10 replies to this topic

[desmo]

From Peter Wright's book:

"The last attempt to change the concept of selecting gear in a racing gearbox, away from the system of face-dogs was, to the best of my knowledge, the Lotus "queerbox" fitted to the T78 on occaision in 1977. Based on a principle used in the Goggomobil bubble car[!], the gears were selected by balls being forced out through holes in the shaft, into grooves in the internal bore of the gear to be driven. The arrangement resulted in a very short gear cluster, having removed the need for gear face-dogs and dog-rings and probably would worked well with a hydraulic gear change system to provide selection load. As it was, the feedback through the gear lever gave the drivers tennis elbow, and I distinctly remember the day at Snetterton when the gearbox selected a gear by itself while the engine was being warmed up. The car wandered off across the paddock, chased by the mechanics."

According to an article by Wright published in RCE, this design theoretically doesn't require a clutch to accomplish gear changes. Word of Ferrari's reportedly having an extremely compact gearbox and talk of clutchless designs from maranello as well has lead me to wonder if some development of Chapman's "queerbox" concept has finally been successfully realized. Here is a drawing of the early 1959 version:



I can't figure out from the drawing how ratios were selected, anyone?

[just me again]

I think they are using the teleskopic Inputshaft, you can see it has 2 times 4 little holes, they are for the balls in the unengaged gears so they are acting like a bearing. the engaged gear in the drawing is first ( most to the right ) were there is no hole in the inputshaft, instead there is a dogring there via the ball is engaged to another dogring inside the gearwheel on the outputshaft.

The weaknees of this box have to be the balls.

Bjørn

[Ferrari FX]

What picture?

[desmo]

This one.

[just me again]

Sorry i think i messed up my explanation, with "dogrings" i meant straight cut gears and not moving gears, although the one on the inputshaft is moving right/left when changing gear.

Nigel Roebuck is Writing in Fifth column in this weeks Autosport that this years Ferrari gearbox does without dog rings, maybe it is a "queerbox"!!! It could be possible!!

[Yelnats]

I recall an article in Race Tech or some similar mag about a new transmission that uses tiny clutches instead of dog rings. Anyone recall this article? Perhaps Ferrari is using this technology.

[MattPete]

Originally posted by Yelnats
I recall an article in Race Tech or some similar mag about a new transmission that uses tiny clutches instead of dog rings. Anyone recall this article? Perhaps Ferrari is using this technology.

Aren't synchros pretty much just clutches?

[Yelnats]

Sort of except syncros only have to absorb the inertial component of the gear train to match the gear speeds. But these tiny clutches relied on a friction facing material to transferr the entire drive load and could be shifted under power. Sorry I didn't make a note of the details at the time as I didn't buy the mag but just browsed it on the stands.

[AS110]

There was a minibike in the late 70s called the Gemini (taiwanese?)that used this system.I had to put the motor together out of a box,with no manual,it had me puzzled for a while.Very simple design,the gears freewheel on one shaft and a rod is pulled through the hollow shaft,pushing the balls up into cutouts in the gear.As mentioned a weakness is in the load on the balls,also getting the thing adjusted perfectly is a major pain.

[MRC]

My questions are how do the balls not partially engage or at least not cause too much undue friction by engaging the gears from centrifugal force? I am also guessing that perhaps wear on the balls and gear sets along with the likely tight tolerances might be a difficutly of the design??

[just me again]

Originally posted by MRC
My questions are how do the balls not partially engage or at least not cause too much undue friction by engaging the gears from centrifugal force? I am also guessing that perhaps wear on the balls and gear sets along with the likely tight tolerances might be a difficutly of the design??

I don't think it is a problem in the 59 version with the teleskopic inputshaft that the balls will partially engage. I think they will act a little like a ball bearing. If they are engageing with the inner gear on the gearweels, then they will either not touch the inputshaft at all or just touch a plain shaft with no gears, because the only gear on the shaft is engageing the selected gear.
However i think you are right with the versions with no teleskopic inputshaft. DOES ANYBODY have a drawing of a newer gearbox, or is this link the only other source

http://www.weismann....uickshifts.html

Bjørn