine braking", then yes, to a very small degree, the automatic will "turn" the engine, though it's really more correct to think of the engine retarding the movement of the vehicle when going down an incline. Very few automatics these days provide any noticeable amount of engine braking if you are in top gear. If you pull it into a lower gear, then yes, you get some engine braking.
You are losing me here....obviously, we must be talking past one another.
See above.
Ian
That is interesting. The GM, Ford, and Chrysler products that I have driven all drop to idle when I take my foot off the gas at highway speed.
I have done it for years. When I was 17 the power steering pump on my
72 Chevelle broke at the lower bolt. So I hopped out with a pocket knife and cut the belt. When I stopped driving the car when I was 25 I still had not repaired the pump, or put another belt on for the power steering.I also Drove my 87 Astro Van for 3 hours with no power steering. The pump shaft was snapped inside of the pump. When I removed the pulley, the shaft came out with it. Astor Vans have a higher boost rate, and lower geared steering boxes.
I have drove all sorts of vehicles over the years where the power steering is In-Op. Including the Jeep CJ-7 I just drove yesterday & today while off roading. 31x10.50x15 Heavy Lug tires at 15 PSI. Didn't have problem one, and I was dodging tree's on a trail just wide enough for Suzuki Samurai's.
Now that we have seen I sure as hell can. How about some learning for you.
The faster you go, the less steering boost is needed.This is the principal behind variable boost power assist steering systems. At 55 to 60 MPH they basically let the pump free wheel. At 20 MPH and below they increase boost levels.
When you are at low speeds (20 MPH or less) that is when power steering is a help. Especially when trying to turn a sharp angle (such as a parking space). At High Speeds having no power steering requires less effort to turn the wheels (55MPH & UP). Charles
As I said, turning the wheel in my Alero to the dealer was painful chore. News flash for you: cars 30 years were designed differently.
From what you're saying, one would conclude that automatics don't provide any engine braking, which is false. If you want to try, just slam 1st gear coming to a light and hold fast to the wheel.
Try doing that in N...
Some? Come on, try down shifting to 1st gear when coming to a light!
The fact that in top gear there's barely any engine braking is because top gears have a long ratio, but that's the same in manuals: barely any engine braking at 5th or 6th gears.
Well, both my Intrigue and my Bonneville remain at 1700RPM at 60MPH, whether they're coasting or cruising (same tranny and final ratio).
But as I said before, it depends on the speed. Typically, below 40MPH the TCC is not applied, then RPM falls quite a bit, but still well above idle (~ 1200 to 1500RPM).
That's scary!
With a standard shift/manual shift transmission you will get engine braking in top gear assuming you have enough speed & RPM. If your engine is at say 1,500 RPM in top gear, you will not get much. If your turning
3,000 RPM in top gear you will get some.Automatics unlike standards/manuals have a controller. They will not engage first gear above certain speeds. Such as 80 MPH. It may try for a second then the pressure will be so high it will only engage one or two gears down, when pressure drops enough to engage first it will do so. Even old 1969 TH350's are like that.
With a standard/manual you can go in to any gear you can engage. Your only protection is gear speed. I have seen that over come before. My younger brother did it when learning how to drive standard shift. Went from
4th to first, in my 1986 Chevette 5-Speed. He almost killed the engine. Thankfully we were only going 33 MPH. Yes the car did have the 4.11 Posi Rear End, Yes they put those is Chevettes.Ian said you will not get much or any engine braking in modern automatics in top gear. That is at normal driving speeds (under 85 MPH). This is because there is not enough RPM for that gear ratio to slow the engine.
Now if your in top gear at just off idle, and you drop to first gear, you will get violent engine braking. The transmission will nuke it's self before it will over rev the engine. To really do this on a regular basis, you need to know at what speeds you can safely go down to the next gear. Else wise you risk burning out the transmission. Charles
"Neo" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com...
I never said anything about engine braking, all I said was that the wheels wouldn't turn the engine. And yeah, no shit, if you go from 30 MPH down to first you're going to experience slowdown. I wouldn't really call that engine braking either. Basically, if it can't be push started it doesn't provide any noticeable amount of engine braking. Both work off of the pressure of the engine. Push starting it is overcoming the inertia of the engine by pushing it..thus starting it. Engine braking uses that pressure to slow down the wheels. If only you could take your car out, get it up to 30 mph and put it in neutral, turn it off, then put it in 1st. You'd still slow down, but not by the engine pressure but by the gearing. I'm sure you've been on here when people have said that their cars die when it warms up unless they give it gas. And I'm sure that you've heard the response about the TCC solenoid being bad. It locks the TCC up. Since a locked-up TCC is like a clutch in a manual you could do all the stuff you'd be able to do with a manual. The reason those cars kept dying is because the TCC wouldn't unlock so the car was always in gear. Now if you've driven a manual anything you know that putting a car into gear without giving it enough gas will make it die. Since it doesn't happen to cars that don't have the TCC locked-up what does that say? That there isn't enough of a load on the engine to kill it. Which would imply what? That the tranny isn't hooked up to the engine.
Actually the rack and pinion steering system is over 30 years old. Look at the Vega & the Pinto. Steering Rack design does not differ much in operation from them.
Actually your Olds with dead power steering requires less effort then that 72 Chevelle with a tight Lee Remanufactured quick ratio steering box.
But the principals you ignore are the same. Power Steering systems are hydraulic over manual systems. Except for some late 70's early 80's Fords. Where they had a 100% power rack. Where if the engine was not running, thus no hydraulic pressure, the wheels could not be turned.
In the last 30 years they have improved pump designs, especially impeller design. They have designed better racks and gear boxes. They have reduced turning effort with no hydraulic boost. They have even gone to remote reservoirs on some cars.
Yet if you look at something like a pump from a 1995 Park Ave, then look a pump from a 1969 Camaro, you will see the newer pump is just a evolved design.
I work on Newer Vehicles (mostly 1999 and older), I also work on older vehicles. The majority of both come in dead. So I have a lot of practice steering both at low speeds. Either way coming in to my shop you have to turn sharp.
If you want to feel some steering effort. Get in a car that is being picked up from the back so the front bumper is just 1/4 inch from grinding. Then try to steer it totally dead. Heck even with the engine running, and fully operational power steering, the turning effort is increased. We do this around my shop when moving some totally dead vehicles. More often then not I'm the one steering them.
No matter what, no matter the facts, you will think your right. So take your Olds, and go drive off some where. Maybe someday you will find some one who is gullible enough to think your an expert. Charles
--------->> i luv ya !
Here's where you show you haven't really tried it. Well, teaching my daughter about how to use the gears to slow down in case of brake failure, I did: coming at 40MPH, I slammed 1st gear and as soon as the speed came down and the ECU realized that 1st gear wouldn't over-rev the engine, when it was engaged there was as much engine braking as used the brakes. Try it, it won't hurt... much.
You said it: "there isn't enough of a load on the engine". You're nothing but confirming my answer.
Except that then it would take more than 2 turns from end to end. You know, the longer the gearing ratio, the less torque multiplication there is.
No. Power steering racks use more direct ratios than regular ones.
Not possible, The lease was over 3 of years ago, a couple of months after the steering pump failed.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.