What are the differences between dry and wet dual-clutch systems?

[DiJackson]

Dry and wet dual-clutch systems differ in the following aspects: 1. Transmission efficiency: The structure of wet clutches is more complex, leading to higher energy loss. Consequently, wet dual-clutch transmissions have lower transmission efficiency, consuming more engine power and resulting in higher fuel consumption under otherwise identical conditions. 2. Response speed: Dry clutches transmit power through direct metal plate contact, providing more immediate power transfer with higher transmission ratios when plates are compressed. Wet clutches require oil as an intermediary, involving additional steps from driving plate acceleration to oil centrifugal force increase and then driven plate acceleration, resulting in slightly slower response. 3. Torque capacity: The metal friction plates in dry clutches cannot withstand excessive torque, as significant stress impacts can easily damage them. Therefore, dry clutches are only suitable for small-displacement, low-torque output vehicles. Some models even deliberately limit engine torque output in lower gears to protect the transmission clutch when using dry clutch systems.

[LaEdward]

When it comes to the difference between dry and wet dual-clutch transmissions, I think the main distinctions lie in cooling methods and performance. Dry types rely on air cooling, featuring simple structure, lightweight, and lower cost, making them common in small-displacement cars like the Volkswagen Golf and other economy models. The downside is they're prone to overheating, especially in city traffic or frequent starts, leading to faster clutch wear. Wet types are immersed in oil, which provides lubrication and cooling, allowing them to handle higher horsepower, smoother shifts, and better durability, making them suitable for high-performance cars or SUVs like the Ford Mustang. I once drove a friend's dry-type car on mountain roads, and it started shaking after a while; my own wet-type pickup has hauled cargo for five or six years without major repairs. The principle is similar—quick shifts save fuel—but wet types are more expensive and require more maintenance for oil changes. Overall, dry types save costs but have poor heat management, while wet types are more reliable but come with a higher initial investment. When buying a car, just consider your daily driving habits.

[LeTheo]

Having tried various dual-clutch transmissions, the driving experience between dry and wet types is vastly different. The dry type responds quickly and is fuel-efficient in daily use, but jerking is noticeable in traffic jams, and the clutch is prone to skipping gears or making strange noises when overheated. The wet type, immersed in oil, has excellent heat dissipation, ensuring smooth and stable gear shifts at high speeds, and remains reliable even on long-distance mountain drives. My old Hyundai with a dry clutch started shaking badly after three years of city driving and had to be repaired; meanwhile, my neighbor's Audi with a wet clutch still runs smoothly after 60,000 kilometers. Heat dissipation is the core difference: the dry type lacks oil cooling, heats up quickly, and is simpler to maintain; the wet type, protected by oil, can handle high horsepower but requires more frequent oil changes. Vehicle weight plays a big role—small cars with dry clutches are lightweight and affordable, while larger vehicles with wet clutches are robust and durable. If you frequently drive on highways or haul heavy loads, the wet type is recommended; otherwise, the dry type suffices for daily use. Regularly checking the clutch plates is crucial.

[LouisMarie]

From a cost perspective, the difference between dry and wet dual-clutch transmissions is significant. Dry types are cheaper when new, offer slightly better fuel efficiency, and require less maintenance, making them suitable for economy models. However, their clutch plates wear out and fail more easily—for example, frequent driving in congested traffic might necessitate a replacement within three years, costing thousands. Wet types have a higher initial price, commonly found in performance cars like BMWs, but they are more durable with similar fuel costs, offering long-term peace of mind. I've compared the residual values of used cars, and wet types tend to have better resale value due to their superior reliability. For maintenance, wet types require periodic fluid changes costing a few hundred dollars, while dry types are virtually maintenance-free but may incur higher overall costs. Environmental factors—dry types are prone to overheating in hot weather, increasing insurance premiums. Choosing a car: dry types are practical for tight budgets; for comfort, wet types are more cost-effective, considering usage frequency.