future9er24

actually.. i think BMW has this. or at least are still developing it. I saw it on top gear.. Clarkson was scared less

not that i approve or care for it, but it just reminded me

xlover

The issue with fords DCT transmissions is its ability to handle high torque applications that is why ford is using them in europe and i believe in the usa on the fiesta and new focus. as soon as they perfect one that can handle GT500 torque i believe we will see it in the GT and V6. if they are all being built on the same assembly line it makes more sense to amortize the cost between more (and higher volume) versions of the car than just on thier lowest volume version. call it a 2.5k option, just a guess.

stangfoeva

I remember that episode. maybe thats where I got it from lol

Cusp

Duel clutching with even odd gear preselect transmission. Requires co-axial power paths. Sounds expensive and less robust than the traditional transmission. So our 1,800 dollar transmission now becomes a 6,000 transmission. And the costs to repair..... Yikes. Their needs to be an inexpensive muscle car. If you want to pay up the yang, all those things already exists. Keep it simple.

Moosetang

Actually, a computer-controlled DCT is likely going to last much longer than a regular row-your-own. The shifts happen MUCH faster and completely consistently, which is going to dramatically reduce wear-and-tear. Even great drivers miss shifts, or cook the clutch showing off, or grab the wrong gear, etc etc, but the computer won't (as long as Toyota didn't design it).

rhumb

While having three (tri-axial) main/lay shafts, I don't think that would necessarily equate to a 50% increase in failure rates over a two-shaft manual as it is rarely that the gear shaft itself fails and the other main components, not dissimilar to a manual tranny, would likely have similar failure rates. Presumably a DCT would be properly engineered to handle whatever torque loads are required of it.

The two clutches and various solenoids and sensors would represent an increase in parts and thus, potential failure loci. However, clutches, sensors and solenoids are common, mature and proven technologies (auto trannies are full of them for example) and thus would likely represent on a nominal increase in reliability concerns.

Another countervailing factor, as Moosestang touches upon, is that with greater control over shifting, any higher failure rate due to increased parts counts may be negated and then some by avoiding abuse and shock/overloading failures that can plague manual boxes.

My guess is that in the end, reliability will be a wash and hardly a deal killer itself. That or perhaps a reliability rate somewhere between a tradition manual and auto gear box.

As for overall driver involvement, I think it is refocused rather than removed and overall driver enjoyment would be maintained or even enhanced.

bob

Performance gains aside, I think this is probably a very appealing feature to the OE guys.

Zoomie

And for old dogs like me whose left leg will no longer sustain clutch use, but still prefer to choose their own shift points, a DCT is the best answer.

rhumb

My current (as of today) theory is that DCT's may first replace the even more expensive, heavy and complex slushbox trannies of today while manuals will stick around longer as a low cost base/optional transmission.

As for being able to handle Mustang V8 levels of torque, I might point to exhibit A, the Bugatti Veyron. There doesn't seem to be a modest torque ceiling as with, say CVTs which don't seem to be able to handle much beyond 200 lb/ft reliably.

Moosetang

Not a bad theory, but at some point the cost of designing new manual trans and keeping the separate parts chain going is going to look pretty unappealing to the guys and gals with the spreadsheets. Likely take awhile before we get to that point, though.

Falc'man

I never knew what all the fuss of DCT was about until I drove a car that had one.


You raise an interesting point.
Costs aren't the only reason why they'd wait for DCT to handle the GT500's torque; imagine a 5.0 with DCT vs a GT500 without one! I'm not saying it'll threaten it in terms of speed, but certainly as a driving experience it could prove to be a little more desirable.

clammy

i hope soon....

Ethanjbeau

I would bet that the DCT will replace the traditional automatic tranny eventually but I don't see them getting rid of the manual stick shift due to all the die hards out there that want the 3rd peddle.

I personally have driven an audi and VW with a DCT and they are awesome. If you look at tests between DCT and manuals of the same car the DCT is almost always faster.

In my opinion, i would take either of them. It depends on what the car is and what i want it for. All personal preference though.

A DCT mustang? Hell yes!

xlover

i would def order a DCT on my next one if i could. i live in the city and the traffic benefit would be great plus the lightning quick shifts and perfect rev matching would be a benefit as well. just think about it a car would need two sticks and two clutch pedals to do what the DCT can do we just dont have enough hands and feet to keep up haha.

Adam

DCT is the future. A human simply cannot consistently shift as smooth and quick. If this is an option on the next gen 2014 I'm definitely getting it.

Overboost

I think when (not if) we see this is all dependent on where Ford targets the Mustang during the next redesign. Should they keep it on par with what they currently offer, as a slightly more upscale alternative to the Camaro and Challenger, and a "poor-man's E92 M3", then it will be here sooner than we think. If they go back to older ways and keep it on par with them, then it might take longer. By offering the DCT, you might be able to draw some of those German car owners away, and increase your customer base. Also, giving them class-exclusive features is a nice feather in their cap.

Fords4Ever

My prediction is that as long as the Mustang has a combustion engine we will have a manual transmission option if not standard. I do believe the DCT will eventually arrive and that's good for those who do not want to deal with a clutch pedal. I personally would rather have a Mustang a tenth slower that I can manually shift in the traditional sense.

I don't think the Fuel Injection vs Carb argument really applies here, the driver was/is pressing the accelerator regardless of how fuel is delivered so the driver involvement didn't change like it would if you removed the third pedal.


I see the value of a DCT and I really wish Ford had a midsize rear wheel drive sedan to put the DCT in, I'd be all over that! Think something Lincoln LS sized with a 3.7 V6 and/or a 5.0 V8 - that would be sweet!

montreal ponies

Even if not an option, i will probably be getting a 2014. Just sayin' .

bob

Sucktastic future, but I digress - A DCT (or DSG as one prefers) is great for extracting maximum performance from the engine, but honestly would leave me unimpressed with the driver if the game were merely one of acceleration.

Gene K

The traditional manuals days are numbered as long as the EPA Fuel Economy Test remains structured as it is.

17 Mph
25 Mph
40 Mph
45 Mph
50 Mph

Those are the mandated shift points for the manual and the reason we have been saddled with skip shift. To allow the engagement of high gear by 40 mph and reasonable rpm for mpg on changes (1-4 excepted).

A DCT on the other hand is considered an Automatic and can start in 2nd, skip to 4th, skip to 6th all at a low rpm getting in high gear by 30 mph doing much better on the EPA Test. When you take into consideration it also does better on than the best hydraulic automatics and can replace two different transmissions its a no brainer from a manufacturers standpoint.