Talk:Direct-shift gearbox

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Automobiles High‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trucks Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trucks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of trucks on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TrucksWikipedia:WikiProject TrucksTemplate:WikiProject TrucksTrucks articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

American POV

Uh, American reviews usually don't like CVT, but DSG is getting rave reviews here... I will dig out (links to) the two articles that gave me that impression. Both from BorgWarners investorrs web site, scanned in articles from "Auto News" (publication):-

"[1]". {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help) and
"[2]". {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help)

Agreed. This is an odd comment and in my opinion not relevant to this article. Perhaps the author was referring to the fact that more vehicles contain CVT's? Porcupine911 02:55, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who are the two new European OEMs?

I have scanned the internet and can find numerous references to BorgWarners recent press release but no one has named the two new car manufactureres that will be able to use the DualTronic (DSG) gearbox in their 2007 models. Mark 23:05, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that Mercedes-Benz and BMW will use DSG gearboxes under license from Borg-Warner. Meanwhile, Ford Motor Company announced their intention to build their own version of a DSG gearbox.

Isn't it VAG?

...to Volkswagen (which also owns the Audi, SEAT, Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini and Škoda brands). I think technically, all those brands are held under the VAG company (Volkswagen Audi Group) so this sentence is not exactly accurate... --67.189.98.43 02:55, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VAG does not stand for Volkswagen Audi Group, but rather Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft, or "Volkswagen Corporation." TomTheHand 12:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong . . . "Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft" does NOT exist, and has not done so since 1985! -- Teutonic Tamer 10:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is known as Volkswagen AG, AG (as explained) is a type of German company.

In the UK, "VAG" initially stood for "Volkswagen Audi Group" - when just VW and Audi were under the same ownership, and both marques were sold from the same car showrooms.
However, the current Volkswagen Group contains many more brands, but "VAG" is still used informally to indicate "Volkswagen Group" brands/marques.
Only in Germany, does VAG now technically refer to "Volkswagen AG" - however, informally, VAG still refers to the entire stable of VW Group brands. -- Teutonic Tamer 10:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Veyron gearbox?

My understanding is that the Dual Clutch transmission for the Veyron was the work of Ricardo plc, the UK transmission specialist responsible for the Ford GT's transmission. That would be backed up by the fact that they won an award for it (see http://www.ricardo.com/media/pressreleases/pressrelease.aspx?page=38).

The gearbox developed by Borg-Warner is certainly a nice piece of kit, but it's a different piece of equipment than the Veyron box - which has to deal with over 900lb.ft of torque in the Veyron.

While I am on the subject of amendments - the article reads like Borg Warner invented this class of transmission (dual-clutch, pre-engaging). I know that Porsche used this design in the early 1970's on their Le Mans car of the time, and I expect the history goes back further than that. One could argue that Borg Warner "invented" DSG, but its akin to saying Ford "invented" the Mustang. They certainly make the car in question, but the point is, it's not an invention, it's a product... Craigy 217.155.94.30 19:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per your last point, what if we were to say, "...dual-clutch gearbox designed by BorgWarner" ? That would confer that this iteration of a dual-clutch transmission is their work, but doesn't imply that they invented the concept (much like Ford designed the Mustang). Peel 19:40, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Veyron 'box was indeed done by Ricardo; a mate of mine worked on it. Mr Larrington (talk) 13:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 5

I added more to the page including operation, advantages, and disadvantages aswell as cleaned it up. KG

8 or 80 milliseconds, which is it

The page says 80 millisecond shift times, but the reference page (on about.com) says 8ms... which is it anyone? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.152.114.136 (talk) 00:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I believe the 2008 M3 will have DSG as an option

80 I believe

The figures I see in most sources are 8/100 of a second, which is 80 ms. If it was really 8 ms, it would be shifting in less time than it takes an M60 20mm Gatling gun (6000 rounds per minute) to fire a single bullet, which is pretty unbelievable.

Shift speed varies widely

Gatling comparison is pointless, DSG is not a hydraulic-power rotating gun and there are no elevant parallels in the mechanisms. Upshifts as fast as 8ms are mentioned [[3]].

Typical shift times are 0.3 to 0.4 seconds; during upshifts engine power is interrupted for only 8 milliseconds.

The modeller is ex-industry (transmission engineer, FFD-Ricardo, so I credit that he he is knowledgeable about the real thing (link is for a Meccano model, but comment is about full-scale DSG gearbox). An 8ms change is not quite so unbelievable, keeping in mind that DSG shifts involve a change from clutch in use to the second clutch, with the gear to be used on the second clutch pre-selected. Centrepull (talk) 07:45, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I opened up a discussion over on the wikiproject. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#DSG trannies Dabbaman (talk) 20:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

clutch needed for first and R ?

also if downshift is anticipated, how is the (currently unused) input shaft 'sped up'? CorvetteZ51 13:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

→ Clearly, the open clutch is sped-up by the synchroniser, same as on a manual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.31.245 (talk) 00:23, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's one input shaft, connected by the clutches to the gearshafts. In my DSG car, when downshift is anticipated, the gearbox selects a lower gear on the unused gearshaft, which connects that gearshaft to the wheels, speeding it up to match the wheel speed; at the point the downshift happens, one clutch opens, the engine is "blipped" by the transmission to the higher revs needed to match with the lower gear, and the other clutch then closes, connecting engine to wheels with matched speed. Same basic principle as double clutching on a manual gearbox, but done by robot. TrueFarnz (talk) 12:12, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(N) while parked?

For the VAG DSG, nothing I have read indicates that the clutchpacks are engaged while the car is stationary. In fact, if you let off the gas while it is on a hill, it will roll back while the clutches engage. This needs a citation note or explanation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.246.185.206 (talk) 05:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cant speak for all VAG DSG's but the DL501/OB5 Gen 1 fitted in my B8 A4 does keep the Odd clutch set slightly engaged when stopped in drive, the requested pack torque depends on the brake pressure and varies from 5Nm when strongly depressed to 15Nm when lightly pressed, I assume to aid in a smooth takeoff without bogging down the engine or unnecesarily wasting fuel while stopped for long periods. They really do try and make it feel like a torque converter.

I've only validated this behaviour while on level ground. My car will hold in place while stopped on a hill via the brakes and then roll back after a small amount of time. Whether the clutches are fully disengaged in this state or are still engaged softly (i.e at the 15Nm takeoff target) is hard to tell due to it being a heavy car and that 15Nm of engine torque is bugger all.

I have VCDS (which is how I obtained that 5/15Nm torque value) however my DSG is now tuned so the behaviour is likely non standard, so someone else with an unmodified DL501 Gen 1 and VCDS would have to validate that. You could likely verify the clutch behaviour (In any DSG) by driving up on a hill and switching between drive and neutral, getting on and off brakes while watching the instantaneous fuel usage readout.

Regardless, for this specific transmission, while stopped (on level ground) for long periods of time, shifting to neutral will save fuel and clutch wear. 58.167.139.219 (talk) 14:24, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the coasting advantage

I took out the advantage that said

Both clutches can disengage when travelling downhill, allowing the car to coast

Because I thought that

It is dangerous to coast down a hill, in case you need engine fcontrol
It saves fuel to just ride the hill with the wheels keeping the engine spinning as opposed to pumping more fuel to get it to stay at idle when disengaged with the wheels.
Manuals and autos can do it too. (Neutral anyone?) OMGsplosion 23:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And yet the owner's manual edition 05.2014 page 167 for my 2014 Polo (7-speed DSG) indicates this:

"Coasting with the dual clutch gearbox DSG

In coasting mode, the momentum of the vehicle can be used to save fuel in conjunction with a foresighted driving style. The engine is de-clutched and no longer brakes the vehicle - the vehicle can roll out over a longer distance.

Switch-on condition: the selector must be in position D.

Triggering coasting

Remove foot from accelerator pedal. The engine will be disengaged and run in freewheel mode. The vehicle rolls without the braking effect from the engine.

Canceling coasting mode

Press the brake pedal briefly or pull the left hand paddle (-) towards the steering wheel."

Now, in practice I can't verify this actually happens as the engine rpms are very low anyway in 7th gear, but it certainly downshifts when you tap the brake pedal. 122.58.31.245 (talk) 00:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)KiwiME122.58.31.245 (talk) 00:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC) 20/01/2015[reply]

Perhaps the article needs to be edited to clarify the behaviour in regards to specific transmissions. The DL501 will not disengage the clutches unless in neutral so engine brakes at all time. 58.167.139.219 (talk) 14:51, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added another disadvantage pertaining to engine modding

Because of car/engine modding/tuning popularity today, thought it would be a worthy edition for those interested. It is even pointed out and referenced in the Audi TT review in the external links. Here's how I quoted it.

"From car/engine modding perspective, the ability of the transmission handle extra power (ex upgraded turbocharger) is very questionable"

This statement is almost guarenteed to be untrue. Companies such as HPA are now using DSG transmissions in their high performance VW projects, pushing >600hp through a nearly unmodified transmission. For example, here is a current project car, the Jetta R-GT at 550hp with a DSG transmission. http://www.hpamotorsports.com/projects_finished_rgt-jetta.htm 142.161.255.36 (talk) 21:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if it is worded well enough. But anyone with better way of quoting it....suggestions are welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.238.36.254 (talk) 06:40, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advantage "sporty" not a valid point as an advantage

The usage of such a wording is nothing more then an opinionated point, and does little to really describe the "mechanical" and operational advantage of DSG. Plus the usage of VW's press release cite sounds nothing more then just promotional material, which can be considered bias. And besides what type of transmission certain people consider "sporty" can vary from individual to individual. Example there are many car enthusiast whom may consider a traditional manual transmission to be very sporty due the amount of control they have over their vehicle. Such a point does not have a place in what is to be an unbias POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fsdude77 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Merge with Twin-Shift Gearbox

Against - DSG is notable on its own, and the amount of information on it is non-trivial. There's simply no point in merging it with another article, regardless of how related its subject is. 24.87.161.50 (talk) 03:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - DSG is a unique piece of engineering. Do NOT merge! -- Teutonic Tamer 10:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

new 'S tronic' info from Audi press release-- Q5 will be first vehicle

The following info should be added to the DSG wiki entry:

Originally developed to work with transversely mounted units, and so initially restricted to the TT and the A3, the latest generation of S tronic can now extend its reach upwards to the A4, A5, Q5 and many other Audi models whose engines are mounted ‘lengthways’.

In its latest form the famously quick and slick gearbox, developed exclusively by Audi, offers the existing transmission’s familiar Drive, Sport and ‘Manual’ modes, the latter upgrading from six to seven fixed ratios, and boasts a higher torque threshold of 550Nm. This impressive capacity means that it is theoretically compatible with a wide spectrum of sports models, including the majority of the V8 and V10-powered performance flagships and the high performance TDI models.

The formidable outputs produced by these cars will be handled by two multi-plate clutches – one controlling the odd gears 1, 3, 5 and 7 and the other the even 2, 4, 6 and reverse. Both transmission elements are continuously active, but only one is powered by the engine at any one time. This means that when the driver accelerates in third gear, for example, fourth is already pre-engaged by the second transmission element. The switching process takes place in mere hundredths of a second as the clutch shifts – while one is opening, the other closes, so changes are remarkably swift and the power flow is never interrupted.

The new seven-speed S tronic has also been designed to work in conjunction with the latest generation quattro four-wheel-drive system with asymmetric-dynamic distribution, so in normal conditions 40 per cent of the power is channelled from the drive shaft to the front axle differential and 60 per cent to the rear, resulting in optimum handling poise.

Twenty three years ago Audi fielded its first dual-clutch transmission in the 476PS Sport quattro S1 rally car piloted by Walter Rohrl and Christian Geistdorfer, and since its transfer to the road in 2003 as the Direct Shift Gearbox or DSG over 188,000 examples have been installed worldwide. The latest version, with its dramatically greater scope for application across the Audi range, will make its debut in UK-bound Audi models in late 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockreid (talk • contribs) 19:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That lot looks just like an official Audi press release - so why didn't the OP post the link? -- Teutonic Tamer 10:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Porsche DoppelKupplung

I'm under the impression that the designation DSG is a Volkswagen trademark and that the PDK was developed independently of DSG. If these impressions are correct, Wikipedia should not mention PDK in this article, much less have PDK (Porsche Doppelkupplungs) redirect here. --anon.141.157.220.2 (talk) 23:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an article that reports PDK was developed by Porsche and ZF. --anon. (same as above) 68.161.201.118 (talk) 23:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another article that justifies removing the mention of PDK from this Wikipedia article. It says, "PDK (Porsche Doppelkupplung, or double clutch) [is] an automated manual seven-speed, similar in concept to Audi's DSG but developed independently during six years with transmission manufacturer ZF." --anon. (same as above) 68.161.199.41 (talk)

Porsche Doppelkupplung is the correct name, not kupplungs —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metallion (talk • contribs) 12:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the heading of this section of the talk page. Someone should redirect PDK (Porsche_Doppelkupplungs) to PDK (Porsche_Doppelkupplung) (which currently doesn't exist), if I can't figure out how to do it myself. --anon. 68.161.199.41 (talk) 17:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put in a request for a redirect, and now both redirect to dual clutch transmission. However, if and when PDK (Porsche Doppelkupplung) gets an article of its own, the redirect of PDK (Porsche Doppelkupplungs) should be edited to point to that. --anon. (same as above) 141.149.54.135 (talk) 22:20, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First dual clutch gearbox-equipped car?

I had intended to fill this point in the list of automotive superlatives by checking the first DSG model in this article, but it doesn't mention it anywhere. Which road car was the first to receive one of these double-clutch gearboxes? --NaBUru38 (talk) 23:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't know for sure, but I would hazard a guess at either the Golf Mk4 R32 (German market only), or the original Audi TT. Hope that gives you some leads. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 20:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

S mode downshift

According to the 2009 TSI DSG GTI manual (USA), there is no engine braking when the transmission is in S mode. The only engine braking available is on manual mode. Roytoy (talk) 03:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The English language Wikipedia covers more than just the USA, and the DSG has engine braking in ALL modes! 78.32.143.113 (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brake auto engage

I have noticed that when the clutches are fully disengaged on a incline and the car rolls back, the brake automatically engages and then the transmission "bites" to stop the rolling. It is hard to explain without actually experiencing it. It seems to me like the natural expected thing one would to if a manual car started rolling. Of course with the DSG you don't have a clutch pedal and you can not "ease it in" on a hill so this feature is very helpful because it gives ample time to move the foot from the brake pedal to the accelerator pedal.

I wish I had more technical or on paper data than first hand experience. It is no where listed on the manual. Roytoy (talk) 03:14, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's called "Hill Hold Assist" (HHA). It is, in fact, described in the owner's manual. VAG has since added this feature to traditional (i.e. clutch-pedal) manual transmissions as well. 74.210.23.143 (talk) 17:18, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfounded "disadvantages".

I removed a few of the disadvantages because they were either opinion, weren't verifiable, and/or poorly worded.

One was some nonsense about "maximal accleration uphill" and mere opinion/rant about the kickdown switch. It's very easy to argue the kickdown switch is desireable. These are both opinions however not facts for the wiki.

Another, a mention of the torque limit which has already been refuted (with evidence) on the talk page.

The other was the cost, which also had no citiation. It may be expensive to manufacture (no evidence was given though) however all the consumer knows is the price they pay for it. Given the cost of the DSG (FWD) is not much different than that of a traditional (torque converter) automatic on similar other cars, the DSG is not something that adds an extrodinary premium to the price of a vehicle. 74.210.23.143 (talk) 17:47, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mine failed twice

Mine failed twice. 2007 Jetta. Perhaps I had an early version of course. I do not recommend. --81.164.160.148 (talk) 18:49, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I retract this statement. Turns out that the second time, 2007 Jetta popped a spark plug following an ignition coil failure. Nothing to do with the DSG box at all --81.164.160.148 (talk) 18:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. This was a difficult one. The last discussions seem to favor a merge which is not without problems. But there are problems with the proposed rename of this article. I think this needs to be worked out by the editors involved. Maybe a partial merge and a rewrite of this article with a move to a more VW centric name to follow? In any case more discussions here and likely some editing. Once it looks like a consensus is present, then either do the move or return to RM. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:43, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Direct-Shift Gearbox → Direct-shift gearbox – Relisted. Seems like the consensus is for a merge. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:10, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. In addition, WP:MOSCAPS says that a compound item should not be upper-cased just because it is abbreviated with caps. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. $Tony (talk)$ 14:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support – commonly lowercase in sources, so should be in WP. Dicklyon (talk) 06:50, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Obvious case. Jenks24 (talk) 18:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: this article appears to be specifically about VW Group dual-clutch transmissions. I believe VW Group coined the term "Direct Shift Gearbox" (DSG) (see, for instance here), though I'm not sure if they have registered it as a trademark. I'm not aware of any other manufacturers using the same name. There is another article about dual-clutch transmissions in general, so it would be confusing to have two different articles apparently dealing with the same general topic, IMHO. Regards, Letdorf (talk) 21:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Weak oppose, per Letdorf

If this is to be renamed, and to be renamed away from a proprietary brandname (which probably implies capitalisation) then a better target would be Double clutch transmission or similar. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was "initially licensed" to Volkswagen. I presume "dual clutch" and "multiple-shaft manual gearbox" were proprietary, too, but they're (correctly) downcased in the article (well, inconsistently for the first, I see), and our article on the topic is downcased, too, despite the fact that it was licenced to/from Porsche (language is unclear). The direct-shift gearbox. We could go the full way and upcase "clutch pedal" and even "clutch", since they were proprietary when first developed. Where would it stop?

Tony (talk)

06:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've just checked the European OHIM trademark database, and a trademark registration for "Direct Shift Gearbox" was applied for by Volkswagen AG in 2002 [4], although its current status is "application withdrawn". MOS:TM states that trademarks should be capitalized as per proper names. I very much doubt anyone has tried to trademark "Clutch Pedal"! Regards, Letdorf (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for confirming that they withdrew their attempt to trademark this generic term. I copyeditted per your suggest, that and the Clutch and other stuff. Dicklyon (talk) 20:32, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think you misunderstood - the common generic term in use appears to be "dual-clutch transmission". Is there any evidence that DSG is used generically outside of VW Group? Letdorf (talk) 21:42, 7 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

If the topic really is the same as dual-clutch transmission, then I agree a merge is in order. Dicklyon (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dick's/Andy's suggestion to merge sounds good. Can anyone confirm the proposed basis for this?

Tony (talk)

07:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any significant technical difference between the two?

If not, then I suggest merging both to Dual clutch transmission, with Dual clutch transmission#Direct-Shift Gearbox as a section within that, solely on Volks' development and commercial use of it. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with merging this article with Dual clutch transmission is that unless the content of this article is edited down massively in the merge, then there will be undue weight on VW Group's DSG systems in the Dual clutch transmission article. Letdorf (talk) 21:42, 7 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Singapore recall

In the Malaysia section, the page says '13 days after the Singapore recall', but there is no mention anywhere of a Singapore recall! Either describe it or remove the mention please.

Move or delete the "Operational introduction" section

The section Direct-shift gearbox#Operational introduction has two major problems:

It is not specific to DSG, but is a general overview of how all dual-clutch transmissions work
Some of it doesn't make any sense. At the start of the subsection for "D", it says:

The transmission's reverse gear is selected on the first shaft K1, and the outer clutch K2 engages at the start of the 'bite point'. At the same time, on the alternate gear shaft, the reverse gear clutch K1 is also selected (pre-selected), as the gearbox doesn't know whether the driver wants to go forward or reverse.

That's nonsense. If you just put the car in "D", how can it not know if you want to go forwards or reverse?

It also says that it accelerates in second gear unless you accelerate hard in which case it decides to downshift to first. I'm not sure this is correct, and in any case it contradicts statements later that talk about deciding when/whether to shift into second gear.

that is, the DSG will "learn" how the user drives the car, and will progressively tailor the shift points accordingly to suit the habits of the driver.

It's marked as citation-needed, but it's just outright wrong. There's no learning behaviour, especially with the aforementioned fuzzy logic. - Bananu7 (talk) 14:20, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Gonna take some guesses as to what it meant if OP wanted to clarify,

On the issue of kickdown, I cant see how this is any different to most transmissions. The stock shift points for many DSGs does lead to very early 1-->2 shifts (for the DL501 its somewhere around 15kmh) but this obviously is not DSG specific and is done for smoothness. "If you mash the throttle it will pick the lowest gear possible" is just obvious.

Maybe what it is refering to is how the 2-->1 shift only occurs at 2-3kmh so if you come to an almost (but not quite) complete stop, the transmission will stay in 2nd to avoid the rough 2-->1-->2 shift (it really tries to go into 2nd as early as possible and not go back into 1st unless required, it doesnt seem to like 1st gear), and if you mash the throttle while in a clutch slip condition in 2nd (starting from a crawl) ~<15kmh it will slam you very ungracefully into 1st. Perhaps this reluctance to shift back into 1st except for complete stops is what the comment refers too.

And perhaps the remark about "learning" is refering to the continual adaptation as the clutches wear and the required pressure for the bite point changes. I guess this can be seen as "tailoring" as the bite point adapation can become higher than required after a lot of hard driving leading to more agressive shifting and can require re-learning, this however has nothing to do with the shift points. Over the years ive driven my DSG A4, being on my 3rd set of clutch packs (Thanks mech unit problems) before I tuned the box it would always shift at the exact same speed into every gear, every time, despite me thrashing it.

All of my info is pertaining to the Gen 1 DL501 that I own so the particular behaviour may not be relevant to all DSG's however ive driven a few DSGs and they all seem to behave like this, furthermore if the behaviour is model specific that requires clarification. 58.167.139.219 (talk) 14:47, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest moving move of this section to Dual-clutch transmission, which is lacking such a description. Whatever remains on this page should be pared down to Volkswagen-specific info, such as "S" and manual modes. --Bigpeteb (talk) 20:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Direct-shift gearbox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Direct-shift gearbox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Direct-shift gearbox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:59, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Direct-shift gearbox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pto

Can the part about the power take off be changed to something a bit more in line with what it is. A PTO is not what that output does as such. A PTO is used to power external power tools such as bench saws found on some older land rovers for example.

I think it should be more in line to use a term such as output pinion/shaft for the rear wheels on a four wheel drive car. Tanis8472 (talk) 14:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adaptive DSG

Not possible on the face of it. All the transmission control unit is doing is executing a predetermined set of instructions based on certain conditions related to the operation of the car. The term "fuzzy logic" is a marketing tool designed to make the system appear more sophisticated than it actually is. The average driver may think the DSG is adaptive but because the ECU is a computer it does not deal with partial truth. It only "understands" yes or no. 1 or 0. The if then else gate is as "smart" as a digital computer can get. 142.188.52.189 (talk) 02:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]