9

While reading this question it came to mind:

Why did manufacturers start building transmissions without a 1:1 ratio?

In the older transmission you'd see the 1:1 ratio all the time, either as the final drive ratio or the one just before the overdrive. Is there a reason for this, either technically, mechanically, or financially? Seems to me it would cost more to create your transmission as such because a 1:1 (to me) would entail less gearing*. Power in = Power out ... help me to understand?

*Note: By gearing here, I probably should have said engineering.

Community
  • 1
Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2
  • 156,290
  • 29
  • 252
  • 491
  • I'm not sure I get your question. Are you asking about final drive or are you asking about the highest gear in a the transmission? – DucatiKiller Jan 15 '16 at 22:36

1 Answers1

11

Gearbox designers should avoid integer ratios like the plague.

For mechanical reasons.

Integer ratios will accelerate wear and tear because it increases the frequency with which tooth A on the driver gear will meet tooth B on the driven gear.

This frequency is known as the hunting tooth frequency, which I've explained in more detail here.

Regarding 1:1

1:1 is a special case known as direct-drive. The input shaft is locked with the output shaft, so the above argument doesn't really apply.

I believe Wikipedia sheds some reasonable light on this matter:

In an era when different models of car with different wheel sizes could be accommodated by simply changing the final drive ratio, it made sense for all transmissions to use direct drive as the highest gear. As noted earlier, however, this would cause the engine to operate at too high an RPM for efficient cruising. Although adding the cruising gear to the main gearbox was possible, it was generally simpler to add a separate two-gear overdrive system to the existing gearbox. This not only meant that it could be tuned for different vehicles, but had the additional advantage that it could be offered as an option, which was easy to add.

I interpret that to mean there are a few motivating factors at play (denoted in brackets):

  • 1:1 isn't sufficient as a final gear ratio because the resultant engine RPM is too high for the cruising speeds of modern vehicles (mechanical)

  • It is simpler to design the gearbox to have two overdrive gears than have direct drive with one overdrive gear (cost, manufacturing, engineering)

  • A design with two overdrive gears is easier to tune for different vehicles, making the same gearbox design more universal (cost)

Community
  • 1
Zaid
  • 39,111
  • 48
  • 142
  • 290
  • 1
    But in 1:1 the input shaft is locked with the output shaft, there is no gear involved – Move More Comments Link To Top Jan 15 '16 at 17:37
  • @Movemorecommentslinktotop I see what you're saying, you're referring to direct-drive. – Zaid Jan 15 '16 at 17:57
  • @Movemorecommentslinktotop have a look at the edit – Zaid Jan 15 '16 at 18:11
  • Note that direct-drive isn't useful in many (most?) transaxles because the differential is offset from the crankshaft's axial line. Some type of gearing mechanism is needed to move the torque from one shaft to another. – MichaelS Jan 15 '16 at 21:33
  • @MichaelS - While you're right, that is pretty easily done with either a chain drive or gearing ... would be like what is used for a cam shaft. – Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 Jan 15 '16 at 21:44
  • I think at that point though, you've defeated your purpose of simplifying the design. Two gears is less complex (and typically smaller) than two cogs and a chain, at which point avoiding 1:1 makes sense in light of this answer. – MichaelS Jan 15 '16 at 21:56
  • @MichaelS - You'd still need at least three gears to make it happen if you want everything to turn the same way. With only two gears you change the rotation ... You need an intermediate gear for it to go the right direction. You don't gain anything over a chain drive as far as complexity goes. – Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 Jan 16 '16 at 05:45
  • A transaxle output shaft spins the opposite direction of the input shaft, and only uses two gears (except for reverse). The output shaft directly drives the pinion gear which drives the diff ring gear (and therefore half-shafts and wheels) the opposite direction of the output shaft, which is the same direction as the crankshaft. To use a chain-drive on this setup, you'd have to drive the diff carrier directly from the input shaft with the chains running above/below/around the output shaft. Which would also bypass the diff gear. At least, that's how mine are designed. – MichaelS Jan 16 '16 at 06:22
  • Rereading this answer does not answer my question, really. I understand 1:1 direct drive ratios and final drive ratios. What I'm wondering is why would they build a transmission without* a 1:1 direct drive? Yes, they should avoid them, but the manufacturers are doing it anyway. For instance, every standard shift transmission shown in this forum thread for Subarus shows none of them have a 1:1 gear ratio. Why*? – Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 Feb 09 '16 at 00:36
  • @ᴘᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 I thought I had addressed possible motivations for the why with my interpretation of the Wikipedia article quote. – Zaid Feb 09 '16 at 10:32
  • One finally attempt: Why is Subaru using a 1:0.97 gearing instead of a 1:1 gearing in their standard shift vehicles? Wouldn't a 1:1 be an easier gearing to accomplish? – Pᴀᴜʟsᴛᴇʀ2 Feb 09 '16 at 12:16