fastaussie
Suspended
the EVO is gone, discontinued. but for now there are heaps of Vipers around, they can't even pay people to take those things off the lot...
NEW GEN NSX in manual or auto
- Thread starter GlowNSX
- Start date
Interesting. What's so great about the Viper? It's having a really hard time right now compared with it's typical competitors (especially the ZR-1). For Viper money, you could certainly realize a GT-R or high end 911 with PDK.
Its an awesome car. That's why
The ACR-X or "TA" (or whatever their track-package is these days) is quite a bit faster than the regular car and more on the lines of the ZR1. However the new Z06 is pretty spectacular in every regard. Looking forward to see what Dodge does to the Viper in response.
I find that the Viper has a lot of appeal to a driver like me, but if I'm honest, I'd rather buy a Corvette, if we're talking new cars. Although, a 500 hp SRT-10 coupe, or even the later versions of the 8.3L convertible are quite appealing. The new one has grown on me, but I still think that both the Viper and Corvette of today look too much like Ferraris. The don't look "American" enough. The C5 and C3 are generally my favorite body styles for Corvette. I like the SRT-10 (in Copperhead Orange) and the 96+ GTS (in Metallic Blue with white stripes) for the Vipers.
But a GPW NSX coupe trumps all!
But a GPW NSX coupe trumps all!
Last edited:
Yesterday I had a chance to participate in the Corvete Track Experience (www.corvettetrackexperience.com) event held at Sonoma Raceway by the folks from GM.
The track configuration that was run was the NASCAR chute, long T7 and the short T11. So that took out some of the best turns of the track (T5 - T6 Carrousel - short T7 and - T11) that would have shed a bit more light on the handling capabilities of the car
Got to drive 3 different C7's with the Z51 package. The first 2 cars had the standard non-adjustable Z51 suspension the 3rd car had the optional Magnetorheological Suspension.
Since there were only about 8-10 manual transmission cars I got stuck driving the automatic transmission cars in all 3 sessions. I drove the vehicles with the traction control set to track mode, and kept the traction control enabled. I wasn't too impressed with neither the 1st or the 2nd cars that I drove in the first 2 sessions since the suspension felt too soft for a track with significant elevation and camber transitions like Infineon (err Sonoma).
On my 3rd session I was able to get into a C7 with the Z51 package that had the optional Magnetorheological Suspension. That made a huge amount of difference since the car would transition without any hesitation or 2nd order effects (like the car shifting weight due to the car not settling all at once). The combination of the E-diff and the Magnetorheological Suspension made putting down the power more predictable and easier to modulate the throttle to get the car to do what I wanted.
Given the fact that the cars were running stock alignment specs and pretty much the stock run flat MPSS's set at 29~30F/29R the car with the Magnetorheological Suspension felt very planted.
The engine was torquey, the brakes were really good as well. Even the standard seats were pretty decent, the optional Competition Seat that is available makes the crappy seats issue of the previous model years a non-issue. Build quality of the cars was pretty good as well, good material as well as fit and finish. A big progress in the interior compared to the C6.
Chevy's policy of not voiding warranties when their cars are tracked is a plus as well
.
The C7 was the first automatic/paddle shift car that I've driven at Sonoma (Infineon/Sears Point), didn't really miss the good old stick and clutch on the car given the unfamiliarity of the car. (Very familiar with the track)
The Adjustable suspension of the car was the same type that was used by Ferrari on the F458 and in some ways it felt similar when going through the transitions. The main difference was in power delivery to the ground on corner exit, a MR car like the F458 would be better at putting down power than the C7 Z51 car that also makes use of an E-diff.
Given that the Acura MDX with the Sports Suspension used the Magnetorheological Shocks that were designed by Delphi (GM), perhaps the NSX 2.0 will use a similar technology as well to enhance the handling of the vehicle as well as keeping the car civil on rough roads.
Given that the C7 is such a good car, it's no surprise that folks don't want to get Vipers.
Interested in getting a chance to play around with a C7 Z06 when they come out
The track configuration that was run was the NASCAR chute, long T7 and the short T11. So that took out some of the best turns of the track (T5 - T6 Carrousel - short T7 and - T11) that would have shed a bit more light on the handling capabilities of the car
Got to drive 3 different C7's with the Z51 package. The first 2 cars had the standard non-adjustable Z51 suspension the 3rd car had the optional Magnetorheological Suspension.
Since there were only about 8-10 manual transmission cars I got stuck driving the automatic transmission cars in all 3 sessions. I drove the vehicles with the traction control set to track mode, and kept the traction control enabled. I wasn't too impressed with neither the 1st or the 2nd cars that I drove in the first 2 sessions since the suspension felt too soft for a track with significant elevation and camber transitions like Infineon (err Sonoma).
On my 3rd session I was able to get into a C7 with the Z51 package that had the optional Magnetorheological Suspension. That made a huge amount of difference since the car would transition without any hesitation or 2nd order effects (like the car shifting weight due to the car not settling all at once). The combination of the E-diff and the Magnetorheological Suspension made putting down the power more predictable and easier to modulate the throttle to get the car to do what I wanted.
Given the fact that the cars were running stock alignment specs and pretty much the stock run flat MPSS's set at 29~30F/29R the car with the Magnetorheological Suspension felt very planted.
The engine was torquey, the brakes were really good as well. Even the standard seats were pretty decent, the optional Competition Seat that is available makes the crappy seats issue of the previous model years a non-issue. Build quality of the cars was pretty good as well, good material as well as fit and finish. A big progress in the interior compared to the C6.
Chevy's policy of not voiding warranties when their cars are tracked is a plus as well
.The C7 was the first automatic/paddle shift car that I've driven at Sonoma (Infineon/Sears Point), didn't really miss the good old stick and clutch on the car given the unfamiliarity of the car. (Very familiar with the track)
The Adjustable suspension of the car was the same type that was used by Ferrari on the F458 and in some ways it felt similar when going through the transitions. The main difference was in power delivery to the ground on corner exit, a MR car like the F458 would be better at putting down power than the C7 Z51 car that also makes use of an E-diff.
Given that the Acura MDX with the Sports Suspension used the Magnetorheological Shocks that were designed by Delphi (GM), perhaps the NSX 2.0 will use a similar technology as well to enhance the handling of the vehicle as well as keeping the car civil on rough roads.
Given that the C7 is such a good car, it's no surprise that folks don't want to get Vipers.
Interested in getting a chance to play around with a C7 Z06 when they come out
Attachments
Last edited:
fastaussie
Suspended
Matt Farah about the Viper - "I wouldn't even want that as a second car, that's a third car"
about the Porsche - "as much as I love driving (a) stick, and I really do. you cannot fault the PDK gearbox..."
about the Porsche - "as much as I love driving (a) stick, and I really do. you cannot fault the PDK gearbox..."
BMW, like Audi or GM have enough volume for their certain models to justify only 10 or 5% manual tranny cars.
Exotic/low production cars are harder to justify. Perhaps the "mini" NSX will have it, depending on sales volume.
Some of you need to read up on things and better go DRIVE some of these new performance cars with "automatic" transmissions. The automatic in question is NOT your father's or your grandfather's torque converter/slush box 3 speed automatic but a state of the art dual-clutch transmission. Some of you pretty much equate playing with a fish bone joystick with a clutch pedal as having control, fun, and sporty experience. How about just DRIVE one of these PDK Caymans and come back to talk about your "lack" of control, speed, and sportiness compared with your 5 speed joystick? After owning 6 Porsches and 4 NSXs, driving the 2014 Cayman S and the 991 with PDKs at Sears Point left me jaw dropped. The manual transmissions of my current NSX, 911, and 928 all of a sudden became chores and distractions. If my life depends on a getaway drive, I want THAT "automatic" instead of the NSX 6 speed. The PDK allowed me to extract every ounce (not too many ounces) of my driving skill. Having both hands on the steering wheel, and using one foot to control the braking and the throttle, I was faster and in MORE CONTROL than ever. I found myself concentrating on driving the car rather than being distracted by the needs to shift, heel-N-toe, and worrying if I would shift into the wrong gears and over-rev the engine. I was ALWAYS in the right gears with the PDK entering or exiting corners. To me, THAT is control and fun. In addition, the PDK shifting was seamless and faster than I can ever shift. Bring on the automatic transmission for the new NSX, Honda!
Do people really think that current F1 drivers have less control of their cars? Yeah, what a bunch of p$$$$$$ driving automatics on F1 tracks.
Steve
Do people really think that current F1 drivers have less control of their cars? Yeah, what a bunch of p$$$$$$ driving automatics on F1 tracks.
Steve
Last edited:
Amen to that, if you want a stick keep the old one
- Joined
- 3 March 2013
- Messages
- 67
You basically said what a lot of us are thinking but we know its a sensitive topic so, generally, we let it be. I agree with everything you said. And thats coming from someone whose first pride and joy was a 5 speed Supra.
Thank you whiteNSX.
I think the point is that even though DCT/PDK is "better" and offers more control, this is best realized on a track or during other spirited driving sessions. It doesn't take a genius to realize they would not be able to shift faster in a full manual either. I believe peoples general preference comes down to feeling more involved with the operations of their car for everyday use. On a track however the DCT/PDK is awesome!!
The thing is, many people think that a manual transmission is the main item that makes a car "fun to drive" and the lack of said manual will make a car boring and uninvolved. Now all the cars that I've bought had manuals, and some of them were still boring to drive, even with a manual. On the other hand, I got to drive an Audi R8 and a Gallardo with the paddle-shifters, and I have to say I enjoyed them and never once thought, "this would be way better with a manual."
so I am not too concerned that the new NSX will not have a true manual transmission. Whether the car is enjoyable to drive will depend a lot more on the total package rather than whether or not it has a clutch pedal.
so I am not too concerned that the new NSX will not have a true manual transmission. Whether the car is enjoyable to drive will depend a lot more on the total package rather than whether or not it has a clutch pedal.
Last edited:
I think you may have missed the point... it has nothing to do with control. Nor is it a question of what is "faster." To me, the G-forces are the only element that I am concerned with when it comes to speed. It's the sensation of speed, and that is not affected by a paddle. That is, torque/power to the wheels is still delivered by a more or less conventional means, and therefore, the "increased" acceleration of a dual clutch is not experienced in a physical sense (i.e. more Gs). It's only registered on the clock.
If I were interested in every last tenth of a second, then I'd be all over the dual clutches. But I'm just not. I'm interested only in the sensation of driving, and I particularly enjoy rowing through gears. That particular activity adds a significant amount of enjoyment to the driving experience to me. I have driven paddle shifter cars before and I did not enjoy the activity of shifting gears as much as I did in my manual. And whatever performance benefits were realized were lost on me because I was not looking for them.
I don't think anyone disagrees that the PDK/dual clutch set up is an advancement in terms of performance. Driver involvement is debatable, as this thread has shown. I believe it simply comes down to preference.
G-force, sensation of the speed, "increased" acceleration of a dual clutch is not experienced in a physical sense???!!! So a car with PDK which out-accelerates the conventional manual counterpart will not feel quicker by the driver but only registered on the clock??!! Really, your statement is simply one of the most absurd ones that I have read for a long time. Simple physics does not apply here.
Steve
What is that supposed to mean? Physics applies everywhere.
And FWIW, I totally understood what he was saying.
And what exactly are those paddle shifter cars that you drove?
@ naaman I love full manual cars too but driving say the IS-F or even say the CTS-V paddle shifter isn't the same as those on the GT-R/Lambos and F-Cars. They aren't clutch based systems. Feel different, shift slower..
It doesn't matter. They don't add horsepower/torque, and therefore do not change the sensation of acceleration. Acceleration equals F/M. There is no contingency in that equation for paddle shifters. The only thing that a paddle shifter does for acceleration is eliminate/reduce the loss of speed during a gear change. It does not make the wheels turn faster, which is where the G forces pressing against the chest come from.
I never stated that they effect the power of the car. I simply stated driving paddle shift cars like the CTS-V and IS-F isn't the same as driving a clutch based paddle shift car like the GTR or PDK based Pcar. You will notice a difference between the two. My favourite is still rowing through my own gears and using a clutch pedal but that option is on the way out. when just cruising around town on a sunday I love that both my NSX and my daily are full manual... But on a track after having driven a GT-R, 991 911 C4S with PDK, I can safely say irrespective of who you are, you will put down better results and have more control with a dual clutch based automatic transmission provided you use the manual shift option... and shifting is a lot of fun even with paddles when on a track. I found I enjoyed the experience more cause I could stay focused on the course ahead better. There's a reason F1 uses this. It's more efficient and safer.
I totally agree, butter78. My reply was meant for all the posts between it and my previous post (including whiteNSXs').
Since I'm not a racecar driver, the paddles will (probably) never appeal to me enough to prefer them over a traditional manual.
For what it's worth (no slam at you or anyone else), using the "F1 cars do it" logic could be seen as irrelevant since F1 cars do a lot of things that street/production cars will never or have never done. F1 cars use engines that rev to 20K and they have wicked aerodynamics and all kinds of other things that make them perform better than a regular car. (And before anyone says it; yes, I know the NSX was born of Honda's F1 technology).
As production costs decrease, I suspect we will see more and more race technology in our regular cars, but by then F1 will have moved on to something else. I suspect that one day (perhaps soon), the PCMs in F1 cars will be smart enough to know when to shift, so that the transmissions will be set up to allow the driver to shift if/when he wants to, but if not, the auto will just do it for him... unless they come up with sanctions that forbid this.
Since I'm not a racecar driver, the paddles will (probably) never appeal to me enough to prefer them over a traditional manual.
For what it's worth (no slam at you or anyone else), using the "F1 cars do it" logic could be seen as irrelevant since F1 cars do a lot of things that street/production cars will never or have never done. F1 cars use engines that rev to 20K and they have wicked aerodynamics and all kinds of other things that make them perform better than a regular car. (And before anyone says it; yes, I know the NSX was born of Honda's F1 technology).
As production costs decrease, I suspect we will see more and more race technology in our regular cars, but by then F1 will have moved on to something else. I suspect that one day (perhaps soon), the PCMs in F1 cars will be smart enough to know when to shift, so that the transmissions will be set up to allow the driver to shift if/when he wants to, but if not, the auto will just do it for him... unless they come up with sanctions that forbid this.
Been there. Done that. Auto shifting is already banned but some teams in prototype and high level GT racing are still able to get away with auto upshifting.
The reason a manual feels faster with more Gs is because during the time it takes to shift, the car actually decelerates most of the time. So the acceleration force and GS felt (from decel to accel) feels greater than a much faster/seamless DCT upshift. Its funny how people rag on first generation SMG and automated manuals for shifting so slow, when in fact they were as fast or slightly faster than most people in a standard transmission. If a DCT shifted as slow as a human, most would still complain even if you got the added Gs from a slow shift because you're not as busy working a 3rd pedal and a stick. However cars are so fast now that not only does a DCT allow you to shift faster, but take a Porsche GT3 or 458 for example, most would drive a manual version much slower because the capability and limit is so high on those cars compared to how slow our <300hp NSXs are which dare I say might be less engaging or boring with a DCT for the speeds a stock car can go.
The reason a manual feels faster with more Gs is because during the time it takes to shift, the car actually decelerates most of the time. So the acceleration force and GS felt (from decel to accel) feels greater than a much faster/seamless DCT upshift. Its funny how people rag on first generation SMG and automated manuals for shifting so slow, when in fact they were as fast or slightly faster than most people in a standard transmission. If a DCT shifted as slow as a human, most would still complain even if you got the added Gs from a slow shift because you're not as busy working a 3rd pedal and a stick. However cars are so fast now that not only does a DCT allow you to shift faster, but take a Porsche GT3 or 458 for example, most would drive a manual version much slower because the capability and limit is so high on those cars compared to how slow our <300hp NSXs are which dare I say might be less engaging or boring with a DCT for the speeds a stock car can go.
