There's a Fiat 124 Spider in my driveway

In reply to rslifkin:

It absolutely is true. A clutch also "multiplies torque" as it slips. But "multiplying torque" through slippage is never going to be as efficient or responsive as doing so through a gear train.

I can understand there being reasons for unlocking the torque converter under certain conditions in fully automated mode, as the computer/transmission can't read my thoughts or predict my actions. But once the wheels are rolling in "manual" mode, where I am supposed to be able to take over control of the transmission, I have yet to hear a good reason ever having it unlocked...Especially with 6+ gears to choose from.

tuna55 wrote:

Joe Gearin wrote: Maybe it's just me, but I find the ND way more attractive than the 124. Everyone has a different set of eyes, and if this forum as taught me anything, it's that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To each his own. For me though--- the ND is more flowing and organic looking. The 124's styling looks tacked on and derivative to me. I understand it's supposed to remind us of the original, but the way it goes about it seems awkward. I do want to drive a manual model though.....as that engine in the Abarth 500 sounds fantastic!

Agreed!

Choice is good. I'm looking forward to our 124 so I can taste the flavors

Driven5 wrote: In reply to rslifkin: It absolutely is true. A clutch also "multiplies torque" as it slips. But multiplying torque through slippage is never going to be as efficient as multiplying torque through a gear train. I can understand there being reasons for unlocking the torque converter under certain conditions in fully automated mode. But once the wheels are rolling in manual mode, I have yet to hear a good enough reason for me to ever want it unlocked.

A slipping clutch does not and cannot multiply torque. A slipping clutch simply allows a rotational speed difference between the input and output and wastes energy as heat. A torque converter is a bit more complicated than a simple fluid coupling.

As far as reasons to unlock, a really good reason is stopping with the trans in gear...

In reply to Keith Tanner:

Yes, but it won't look exactly like that. Hence my interest what it actually looks like.

In reply to rslifkin:

Edit: I'll concede that a clutch does not technically multiply torque...However, in my humble opinion, any time you use slippage to increase torque rather than a direct mechanical connection, you are doing effectively a variation a theme. The romantic sounding notion of torque converter (waste heat generator) "multiplying torque" is a bit misleading to many people, as it still can't overcome the laws of physics.

So maybe a better analogy is that an unlocked torque converter is to continuously slipping the clutch, as simply using the correct gear is to an unlocked torque converter.

And I know I don't get out enough, but I can't say that I've ever seen a car stopped with the "wheels rolling".

With a slipping clutch, yes, the engine could get better into its powerband and produce more torque. But the torque at the clutch output will never be more than the torque at the clutch input (and output rpm will be lower than input rpm). However, with a torque converter, the torque at the output will be more than the torque input (output rpm will be lower than input rpm).

Torque converter multiplication is like having a mechanical gear reduction, just not as efficient.

I'll put some numbers to it as an example:

Scenario 1: gear reduction, 4000 engine rpm, 2000 output rpm, 200 ft. lbs input torque, 95% efficency

Scenario 2: slipping clutch, 4000 engine rpm, 2000 output rpm, 200 ft. lbs input torque

Scenario 3: torque converter, 4000 engine rpm, 2000 output rpm, 200 ft. lbs input torque, 80% converter efficiency

In scenario 1, we'd have an output torque of 390 ft. lbs

In scenario 2, we'd have an output torque of 200 ft. lbs minus whatever is being lost as heat due to clutch slip (I don't have a good way to determine the value of this)

In scenario 3, we'd have an output torque of 320 ft. lbs

EDIT: I just saw the edit on the previous post. Yeah, the tradeoff the converter provides is like moving to a lower gear.

In reply to rslifkin:

Agreed...Although it's worth also noting that the torque converter (and clutch) still has to go through a similar gear reduction to scenario 1 as well, to get to the same point, further increasing the relative (now 304 ft-lb vs 390 ft-lb) inefficiency.

rslifkin wrote:

Driven5 wrote: Seriously? Why?? The more a torque converter 'works', the more inefficient the transmission becomes. Functionally, it's no different than slipping the clutch to get higher into the power band, rather than simply downshifting.

That last bit isn't true at all. As a torque converter slips, it multiplies torque. It does lose some power as heat, but it's nothing like slipping the clutch with a manual. IMO, in most driving, the converter should be locked. But if you go WOT, unlock the converter immediately to help get the engine into its powerband while the trans grabs the lowest available gear.

And with a turbo, if the converter and turbo are well-matched, you'll be running at light load and low RPM, but lay into it a little and the revs go right up into the boost-onset range and you're gone, no waiting for a kickdown. Makes the drivetrain feel a lot more powerful than it really is. You end up with far more "gear ratios" than exist in the trans.

Turbos and automatics can be absolute magic when they're sorted. They can also be hellishly bad. It's just a shame that so many new automatics do not use converters anymore. Then it's all of the downsides of a manual transmission with all of the downsides of an automatic. Bleah.

Driven5 wrote: In reply to rslifkin: Edit: I'll concede that a clutch does not technically multiply torque...However, in my humble opinion, any time you use slippage to increase torque rather than a direct mechanical connection, you are doing effectively a variation a theme. The romantic sounding notion of torque converter (waste heat generator) "multiplying torque" is a bit misleading to many people, as it still can't overcome the laws of physics.

They do multiply torque, in that as the fluid gets slung from one set of vanes to another, they pass through a third set of vanes that redirects the fluid. This is how torque converters are different from fluid couplings, which is what Very Old Automatics had and were nothing better than a slipping clutch (That is why the original Hydra-Matic had four forward speeds, with a super low first gear to get moving) One way to visualize it is propelling yourself by ejecting mass, and the ejected mass bounces back off of something and hits you, pushing you forward even more.

Ed Higginbotham wrote: Well I don't have a photo of David's driveway, but I have this.

Is that a spoiler or a luggage rack?

I think it's a reflection - but it does lead into my question about the 124.

Is it a little retro roadster for the "drive to lunch" crowd who would pick a luggage rack out of the dealer accessory catalog? A Moss Motors customer of the year candidate? The sort of customer who gets offended if some other enthusiast car sullies the uniformity of the Fiat-only parking lot? The sort of person who doesn't call their car "blue", but always "Dynamic Blue Mica" or "Azzurro Italia"? Average age: old enough to remember the original 124 Spider.

Or is it a hair on fire sports car, an Alfa that got the wrong badge, that's all snarls and pops and crackles? Guys who put spoilers on cars because of the aerodramatic aspect and they think it might actually do something? Guys who will put in roll bars and not get too stressed about the rubber streaks on the side after a track day? Average age: missed the chance to buy the original S2000 new.

Knee-jerk response: "Why not both?" But that's avoiding the question. It can't really be both unless it's compromised for both groups. I'll admit the original Miata attracted many of the first type, and there were a few NC owners of the latter type - but the cars were aimed at very different audiences.

Fiat's marketing seems to be about wine tours and lifestyle, but the driving reports seem to be that they've hit the driving enthusiast market. So I'm curious. Where does it settle on the continuum?

I love you guys. Instead of questions about the car in question, like 'did you find any areas in the infotainment system that still say Mazda instead of Fiat?', you go off on a tangent about the workings of automatic transmissions and totally captivate my interests!

I'm a little surprised to see 4 lugs. Thought that was no longer a thing.

Personally, I think they are both handsome little cars and to choose, I'd have to drive to see if the engines make me feel one way or the other. I like the F-Type looking rear on the Miata though.

Also, how many Mazda logos have you found on the car?

Keith Tanner wrote: I think it's a reflection - but it does lead into my question about the 124. Is it a little retro roadster for the "drive to lunch" crowd who would pick a luggage rack out of the dealer accessory catalog? A Moss Motors customer of the year candidate? The sort of customer who gets offended if some other enthusiast car sullies the uniformity of the Fiat-only parking lot? The sort of person who doesn't call their car "blue", but always "Dynamic Blue Mica" or "Azzurro Italia"? Average age: old enough to remember the original 124 Spider. Or is it a hair on fire sports car, an Alfa that got the wrong badge, that's all snarls and pops and crackles? Guys who put spoilers on cars because of the aerodramatic aspect and they think it might actually do something? Guys who will put in roll bars and not get too stressed about the rubber streaks on the side after a track day? Average age: missed the chance to buy the original S2000 new. Knee-jerk response: "Why not both?" But that's avoiding the question. It can't really be both unless it's compromised for both groups. I'll admit the original Miata attracted many of the first type, and there were a few NC owners of the latter type - but the cars were aimed at very different audiences. Fiat's marketing seems to be about wine tours and lifestyle, but the driving reports seem to be that they've hit the driving enthusiast market. So I'm curious. Where does it settle on the continuum?

If I understand what you are saying, I'd wrap it up as:

TLDR: Wine and Cheese or MT.net?

Woody wrote: My lifelong disdain for automatic transmissions is evaporating rapidly.

for me the next car I buy if it has an available DCT i'll take it, not a slushbox tho

Wine and cheese or whatever, I want one because it's a Miata with a tiny turbo engine and it isn't silly-expensive.

And I really, really hope that it doesn't have the godawful running lights that the ND has, because I saw someone driving towards me the other day with those things on, and it set my hackles up to "ire". And I don't even know what that means, that is how bad it was. Made me want to get out and correct the lights with a crowbar, it did.

No, no luggage rack on the car.

I'll count Mazda logos. I like how the glass sports Mopar logos.

The Miata DRLs can be turned off. It's a setting in the infotainment system. I believe the Fiat DRLs are around the headlights.

And no, not MT.net. They'll buy it in 15 years and then make fun of the old people buying the new version. I'm thinking more of GRM readers (but not necessarily the forum subgroup of such). People who compete in autox with new cars.

4 lug wheels are fine for cars that don't weigh 3000 lbs. That's what's no longer a thing.

In reply to David S. Wallens:

How about some photos of the underside while you're counting Mazda logos?

Quickie update as I just had to run to Lowe's today to pick up some sprinkler heads:

The automatic box will hold a gear when in the manual mode. I drove around at 50 mph or so in second gear for a long, long time. Shifts aren't the snappiest, though, in the automatic mode.

Ed Higginbotham wrote: Well I don't have a photo of David's driveway, but I have this.

IMHO i think the ND looks better too. More youthful. The 124 looks tacked together. The part line between the front fender and front bumper, triple light layout, the double mouth grill. Just looks like it is going to age very quickly.

In reply to Flight Service:

In my mind the ND has already aged, when they announced the 124 it immediately made the ND look like an old failed design attempt that never lived up to it's expectations. The car aged, ungracefully, twenty years overnight.

How hard is to to get to the wastegate arm and crank up the boost?
Does it drive the same as the MX-5 or is it a slightly different suspension setup ala FRZ vs BRZ?
Does the infotainment system look like a tacked on after thought?
How big of a wheel/tire combo can you fit in there and is it more than the MX-5?
Are the seats comfortable?

In reply to Nick (picaso) Comstock:

I'm sort of reminiscing about the Saturn Sky/Pontiac Solstice twins right now. The organically modeled Solstice, I think, aged better than the more angular Sky. I remember being a bigger fan of the Sky when they two of them debuted. This time around I'm a bigger fan of the MX-5.

I wonder how this pair will age?

In reply to Keith Tanner:

I see very few other young NC owners, especially considering how many Frisbee ownership my age segment there are. In my test drives, I didn't really see the Frisbee as being that much more practical or faster.

I haven't checked the wastegate arm, but it's basically the Fiat 500 Abarth engine turned sideways.

It rides like an MX-5. This car is a Lusso, and it feels more like an MX-5 GT vs. an MX-5 Club.

It has the same info screen as the MX-5--same position, same screens, same controls, same everything. Once you're behind the wheel, it all looks fine.

I'm going to assume same wheels and tires as MX-5.

Seats feel fine. Just drove a bit and back to dinner. No complaints. This car has leather.

In manual mode, the automatic transmission will hold a gear forever. Shifts aren't like a twin-clutch, though. Can't wait to drive one with a stick.