Automatic gear boxes...

[hattaresguy]

Now here is what a proper modern gear box can do. I would LOVE to see a stick do an ignition interrupt like that with perfect rev matching on the downshifts, in .0001 seconds or whatever it takes.

Technology marches on. This is why really, really fast cars are auto's these days.

 

[Lead Shoes]

Nothing will ever beat the feel of being connected and in total control of your vehicle. Long live manuals!

 

[cchase]

Technically, aren't these automated manuals and not an "auto" the way you mean it?

BTW, conventional "auto" transmissions have been faster than manuals for a very long time. Maybe not in a stock car, but you won't see too many of the fast guys running manuals at the drag strip.

 

[MrHorspwer]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Technology marches on. This is why really, really fast cars are auto's these days.


Except the 599XX isn't an automatic. It is an automated manual. The transmission still has a clutch and still has meshed cogs. Electro-mechanical actuators replace the driver's hands and feet.

I have to ask though, what is the benefit for circuit racing? Quicker shifts lead to lower lap times? In all but the highest echelons of GT racing, that's very doubtful. The sequential gearboxes that preceeded the automated manual are fast, cheap, simple, and reliable.

However, not everybody can step into a sequential gearbox car and knock off lighting quick upshifts and rev-matched downshifts and it would be utterly dreadful on a road going car. Ah-ha! We the real reason why manufacturers like Ferrari went to the automated manual (and later dual-clutch). The guy who spends $400,000 on a 599 shouldn't need a decade of competition experience to effectivly shift the transmission of his new car. Gosh, wouldn't that shatter some rich guy's ego?

A proper modern gearbox does exactly what an old, antique, fully dogged sequential gearbox has done for the past 50 years. Sure, it does it in .0001 second instead of .1 second, but, underneath it all, the doctor who can afford a 599 doesn't have to be Aryton Senna to drive it.

Tommy Milner working his C6.R. This is not an electronic gearbox. It is a regular mechanical sequential gearbox. Isn't it just so slow on the gear changes?!?!

 

[MrHorspwer]

Too late to edit: Above video is of Milner in his ALMS M3 GT, not a C6.R. Still a mechanical sequential gearbox though; no electronics.

 

[needsducktape]

I don't care how fast a tranny can shift.
For me its not about going faster

- Its the enjoyment you get learning each manual gearbox and being able to focus on nothing else but driving...

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: cchase
Technically, aren't these automated manuals and not an "auto" the way you mean it?

BTW, conventional "auto" transmissions have been faster than manuals for a very long time. Maybe not in a stock car, but you won't see too many of the fast guys running manuals at the drag strip.

Ding Ding Ding. Lets take my six speed LS1 VS a 4 speed auto LS1 all things equal the Six speed is faster. Once the 4 speed auto gets an after market converter...It is over. It launches harder and is just dang consistent which is the key in bracket racing.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Now here is what a proper modern gear box can do. I would LOVE to see a stick do an ignition interrupt like that with perfect rev matching on the downshifts, in .0001 seconds or whatever it takes.

Technology marches on. This is why really, really fast cars are auto's these days.


Thanks for the lesson. That's awesome that they now have street cars that shift 500 times faster than an F1 car.

Conventional manuals certainly are obsolete at the highest levels of racing. They'll become obsolete for racing on a budget when automated versions are as cheap to buy, maintain, and repair as a conventional manual.

 

[needsducktape]

Yes but... This makes my left foot very sad

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Now here is what a proper modern gear box can do. I would LOVE to see a stick do an ignition interrupt like that with perfect rev matching on the downshifts, in .0001 seconds or whatever it takes.

Technology marches on. This is why really, really fast cars are auto's these days.

Sure. But when was the last time you saw someone seriously proposing that stick is better because it's faster?

 

[SteveSRT8]

Yep, I have beaten many a faster car with a stick at the strip.

But that's all about the driver. Not the gearbox.

Frankly I have not yet grown to appreciate the very limited slice of the SMG/DSG boxes I have actually driven. While they may have been quick in a straight line they really sucked around town, a bit clunky and jerky.

 

[jcwit]

Now if I could only get my knee and hip to work as good as a manual I might return to a manual.

But hey, I had my fun years ago.

 

[hattaresguy]

Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Technology marches on. This is why really, really fast cars are auto's these days.


Except the 599XX isn't an automatic. It is an automated manual. The transmission still has a clutch and still has meshed cogs. Electro-mechanical actuators replace the driver's hands and feet.

I have to ask though, what is the benefit for circuit racing? Quicker shifts lead to lower lap times? In all but the highest echelons of GT racing, that's very doubtful. The sequential gearboxes that preceeded the automated manual are fast, cheap, simple, and reliable.

However, not everybody can step into a sequential gearbox car and knock off lighting quick upshifts and rev-matched downshifts and it would be utterly dreadful on a road going car. Ah-ha! We the real reason why manufacturers like Ferrari went to the automated manual (and later dual-clutch). The guy who spends $400,000 on a 599 shouldn't need a decade of competition experience to effectivly shift the transmission of his new car. Gosh, wouldn't that shatter some rich guy's ego?

A proper modern gearbox does exactly what an old, antique, fully dogged sequential gearbox has done for the past 50 years. Sure, it does it in .0001 second instead of .1 second, but, underneath it all, the doctor who can afford a 599 doesn't have to be Aryton Senna to drive it.

Tommy Milner working his C6.R. This is not an electronic gearbox. It is a regular mechanical sequential gearbox. Isn't it just so slow on the gear changes?!?!


Yes I know what kind of gear box the 599 has, its more closely related to a manual.

But it lacks a clutch pedal and a stick, you just get paddles, so it has about as much driver involvement as a regular put it in D and punch it auto.

The die hard manual guys should hate it since it lacks a clutch pedal.

 

[hattaresguy]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Now here is what a proper modern gear box can do. I would LOVE to see a stick do an ignition interrupt like that with perfect rev matching on the downshifts, in .0001 seconds or whatever it takes.

Technology marches on. This is why really, really fast cars are auto's these days.

Sure. But when was the last time you saw someone seriously proposing that stick is better because it's faster?


Its all over the interweb and this forum.

 

[artificialist]

I love the automated manual of my car. It was one of they key reasons I chose it.

 

[91344George]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

Frankly I have not yet grown to appreciate the very limited slice of the SMG/DSG boxes I have actually driven. While they may have been quick in a straight line they really sucked around town, a bit clunky and jerky.


My experience exactly!

Frankly for daily drivers and consumers they suck to be honest.
There is just no substitute for a well designed manual box, NONE!

 

[cchase]

Quote:

Its all over the interweb and this forum.


The reality is still that your link shows cars with manual transmissions. Your implication seems to be that these cars have transmissions in which hydraulic fluid provides a transfer of torque.

I don't disagree that transmissions that shift themselves are better at everything. But you could show just about any "slushbox" equipped car at a drag strip that can bang off shifts just as efficiently as these automated manuals (and more so). And that's been the case for years.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Sure. But when was the last time you saw someone seriously proposing that stick is better because it's faster?


Its all over the interweb and this forum.


On BITOG? I must have missed those threads. Please provide a link to one.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: cchase
The reality is still that your link shows cars with manual transmissions. Your implication seems to be that these cars have transmissions in which hydraulic fluid provides a transfer of torque.

I don't disagree that transmissions that shift themselves are better at everything. But you could show just about any "slushbox" equipped car at a drag strip that can bang off shifts just as efficiently as these automated manuals (and more so). And that's been the case for years.

Not everyone has the same definition of "manual;" some use it to mean everything other than a torque converter automatic or CVT, while others have a narrower definition.

I think that's why hattaresguy used the term "stick."

 

[andyd]

My Ranger is the first manual shift for me in over 20 yrs. It will just see occasional use.