9G Tranny in S Class Coupe starting in Jan 15, 2015
10-23-2014, 02:52 AM
#1
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 9,996
Received 3,186 Likes
on
1,987 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
9G Tranny in S Class Coupe starting in Jan 15, 2015
Just read that info in Germany...
Not sure if that was posted here before. Just FYI
Not sure if that was posted here before. Just FYI
10-23-2014, 09:19 AM
#2
MBWorld God!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: on my way
Posts: 30,589
Received 3,361 Likes
on
2,814 Posts
2012 CLS63
wonder what KA has to say LOL!!!!!!
10-23-2014, 11:40 AM
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 4,846
Received 289 Likes
on
202 Posts
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
I can hear the early S550 Coupe owners now. They're going to be pissed if Mercedes makes this a running model year change for the 2015 S550 Coupes. I doubt they will do that though. I would bet that for the 2016 MY the S550 Sedan and Coupe, and Cabriolet will have the 9G. So far the only U.S. Benz that has 9G for 2015 is the CLS550 RWD model.
M
M
10-23-2014, 03:00 PM
#5
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 9,996
Received 3,186 Likes
on
1,987 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
I can hear the early S550 Coupe owners now. They're going to be pissed if Mercedes makes this a running model year change for the 2015 S550 Coupes. I doubt they will do that though. I would bet that for the 2016 MY the S550 Sedan and Coupe, and Cabriolet will have the 9G. So far the only U.S. Benz that has 9G for 2015 is the CLS550 RWD model.
M
M
Here is the schedule for 9G-Tronic (NAG3)
March/April 2014 - E350 Bluetec
Sep. 27, 2014 CLS 220/250/350 Bluetec, CLS 500
Jan 2015 S500 Coupe
The 500 models are obviously 550's in the US.
I haven't seen anything about the sedan though. The info was specific to the coupe.
10-23-2014, 05:29 PM
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 4,846
Received 289 Likes
on
202 Posts
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Good question of how country-specific roll outs effect the intro date. I do believe that MB will not build coupes with 7G & 9G trannies at the same time.
Here is the schedule for 9G-Tronic (NAG3)
March/April 2014 - E350 Bluetec
Sep. 27, 2014 CLS 220/250/350 Bluetec, CLS 500
Jan 2015 S500 Coupe
The 500 models are obviously 550's in the US.
I haven't seen anything about the sedan though. The info was specific to the coupe.
Here is the schedule for 9G-Tronic (NAG3)
March/April 2014 - E350 Bluetec
Sep. 27, 2014 CLS 220/250/350 Bluetec, CLS 500
Jan 2015 S500 Coupe
The 500 models are obviously 550's in the US.
I haven't seen anything about the sedan though. The info was specific to the coupe.
M
10-23-2014, 07:29 PM
#7
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E420
I understand (via certain car websites / magazines) that the only reason Mercedes is going 9-speed is to satisfy certain efficiency standards...not because of a performance issue.
Trending Topics
10-23-2014, 08:54 PM
#8
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 9,996
Received 3,186 Likes
on
1,987 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
While I have not been dissatisfied with the 7G, perhaps the new one could optimize the torque throughout the gears.
Look forward to the reviews when paired to a proper V8TT
10-23-2014, 09:31 PM
#9
A transmission needs a certain number of gears in order to accommodate the low end of the speed range simultaneously with the high end of the speed range.
The low end of the speed range is traction limited, so there is no reason one wants a numerical 1st gear ratio lower than the one that will spin the tires on a high traction surface.
The high speed range is power limited, where you want (at least the AMG version) to be able to reach top speed limited only by the HP of the motor.
Between these two limits, one needs to select gears such that the power curve is utilized well. The modern Mercedes turbo engines have a nice rounded HP curve with a peak HP from about the top 1/3rd of the RPM range wide.
So, lets say that one can spin the tires at low speeds with a gear ratio of X.
With an RPM band of high HP in the 1/3rd range we want to shift from whatever MPH of 1st gear to that same HP in 2nd gear. With a 1/3rd RPM band of peak HP, 2nd gear will be 2/3rds * X.
So, lets see how this works:
7G
1st gear 4.377
2nd gear 2.859:: 4.377/2.859 = 1.530 compared to 1.500
3rd gear 1.921:: 2.859/1.921 = 1.495 compared to 1.500
4th gear 1.368:: 1.921/1.368 = 1.398
5th gear 1.000:: 1.368/1.000 = 1.368
6th gear 0.820:: 1.000/0.820 = 1.220
7th gear 0.728:: 0.820/0.728 = 1.126
One can see the feathering of the top 4 gears because these cars end up electronically limited, and that there are enough speeds so top speed can be achieved (is still power limited) even if it is not electronically governed.
So my conjecture of what happens with 9 speeds, is that the lower 3 gears will be feathered towards a ratio of 1.3-1.35 rather than the 1.5 they are set to now.
Performance gains, the added lower end engine performance will be offset by the transmission having to shift more times; in my opinion, so performance gains will be minimal (excepting for the loss in weight of the transmission.)
The low end of the speed range is traction limited, so there is no reason one wants a numerical 1st gear ratio lower than the one that will spin the tires on a high traction surface.
The high speed range is power limited, where you want (at least the AMG version) to be able to reach top speed limited only by the HP of the motor.
Between these two limits, one needs to select gears such that the power curve is utilized well. The modern Mercedes turbo engines have a nice rounded HP curve with a peak HP from about the top 1/3rd of the RPM range wide.
So, lets say that one can spin the tires at low speeds with a gear ratio of X.
With an RPM band of high HP in the 1/3rd range we want to shift from whatever MPH of 1st gear to that same HP in 2nd gear. With a 1/3rd RPM band of peak HP, 2nd gear will be 2/3rds * X.
So, lets see how this works:
7G
1st gear 4.377
2nd gear 2.859:: 4.377/2.859 = 1.530 compared to 1.500
3rd gear 1.921:: 2.859/1.921 = 1.495 compared to 1.500
4th gear 1.368:: 1.921/1.368 = 1.398
5th gear 1.000:: 1.368/1.000 = 1.368
6th gear 0.820:: 1.000/0.820 = 1.220
7th gear 0.728:: 0.820/0.728 = 1.126
One can see the feathering of the top 4 gears because these cars end up electronically limited, and that there are enough speeds so top speed can be achieved (is still power limited) even if it is not electronically governed.
So my conjecture of what happens with 9 speeds, is that the lower 3 gears will be feathered towards a ratio of 1.3-1.35 rather than the 1.5 they are set to now.
Performance gains, the added lower end engine performance will be offset by the transmission having to shift more times; in my opinion, so performance gains will be minimal (excepting for the loss in weight of the transmission.)
10-23-2014, 10:12 PM
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Corona Del Mar, CA
Posts: 7,134
Received 3,492 Likes
on
1,990 Posts
2020 S560 Sedan, 2019 SL450, 2019 E450 Luxury Trim Wagon, '24 BMW I7 on order...
A transmission needs a certain number of gears in order to accommodate the low end of the speed range simultaneously with the high end of the speed range.
The low end of the speed range is traction limited, so there is no reason one wants a numerical 1st gear ratio lower than the one that will spin the tires on a high traction surface.
The high speed range is power limited, where you want (at least the AMG version) to be able to reach top speed limited only by the HP of the motor.
Between these two limits, one needs to select gears such that the power curve is utilized well. The modern Mercedes turbo engines have a nice rounded HP curve with a peak HP from about the top 1/3rd of the RPM range wide.
So, lets say that one can spin the tires at low speeds with a gear ratio of X.
With an RPM band of high HP in the 1/3rd range we want to shift from whatever MPH of 1st gear to that same HP in 2nd gear. With a 1/3rd RPM band of peak HP, 2nd gear will be 2/3rds * X.
So, lets see how this works:
7G
1st gear 4.377
2nd gear 2.859:: 4.377/2.859 = 1.530 compared to 1.500
3rd gear 1.921:: 2.859/1.921 = 1.495 compared to 1.500
4th gear 1.368:: 1.921/1.368 = 1.398
5th gear 1.000:: 1.368/1.000 = 1.368
6th gear 0.820:: 1.000/0.820 = 1.220
7th gear 0.728:: 0.820/0.728 = 1.126
One can see the feathering of the top 4 gears because these cars end up electronically limited, and that there are enough speeds so top speed can be achieved (is still power limited) even if it is not electronically governed.
So my conjecture of what happens with 9 speeds, is that the lower 3 gears will be feathered towards a ratio of 1.3-1.35 rather than the 1.5 they are set to now.
Performance gains, the added lower end engine performance will be offset by the transmission having to shift more times; in my opinion, so performance gains will be minimal (excepting for the loss in weight of the transmission.)
The low end of the speed range is traction limited, so there is no reason one wants a numerical 1st gear ratio lower than the one that will spin the tires on a high traction surface.
The high speed range is power limited, where you want (at least the AMG version) to be able to reach top speed limited only by the HP of the motor.
Between these two limits, one needs to select gears such that the power curve is utilized well. The modern Mercedes turbo engines have a nice rounded HP curve with a peak HP from about the top 1/3rd of the RPM range wide.
So, lets say that one can spin the tires at low speeds with a gear ratio of X.
With an RPM band of high HP in the 1/3rd range we want to shift from whatever MPH of 1st gear to that same HP in 2nd gear. With a 1/3rd RPM band of peak HP, 2nd gear will be 2/3rds * X.
So, lets see how this works:
7G
1st gear 4.377
2nd gear 2.859:: 4.377/2.859 = 1.530 compared to 1.500
3rd gear 1.921:: 2.859/1.921 = 1.495 compared to 1.500
4th gear 1.368:: 1.921/1.368 = 1.398
5th gear 1.000:: 1.368/1.000 = 1.368
6th gear 0.820:: 1.000/0.820 = 1.220
7th gear 0.728:: 0.820/0.728 = 1.126
One can see the feathering of the top 4 gears because these cars end up electronically limited, and that there are enough speeds so top speed can be achieved (is still power limited) even if it is not electronically governed.
So my conjecture of what happens with 9 speeds, is that the lower 3 gears will be feathered towards a ratio of 1.3-1.35 rather than the 1.5 they are set to now.
Performance gains, the added lower end engine performance will be offset by the transmission having to shift more times; in my opinion, so performance gains will be minimal (excepting for the loss in weight of the transmission.)
10-24-2014, 12:06 AM
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
Think abt this in terms of engine/gearbox/chassis balance
Arguably MB makes best motors on planet today...whether 550/63/65
Gearboxes are arguably vastly superior vs latest Porsche PDK, Ferrari DCT, etc but leave much room for improvement...not sure new boxes w/more gears are better when MB/AMG struggles to optimize current, imperfect boxes in 550/63/65
MCT is an absolute debacle some 5yrs post-launch w/many bugs/lemon issues, making any 63 a laughable POS
Latest 7-sp box in 65 is much better than ole 5-sp esp because of addictive downshift/upshift blips....but has annoying jerkiness in 30-0MPH decels in routine driving (and default Comfort mode upon start-up is hugely unergonomic/annoying when car is driven in SportPlus 99+% of time in CA, at any speed)....so, 7-sp better than ole 5-sp in perf driving but sucks in terms of smoothness in routine BH/SF commutes @<35MPH (majority of driving use-cases for commuter 65s in BH/SF)
Chassis set-up of 550 Coupe is a true POS....non-perf tires and a crap Airmatic/4Matic, not ContiSC5 and MBC...and 4Matic/all-seas/run-flat tires vs proper winter perf tires&MBC is a dubious argument in relatively flat Manhattan/Greenwich/Chic/Winnetka where disproportionate % of foul-weather 550/63/65 may be used as winter commuter cars (if at all....suspect most affluent car nuts fled to SF/LA 10-20yrs ago, so NYC/Chic are fairly irrelevant regions vs SF/BH/Hou/Dall/Seatt in buying/consuming stuff like S Coupes as commuter cars)
Any safety-conscious driver likely favors a reliable/smooth gearbox and tires/wheels/chassis allowing shortest poss stopping distances in an emergent situation....basics not solved by today's 550/63 Coupe....550/63 are cheap cars w/cheap, obvious solutions to remarkably improve their safety/reliability/smoothness vs needs of typical buyer of >$150K daily commuter cars in LA/SF (or even NYC/Chic...or Hou/Dall/Seatt or other places w/crap weather&rds)
Arguably MB makes best motors on planet today...whether 550/63/65
Gearboxes are arguably vastly superior vs latest Porsche PDK, Ferrari DCT, etc but leave much room for improvement...not sure new boxes w/more gears are better when MB/AMG struggles to optimize current, imperfect boxes in 550/63/65
MCT is an absolute debacle some 5yrs post-launch w/many bugs/lemon issues, making any 63 a laughable POS
Latest 7-sp box in 65 is much better than ole 5-sp esp because of addictive downshift/upshift blips....but has annoying jerkiness in 30-0MPH decels in routine driving (and default Comfort mode upon start-up is hugely unergonomic/annoying when car is driven in SportPlus 99+% of time in CA, at any speed)....so, 7-sp better than ole 5-sp in perf driving but sucks in terms of smoothness in routine BH/SF commutes @<35MPH (majority of driving use-cases for commuter 65s in BH/SF)
Chassis set-up of 550 Coupe is a true POS....non-perf tires and a crap Airmatic/4Matic, not ContiSC5 and MBC...and 4Matic/all-seas/run-flat tires vs proper winter perf tires&MBC is a dubious argument in relatively flat Manhattan/Greenwich/Chic/Winnetka where disproportionate % of foul-weather 550/63/65 may be used as winter commuter cars (if at all....suspect most affluent car nuts fled to SF/LA 10-20yrs ago, so NYC/Chic are fairly irrelevant regions vs SF/BH/Hou/Dall/Seatt in buying/consuming stuff like S Coupes as commuter cars)
Any safety-conscious driver likely favors a reliable/smooth gearbox and tires/wheels/chassis allowing shortest poss stopping distances in an emergent situation....basics not solved by today's 550/63 Coupe....550/63 are cheap cars w/cheap, obvious solutions to remarkably improve their safety/reliability/smoothness vs needs of typical buyer of >$150K daily commuter cars in LA/SF (or even NYC/Chic...or Hou/Dall/Seatt or other places w/crap weather&rds)
10-24-2014, 07:12 AM
#13
MBWorld God!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: on my way
Posts: 30,589
Received 3,361 Likes
on
2,814 Posts
2012 CLS63
