sst shifting, no first gear?

matt ls · #1 03-07-2005, 06:42 PM

How come you can't shift into first gear when manual shifting?
Is there a way to get it into first gear?

Thanks, Matt

LincolnLS · #2 03-08-2005, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt ls

How come you can't shift into first gear when manual shifting?
Is there a way to get it into first gear?

Thanks, Matt

Apparently you are not supposed to be able to get it into 1st by design. But I have found a way that gets it into 1st every time. I don't use it much but noticed it happen so played around until I figured out what makes it go to 1st off the line in SST. I have a 2000 LS V8 Sport...Heres what I do:

Have it in D5 while at a stop
Hit the gas to make it rev up higher than 3000 RPM then switch it into SST (gotta be quick at it or yer just in 2nd as normal)
...it's in 1st
...then you can wait till whenever you want to switch it up to 2nd.

I don't think it makes much of a difference, but if you are in the proper place to want to try and get the most out of the tranny off the line...might make a diff in numbers...

CGGorman · #3 03-08-2005, 08:09 AM

Yeah, one of the fine quirks about the early (pre-'03) cars... They did that to be able to "pass" some very specific governmental CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) testing for manual shifting cars. In order to get the car to perform in the bracket they need, the secind gear start was required. In '03, they introduced the new engine and transmission which are both more efficient. Consequently, the first gear start became available to consumers.

There is no known way to disable the "feature". SCT claims they can't and Lincoln obviously won't...

In auto, the car ALWAYS starts in first. In SST, the car will start in second, but it will automatically downshift to first if the throttle is pressed beyond 60% while in second gear AND under a certain speed (Not sure what it is, though. Maybe 20mph). ...If you want to run around redlining in first, it'll let you... After that, first will be available until the vehicle's speed drops below (I think) 5 mph (though, it may be even lower than 5mph), at which point it automatically shifts to second again and you have to repeat the 60% thing.

At the 1/4 mile track, no one has been able to improve their times by using SST launches. The fastest way to get to the end of a 1/4 mile track is launching in auto and then switching it over to SST once in third to prevent the 3-4 shift during the last 100'. That assumes you have a 3.31 rear end. With the 3.58, you'll probably need the extra shift. Not sure, as I currently have the 3.31

matt ls · #4 03-08-2005, 01:34 PM

Thanks for the info. I'll have to try reving it up in D5.
If anyone else has another way, please post.

Thanks, Matt

MercCougarXR7 · #5 03-10-2005, 07:02 PM

No offense intended Matt, but do you have reading comprehension problems

?

Chris just posted that when in Drive, it automatically starts in 1st gear. And to get 1st gear while in SST, just press the throtle hard, it'll catch - and stay in 1st.

No need to rev it in Drive than switch over, you get the same effect while already in SST mode when it says it's in 2nd. Switching it from D5 while it's being reved might lead to some clunking/banging if you confuse the tranny and it's hunting for 2nd while you've told it to go to first.

Viara21 · #6 03-12-2005, 09:18 AM

The easiest way in simple terms is this:

when stopping, leave a little extra room in front of you. As soon as you are starting off, put the pedal more than 60% down for one second. The car wont jump or spin (there isn't enough power in 2nd) but it will jump right into 1st and the indicator will show 1.
sad way to have to get the car to go? yes...but then again those of us who own the v6 need every gear advantage we can get in these sadly underpowered sleds.

CGGorman · #7 03-14-2005, 07:26 AM

"Sadly underpowered"?

If it's so sad, why did you buy it? I'm not saying that it couldn't use more power, but it's FAR from being as bad as you put it. Ever driven a typical Japanese family sedan with 4-popper?

Viara21 · #8 03-14-2005, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGGorman

"Sadly underpowered"?

If it's so sad, why did you buy it? I'm not saying that it couldn't use more power, but it's FAR from being as bad as you put it. Ever driven a typical Japanese family sedan with 4-popper?

Respectfully,,, How would that be fair? If you were to compare it to most V6 models, you would be closer to reality. My company car is a Ford Taurus 3.0sohc-it will walk the lincoln hands down, no question.

as for why did we buy it? Everyone makes mistakes...

Just wish we had bought the V8.

Sean

Quik_LS · #9 03-15-2005, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viara21

Respectfully,,, How would that be fair? If you were to compare it to most V6 models, you would be closer to reality. My company car is a Ford Taurus 3.0sohc-it will walk the lincoln hands down, no question.

Sean

you must be joking right?

Taurus - 3.0L sohc - 153hp - 3400lbs
Lincoln LS - 3.0L - 232hp - 3716lbs

CGGorman · #10 03-16-2005, 08:03 AM

Sometimes people are deceived by the LS because it doesn't exibit nearly as much squat or dive as a typical sedan. That extra body motion gives the impression of speed where there may be none. Your Taurus won't do 140...not enough power or suspension to get the job done. The LS will.

Viara21 · #11 03-20-2005, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik_LS

you must be joking right?

Taurus - 3.0L sohc - 153hp - 3400lbs
Lincoln LS - 3.0L - 232hp - 3716lbs

Exactly what I thought when buying the V6 232hp wow... Reality is light to light and around town, the car is seriously lacking in the torque dept.
You guys probably think I'm talking smack, but face reality. Try it sometime...

I'm not a Taurus fan by any means, It was just a comparison. Someone said in a post that the Taurus wont do 140... Who's doing 140??.. It's the around town,light to light, cruising that kills me with the lincoln.

If any V6 owner tells you while cruising in 4th or even when in third and putting the pedal down some his car does any thing but just flat line or have to jump into a lower gear and SCREAM rpm just to move... he's a liar.

Nuff said.

Quik_LS · #12 03-20-2005, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viara21

You guys probably think I'm talking smack, but face reality. Try it sometime...

2000 Ford Taurus SE
- 0-60 8.02sec
- 1/4mile 16.106

2000 Lincoln LS V6
- 0-60 7.88sec
- 1/4mile 15.973

seems the actual numbers do not prove out your statement of "My company car is a Ford Taurus 3.0sohc-it will walk the lincoln hands down, no question" - but then you're base in reality - right?

for-duh · #13 03-21-2005, 05:56 AM

I was expecting a lot more pep out of the V8 LS than what I got. My Contour SVT is a lot more fun to drive hard, more all around power, except I'm sure the LS would win in a top speed race. The SVT Contours top out at 147mph, fastest I've had it was 130mph. The LS is great for cruising, but to drive hard, no fun.

CGGorman · #14 03-21-2005, 09:22 AM

I don't think it's fair to compare a compact tuner with a full size sport sedan. Totally different worlds.

I really don't understand where these power/handling complaints come from... Don't you people drive car beofre you buy it? If it was so underwhelming, why did you buy it?

I test drove several wildly different cars the same day as the LS...a Focus ZX3, a Mustang GT, and LS. I bought the LS. Sure, the Focus was more toss-able and the Mustang was more powerful, but you don't hear me crying foul. I knew what I was buying and I STILL love it and know I made the right decision.

Quik_LS · #15 03-21-2005, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by for-duh

The LS is great for cruising, but to drive hard, no fun.

first I ever heard this....

I autocross my LS at least once per month (twice if my wife lets me) and the car is a dream! it is one of the best balanced cars on the track.

the car is very capable - what else are you looking for?

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD