Does anyone happen to know what the limitations are on the DSG gearbox? It occurs to me that the new vRS may come with DSG (possibly as standard), and if it's also packing the 200 BHP 2.0 FSI Turbo, will the limitations of the gearbox prevent much tuning? I'm sure I read a thread a while ago that quoted 350 NM.

I also hear that while DSG is great when it works, it's horribly unreliable. Anyone got any more information?

I can not understand why anyone wants an automatic unless they are disabled. Auto cars are horrible to drive and just look at the figures in the New Octy brochure at just how much petrol extra they use and even with that how much lower the performance is. For that reason alone a DSG or any automatic on a performance car is madness. PS I thought the DSG was for the diesels with Triptonic for the Petrols????

Jason Plato seemed to like the one in the Golf, the other day ... :rubchin:

At work we had a Audi A3 Quattro with the DSG transmission fitted for a year for transmission evaluation. Over 90 people evaluated the transmsission in that time with very differing views.

The main issue is the max torque it will accept and the vehicle creep prior to tip in of the throttle.

ZF are supplying the transmissions to OEM's who are using the principle in many other vehicles, but the transmission is having to be refined to cope.

Mark

Rob, you read the figure of 350 Nm correctly.

Given that the 140bp diesel is kicking about somewhere in the 300-320Nm ball-park level anyway (iirc) seems that potential for tuning is fairly limited without serious mechanical changes........

DSG isn't an auto is it? I understood it was a electronically controlled manual box with 2 clutches. If this is correct it shouldn't be any heavier on fuel than a normal manual.

As far as I know it is the new automatic box for the TDis and according to the brochure it is much harder on the fuel than the manual. DSG stands for Direct Shift Gearbox as far as I know.

Jason Plato seemed to like the one in the Golf, the other day ... :rubchin:

Didn't he say something like "I can't understand why the likes of Ferrari, Maserati, etc haven't come up with something this good before. It's the best gear change I've ever used in a road car". DSG works by having 2 clutches and predicting the gear you're going to change to and engaging it with the clutch not in use. The gear change is then basically switching between clutches. I was under the impression this led to very fast gear changes (much faster than a manual) which would be an advantage on a sporty car. However, saying all that I've never driven one to compare it ....

Chris

Basically it is an electronically controlled automated manual where the second clutch lets the next gear to reach the pre-engagement phase of the shift prior to be engaged.

350Nm is the torque capacity on this vartiant but ZF are producing versions with a greater input torque facility.

Porsche Cayenne have tested DSG and the VW Tourag with the V10 diesel has been seen tested as well.

Mark

Rob, the thread you are looking for is below. William, the DSG is supposed to give marginally better mpg than a conventional manual gearbox, and even better mpg compared with an automatic. There are a couple of links in the thread below which give more info about the DSG.

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/showthread.php?t=11650

Auto cars are horrible to drive and just look at the figures in the New Octy brochure at just how much petrol extra they use and even with that how much lower the performance is.

This is due to inherent inefficiencies in the torque converter though...so anything which uses a plate clutch isn't going to suffer so much. Admittedly an auto on a plate clutch doesn't always get it right, so it tends to be marginally less efficient, but there really isn't a lot in it.

Rob.

Drove the 3.2 TT with this 'box in the other day. Around a slarlom track it was about 1/10th sec quicker than a standard manual 'box. It wasn't as quick at changing as I thought but then again the performance wasn't exactly quick when compared to the Octy I had just jumped out of. Drove the S4 and the RS6 with flippy paddles but couldn't say if it was DSG or not.

I would! :naughty:

Denis, I am just going by the figures quoted in the brochure for Octy 2 sent to me by Skoda UK when they arranged my 24 hr test drive. The TDi economy droped from 50+ mpg to just over 40 with the DSG, but some how became Euro IV compliant compared with Euro III with the manual. As I said the DSG is not offered for the petrol versions. The brochure also markets it very much as an automatic!

Drove a DSG TT at anglesey on saturday.... is very very good, and I'm an auto-hater for enthusiastic driving.

If I was ordering a new octy, I'm pretty certain I would go for DSG.

I was quoting from the DSG blurb, William, rather than from actual figures for the new Octavia - hence my use of the word 'supposed'. I've now found the figures you are referring to and you are absolutely right. I see that the DSG-equipped 1.9TDI PD/105bhp is 2 mph slower on top speed, 0.4 secs slower from 0-62mph, and the combined fuel consumption figure is 47.1mpg versus 53.3. Given what is being claimed for the DSG and economy, I wonder if those differences reflect the requirements for meeting EU IV (DSG-equipped car) rather than EU III (manual gearbox car).

I was quoting from the DSG blurb, William, rather than from actual figures for the new Octavia - hence my use of the word 'supposed'. I've now found the figures you are referring to and you are absolutely right. I see that the DSG-equipped 1.9TDI PD/105bhp is 2 mph slower on top speed, 0.4 secs slower from 0-62mph, and the combined fuel consumption figure is 47.1mpg versus 53.3. Given what is being claimed for the DSG and economy, I wonder if those differences reflect the requirements for meeting EU IV (DSG-equipped car) rather than EU III (manual gearbox car).

Could this performance/economy difference be attributed to the additional weight of DSG over a manual gearbox? Don't have my Octy brochure to hand to see what the weight difference is........

Chris

Keb weight (1510kg) and payload (470kg) are the same but the DSG car's total weight is 40kg more (ie 2020kg v 1980kg).

Interesting that, given that the Audi A3, when equipped with DSG, posts quicker 0-60 times. The 2.0 FSI Turbo 0-60 is 7 seconds in manual guise, but 6.9 seconds with DSG gearbox.

I do love it when I'm right.

Interesting that, given that the Audi A3, when equipped with DSG, posts quicker 0-60 times. The 2.0 FSI Turbo 0-60 is 7 seconds in manual guise, but 6.9 seconds with DSG gearbox.

Even more so with the new Golf GTI - the DSG version is supposed to be 0.3s quicker! Given most people's manual-shift capabilities that's probably even more in real life...

And there is almost nothing between the fuel consumption figures either.

Gonna be on my options list on my next Octavia vRS!!!!!

driven a A3 3.2 V6 S-Line with DSG and it was fantastic,especially the auto blip of the throttle on down changes and makes you feel like a driving god when your accelerating hard and the gear change is peeerfect everytime.

my only concern is the torque limit for when i get the new one re-mapped!!!!

well i raised this issue a while back, and after talking to AMD, they have mapped quite a few 2.0 TDI with DSG box in it. There is no problem, the torque is capped at the safe limit while upping the bhp.

The top end BHP can be mapped higher, keeping the lower and mid speed torque capped.

Must admit I'm intriguded by DSG and would consider it if I were to change my RS.

Not really a liker of automatics and am of the view they should only be used with engines of 6 cylinders or more.

In the new Octy they 140bhp PD diesel can be specced with DSG buy it doesn't have the paddle changers.....that would be a must for me.

Must admit I'm intriguded by DSG and would consider it if I were to change my RS.

If I were you I'd go for it - mine comes highly recommended, almost a year old and no problems so far (fingers crossed)

My Passat PD170 running a Shark Peformance Stage 1 map was running 450Nm happily enough