Dual Clutch Transmission

I found Kevin's comments about the DCT interesting, particularly when it comes to economy. The sales pitch is that they're more efficient than other boxes, but I can't figure out how they'd improve on a manual box mechanically. (Auto boxes are different, which is where the 10% figure tends to come from.)

The extra won't have much of an impact on fuel economy. The US government reckons a weight reduction of 10% reduces consumption by 7%.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/lightweight.shtml

The total weight of a standard VFR plus average rider (80 kg) is around 340 kg, so the DCT bike and rider will be around 350 kg. That's a 3% difference in weight, which would suggest using 2% more fuel - approximately 1 mpg less.

Would I pay for one? I don't know. It depends on what the price difference turns out to be, and what it's like to ride. I figured that it would be the mother of all quickshifters, but Kevin sounds a bit underwhelmed, so...

Good points Paulvt1. In the past week I've done several hundred miles over twisty, undulating, single-track Highland roads on a big single. To make progress on a bike with a limited spread of torque I was constantly working the gearbox. Good fun, but also tiring by the end of a 8 or 10 hour riding day. On such a bike, in that type of environment, an auto option would have some benefit in enabling the rider to concentrate on road position and braking when high levels of concentration are needed in view of poor surfaces, gravel/ debris on the riding line, hairpins, sheep...

It's paradoxical that this technology should turn up on a bike where it's perhaps "needed" least; while the penalties in terms of cost, weight and added complexity probably rule out fitment to more modest machines where it could have a useful role.

In fact they haven't, as the gearbox itself is exactly the same as any other manual gearbox, including the selector forks, drum and so on. The only difference is that the clutches (also the same as a manual clutch) and gear selection is done by hyradulic rams.

The extra weight doesn't have much of an effect (although it doesn't help either), it's more that I'm expecting the drag from having one gear permanently engaged with the clutch lifted, as well as the power going into the clutch hydraulic lifters to reduce efficiency.
The point really here is that Honda's claims that DCT is going to improve economy don't stand up. What's improving economy is riding more slowly!

Sorry, I didn't make the final price clear in the article, I'll add that at the end, but anyway it's £1000.

Honda has built the system because it can. It's very much an engineering led company, and when engineers have ideas they get produced, like the DN-01, created to prove the feasibility of hydraulic drive. I really like that philosophy, even if I don't always like the products, because it leads ultimately to innovation and progress. And it's interesting!

Re the DCT system specifically, it does what it's supposed to do very well indeed, far better than Yamaha's auto in the FJR, it's just that I don't think many riders will feel they need it or want to pay that much for it. This kind of thing does pretty well in cars because changing gear and working the clutch is much more of a chore in a car - fingertip gearchanging alone is extremely useful as it means you can keep your hand on the wheel, while using the clutch is more physical effort. On a bike these are less effort to start with, and bikes' sequential gearchanging is already pretty fast, and quick shifters speed it up even more, so the argument for DCT is less strong. But if you want it, this is a very good one.

I'm sure that's true and it's a good point, DCT can change up at exactly the right rpm to maximise fuel efficiency, and do it consistently and repeatedly, which I'm sure is what they base their claim on. In practice though you simply wouldn't ride the bike this slowly - it's not an especially torquey engine and you simply wouldn't keep the revs this low as it responds too sluggishly.

The DCT does happen to highlight the lack of torque when it's in Sport mode too - if you're giving it medium throttle openings the revs drop back to below 6500rpm when it changes up, beneath the point where there's something of a power kick, so the acceleration drops right off as it's a fair bit flatter here. In manual you'd hang on for another 1000rpm to keep it in the sweet spot.

Well you can't clutch it up! It'll lift the front under power in first though, if you do 'em that way...

Nicely put. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Honda are thinking what you're thinking. It's all of a piece with their approach to other aspects of bike design - e.g. linked brakes, airbags - the thrust of which appears to be to make motorcycles more accessible and less intimidating (for want of a better word). I think their first attempt at an automatic bike (as distinct from a scooter) was the CB400AT of the late 70s, so the concept has been on their back burner for a long time.

Although my wool is somewhat dyed, I am wary of the sheepy tendency among some of our biking brethren. The criticism from those quarters will doubtless be that an automatic motorcycle is not a "real" bike for "real" (i.e. skilled) riders. Personally, I can see the attraction of a twist and go with hyper performance, although ideally such a system would also feature a manual clutch which the rider could elect to use when desirable. I'm just not entirely convinced that this is the best application of the technology. It's not beyond the wit of Honda to design a big touring bike engine that to a greater extent eliminates the need to shift gears when threading those Alpine bends together, simply by virtue of being sufficiently smooth and flexible where it counts in the rev range.

Kev, was there any hint from the Honda guys that this system might go into the next Pan?

Kev, did you got some information on maintenance intervals and costs of this system in comparison with the normal manual transmission?

Thank you Kevin, and thanks for the review. I'm very conscious of how much busier life must have become for you lately with the success of the site so the continued personal touch is very much appreciated.

The majority of powered two-wheelers sold in Europe (and round the world?) are automatics. And scooters don't have to be low cost/ margin products for manufacturers. Last year the Yamaha TMAX sold about 15,000 units at 10,000 euro a pop across just three markets - France, Italy and Spain. These are numbers far in excess of what they and probably any other manufacturer are achieving with geared motorcycles offered at a similar price. So I suspect that one of Honda's motives with DCT is to try and broaden the appeal of motorcycles to the huge pool of potential customers currently riding or attracted to the ease of a twist'n'go scooter.

As you might have seen, this week's MCN had supposed spy shots of a "shock" new Honda middleweight bike using DCT. They reckoned that apart from the gearbox it was a broadly conventional parallel twin. Another publication has a more convincing account of what this bike could be: a forward-inclined single of just under 50 hp (so it slots into the forthcoming A2 licence category) driving through DCT, with an underseat tank and hence space above the engine for both an airbox and helmet/ luggage storage. At first blush that sounds a bit like a marriage of the not-wildly-successful DN-01 with the Aprilia Mana, but I reckon they could be on to something in continental Europe depending on price and how well the details of the finished package blend together. Achieving a useful improvement on the TMAX's 50 mpg would certainly be a step in the right direction.

Of course if this had been a grainy photo of a forthcoming Triumph version of an established model of BMW then MCN's praise would have been unstinting, if not embarrassingly gushing. As it was their man with an instant opinion dismissed the prototype Honda in a couple of hackneyed sentences (summary: "plot" has been "lost"; unfavourable implied comparison with "cup of sick"). The small-minded parochialism of the mainstream British motorcycle press (our host and one or two others excepted) rarely fails to disappoint.

Thanks Rocca, don't disagree with a thing you say. Particularly when I read some of the cheap headline stuff that MCN writers (not Kevin) seem increasingly to write these days. If I compare their observations with reports in other reputable publications about the same bikes and my own experiences, I wonder if they are riding the same machine, and if not what planet they were on at the time.

No disrespect to Triumph, I can't forget how MCN criticised the VFR1200 for being "too heavy", yet when they tested the Triumph Sprint GT, with a smaller 1050cc engine, they failed to comment on the fact that it's weight is within a kg. of the VFR. Even though they admitted that it had a handlimg problem at speed, they pointedly failed to criticise it.

Interesting that when Bike mag did a Sports Tourer edition last April, they rated the VFR1200 as better than the BMW K1300S and best in class, with the Triumph Sprint feeling "not 5 years behind, more like 15 years behind". ( I suppose that means "more character". Excuse me)!

I rode the Crossrunner last week and really enjoyed it. Also after 13 years of riding VFR800s I couldn't understand the MCN comments about the handling, I have never experienced the problems they describe and have never seen anything like it reported anywhere else. At least I know that when I set off to do 2000 miles plus on my VFR800s I wouldn't need to be topping up oil on the way as BMWs and Triumphs seem to need and I never had a single defect in all of those years either, they were really bullet-proof despite being pushed hard all the way on 400 mile plus days, often two up.

Then also in this week's MCN they now headline the VFR1200 as being the "sports tourer to have"! Atleast they've got it right for a change, but it does line up with their tendency to be inconsistent and self-contradictory. I give up.

If biking were launched tomorrow as a 'new pastime', how many would choose DCT over pulling clutch levers and kicking gears?

No doubt at all that they can. Porsche use this technology and it is increasingly seen as a performance enhancement, not simply something to make driving easier, although it will if you want to use it that way. Driving a modern high performance car with an auto that allows you to switch to manual and then make fast gear changes clutchless using your finger tips on paddles behing the steering wheel is quite an experience and you don't miss a clutch pedal! DC T makes the gear changes even faster and more precise because of the pre-engagement of the next gear.

The arguments against remind me of a similar situation in my early days of riding about ignition advance being controlled manually or automatically. As late as the 60s bikes like the AJS/Matchless 31CSR sport 650s still used manual levers to advance and retard the magneto ignition manually, some thing that goes back to the very early days of motorcycling. I've ridden them and other bikes (Velocette etc.) with manual advance/retard and it's no problem. Lots of people said they much preferred to exercise their skill and experience by having this element of manual control and didn't want automatic systems, which in those days were crude but effective mechanical devices using bob-weights which moved in or out under centrifugal force at different rotation speeds. They actually worked very well. However noone would now suggest going back to an advance/retard lever on the handlebar. In fact the extremely precise control of ignition timing allowed by modern electronic systems is a major factor in the engine performance and emission control we see today.

I don't see anything different in a manual clutch. With DCT it is simply redundant and at some point people may well think of it simply in terms of nostalgia and the "good old days" in the same way as the above example. Great for riding your old bike in a VMCC rally, but that's it. At least Honda are brave enough to take on the commercial risk at this early stage of persuading people and I think they'll succeed.

You can do clutchless upshifts and downshifts on any bike these days, and shifters that allow you to upshift without getting off the gas at all have been common for many years in racing. Same thing for slipper clutches.

You still see clutches on race bike though. Never seen the motoGP shots of Rossi's clutch lever? The way he uses it on its downshifts, especially on the last one entering in a corner? How he feathers it, modulating the engine braking?
A clutch is an incredibly important control on a motorcycle if you want to master the finer aspects of riding. If you ride your bike like you would ride a scooter, then I guess it's a different story.

With time and all the electronics getting crammed into bikes, we might very well be left without a clutch lever, even in racing. The clutch used to be used by the best riders to control rear wheel spin, but traction control now takes care of it. In supermotard, mastering the clutch was essential to the art of controlling your sideway slides. Slipper clutches have done away with that skill.

With ABS, Traction Control, ride by wire and all the new gizmos, people will be able to just grab a handful of brakes, pin the throttle open and do away with a clutch lever altogether in all circumstances. What riding skills will be left? The ability to pick a line through a series of corners? Surely that will be soon taken care of by some GPS/laser guiding technology, insuring your bike follows the safest/fastest line through a series of corners...
What will be left of motorcycling then? Just being a lot more vulnerable when getting hit by another vehicle than if you were driving an automatic car?

Personally, being involved and always striving to ride better through the mastery of all the bike controls is what make me want to ride all the time.
When the bike becomes just a means of transportation, without any riding involvement left, I'll just get a car... a convertible one I guess...

Honda has been making incredibly bland bikes over the past few years, mostly excellent bikes, but really bland (heavy, over-assisted...), car-like really...

If that is the direction motorcycling is going to follow, euro-bureaucrats can kill motorcycling for all I care...

Rant over...

I'll now go for a nice ride in the sierra, enjoying my clutch to the fullest! :-P

Sorry to mess your mail around Graeme but I've removed the image as that's another site's copyright, but I've left the link in place so it can still be seen by anyone interested.