Points noted, but, and I may be in the minority, I haven't really seen much that's improved the automatic transmission since the 60's and 70's. If anything the reliability and durability have taken a major step backwards. Now all credit to GM in seeming to avoid a few of the industry wide pitfalls. You can say that there were "advancements" ..but I don't see where they've really translated into productive consumer value.
It's almost like anti-para-German Engineering. They appear to care less if it cost $10k to produce .0000000009% utilization improvement (hp/efficiency/whatever) ..but it does ultimately produce "more". My view of our advancements (those that I consider successful being taken for granted, naturally (EFI/etc.) tend to be more along the lines of improvements for the sake of obsolescence. That is, it's part of a whole culture that can't leave well enough alone. I'm sure there's also monetary motivators behind a few of them with patents expiring and whatnot ..or contract agreements to turn over OEM production rights to aftermarket production rights ..etc..etc.
That is, for whatever motivation there was to employ these advancements, they've proven more to be liabilities that need to be compensated for ..and ultimately cost more than they bring to the table.
Take the infamous Ultradrive. A new fluid was created for it over the tried and true DexIII. It was a technological marvel ..measured cc's of fluid for OD engagement ..even though OD's were not alien nor needing such sophistication ....yet complicate it they did. For what gain? It's not the same thing as having a television set with a MTBF rate of in excess of 15 years getting a remote in the evolution process. In that case R&D recovery costs are the only way to make money since the hardware is too reliable. There you've got a real motivation to "top this" from past evolutions (5.25 floppy to 3.5 floppy ..CD to DVD ..etc.).
Has there been any significant reduction in hp losses through the transmission over the past 30 years (I don't know)? I'd say that the lock up tc would be one worthy advancement in that it allowed high stalls to be employed to compensate for power ..but let the higher heat liabilities to be ignored.
Again, I'd never turn in my badge and say, "Lay me off", so I would be seeking advancements ..and even if non of merit were found ..I would produce "something".
Respectfully submitted
..but the view from a few steps back produces a few questions.
