[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: bmw-digest V5 #72

> 
> From: Robert Charles <bikerx@domain.elided>
> Date: Sun, 04 Aug 1996 15:17:41 +0000
> Subject: Re: GM Trannies in New BMWs
> 
> This looks like a classic case of Auto-maker "inbreeding" (for lack
> of a better term) to me.  I have a friend who works for GM Powertrain.
> The GM automatic transmissions are actually pretty well respected in the
> industry.  They provide them to a number of very well respected auto
> manufacturers world wide.  I do not remember exactly WHICH manufacturers
> were using GM trannies, but I remember that they were pretty well
> respected names in the industry (i.e. NOT Hyundai  :-)  )
> 
>      The GM transmissions are widely felt to be some of the smoothest
> shifting in the business.  (would Cadilac drivers have it any other
> way??)  Apparently, BMW thinks fairly highly of them, too.
> 
>      Just another example of the "inbreeding":
> GM used to use a Getrag Manual Transmission in the Cadilac Cimmaron.  And
> yes, Reverse was in the upper left corner just like a BMW.
> 
>      Still, it does hurt the ego a little to think that BMW Horsepower
> gets delivered through GM gearing.  Personnally, I'll "stick" with a
> manual transmission.
> 
> Have fun!
> Robert
> '91 <E30> 318is
> 

It's myth explosion time. If BMW has finally figured out that those
zf's never were 1/10 the tranny some of the gm's have it's a testament
that they do have a learning curve. My 84 Jag xjs v-12 with a factory
GM turbo 400 transmission will actually live at elevated rpm in park
or neutral, something that the ZF in my 81 BMW won't do. Not to mention
the dramatically improved shifts between the two. Bye the way, smooth
shifting automatics are not necessarily good, and each application
of a transmission is speced differently. IE my cadilac tranny shifts 
smooth(and only lasts 100,000 miles) and the jag(programmed firmer)
lasts damn near indefinetly.