NEW GEN NSX in manual or auto

[naaman]

tell me if you think Clarkson prefers the Corvette (or any other car for that matter) after watching this?:

http://youtu.be/xgKjp1pq7iI

pay extra special attention at 3 minutes and 30 seconds in...

LOL!!!! Still, it's a Ferrari. A Ferrari DCT should be better than a GM or Ford or Toyota DCT (if there are such things). The IDEA of paddle shifting is what does not appeal to me. I'm not saying it's not "better." Also, the preference for the Corvette was in comparison to the Audi (which was also a three-pedal car).

This is thread is pretty hilarious. Computer-simulated fake three pedal systems and the still ongoing comparison of DCT technology to the button-shifted automatics in GM shitboxes.

I couldn't fathom buying a brand new digital all wheel drive hybrid electric turbocharged mid-engined japanese supercar with a stick.

If you really want that pure three pedal experience, why not buy a pure car? There are plenty of old cars out there with three pedals (or more!). The old guys have it in their head that a stick = sporty and the young guys want to look cool with their hand on the shift knob. Sure there's a dual clutch box or two out there that isn't the greatest, but they're typically attached to cars that aren't worth buying.

It sounds like Acura has confirmed there won't be a manual in the new car so this thread is moot pending some new revelation from the manufacturer.

That's exactly what I've been saying all along. There are certain must-haves when I shop for a car. A paddle-shifted transmission is a "must-not-have."

 

[N Spec]

Well, with regard to the ZR-1 vs Audi, I'd take the Corvette on looks alone without even bothering to test drive the two cars. The Audi is that ugly to me. LOL! I also happen to think the GT-R is ugly, although, I'd sooner take an R34 M-Spec or V-Spec than the 2014 Z28. Although, since owning a Camaro, I've grown fonder of the domestics in general.

Nonetheless: it's interesting that a car with less power and a three-pedal layout beat the paddle/auto ("faster") shifting, AWD, computer aided car. Even though it was a marginal victory, it goes to show that there is much more to going fast than eliminating shift lag/human error/obsolete technology, and that driver involvement doesn't necessarily come at the cost of speed (the racecar driver kept noting that he felt "more involved" with the Chevy than he did with the Nissan). In other words, on paper, the GT-R is "better" in the same way that a DCT Ferrari is "better" than a three-pedal Corvette (or NSX or whatever). Yet, the Camaro manages to remain competitive on the track, where absolute performance is the only thing that matters.

I agree with your assessment of the R8. It's just not sleek and low slung enough for me to be considered a true sports car. The shape is more elemental like the 911 or Cayman, where they are closer to circles versus the mean wedge shape. Basic, elemental shapes just do not look good or dramatic. Think about why all legitimate typeface or font do not use actual circles or squares in their geometry. It's actually harder to read words if they are circles or squares.

I think the Camaro beat the GTR simply because it has better tech. The specs they described were quite amazing and it definitely has better brakes and more torque. However, if you put the vehicle in the hands of Joe Guy, I believe the GTR would have won by a much greater margin. That is the difference between the GTR and a traditional FR setup in the hands of a decent driver and a professional driver.

 

[BD]

I always thought R8 is one of the ugliest mid engine car ever made, and I stand by my statement/opinion.

I still can't believe people are still running around on the Internet trashing the new NSX for "copying" the R8. People are freaking blind!

 

[naaman]

I agree with your assessment of the R8. It's just not sleek and low slung enough for me to be considered a true sports car. The shape is more elemental like the 911 or Cayman, where they are closer to circles versus the mean wedge shape. Basic, elemental shapes just do not look good or dramatic. Think about why all legitimate typeface or font do not use actual circles or squares in their geometry. It's actually harder to read words if they are circles or squares.

I think the Camaro beat the GTR simply because it has better tech. The specs they described were quite amazing and it definitely has better brakes and more torque. However, if you put the vehicle in the hands of Joe Guy, I believe the GTR would have won by a much greater margin. That is the difference between the GTR and a traditional FR setup in the hands of a decent driver and a professional driver.

Well, what you're saying supports the idea that a paddle shifter is only faster for those who don't know how to properly drive a "true" manual. That is, if you reduce the car's reliance on the driver for performance, then it will be faster. I'm not actually saying this is false, but obviously, if the "magic paddles" made the GT-R faster, then by comparison to the Camaro, if the GT-R had a three-pedal set up, it would have been woefully outclassed all together (assuming that the paddles are THAT much faster than hand/foot shifting), which would mean that the GT-R "ain't all that" to begin with.

 

[JD Cross]

Rumor came out late last week that a 3 pedal version of a mid-engine sports car is coming from Honda. Rolled at vtec.net is also making the same noise. Get a load of this. The car is supposed to use a Gen 2 NSX transverse engine chassis. This is the original chassis for the Gen 2 but was later revised for longitudinal engine mount. So now that Honda already have the MR transverse engine chassis, they will use it as the basis for the so called next generation "S2000".

There are multiple rumors flying most of them are saying 2.0L Turbo with around 350 Hp. Some reported close to 400Hp with the hybrid. RWD only, hence hybrid version will only power rear wheel. 6 speed manual and DCT available. My take based on a compilation of what I gathered is that the Hybrid will make closer to 400hp and will be mated to DCT. Whereas the non-hybrid variant will be available with a manual trans. This more affordable mid engine car will use some existing parts (presumably from Gen 1 NSX) to save cost compared to the NSX 2. I can see Honda carry over the 6 speed from the Gen 1 NSX to this car.

Price range from $60-$75K.

If that doesn't float your boat, then Google Cayman GT4. 1-2 years away sporting the same philosophy as the 911 GT3, but applied to the Cayman. It will be exciting time in a few years getting to decide what to buy.

It's conceivable Honda could put out a 2 liter 4 cylinder turbo version of the new NSX
A 4 cylinder would be longer than a V6 so a transverse install would be a logical move.
It would be a way to spread the development costs of the new NSX chassis over a larger volume and wouldn't cannibalize NSX sales or prices.
I guess we'll find out in 3-4 years.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, what you're saying supports the idea that a paddle shifter is only faster for those who don't know how to properly drive a "true" manual. That is, if you reduce the car's reliance on the driver for performance, then it will be faster. I'm not actually saying this is false, but obviously, if the "magic paddles" made the GT-R faster, then by comparison to the Camaro, if the GT-R had a three-pedal set up, it would have been woefully outclassed all together (assuming that the paddles are THAT much faster than hand/foot shifting), which would mean that the GT-R "ain't all that" to begin with.

Are we possibly overlooking that the Camaro has a 7 liter engine compared to the GTR 3. 8 liter turbo?
If Nissan put a 7 liter NA V8 in a GTR would there be any comparison?
GM is getting about 80 hp per liter NA.
I suspect Nissan would get 110 hp + per liter with an OHC direct injected engine

 

[fastaussie]

not only are most people overlooking the fact that it is a 7.0 litre monster engine (almost twice the size of the GTR, literally)in the Camaro, but the fact that the new Z28 is literally a track car. my good mate Randy Pobst has driven the car quite a bit, and he'll be the first one to tell you. it is completely built as a track day car. the list of components speak for themselves. although, i'm not a fan of the GTR anyway...

- - - Updated - - -

Rumor came out late last week that a 3 pedal version of a mid-engine sports car is coming from Honda. Rolled at vtec.net is also making the same noise. Get a load of this. The car is supposed to use a Gen 2 NSX transverse engine chassis. This is the original chassis for the Gen 2 but was later revised for longitudinal engine mount. So now that Honda already have the MR transverse engine chassis, they will use it as the basis for the so called next generation "S2000".

There are multiple rumors flying most of them are saying 2.0L Turbo with around 350 Hp. Some reported close to 400Hp with the hybrid. RWD only, hence hybrid version will only power rear wheel. 6 speed manual and DCT available. My take based on a compilation of what I gathered is that the Hybrid will make closer to 400hp and will be mated to DCT. Whereas the non-hybrid variant will be available with a manual trans. This more affordable mid engine car will use some existing parts (presumably from Gen 1 NSX) to save cost compared to the NSX 2. I can see Honda carry over the 6 speed from the Gen 1 NSX to this car.

Price range from $60-$75K.

If that doesn't float your boat, then Google Cayman GT4. 1-2 years away sporting the same philosophy as the 911 GT3, but applied to the Cayman. It will be exciting time in a few years getting to decide what to buy.

a light weight, mid engine, RWD, DTC, 350-400hp car from Honda for $60k to $75k could be sickening. interesting to see what happens with that. a 2.0 litre turbo 4 sounds like it'd be a bit peaky however. should be a piece of cake for Honda though, Lotus was producing over 300 from their little 2.2 turbo 4-banger 20 years ago.

I can say from experience driving a Cayman R, that it's a wicked little machine. the only thing it needs is more power. the philosophy is definitely right with that car...

 

[stuntman]

The Z28 is a Porsche GT3 equivalent and maybe a bit more hardcore. It's 7L motor was from the C6 Z06 but you can't blindly look at engine displacement when the GTR is putting close to 500hp to the ground while the Camaro is a bit over 500hp at the crank and has 305 R-comps all around, which is wider than the GTR's rear tire. It's quite impressive and cool that GM actually built such a car. Now the C7 Z06 looks like a monster.

 

[N Spec]

I always thought R8 is one of the ugliest mid engine car ever made, and I stand by my statement/opinion.

I still can't believe people are still running around on the Internet trashing the new NSX for "copying" the R8. People are freaking blind!

View attachment 112504

It's because the Audi clout is much greater than Acura.

The NSX in pure physical form is already leaps beyond the R8 IMO. The tech they are offering is better. The only way the R8 would be able to compete is receive a complete overhaul in design/appearance, but I've yet to see a super low slung German sports car besides the Carrera GT/918 variants. Also the V10 from the Huracan would help also, but why not just stick to the original???

- - - Updated - - -

Well, what you're saying supports the idea that a paddle shifter is only faster for those who don't know how to properly drive a "true" manual. That is, if you reduce the car's reliance on the driver for performance, then it will be faster. I'm not actually saying this is false, but obviously, if the "magic paddles" made the GT-R faster, then by comparison to the Camaro, if the GT-R had a three-pedal set up, it would have been woefully outclassed all together (assuming that the paddles are THAT much faster than hand/foot shifting), which would mean that the GT-R "ain't all that" to begin with.

Well, I think if Nissan offered a manual or GM offered a DCT for the Z28, you would find that the DCT cars would be faster than the manual cars of the same model in the hands of a pro racer still. You provided a good argument, but again, the Z28 simply has a better package. It's got gobs of torque on tap, no turbo lag, and less understeer with better brakes. The suspension is designed for the track and the tires were a big factor too. Even the driver admitted that.

- - - Updated - - -

a light weight, mid engine, RWD, DTC, 350-400hp car from Honda for $60k to $75k could be sickening. interesting to see what happens with that. a 2.0 litre turbo 4 sounds like it'd be a bit peaky however. should be a piece of cake for Honda though, Lotus was producing over 300 from their little 2.2 turbo 4-banger 20 years ago.

That would be glorious! They could actually just use a variant of the new Type R engine. Then Toyota could revive the MR2 line and make a proper successor to the SW20.

 

[naaman]

not only are most people overlooking the fact that it is a 7.0 litre monster engine (almost twice the size of the GTR, literally)in the Camaro, but the fact that the new Z28 is literally a track car. my good mate Randy Pobst has driven the car quite a bit, and he'll be the first one to tell you. it is completely built as a track day car. the list of components speak for themselves. although, i'm not a fan of the GTR anyway...
...

The GT-R was the Track Edition, not the base model.

What does the engine size matter?
Z/28: 505 HP/6100rpm, 481 lb.ft/4800 rpm, 3837 lbs
GR-R: 545 HP/6400rpm, 463 lb.ft/3200-5800 rpm, 3851 lbs

The turbos in the Nissan are capable of bringing on power much sooner than the LS7, with its cam-in-block, push-rod design. What I seen in this case, is simply technology getting in the way of the driver ("wating on understeer," etc). But again, if we fall back to the logic that the Camaro is a "track car" and therefore it should have been faster, then we can also use the same logic in regards to the Ferrari and say "well, it's a Ferrari, its supposed to be fast." You'll note, however, that both drivers of the Z and the GT-R said that the Z was "more involved/more fun" to drive.

It may also be worth considering that the GT-R will out accelerate a 458 (due to having AWD and the paddles, although, the Ferrari does have launch control), yet is was no faster round the track. Or to put it another way, the paddles only allowed it to compete with the Camaro, since they make "so much" difference to speed. Based on the "pros" presented in this thread for paddles, we can logically argue that with paddles, the Camaro would have utterly mopped the floor with the GT-R, correct?

And, no: I'm not suggesting that the Camaro would be faster around the track than a 458... although... if we gave the Chevy a DCT, maybe the magic paddles would shave 5-10 seconds off... :tongue:


EDIT:

Just curious: what data is available that will allow us to make a proper comparison between a traditional manual, an SMG/Automatic/Tiptronic, and DCT? For example, how much time did the F1 gearbox in the 360 shave off the 1/4 mile or 0-60 times? I'm not sure I've ever seen data on that, but the best way to compare would be with two otherwise identical cars. I do remember reading that Mario Andretti thought that the paddle shifters (some 10 or more years ago, mind you) shifted "too slowly" for his taste (at .150 seconds, if memory serves), which at the time, I think I read in the article that he could clutch/shift faster than the computer could.

Found it: 150ms for the F1 gearbox, 20ms for Mario Andretti hand/foot shifting:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...onvertibles_comparison/interior_handling.html

 

[fastaussie]

the GTR is very much a street car, even the track edition. the 458 is also a street car. the Challenge, Scuderia, and the Speciale are the real track versions of the mid engine Ferrari's, not the base models. arguably, the Z28 is a complete track car as it comes from the factory, the only thing missing is a roll cage. that's what I mean. now I've not driven it, that's just what I hear.

as far as the GTR, I've never liked the car to begin with. not many good drivers I know like it either. it has a high center of gravity, too soft suspension, and heaps too much weight for serious track use, in my opinion. the electronics system is another story all together. and reliability-wise, it's rather unimpressive if you're constantly beating on it. let's just say it's very un-Japanese in that regard for owners of a particular car named the NSX.

as far as the F1 system in the 360, it's not even comparable to the 430, which in turn is not even comparable to the 458. it was total junk, I've driven the F1 systems in the 355's and 360's and they were bloody horrible. absolutely no comparison to what's on the market these days. and I would fully expect Honda's DCT system in the new NSX to be even better than Ferrari's, as that system has already been on the market for 4 years now.

 

[N Spec]

Found it: 150ms for the F1 gearbox, 20ms for Mario Andretti hand/foot shifting:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...onvertibles_comparison/interior_handling.html

How many drivers can consistently shift at 20ms tho? The machine is consistent and will not waver like the human mind. Even Andretti said, it's the way to go though.

Also, don't forget about the tires. The driver even said the Z28 had stickier/better tires.

 

[fastaussie]

ahh yes, I did completely forget about the tires. those round black things alone can make all the difference, and do...


interestingly, here's a quote from AutoGuide.com's review of the 2015 Lamborghini Huracan:

"Purists may be disappointed to discover there is no manual. Thankfully, there’s also no reason to care. Along with the fact that nobody orders them, Lamborghini says it would essentially be impossible to engineer all of the adjustable parameters of the car around one factor that’s not within the vehicle’s control.

Trust me, after feeling the immense capability of the Huracán on a track, given the opportunity, there isn’t a soul on this planet who would say a stick shift would improve the experience."

 

[naaman]

"The one factor that's not within the vehicle's control..."

So, essentially, the car is the real driver in the Lambo, the person just tells it where it wants to go and how quickly it wants to get there...

As for the comparison between two identical cars one with stick, the other with DCT...
Here's one (highlighting the case for elimination of human error):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXah9L5ShtI

- - - Updated - - -

How many drivers can consistently shift at 20ms tho? The machine is consistent and will not waver like the human mind. Even Andretti said, it's the way to go though.

Also, don't forget about the tires. The driver even said the Z28 had stickier/better tires.

And it's cheaper than the GT-R to boot!

So, are we saying that tires (which are cheaper than a DCT) can overcome the obsolecence of stick and pedal technology (track speed/drivability/total performance envelope depends more on tires than on "technology;" and even a fallible human, with magic tires is better than a DCT with "less magical" rubber). So, then, what about a comparison of the 458's shoes to other cars? How can we eliminate the tires as the "true" reason for its majestic performance? Just how much of the 458's prowess are we attributing to the DCT (and its effect on the driving experience/confidence inspiration/etc)?

 

[stuntman]

Just curious: what data is available that will allow us to make a proper comparison between a traditional manual, an SMG/Automatic/Tiptronic, and DCT? For example, how much time did the F1 gearbox in the 360 shave off the 1/4 mile or 0-60 times? I'm not sure I've ever seen data on that, but the best way to compare would be with two otherwise identical cars. I do remember reading that Mario Andretti thought that the paddle shifters (some 10 or more years ago, mind you) shifted "too slowly" for his taste (at .150 seconds, if memory serves), which at the time, I think I read in the article that he could clutch/shift faster than the computer could.

Found it: 150ms for the F1 gearbox, 20ms for Mario Andretti hand/foot shifting:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...onvertibles_comparison/interior_handling.html

Apples to oranges. They were referring to Mario's Hewland dog-ring gearbox in his F1 car. Clutchless upshifts. A synchronized street transmission is A LOT slower than 150ms.

You also need to take into consideration what "SMG/DCT" gearbox you're talking about. 360 Modenas and E46 M3's (250m/s SMG) basically keep a stock manual and uses hydraulic pistons to replace the linkages for the clutch and shifter, they are very archaic. Dual-clutch transmissions are a whole different animal designed from the ground-up with odd gears on one clutch and even gears on another clutch shaft that allows seamless power delivery during upshifts. It's worlds faster than anything else.

as far as the GTR, I've never liked the car to begin with. not many good drivers I know like it either. it has a high center of gravity, too soft suspension, and heaps too much weight for serious track use, in my opinion. the electronics system is another story all together. and reliability-wise, it's rather unimpressive if you're constantly beating on it. let's just say it's very un-Japanese in that regard for owners of a particular car named the NSX.

as far as the F1 system in the 360, it's not even comparable to the 430, which in turn is not even comparable to the 458. it was total junk, I've driven the F1 systems in the 355's and 360's and they were bloody horrible. absolutely no comparison to what's on the market these days. and I would fully expect Honda's DCT system in the new NSX to be even better than Ferrari's, as that system has already been on the market for 4 years now.

I've had the fortune to drive every generation GTR on track: R32, R33, R34, R35. They are a different driving experience and engaging in a different way. Its somewhat bothersome to read posts by people who have either never driven a GTR and criticizes the car based on what they read in magazines and on the internet by separately opinionated journalists, as well as the elitist attitude of the 'purists'. For me, GTRs are a ton of fun, crazy fast, and like I said before, still takes a lot of talent and inputs by someone who knows what they are doing to extract the last 10% out of the car.

Do you know the center of gravity height? It hardly has soft suspension and its about the same weight as the Z28. From press articles, almost the entire transaxle is below the wheel center height which is impressive and the GTR is just an impressive engineering exercise from it's aero, to mechanical grip, to electronics. I really like it.

 

[naaman]

Apples to oranges. They were referring to Mario's Hewland dog-ring gearbox in his F1 car. Clutchless upshifts. A synchronized street transmission is A LOT slower than 150ms.

You also need to take into consideration what "SMG/DCT" gearbox you're talking about. 360 Modenas and E46 M3's (250m/s SMG) basically keep a stock manual and uses hydraulic pistons to replace the linkages for the clutch and shifter, they are very archaic. Dual-clutch transmissions are a whole different animal designed from the ground-up with odd gears on one clutch and even gears on another clutch shaft that allows seamless power delivery during upshifts. It's worlds faster than anything else.


I've had the fortune to drive every generation GTR on track: R32, R33, R34, R35. They are a different driving experience and engaging in a different way. Its somewhat bothersome to read posts by people who have either never driven a GTR and criticizes the car based on what they read in magazines and on the internet by separately opinionated journalists, as well as the elitist attitude of the 'purists'. For me, GTRs are a ton of fun, crazy fast, and like I said before, still takes a lot of talent and inputs by someone who knows what they are doing to extract the last 10% out of the car.

Do you know the center of gravity height? It hardly has soft suspension and its about the same weight as the Z28. From press articles, almost the entire transaxle is below the wheel center height which is impressive and the GTR is just an impressive engineering exercise from it's aero, to mechanical grip, to electronics. I really like it.

I'm making no claims about the GT-R other than that it is ugly. I also assert that paddle shifting (regardless of the clutch/transmission mechanism operated) is a less fun activity than hand/foot shifting. I am hesitant to bemoan electronics since I am not sure to what degree I rely on ABS and TCS when I am pushing my car around a canyon... However, that is as much technology as my current car has.

Of course, I do realize that the F1/SMG/DCT are all different. I was simply hoping to find info from the past which might shed light on this present question (from a time when cars were offered with either or). If the DCT is truly seamless, then is it accurate to say that there is zero loss of acceleration between gears? The video I posted shows a clear loss of ground during the 2-3 shift for the manual driver, but further shifts seem to give up nothing to the DCT.

 

[butter78]

I'm making no claims about the GT-R other than that it is ugly. I also assert that paddle shifting (regardless of the clutch/transmission mechanism operated) is a less fun activity than hand/foot shifting. I am hesitant to bemoan electronics since I am not sure to what degree I rely on ABS and TCS when I am pushing my car around a canyon... However, that is as much technology as my current car has.

Of course, I do realize that the F1/SMG/DCT are all different. I was simply hoping to find info from the past which might shed light on this present question (from a time when cars were offered with either or). If the DCT is truly seamless, then is it accurate to say that there is zero loss of acceleration between gears? The video I posted shows a clear loss of ground during the 2-3 shift for the manual driver, but further shifts seem to give up nothing to the DCT.

There is less loss of acceleration not zero. I love my three pedals and shifter but there's just no way a human is going to shift faster than a DCT or PDK. The Porsche PDK is excellent. GTR has the BEST DCT in the market period and it's as close to zero acceleration loss you're gonna get. Now the Murci's I've driven/been in with the F1 style shifter and SCT can be outperformed by a human. You can feel the jerk between shifts. I think all the lambos and even the Aventador had this SCT. The Huracan is the first to sport DCT for lambos.

 

[Craigy]

I was simply hoping to find info from the past which might shed light on this present question (from a time when cars were offered with either or). If the DCT is truly seamless, then is it accurate to say that there is zero loss of acceleration between gears? The video I posted shows a clear loss of ground during the 2-3 shift for the manual driver, but further shifts seem to give up nothing to the DCT.

In my DCT M3, I have zero loss of acceleration. The moment I pull the paddle the next gear is instantly selected with a crisp bite, almost a punch into the next gear. If there is any delay, it is certainly not discernible like the lambo boxes and the old Ferrari F1 boxes.

The new boxes McLaren is putting out will actually harvest the extra momentum of the RPM drop between shifts to give an extra surge of power with each shift. So there's actually an additional acceleration during shifts, a net gain instead of a momentary loss.

 

[fastaussie]

Stuntman, I've driven the GTR heaps, and more importantly, back-to-back with the Porsche 911 Turbo S, Ferrari 458, Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera, McLaren MP4, etc. same track, same day. personally i'm just not a fan of the car. in comparison to those other cars mentioned, I do not find the GTR to be on the same level of pure speed and exhilaration. this is only my opinion, which emulates the opinions of some of my good friends who have also driven these types of cars extensively at the track. any seriously good sports car (and the GTR is absolutely one of them) requires serious driver skill to be piloted anywhere near its limit, regardless of the transmission it carries, that is just fact. anyone thinking you can get in a DCT car and immediately take it to the handling limit is dreaming. if anything, these transmissions raise the performance limit of the car, that is why every manufacturer is now installing them, but the car still needs a driver.

Do you know the center of gravity height? It hardly has soft suspension and its about the same weight as the Z28. From press articles, almost the entire transaxle is below the wheel center height which is impressive and the GTR is just an impressive engineering exercise from it's aero, to mechanical grip, to electronics. I really like it.

I have no idea the actual numbers you're referring to, just the difference you feel when getting out of one car and getting into another. then you can feel the weight transfer, body roll, acceleration differences, etc. the GTR is definitely an impressive automobile, but I'd give the thumbs up to the 911 Turbo S all day. I find it does everything the extremely capable GTR does about 15% better or more. again, this is only my opinion.

the GTR is about the same weight as the Z28, which is to say that they're both very heavy. again, this is all in comparison to the 458, or MP4, which are both much lighter cars, with more horsepower, that sit lower to the ground, with less suspension movement, etc.

"The one factor that's not within the vehicle's control..."

So, essentially, the car is the real driver in the Lambo, the person just tells it where it wants to go and how quickly it wants to get there...

I believe what Lamborghini is referring to are things like "launch control" and so on. if the clutch isn't being operated by the car's computer, then there's no way for it to be optimum every time. obviously. you guys seem way, way too hung up on thinking the car will drive itself. it doesn't, trust me.

my point in the last few posts has been, that a lot of people (including myself) would never have dreamed of not wanting a pure manual car until we drove the 458, or the newer Porsche PDK systems, etc. they are so good now, that until you drive one, you may not really understand. like I said earlier, I wouldn't even want a 458 with a clutch. no need, it would honestly detract from the car. that said, I would not want my old school NSX in anything other than a 3-pedal car. the personality of the cars would be very different in either case. again boys, this is only my opinion.

So, are we saying that tires (which are cheaper than a DCT) can overcome the obsolecence of stick and pedal technology (track speed/drivability/total performance envelope depends more on tires than on "technology;" and even a fallible human, with magic tires is better than a DCT with "less magical" rubber). So, then, what about a comparison of the 458's shoes to other cars? How can we eliminate the tires as the "true" reason for its majestic performance? Just how much of the 458's prowess are we attributing to the DCT (and its effect on the driving experience/confidence inspiration/etc)?

mate, race rubber is race rubber, there is no contest between it and a street tire. the difference in grip is monumental and can easily amount to seconds a lap.

the only way to eliminate tires as a factor is to test all of said cars on identical tires on the same track, same day. no other way.

as far as the 458. what makes that car so ridiculously good, is Ferrari...

 

[naaman]

Now, the driver said that the tires "felt like slicks" but we know that they are in fact, street tires. They're just (apparently) awesome street tires. And they are the stock tires that come with the car. I think, in this case, it's not fair to say "well the Camaro has better tires," since they are not an upgrade or aftermarket selection. Nissan could just as easily have put better/different tires on the GT-R. It would be like saying "well, the GT-R has a DCT" except that any car can run any tires, so the GT-R could have been equipped from the factory with better tires, no problem.

 

[jwmelvin]

Now, the driver said that the tires "felt like slicks" but we know that they are in fact, street tires. They're just (apparently) awesome street tires.

I would not say they are street tires. They are no different than other DOT-approved r-compound tires with minimal tread.
http://www.pirelli.com/tyre/ww/en/car/sheet-motorsport/pzero_trofeo_r.html

 

[2slow2speed]

Now, the driver said that the tires "felt like slicks" but we know that they are in fact, street tires. They're just (apparently) awesome street tires. And they are the stock tires that come with the car. I think, in this case, it's not fair to say "well the Camaro has better tires," since they are not an upgrade or aftermarket selection. Nissan could just as easily have put better/different tires on the GT-R. It would be like saying "well, the GT-R has a DCT" except that any car can run any tires, so the GT-R could have been equipped from the factory with better tires, no problem.

FWIW, it's clear that you are purely bench racing given the fact that you don't seem to know the differences between a regular street tire and a R-compound tire like the Pirelli Trofeo's that are equipped on the Camaro Z28.

Anyone who has taken any kind of vehicle to the track will know that simple things like tire pressures, alignment specs, brake pad compounds and tires will make a difference in laptimes.

Laptimes published in magazines should be taken with a grain of salt and should just be used to get a general idea of the performance of vehicles given that they don't publish detailed information regarding amount of fuel in the tank, tire pressures nor alignment specs nor the number of flying laps that were done prior to getting the best laptime.

Different vehicles perform differently at different tracks, just because a vehicle happens to do better at one racetrack on a particular day does not guarantee that same vehicle will perform better at a different racetrack.

 

[butter78]

FWIW, it's clear that you are purely bench racing given the fact that you don't seem to know the differences between a regular street tire and a R-compound tire like the Pirelli Trofeo's that are equipped on the Camaro Z28.

Anyone who has taken any kind of vehicle to the track will know that simple things like tire pressures, alignment specs, brake pad compounds and tires will make a difference in laptimes.

Laptimes published in magazines should be taken with a grain of salt and should just be used to get a general idea of the performance of vehicles given that they don't publish detailed information regarding amount of fuel in the tank, tire pressures nor alignment specs nor the number of flying laps that were done prior to getting the best laptime.

Different vehicles perform differently at different tracks, just because a vehicle happens to do better at one racetrack on a particular day does not guarantee that same vehicle will perform better at a different racetrack.

+1 very accurate info.

 

[naaman]

Fair enough. I'm simply saying that standard equipment compared versus standard equipment is as fair a comparison as can be had. When we start saying "well if the other car had this or that" then it ruins the comparison. And, no, I do not know every tire brand/model/etc by name. So when you say "Trofeo" or "P Zero" it really means nothing to me unless I look up the specs on the tire. But to say that DCT is the ultimate advancment in "driver's car" technology, and then say "well, the 'nferior' car had better tires; that's why it was so fast" is attributing more credit to the DCT than it deserves, when clearly, tires will make a car faster than a transmission will. And any car can get tires with zero engineering/modification work.

 

[fastaussie]

tires will make a car faster than a transmission will.

absolutely, especially when you are talking racing compound rubber with barely enough tread to be deemed DOT approved. there are in fact DOT treaded tires that have just as much grip as slicks.

transmissions only change gears every so often, tires are in contact with the ground 100% of the time.

the most important component of any vehicle are the tires, they are the only part of the vehicle touching the ground. next, comes the suspension, then comes the engine. without good tires and quality suspension, all the power in the world won't do you any good...

 

[stuntman]

Stuntman, I've driven the GTR heaps, and more importantly, back-to-back with the Porsche 911 Turbo S, Ferrari 458, Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera, McLaren MP4, etc. same track, same day. personally i'm just not a fan of the car. in comparison to those other cars mentioned, I do not find the GTR to be on the same level of pure speed and exhilaration. this is only my opinion, which emulates the opinions of some of my good friends who have also driven these types of cars extensively at the track. any seriously good sports car (and the GTR is absolutely one of them) requires serious driver skill to be piloted anywhere near its limit, regardless of the transmission it carries, that is just fact. anyone thinking you can get in a DCT car and immediately take it to the handling limit is dreaming. if anything, these transmissions raise the performance limit of the car, that is why every manufacturer is now installing them, but the car still needs a driver.

While 'pureness' and exhilaration are subjective, the GTR and Porsche 911 Turbo/S keep flip flopping back and fourth on which one is faster. At the end of the day, the GTR is in the same objective performance levels of the Turbo/S, 458, 12C, Superlegerra, etc... and the GTR does require 'serious driver skill' to drive it at its true limit.

DCT really does not have much to do with the handling limit of the car. I agree that it is hands down faster than a 3-pedal stick and far more consistent and allowing the driver to drive at a higher limit consistently.

absolutely, especially when you are talking racing compound rubber with barely enough tread to be deemed DOT approved. there are in fact DOT treaded tires that have just as much grip as slicks.

transmissions only change gears every so often, tires are in contact with the ground 100% of the time.

the most important component of any vehicle are the tires, they are the only part of the vehicle touching the ground. next, comes the suspension, then comes the engine. without good tires and quality suspension, all the power in the world won't do you any good...

The GTR, Viper ACR-X, Z28, Boss 302, and many other cars have extremely sticky R-compound tires from the factory. Albeit, the Z28's Corsa R is grippier than the GTR's Dunlop Sport Maxx. Both are incredible tires and probably slightly grippier than Michelin PSS's.