What's Up With GM Transmission Programming?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
31,963
Location
CA
Quote:

As Photo Editor Niebuhr pointed out, many of the Cruze's transmission issues have been resolved with the TSB service. He also mentioned that it tends to stay in second gear for an unusually long time. I found that to be true too, if you gave it any more than a light throttle application. So, problem solved, right?

Well...

I drove the Cruze on the highway at actual highway speeds yesterday. I was in the number one lane (left/fast lane) and spotted a slower car ahead. I decided to pass the car on my right to get ahead of both cars. I gave the pedal a little more and not much happened. Time and distance to pass was dwindling. A little more pedal, and the Cruze slowly gained speed. Finally, I had to floor it.

A brief pause and a downshift resulted -- but only a single gear downshift. There was nowhere near the amount of power needed to pass. It was as though the Cruze was towing our Raptor. I finally gave up, slowed way down and slotted in behind the car that was on my right.
I didn't get the opportunity to drive the Cruze on the highway before the reflash, so I can't say if this is a new issue. I can say, however, that it's an issue now. In the future, I suppose I'll have to slap the gear selector to manual mode and drop the gears down a few cogs by hand.

Mark Takahashi, Associate Editor


http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/20...h.html#comments

In the recent years, a number of auto publications have criticized GM's transmission programming to be too economy-oriented. That is, the transmissions are hesitant to downshift, are unresponsive and often shift into the highest gear at the earliest opportunity. I understand that GM is doing this to maximize fuel economy, but it seems like other manufacturers are still able to obtain good fuel economy without having to resort to such horrific programming.

I've driven a few GM vehicles myself-- the current gen Malibu I4 and V6, and found the transmissions to be a bit slow to downshift, but not nearly as awful as how Inside Line describes the Cruze to be. They also had similar issues with their long-term GMC Terrain.

So, has anyone found GM's transmission programming to be exceptionally poor in their recent models, especially on their cars with smaller engines?
 
Yes.

Even back in 1999 my Buick was programmed to downshift 1 gear at a time and to upshift ASAP. After a few scares, it was re-flashed to allow 3-1 and 4-2 downshifts. Much better.

The Cruze LTZ automatic I test-drove had no problem downshifting multiple gears flooring it up an on-ramp from about 30 mph. It also had no problem running the turbo engine to redline before shifting. I didn't floor it on the interstate, however.
 
General Motors is The Heartbreak of America. I have owned 2 and will never give G.M money for one of their products.
 
Originally Posted By: The Critic
In the recent years, a number of auto publications have criticized GM's transmission programming to be too economy-oriented.


My wife's 2008 BMW 6-speed auto has a GM autobox (made in France) in it, and the programming is diabolical. It's tried to kill us a few times when it gets lost in the shift program and forgets to deliver power to the wheels. It goes into a zen trance while it meditates on which gear is the best choice.
 
I actually think the tranny programming in my focus isn't that great. I'd prefer if it was programmed and geared like the expedition is. It won't upshift into 3rd and 4th frequently unless I let up on the gas. The TCC doesn't lock up fast enough, and is too easily unlocked. I wish I had a switch to lock the TCC up. Actually I've been meaning to ask about this. Is there any reprogramming ford can do to make it upshift more aggressively?
 
I had a malibu 4cyl rental in Florida over the summer. The car was alright but my biggest gripe was the flappy paddles not being responsive. It seemed like i would hit the up paddle and then could literally hum the 1812 Overture in my head waiting for the trans to respond.
 
Originally Posted By: The Critic
Quote:

As Photo Editor Niebuhr pointed out, many of the Cruze's transmission issues have been resolved with the TSB service. He also mentioned that it tends to stay in second gear for an unusually long time. I found that to be true too, if you gave it any more than a light throttle application. So, problem solved, right?

Well...

I drove the Cruze on the highway at actual highway speeds yesterday. I was in the number one lane (left/fast lane) and spotted a slower car ahead. I decided to pass the car on my right to get ahead of both cars. I gave the pedal a little more and not much happened. Time and distance to pass was dwindling. A little more pedal, and the Cruze slowly gained speed. Finally, I had to floor it.

A brief pause and a downshift resulted -- but only a single gear downshift. There was nowhere near the amount of power needed to pass. It was as though the Cruze was towing our Raptor. I finally gave up, slowed way down and slotted in behind the car that was on my right.
I didn't get the opportunity to drive the Cruze on the highway before the reflash, so I can't say if this is a new issue. I can say, however, that it's an issue now. In the future, I suppose I'll have to slap the gear selector to manual mode and drop the gears down a few cogs by hand.

Mark Takahashi, Associate Editor


http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/20...h.html#comments

In the recent years, a number of auto publications have criticized GM's transmission programming to be too economy-oriented. That is, the transmissions are hesitant to downshift, are unresponsive and often shift into the highest gear at the earliest opportunity. I understand that GM is doing this to maximize fuel economy, but it seems like other manufacturers are still able to obtain good fuel economy without having to resort to such horrific programming.

I've driven a few GM vehicles myself-- the current gen Malibu I4 and V6, and found the transmissions to be a bit slow to downshift, but not nearly as awful as how Inside Line describes the Cruze to be. They also had similar issues with their long-term GMC Terrain.

So, has anyone found GM's transmission programming to be exceptionally poor in their recent models, especially on their cars with smaller engines?


I may be wrong but I think GM fixed this. I think the very early cars had some issues and they went back to the drawing board on the shift logic. I have not driven a new one but I for the most part thought Gm had this worked out for the most part.

My 96 Sonoma with a 4l60E is pretty darn good imo. Its a tad slow to downshift but its not bad and I have no complaints. I had a 91 S10 with the same engine and 700r transmission and it was not electronically controlled and it was terrible. Up shifted way too soon and you had to floor it to get it back down a gear. I hated to drive the truck because of it. The 91 got maybe 1 more mpg and that was because it had a 3.08 rear and the 96 has a3.42.
 
Originally Posted By: Steve S
General Motors is The Heartbreak of America. I have owned 2 and will never give G.M money for one of their products.



FRIEND!
 
Typically this is a small engine complaint.

Consumers want more economy. Then they want responsiveness. You can't have it both ways.

My absolute most favorite slushbox is in my personal 05 Silverado. 5.3 V8 with the 4L65E. Absolutely the finest stock factory programming I've ever driven. Crisp, instantly responsive and smooth as buttah!
 
On my 2005 Cadillac CTS, on sport mode, the transmission acts like a charm! BUT..

on normal operation mode, when doing 85-90 km/h and just pressing the accelerator a little bit to pass a car for example, the TCC disengages but re-engages right away/disengages/engages (makes the rpm jump up and down of 500-750 rpms) and so on until 105 km/h is reached.

They tried to reprogram 3 times the transmission with no results. I hate this because it makes the car kinda jerking a little. I have to oress a little more the accelerator and it makes the transmission downshifts and too much acceleration.
 
Originally Posted By: jaj
My wife's 2008 BMW 6-speed auto has a GM autobox (made in France) in it, and the programming is diabolical. It's tried to kill us a few times when it gets lost in the shift program and forgets to deliver power to the wheels. It goes into a zen trance while it meditates on which gear is the best choice.


Only problem here is that BMW is responsible for the programming you describe, not GM.
 
Originally Posted By: Spykem4e
on normal operation mode, when doing 85-90 km/h and just pressing the accelerator a little bit to pass a car for example, the TCC disengages but re-engages right away/disengages/engages (makes the rpm jump up and down of 500-750 rpms) and so on until 105 km/h is reached.


My Camry will do that, but only once. Seems to only happen in 5th gear, but if I give it some gas for a hill, I can feel it unlock the TCC then quickly lock it again. If I hold the course, it'll chug up the hill. If I give it more gas, it'll either unlock for good, or downshift.

I like the old-school transmission programming. My older GMs always drove great as far as the transmission goes. My '97 Dakota also drives fantastic...and even my former '07 Chrysler Town & Country drove nice, because it used an old-school style of programming. My '05 MDX is actually the other way to me...it holds onto lower gears longer than I'd prefer. My '11 Camry is way on the side of economy: it'll upshift fast and often. Despite it being a 4-cylinder, I could drive around all day and never crest 2,000 rpm. In that car, I keep the shifter over in "sequential" mode most of the time, and only allow it to upshift when I'm good and ready for it to.
 
Originally Posted By: Steve S
General Motors is The Heartbreak of America. I have owned 2 and will never give G.M money for one of their products.



Yeah, you really added to the conversation...
smirk.gif


If you don't have anything to add than don't add more of your anti-GM rants.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top