Transaxle Comparision

Re: Transaxel Comparision

This IS funny... Again people are unhappy about the way some forum members or manufacturers are expressing their opinion. Wanni gave us his opinion... He didn't get personal, didn't use crude words and btw his post contained lots of useful information regarding this thread - "transaxle comparision". He says that Quaife doesn't have comparable experience with street gearboxes - this is plain fact (IMHO). If someone can prove him wrong than please do so. If not than why it makes people mad?
Till now I see gearfox as most transparent manufacturer - showing various drawings and willing to answer tech. questions. BUT! He's so arrogant to ask tech. questions aimed at other manufacturers. Arghhh!!! How could he!
I have some experience in professional racing with Quaife, Hewland and Xtrac. If someone wants to know I will share it. Someone might hate it thought.
Peace
Ted

PS: Sorry for my English and I’m not working for gearfox .

 

[Joe T]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

To be honest opinions at this stage are irrelevant, lets get the boxes into some test cars, then see whos fits the individuals requirements they are looking for.

Then proper discussions can be had on the merits of each box.
Balanced with the purchase price, factory support and professionalism of the company involved.

As anyone got some rough time scales for testing of the boxes in cars. This would be a good start.

 

[DBLDREW]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

This IS funny... Again people are unhappy about the way some forum members or manufacturers are expressing their opinion. Wanni gave us his opinion... He didn't get personal, didn't use crude words and btw his post contained lots of useful information regarding this thread - "transaxle comparision". He says that Quaife doesn't have comparable experience with street gearboxes - this is plain fact (IMHO). If someone can prove him wrong than please do so. If not than why it makes people mad?
Till now I see gearfox as most transparent manufacturer - showing various drawings and willing to answer tech. questions. BUT! He's so arrogant to ask tech. questions aimed at other manufacturers. Arghhh!!! How could he!
I have some experience in professional racing with Quaife, Hewland and Xtrac. If someone wants to know I will share it. Someone might hate it thought.
Peace
Ted

PS: Sorry for my English and I’m not working for gearfox .

I agree, Wanni gave his opinion and it might come across as a little arrogant, but I think people are forgetting that English is a second language for him so we need to cut him a little slack in that regard.

The whole point of this thread is to compare transaxles, which is exactly what Wanni did. He said that Quaife isn’t the best company for making street boxes. So can anybody comment or give examples that rebuttal that statement? Quaife has been in business for 42 years. Do they provide an oem street trans for any of the major car manufacturers?

Ted please share with us your experience with the Quaife, Hewland, and the Xtrac, that’s the whole point of this thread.


Drew

 

[Russ Noble]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

I'm not working for Gearfox either! But I have to agree with Ted and Drew on this one.

However, I think we have a clash between two different types of manufacturers here. Wanni builds trans for OEM fitment and is looking for sales in the thousands and hence must undergo and satisfy the R&D requirements that are inherent in that situation which involves his trannies being used by and having to satisfy some very incompetent and possibly very picky end users.

Chris, Richard, and several others are building bespoke trans. Built by enthusiasts, for enthusiasts, to satisfy a demand by people who, to different extents, generally build their own cars and who enjoy the challenges of that. Production may only be a fraction of Gearfox’s. The fact that they are not undertaking an R&D and consumer testing program as extensive as required for OEM does not necessarily mean their offerings are inferior or that their trans will not do the job required.

If they have a pool of experience and expertise to draw upon there is no reason why they cannot produce an excellent trans. Saying that, the first customers will be taking a quantum leap in faith as they will be the consumer testing program! I’m sure any initial users of any of these new trans will be extremely aware of this and will have made their own judgement call on that. As has been stated, it will be interesting to see how these new trans actually pan out in the hands of forum members.

Wanni’s threads often bring to light issues for consideration and in that respect are most informative but I want to remind him of one of his earliest posts here on transaxle design in which he accused Richard of submitting information in a manner designed to demotivate someone who was investigating building trannies. Wanni gives the impression of doing the same thing!

Never mind guys, don’t let it get personal, let’s just all learn from the tech, considerations and issues that are brought out in these threads.

Cheers

 

[Doug S.]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Dear Mike,
...just because finally your brain begin his predisposition to receive other inputs than Mickey Mouse.
Wanni

OK, Wanni, now you've done it. You can insult Chris, you can insult Mike, and they could and should respond (perhaps more appropriately through the PM function of the forum), but when you insult Mickey Mouse you insult all of America, perhaps the entire world. If you don't believe me, get a copy of "Enemy Mine", a sci-fi movie in which the alien insults an earthling by saying in the heat of argument "Your Mickey Mouse is one, big DOPE!" Yep, it's the ultimate insult, I guess.

OK, all joking aside, there are a few personal clashes in this issue, but I agree with others who say this issue is important and if we are adults, as we claim, we can look past those miniscule spats to the important issues. Wanni does have considerable knowlege in the transaxle arena and he is very honest about not coveting the business of our low-volume quest. He has a rather brash manner of expressing himself, perhaps that is cultural, perhaps not, but he also brings some tech to the table.

I suggest those who find Wanni's posts abraisave just follow the advice of another tech guru, Jac Mac. Use the "Ignore" function. You'll find that ALL of Wanni's posts are hidden from view when you do that, both past and future. Problem solved!!!

Dugly

 

[wanni]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

To be honest opinions at this stage are irrelevant, lets get the boxes into some test cars, then see whos fits the individuals requirements they are looking for.

Then proper discussions can be had on the merits of each box.
Balanced with the purchase price, factory support and professionalism of the company involved.

As anyone got some rough time scales for testing of the boxes in cars. This would be a good start.

Hi boys,
I have alredy done this job, more or less 250 of my boxes are already installed in cars and about 120 more are scheduled to follow them in the next 15 months.
Some records for information:
Pagani Zonda F - 2nd street legal fastest lap on the Nurbuergring Nordschleife epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper:
Koenigsegg CCX - fastest street legal vehicle reaching 388 km/h on the high speed ring of Nardò, speed compensated only up 240 km/h. At 388 km/h with 0.35 G of lateral acceleration.
epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper: epper:
The most extreme installation LOTEC SIRIUS
1.300 HP and 1.400 Nm:chug: :chug: :chug: :chug: :chug:
Second to none:bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: GUMPERT APOLLO
the German ground rocket with the first synchronised sequential manual gearbox.
Soon or later, but within this year, a T906S will be shown on the most powerfull American Supercar as the replacement of................................(still under NDA)
N.B. All the above mentioned MONSTERS are all street legal.............not single prototypes.
Just to be honest and polite, the first 10 boxes were OK because they were assembled at the development dept. and manufactured under 100% of control.
The second lot of 50 was a desaster. Everything was failing. The 3rd lot was at 30% of warraty claims. Now we are at 5% of warranty claims...........after 250.
Who is attentive and smart will understand the meaning of those words.
In Italy we say...........................to have designed accurtly the MAP of the shits.
I have it and now I know where to put my feets, dear friends.............................
I leave the end of the sentence to your own immagination...................................
just to try my best for not up setting sensitive peoples.
Sorry if Micky Mouse was brutalised. My intention was not to minimise this sympatic boy.
See the attachments.
Regards
Wanni

T 606H versus T 906H versus RBT/ZF​

T606H……….T906H

Bell housing face to diff axle 149,3 149,3
( same of RBT/ZF )

Bell housing face to lateral fixing points === ===
( same of RBT/ZF )

Total overall 650 737,5
( 569 is RBT/ZF )

N° of speeds 6 6
( 5 is RBT/ZF )

Flanch to flanch face 280 280
( 280 is RBT/ZF )

As you can understand, the difference is only in the overall length.
569 in stead of 650.
All the other meeting points are similar.

81 mm of difference are justifying 6 speeds and an internal concentric oil pump made for a forced lubrication through the shafts.
A concentric release bearing is also available, with or without electronic control of his position ( this is for OEM supplies looking for paddle shifting ).
That’s the T baby ( T606H ).

It is on his way.

N.B. 600 Nm of input torque capability can easily increase by using Aubert Duval steels carburised at low pressure. 750 Nm are transferable just by using those exotic materials.

Avanti Savoia

 

[wanni]

was cliked twice by error

 

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Hi Wanni

At 81 mm (3.2") longer than the ZF what car are you going to fit this transaxle to?

Chris.

 

[Joe T]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Ah, sorry my fault lack of clarity, by test cars I meant GT40's, as this is where the boxes are initially aimed at? I appreciate your boxes are fitted in other vehicles.

How about pricing some of the installations you list above? just to give us a ballpark, and/or what do your T606H T906H boxes cost? any currency we all have conversion tools, you compared most other aspects to the RBT except the price.

Thanks

 

[wanni]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Hi Wanni

At 81 mm (3.2") longer than the ZF what car are you going to fit this transaxle to?

Chris.

Hi my fried, here you are.........
81 mm is a huge difference if you considere 2 similar bell housings.
Just to let the forum to understand better, if I am allowed.
Let us assume teoric numbers which are not defined at this stage.
Quaife + 95 mm bell housing and T606H + 60 mm bell housing =
81mm - 35mm = only 46 mm at this stage ( and you know that the drive shafts in the Porsches 911 have 8,5 ° of angle without having any kind of problems.
How I will manage such a short bell housing is the difference between you and I.
You build a transaxle, I build a transmission system and it is where the FOX has his best capabilities by being a vehiculist and not only a transmission manufacturer.
When I wrote that I will make first the LS7 packaging and after the Ford Cobra packaging, the meaning was to supply: Transaxle + bell housing + flywheel + release bearing + clutch + linkage + shifting lever.
46 mm is the same extension of your oil pump.
In the back of my box I have the reverse gear, the small gear is at the bottom allowing a design made in order to make shorter the box in the chassis interference area of about 45 mm.
As soon as I get a GT 40 chassis kindly borrowed, I will show you the latest and last design of it from the back, which you have seen yet.
Why my clutch system shall be shorter of about 35 mm ?
Because some joint venture with clutch manufacturers and clutch facing manufacturers are made in order to develop high tech solutions.
If the Baby T is automated, a new design of a kind of torque converter will take place, replacing: flywheel, clutch and release bearing.
If the Baby T is manual, some new clutch facings, which are in testing now will allow to reduce the actually requested thermic inertia of the system of about 60%.
This means that a single plate clutch without torsional damper ( my input shaft is doing this job by having 1° of torsion every 60 Nm without reaching the spring full compression effect ) of 225 mm, pulled type, is capable to transfer 700 Nm + 50% of security factor. The friction co efficient of this innovative facing is 0.35 - 0.38. Pulled type in order to reduce the depressing load and the hysteresis.
The failing temperature for this system is about 420°C and the disk does not stick slip even without the Marcel spring, helping in axial optimisation.
If you are a Rolls Royce engineer, you shall understand all the values I have written in my explanation.
If Mohammed does not go to the mountain..................now the mountain can go to Mohammed.
Ciao
Albert Wannstein

 

[wanni]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Cliked twice.
Shall change my desk top

 

[wanni]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Ah, sorry my fault lack of clarity, by test cars I meant GT40's, as this is where the boxes are initially aimed at? I appreciate your boxes are fitted in other vehicles.

How about pricing some of the installations you list above? just to give us a ballpark, and/or what do your T606H T906H boxes cost? any currency we all have conversion tools, you compared most other aspects to the RBT except the price.

Thanks

Joe, read above and let us start a complete and concrete calculation.
We shall remouve the slices of ham from our eyes and considere the cost of a full and working packaging system.
For the moment I can tell you that with T606H, the 6th gear is for free, the acoustic confort as well without considering the shifting confort.
I hope you are an expert. By understanding the values I have written and by knowing which are the parameters influencing the shifting forces, you would understand.
If something is not clear enough, I can try in a simplyer explanation. Just ask.
Wanni

Some more,
1) The US importer for gearfox transaxles is organising in TEXAS a GearFox service ( bad business....they never fail ) with spares and a vehicle application workshop.
2) The US importer will assemble him self most of the Baby T for the US market.
3) I will be the supervisor for any new application and design change.

PRICE.......PRICE.......PRICE........
Are you wearing ARMANI, VERSACE, VALENTINO or clones made in Taiwan???
Are you drinking French champagne or german champenois???
Are you eating Beluga or fish eggs???

Let us analise the system.....the easyness of installation....the reliability of it.....the customer service........and finally the emotions that it is giving by having made the right choice.
As soon as the US importer is ready to show his face, he will declare all those secondary items like the prices.
Ciao
Wanni

 

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Hi Wanni

So now you are going to use a short bellhousing and move the transaxle forward? This will move the output shafts forward also. Won't work on a GT40 my friend.
The rear cross member on the GT40 sits below our optional oil pump on the ZFQ that why we mounted it high.

If you are saying your baby box is for a GT40 then how is it hung you have no attachments?

I see also that you transaxle is only 600nm = 430ftlbs what is the extra cost to bring it up to the ZFQ's 750nm. 550ftLbs.

Why would anyone want to use your trans and not a cheaper G50 Porsche unit seeing that both will need the same amount of adaptation and cutting to make them fit?

Here are some more pictures of a GT40 (the car in question) so you can see just how the ZF looks when fitted.

I mean you no disrespect but you baby Six speed is not for the GT40 market.

Regards


Chris
A GT40 guy.

 

[wanni]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Me too. This is a great thread title through which much can be learned. Thank you Dom.

I can follow the discussions in the engine section fairly well. However, I'm lost in the transaxle section. I understand just a little about input shafts, bell housing length, sequential and oiling. However, I don't know all of the reasons why. If someone, anyone, who is highly knowledgeable would like to compare the specifics of transaxles and WHY you need certain components to be structured in a particular way, it might be understood by a broader array of forum members and buyers of transaxles. I don't want to be a drag on this thread so if someone can point to a book that explains transaxles, I can study on my own time. Or, someone here might go retrieve all the forum member input that responds directly to
Dom's question and flesh it out.

Thanks. I'm glad to be able to read member input. It's helpful and I appreciate all the guys that are working hard to resolve the transaxle shortage problem.
Steve

Dear Steve,
probably you reached the point about why on this planet are exhisting experts in a particular sector.
In order that this matter is not so semplicistic to be answered by one short reply as you would like, just ask what it is not clear to your eyes.
If you give up like that it does mean that you are not really interested to find out about cold mechanics or to find out who is trully posting or lying or what else you like.
For me the transmission is a reason of life and a profittable job. This means that more you get into the details and more you shall know what you are talking about.
As always I am open to clarify the darkness of this particular section of a vehicle.
Wanni

 

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Hi wanni

So you built your baby transaxle and did not base the design on the requirements for the GT40 as you don't have a monocoque chassis this must be true.

I could loan you mine but unfortunately I am using it at present. If you find one, this is what they look like, then you will see why it is important to use original GT40 bellhousing when mounting the transaxle.

Your cable gear change is not suitably reversed to an original style GT40 gear shift either.

The ZFQ is a true nut and bolt ZF replacement, same GT40 bellhousing, same GT40 clutch, same chassis mounting, same gear shift, same starter motor.

Regards

Chris.

 

[wanni]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Hi Wanni

So now you are going to use a short bellhousing and move the transaxle forward? This will move the output shafts forward also. Won't work on a GT40 my friend.
The rear cross member on the GT40 sits below our optional oil pump on the ZFQ that why we mounted it high.

WILL SHOW YOU NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR DRIVE SHAFTS.
DO YOU KNOW INTERNAL GEARS MADE FOR OFF SETTING SHAFTS???

If you are saying your baby box is for a GT40 then how is it hung you have no attachments?

I HAVE NOT SEE YOURS AS WELL, YET

I see also that you transaxle is only 600nm = 430ftlbs what is the extra cost to bring it up to the ZFQ's 750nm. 550ftLbs.
1.5 €UROS A KILO

Why would anyone want to use your trans and not a cheaper G50 Porsche unit seeing that both will need the same amount of adaptation and cutting to make them fit?
WHO TOLD YOU THAT IT WILL BE CHEAPER???

Here are some more pictures of a GT40 (the car in question) so you can see just how the ZF looks when fitted.
NICE PICS. I WILL APPRECIATE THE COMPARISON FROM MINE AND YOURS INSTALLATION, WICH IS STILL MISSING.

I mean you no disrespect but you baby Six speed is not for the GT40 market
I APPRECIATE A LOT YOUR CONCERNE ABOUT MY BABY.
WILL SEE LATER.

Regards


Chris
A GT40 guy.

THANKS A LOT FOR ADVERTISING MY PRODUCTS

 

[Kirk B]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

I think there is probably too much technological info for a lot of us. To me, I'll trust Chris and Wanni when it comes to the strength/design of the transaxles. And I don't think anyone will buy a transaxle without seeing it a GT40. So "how it's going to work" questions can wait for me. Dimensions from bellhousing to end, along with where that puts the axles would be nice...

I might be getting ahead of things but being able to get help or having a dealer close (in country) will be important. That and cost will probably be the biggest factors. In today's world I can't imagine anyone making this kind of investment and not having the knowledge/expertise to put out a good product. Everyone should have a good idea of what's necessary for a GT40. Seems the only thing customer has to do is choose how many gears, sequential, the gearing and torque you'll need.

Again, thanks to all the vendors that are taking on the transaxle challenge. Sounds like there's a market for all of you.

 

[wanni]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Hi wanni

So you built your baby transaxle and did not base the design on the requirements for the GT40 as you don't have a monocoque chassis this must be true.
IT IS ON HIS WAY

I could loan you mine but unfortunately I am using it at present. If you find one, this is what they look like, then you will see why it is important to use original GT40 bellhousing when mounting the transaxle.
WHEN THE GAME BECOMES HARD, HARD PLAYERS JUMP IN THE GAME.
MY HORSE EYE COVERS ARE REMOVED LONG TIME AGO IN ORDER TO TURN AROUND THOSE SMALL PROBLEMS.

Your cable gear change is not suitably reversed to an original style GT40 gear shift either.
HAVE YOU SEEN IT???CHECK THE PICS OF THE ASCARI AND APPRECIATE THE REVERSING OF THE GEAR POSITIONS.

The ZFQ is a true nut and bolt ZF replacement, same GT40 bellhousing, same GT40 clutch, same chassis mounting, same gear shift, same starter motor.
SAME OLD FASHION, SAME TROUBLES, SAME......
FRESH AIR FOR CUSTOMER EMOTIONS IS REQUIRED.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT REPLICAS....NOT ORIGINAL RESTAURATION.
MODERNISATION OF OLD PROJECTS...

AHHHHH.
SHIFTING WITH 8 KGS ON THE LEVER THROUGH A BALL BEARING CABLE, ONE OF THE SIX QUIET GEARS WHICH ARE TAKING CARE OF MAXIMISING THE CAR PERFORMANCES. ALL THAT BY DEPRESSING A SOFT AND RELIABLE CLUTCH FOR THE PLEASURE OF NOT NEEDING TO GO TO THE BODY BUILDING FOR A SPECIFIC TRAINING...........LEAVE THE REST TO YOUR OWN IMMAGINATION.
CIAO
WANNI

Regards

Chris.

THE DIFFERENCE WILL BE CHOSEN BY THE CUSTOMERS

 

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Quote
Hi Wanni

So now you are going to use a short bellhousing and move the transaxle forward? This will move the output shafts forward also. Won't work on a GT40 my friend.
The rear cross member on the GT40 sits below our optional oil pump on the ZFQ that why we mounted it high.

WILL SHOW YOU NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR DRIVE SHAFTS.
DO YOU KNOW INTERNAL GEARS MADE FOR OFF SETTING SHAFTS???


Hi Wanni

pleas tell me your not serious offsetting your drive shafts with internal gears? This is a race car not a tractor,
Talk about grasping at straws (excuse the pun) to cover design inadequacies.
How will these internal gears be incorporated into the design of your existing baby transaxle without a completely new casing?

Regards

Chris.

 

[MikeD]

Re: Transaxel Comparision

Chris,

Why do you even argue with this know-it-all? His arrogance and his smugness will be his undoing in life. Let him make a fool of himself when he realizes on his own it won't fit.