[WhiteKnight]

Originally Posted by vredesbyrd

About damn time. Hope they keep the AT option at launch or introduce it soon enough. Or else, I'm out

Totally agree. The only credible alternative I see are at 35 lakh plus. Preference should be for an AMT compared to torque converter. Key reason is to avoid "floating" feature which most torque converter autos have.

While many think low about AMT, for a purpose-built vehicle like Thar, it fits.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by WhiteKnight

Preference should be for an AMT compared to torque converter. Key reason is to avoid "floating" feature which most torque converter autos have.

What's this floating feature though? I need to know so that I can relate to this; I own a torque converter automatic currently.

[pgsagar]

Originally Posted by WhiteKnight

While many think low about AMT, for a purpose-built vehicle like Thar, it fits.

Why an AMT? Their nearest rival, Wrangler, retails for close to 70 lakhs on-road. Mahindra has sooo much room to load-up their car and yet cost a fraction of the Yank tank. So, why cost-cut? Heck, they can dip their Thar in gold and sprinkle diamond dust and it will still cost less than Wrangler.

But, yes, what I want them to do is to emulate Korean model of having a wiiide range of variants from here to moon. Seltos has variants from 9.xx to 17.xx lakhs. A Thar for mud-crawler to a Thar for mall-crawler. I fall in the second category. I don't need 4wd. But, an AT box and complete butch looks. To tackle urban jungle of b-2-b traffic, sitting mile-high and not worrying about some moron rear-ending my fragile plastic bumper and burning a hole in my pocket. Parking tall in the parking lot and be able to spot my car from a mile. I always drooled over SWB Pajeros. This one comes closest to that. Short-length is parking-friendly, in addition to being sporty-looking. I don't need this car. I want this car. :-)

[WhiteKnight]

Originally Posted by locusjag

What's this floating feature though? I need to know so that I can relate to this; I own a torque converter automatic currently.

When you take the foot off the accelerator, the box goes into a coast mode with little coupling with engine. RPM would drop to idle. It gives a very disconnected feel, however aids fuel efficiency. I am no expert to explain the details on how this is done.

While AMT would be slow to shift if you use it like other automatic boxes, it is effective in manual mode as it will hold the gear with minimum coding behind in The control unit. It would be abuse friendly (in theory) since the gearbox is the same traditional one.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by WhiteKnight

When you take the foot off the accelerator, the box goes into a coast mode with little coupling with engine. RPM would drop to idle. It gives a very disconnected feel, however aids fuel efficiency. I am no expert to explain the details on how this is done.

Oh that is what you had meant is it? But that's such a nifty feature to have. It makes driving that much more effortless.

While AMT would be slow to shift if you use it like other automatic boxes, it is effective in manual mode as it will hold the gear with minimum coding behind in The control unit. It would be abuse friendly (in theory) since the gearbox is the same traditional one.

Torque Converter (TC) gearboxes are the Original Gangsters in the world of Automatics actually. Lesser automatics and even manual transmissions will fall apart where a TC will keep running with little or no maintenance. My A Star's TC gearbox is sealed and its transmission oil is good for a decade; the Hexa's is also a sealed unit. Many if not all TC gearboxes are like that.

Specifically for an offroading vehicle, TC gearboxes make more sense because of their innate torque multiplier effect.

I don't quite see how an AMT can trump a TC gearbox for the Thar.

[WhiteKnight]

Originally Posted by locusjag

Oh that is what you had meant is it? But that's such a nifty feature to have. It makes driving that much more effortless.

It makes the driver loose sense of control. This might seem ok for a small car or an american sedan. For a body on frame UV with high centre of gravity, it is unsettling.
When braking, there is hardly any engine braking. It can be compensated by better brakes, for the AT. Haven't see that being done by manufacturers off late. Look at Creta which came with drums at the rear. Also note, Mahindra does not have a history of providing super-competent brakes in any of their vehicles.

Of course, part of this is perception, which a driver can adjust. My driving style, when driving UV/SUVs is to use engine braking as much, more so with Mahindras. Last thing I want is to coast on a vehicle that is not a road hugger and doing its own deductions on steering inputs

Originally Posted by locusjag

Torque Converter (TC) gearboxes are the Original Gangsters in the world of Automatics actually. Lesser automatics and even manual transmissions will fall apart where a TC will keep running with little or no maintenance. My A Star's TC gearbox is sealed and its transmission oil is good for a decade; the Hexa's is also a sealed unit. Many if not all TC gearboxes are like that.

Specifically for an offroading vehicle, TC gearboxes make more sense because of their innate torque multiplier effect.

In theory what you said makes sense. In the Thar situation, here are the issues I see.

One, Mahindra does not have an automatic box for 4x4 use. They might be building one, then I take back my comment. If my statement holds, it makes sense to use an AMT on what is available, so that the combination is a go from start.
The torque multiplier effect does not work just like that on the inclines, due to the transmission loss. A simple test you can do with either of your automatic cars-

• Take the car(s) to a flat surface and let it crawl on idle.
• Do the same test on varying degrees on incline. Note down the degree at which the car refuses to crawl. Also note down at what RPM it moves up on that surface.
• Do the second step with a manual car of the same make.My bet is the manual will climb up at a lower rpm.

Of course, the above test can be considered ideal, only if the first gear ratio matches on both auto and manual. It would definitely give an idea.

Originally Posted by locusjag

I don't quite see how an AMT can trump a TC gearbox for the Thar.

Simply by giving the driver to control the shifts and hold the gear, and also giving the ability to him to do mind math on what would happen on his throttle input.

Again, as I mentioned above, everyone has their preferences and tastes, so I respect yours. I am looking at Thar as an off-roader first and road runner second.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by WhiteKnight

It makes the driver loose sense of control. This might seem ok for a small car or an american sedan. For a body on frame UV with high centre of gravity, it is unsettling.
.......
Of course, part of this is perception, which a driver can adjust.

There are countless TC automatic equipped body on frame SUVs and pick-up trucks all over the world which do just fine, engine braking or not. In fact, when the situation calls for it - for instance, coming steeply downhill from Mt.Washington's top, you are given an educational CD that tells you to stick to L1 or L2 gear. That's exactly what I did when I drove a 5 tonne body-on-frame Ford Expedition. You can read about it here - https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/trave...-8-seater.html (Driving a behemoth up Mt.Washington (NH, USA) - Ford Expedition 8-seater)

The torque multiplier effect does not work just like that on the inclines, due to the transmission loss. A simple test you can do with either of your automatic cars-

• Take the car(s) to a flat surface and let it crawl on idle.
• Do the same test on varying degrees on incline. Note down the degree at which the car refuses to crawl. Also note down at what RPM it moves up on that surface.
• Do the second step with a manual car of the same make.My bet is the manual will climb up at a lower rpm.

From my experience with TC automatics, they can climb like a mountain goat up any steep incline, even on steep icy roads. Torque multiplication is very real and not to be dismissed lightly! It ensures that once you lift your foot off the brake pedal, the car is raring to move. That's very handy to have when climbing up steep trails. It can potentially save you the trouble of engaging 4H if you ask me. I'd bet that that's how good the torque multiplication is in a TC automatic. I'd love to be able to experiment and test this thesis out!

Better still, if one of our resident automotive gurus can set the record straight between us two, everything should be plum and peachy.

Even though I haven't tried a comparison with a manual car, here's what I know - my puny Automatic A Star climbs up steep inclines easily with no pedal input.

[pgsagar]

Originally Posted by WhiteKnight

.....The torque multiplier effect does not work just like that on the inclines, due to the transmission loss. A simple test you can do with either of your automatic cars-

• Take the car(s) to a flat surface and let it crawl on idle.
• Do the same test on varying degrees on incline. Note down the degree at which the car refuses to crawl. Also note down at what RPM it moves up on that surface.
• Do the second step with a manual car of the same make.My bet is the manual will climb up at a lower rpm.

Sorry, I defer. I don't know the physics of it but I have purposefully compared 3 cars up steep gradient to see how they fare. Those were, 1. A-Star AT vs. A-Star MT. 2. Scorpio AT vs. Scorpio MT. 3. Honda City AT vs. City MT. And, in all 3 cases, I have seen AT cars charge up the slope leaving their MT variant behind by a long mile. Ok, it wasn't by a mile per se but the proverbial mile. Meaning, by fair distance.

Not for nothing the huge behemoth SUVs in US of A, whether petrol or diesel, all come with torque converter AT. No, I don't think DCT, CVT or AMT will be as good on gradients. Torque multiplication does work.

[padmrajravi]

Originally Posted by WhiteKnight

One, Mahindra does not have an automatic box for 4x4 use. They might be building one, then I take back my comment.

They may not have an inhouse AT, but they sure have a 4x4 AT in their portfolio. Roxor 4x4 is sold in the US with the same AT torque converter that Hexa uses.

https://www.punchpowerglide.com/en/r...nch-powerglide

My bet is that the new gen Thar will also use the same gearbox.

[prkiran]

Question. Now that the Roxor case has been tilted in favour of FCA, would it be a good idea if Mahindra launches this model in our market where the Wrangler is being sold (however small the sales numbers be) ?

[JithinR]

Not sure if these guys are trustworthy but they do have a quote attributed a senior executive in Mahindra.

https://m.indianautosblog.com/2020-m...ch-p320920/amp

[abhikb]

Originally Posted by prkiran

Question. Now that the Roxor case has been tilted in favour of FCA, would it be a good idea if Mahindra launches this model in our market where the Wrangler is being sold (however small the sales numbers be) ?

Roxor is 90% similar to the current gen Thar In terms of exterior design which was the main concern raised by FCA during the law suit. Hence it is a sibling of Thar which is in the market for last 10 years.

[akash_v12]

Mahindra confirms an Automatic Gearbox for the next-gen Thar.

Link to Autocar News - https://www.autocarindia.com/car-new...en-thar-417628

[4x4addict]

Originally Posted by Aroy

My only beef with Petrol engines is their abysmal fuel efficiency. Comparable diesels have upto twice the FE of large petrol engines. Other wise modern petrol deliver all that the diesels do - HP and Lower end Torque.

https://www.autocarindia.com/car-new...evealed-415926

Hi Bro, This article from Autocar India will give you the details of the new TGDi Petrol engines from Mahindra, developed with help from AVL, the same company that developed the 2.2 DICOR for Tata and 2.2 Mhawk for Mahindra. Both these engines proved to be excellent diesel engines.


The 2.0 TGDi Petrol from Mahindra is a very advanced petrol engine with lots of tech/improvements over the old school MPFI petrols. Besides, they have gone for a longer stroke to retain bottom end torque. 190bhp/380 nm Torque from a 2.0 Petrol is fantastic performance.

I suspect the mileage will be around 8 to 11. The 1.8 old school petrol engines from the Corolla/Civic give about 10 KMPL

[84.monsoon]

I somehow feel they could have gone with the 1.5 MStallion in the Thar. That leaves the top end 2.0 motor for larger cars like the XUV500 and the Alturas.

Could have also delivered slightly better fuel efficiency with the smaller engine and maybe even be able to bring the car into a lower tax bracket.

The 1.5 MStallion is already very powerful, with 163HP and 280 NM. That is more power and significantly more torque than the current king of the segment - The Nissan Kicks Turbo CVT. Should be enough grunt for all kinds of on-road and off-road applications.