Talk:Sub transmission
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled[edit]
Is the sub-transmission distinct enough from the 4-wheel-drive transfer case to require its own article? Many, possibly most transfer cases have reduction gearing which qualifies as a sub-transmission built in. Also, I'm not aware of any stand-alone transmissions for passenger vehicles designed to be driven by the output of another transmission which do not also transfer driving power to multiple axles. It seems like this may be an issue of a cultural difference of terminology rather than separate mechanisms. Okto8 (talk) 17:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
RECOMMEND moving this stub-topic into the "manual transmission" article and deleting it as a stand-alone Wikipedia article. Also a DISAMBIGUATION page should be made to correctly direct readers to the correct topics. I've never done one, but the info needed would be something like:
SUBTRANSMISSION, automotive --> see "manual transmission"
SUBTRANSMISSION, electrical --> see "electrical power transmssion"
If there is agreement on this suggestion, I propose to edit the two above-listed articles to include definition of the term "subtransmission" in a manner appropriate to the given article. (For example, I noticed the "manual transmission" article discusses various types of transmissions; perhaps a paragraph on the "subtransmission" type could be added.) (BTW, the "manual transmission" article has also been flagged for numerous QC issues as well.)
As for subtransmission, electrical, I would propose to add the info/definition given by this source:
http://electrical-engineering-portal.com/basics-of-subtransmission-systems
I haven't examined the Wikipedia article, "electrical power transmission," yet, so I don't have a specific proposal on how to add "subtransmission," but I'll bet it would be readily feasible.
So, I hope I will get some feedback on this proposal. If I don't see any dissenting comments i n the next few weeks, I will probably proceed as described. It can always be undone if unacceptable -- I just hate to waste my time doing work that ends up being reverted though. (Don't we all!?!)
Eagerly awaiting input and feedback..... Thanks!
Cynthisa (talk) 08:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
P.S. Working from an iPad-- blame Steve Jobs' ghost for any/all typos....
- Sounds a reasonable way to go apart from the deleting bit. If you merge anything then leave it in the history. But this can remain as the redirector page. Also don't make the words all capitals! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)