Hey,

I've been wondering, what 'type' of autobox do '80s Mercedes use?

The 1999 Golf 1.6 8v Auto I drove recently had none of the nice characteristics I'm used to, primarily the quick step off:

Rather than a whump of torque pushing you off from a standstill as you put your foot to the floor and the revs sit at ~2200 rpm (you know what I mean.. even in a 2.0, and starting in 2nd), it seemed to have none of this effect.


Instead, it stepped off weakly, the revs built steadily (still 'slipping' of course) and only pulled at high revs. I realise it has less torque.. but the effect felt like it was to do with the box.


I couldn't figure the car out - none of the pleasant autobox tricks. With a manual it's nice, & quick enough.



So what does MB use, and what do these cheaper/newer cars use?

thanks

Rusty

__________________
190E's:
2.5-16v 1990 90,000m Astral Silver
2.0E 8v 1986 107,000m Black 2nd owner
http://www.maylane.demon.co.uk/190esmall.jpghttp://www.maylane.demon.co.uk/190esmall2.jpg

Why, Mercedes Benz autoboxes of course.

__________________
Regards

Warren

Currently 1965 220Sb, 2002 FORD Crown Vic Police Interceptor

Had 1965 220SEb, 1967 230S, 280SE 4.5, 300SE (W126), 420SEL

ENTER > = (HP RPN)

Not part of the in-crowd since 1952.

We've got a '99 new-body Jetta with the basic 4-banger, and I expect the same tranny you have in the Golf. It doesn't have the guts off the line that you might expect, and tends to be a bit stubborn about upshifts, especially 3-4 which won't come in until just about 40 mph--very annoying in 35-mile zones, when you're droning along in 3rd.
The box actually behaves very much like the old 1960's MB automatics, and I suspect the technology has a common element. The MB boxes were designed for very quick shifts ("quicker than the fastest hand") and high efficiency; smoothness was not a consideration. To do this, they eliminated the torque converter that most autoboxes used then and still do, and instead used a fluid coupling that gave a more direct connection from engine to car, not unlike the early Hydra-Matics of 1950's Oldsmobiles, but recalibrated for a relatively high-RPM, low-torque engine. The result is what you're noticing.
MB went to more typical torque-converter technology in the 70's and has, of course, advanced since.

__________________
Craig Bethune

'97 SL500, 40th anniversary edition

'04 Olds Bravada (SWMBO's)
'06 Lexus ES330
'89 560SL (sold)


SL--Anything else is just a Mercedes.
(Kudos to whoever said it first)