>> There is, in a (relatively primitive) manual transmission. There is not,
>> however, a linear relationship between engine RPM and gasoline usage.
>
> How many cars use a transmission that would count as "relatively
> primitive"?  But I do agree that there's not a linear relationship
> between RPM and MPG.

I'd say that about 90% or more of cars sold here in Europe the transmission 
is a "relative primitive" manual.  The reason is for efficiency, any extra 
junk in the transmission (like fancy fluid couplings or multiple-clutches 
etc) just increases fuel consumption.  You connect the engine as directly to 
the wheels as you possibly can, otherwise you're just wasting energy.

Post a reply to this message