Jump to content

Need help with my debating points, Maxitorque VS. Volvo automated manuals

Recommended Posts

I'm looking for some arguments to use in the debates I get into with defenders of the Volvo, Daimler, etc. automated single countershaft transmissions. My strategy is to argue the longer life of the multi-countershaft transmissions such as the Maxitorque and Eaton's. I had a Daimler engineer reply that the multi countershaft transmissions were built to get a shorter overall length for the short wheelbase trucks common when we had overall length limits prior to the 1982 STAA. He claimed that because length requirements were now relaxed, they could use wider bearings in their single countershaft transmission and get the same life expectancy as a multi countershaft transmission. I don't have any truck transmissions around here to measure, but found online that Scania's single countershaft transmissions had bearings in the range of 40 and 46 millimeters (almost 2 inches) wide by 70 mm. inside diameter. That struck me as bigger than the Eaton double countershaft bearings I've seen, never seen a Maxitorque apart so I don't know their bearing dimensions. Haven't been able to find any bearing dimensions for Volvo or Daimler's automated manual transmissions, both seem to have that data sewed up pretty tight.

So anybody who has seen the bearings on these transmissions or better yet has specs on them, how do they compare?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Transmitting power across a wider surface area(more cluster gears) is the reason for double/triple countershafts. If you can make the box longer and use wider gears(surface area), then the same basic function is accomplished.

I don't think it is the shaft size persay that is the weak link. Just the capabilities of the gears to transmit the power and survive without breaking.



1959 B61 Liv'n Large......................

Charter member of the "MACK PACK"


Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's my theory- no reason they couldn't design a single countershaft transmission as durable as a multi countershaft transmission, but it would end up bulkier and heavier. Volvo claims a weight of only 723 pounds for their automated manual which includes the clutch, Eaton claims 850 pounds with clutch for a fleet model 10 speed with a lower torque rating. IIRC, the Maxitorque's 9 to 18 speed transmissions weight around 650 to 800 pounds without the clutch, and Scania's manuals run around 800 pounds... They ought to last longer than Volvo's lightweight?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...