458 vs 9ff GT2 with

Not necessarily. Everyone is always raving about DCT, but the Corsa mode isn't exactly a slouch. Sure, you get a tad of interrupt, but it's not like for those 100 ms V -> 0. I think it would help a little, but it's not like it would walk away from it.

 

 

This dual-clutch mania the board is going through right now originates almost solely from the 997.2 PDK's impressive test performance versus the manual .2 or tip-tronic .1 versions of the car.

 

In reality even if a car's shift times were impossibly instant, say at 0.00 milliseconds, it would not significantly affect the acceleration times or distances between an identical car that shifts three times during the same run at 100ms per shift. There must be other reasons why the 997.2 is able to do what it does versus its stablemates, PDK is only a small amount of that equation.

 

This dual-clutch mania the board is going through right now originates almost solely from the 997.2 PDK's impressive test performance versus the manual .2 or tip-tronic .1 versions of the car.

 

In reality even if a car's shift times were impossibly instant, say at 0.00 milliseconds, it would not significantly affect the acceleration times or distances between an identical car that shifts three times during the same run at 100ms per shift. There must be other reasons why the 997.2 is able to do what it does versus its stablemates, PDK is only a small amount of that equation.

 

There has to be a HUUUGGGEE tuning benefit when as an engineer, you know that there will be NO mis shifts, the car is going to do exactly what it is supposed to do at X rpm 100% of the time, so they can map boost and tons of other variables to make the car incredibly efficient right from the factory.

 

Just my .02

The advantage is the fact you don't LOSE boost. 100ms is enough time to drop several psi which means a loss of HP. Loss of HP means slower times. So, not only does it matter from a timing standpoint, it matters far more from an engine efficiency standpoint.

 

My truck for example would be 2.5 SECONDS faster in the 1/4 mile alone if it were an auto or DCT because of loss of boost.

There has to be a HUUUGGGEE tuning benefit when as an engineer, you know that there will be NO mis shifts, the car is going to do exactly what it is supposed to do at X rpm 100% of the time, so they can map boost and tons of other variables to make the car incredibly efficient right from the factory.

 

Just my .02

 

The advantage is the fact you don't LOSE boost. 100ms is enough time to drop several psi which means a loss of HP. Loss of HP means slower times. So, not only does it matter from a timing standpoint, it matters far more from an engine efficiency standpoint.

 

My truck for example would be 2.5 SECONDS faster in the 1/4 mile alone if it were an auto or DCT because of loss of boost.

 

Which in the case of a naturally-aspirated LP560 isn't as much of a benefit, which is why the lust for a DCT in an NA engine-propelled car are possibly overestimating the impact. In the blown GTR and 997.2 the impact is more pronounced, but in the N/A F-cars and L-cars I'm not sure how tangible the improvement in the numbers would be.

Which in the case of a naturally-aspirated LP560 isn't as much of a benefit, which is why the lust for a DCT in an NA engine-propelled car are possibly overestimating the impact. In the blown GTR and 997.2 the impact is more pronounced, but in the N/A F-cars and L-cars I'm not sure how tangible the improvement in the numbers would be.

 

 

Totally agree. The lag in shift times would be just that; if they were geared to factor in that lag (which obviously they would be), there would be no loss of power so it would only make a very marginal difference (a few tenths here or there).

 

Stick with 3 pedals; much better.

Well they say every 1/10 of a second in the 1/4 is 2 car lengths... A Gallardo needs 4 shifts through the 1/4... If the same exact car can shift 1/10 of a second faster thats 8 car lengths in the 1/4.

You're really going to try and tell me that a Gallardo is better around a track than a 458? Not a chance in Hell.

 

I highly doubt the Gallardo would walk a 458 on track . Having said that and even though the Gallardo's chassis is getting dated , it is a very good handling car and i have always found them to be easy to drive fast on track. I believe an average driver without a lot of track experience will have an easier time driving the Gallardo fast than any other modern Ferrari just because of the AWD .

Well they say every 1/10 of a second in the 1/4 is 2 car lengths... A Gallardo needs 4 shifts through the 1/4... If the same exact car can shift 1/10 of a second faster thats 8 car lengths in the 1/4.

 

This is true, with DCT adding maybe 40-60ms per shift to that math. So you're gaining around 40-60ms per each of those four shifts over the 560's e-gear set to Corsa speed (100ms).

 

Four shifts could equal 0.2 seconds under that formula, which would be around 3-4 car lengths.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It all adds up, but, on a track, a good driver can always make up the difference.

This is true, with DCT adding maybe 40-60ms per shift to that math. So you're gaining around 40-60ms per each of those four shifts over the 560's e-gear set to Corsa speed (100ms).

 

Four shifts could equal 0.2 seconds under that formula, which would be around 3-4 car lengths.

Does the 560 shift at 100ms? I think its slower than that.. I know the earlier Egears would shift as slow as 300ms..

It all adds up, but, on a track, a good driver can always make up the difference.

What if both are good drivers?

It all adds up, but, on a track, a good driver can always make up the difference.

 

I would go a step further and say that only in a very very narrow segment of the car's ultimate purpose (1/4 mile drag racing) would DCT be pointed to as a need. Even on the track you've got dozens of other variables that are far more important than the impact of 40ms time savings per shift.

 

The 4 shifts in the 1/4 is something people could point to as a deficiency though for sure, I'll concede that.

What if both are good drivers?

 

Then the tire wear on the cars, or amount of gas in each of the car's tanks, or the driving style of each person, or any of another 20+ things would come into play as being more impactful to a laptime than any 40ms time savings on tranny shifts.

 

However the smoothness of DCT versus SCT could be argued as a track benefit much more convincingly than time savings. Because when the e-gear shifts in corsa so goddamned violently that most average drivers are quickly too scared to engage it at high-g mid-turn due to fear that the whole car will come unglued from the impact then you're losing to the DCT "empowered" driver who feels free to do what they want.

I would go a step further and say that only in a very very narrow segment of the car's ultimate purpose (1/4 mile drag racing) would DCT be pointed to as a need. Even on the track you've got dozens of other variables that are far more important than the impact of 40ms time savings per shift.

 

The 4 shifts in the 1/4 is something people could point to as a deficiency though for sure, I'll concede that.

On track, Ultimately DCT would too add to faster lap times....

It all adds up, but, on a track, a good driver can always make up the difference.

 

You're missing the point.

On track, Ultimately DCT would too add to faster lap times....

 

I know you're thinking "well if you have 500 shifts per race and each one saves 40-50ms then you save 25 full seconds over identically-equipped cars". And you're right as long as the two cars are absolutely identical down to the molecule, with robots driving each of them with identical styles.

 

Otherwise there are probably more impactful variables to focus on that lead to more dramatic time savings, like tire compound or weight or the other biggies that lead to bigger discrepancies than the shift-time savings would.

I know you're thinking "well if you have 500 shifts per race and each one saves 40-50ms then you save 25 full seconds over identically-equipped cars". And you're right as long as the two cars are abosolutely identical down to the molecule, with robots driving each of them with identical styles.

 

Otherwise there are probably more impactful variables to focus on that lead to more dramatic time savings, like tire compound or weight or the other biggies that lead to bigger discrepancies than the shift-time savings would.

 

Allan knows shit about racing on road courses . His obsession is 0-60,40-130 etc etc . Boring,boring,boring

I know you're thinking "well if you have 500 shifts per race and each one saves 40-50ms then you save 25 full seconds over identically-equipped cars". And you're right as long as the two cars are abosolutely identical down to the molecule, with robots driving each of them with identical styles.

 

Otherwise there are probably more impactful variables to focus on that lead to more dramatic time savings, like tire compound or weight or the other biggies that lead to bigger discrepancies than the shift-time savings would.

Thats exactly the point... Every variable must remain constant. You cant say that a better driver in a 6 speed can go faster in a 6 speed than a decent driver in a DCT. We are talking about which car would be superior all around regardless of driver.

 

2 exact same cars, exact same drivers.everything exactly the same.. DCT will have an advantage in every scenario.

Allan knows shit about racing on road courses . His obsession is 0-60,40-130 etc etc . Boring,boring,boring

Dadda, you would be proud of me! I am going to Willow Springs!

Dadda, you would be proud of me! I am going to Willow Springs!

 

Turn the boost down . You will have much more fun with less boost . Also, your car is undertired for the HP so be very careful coming out of corners. It will want to come around on you.

Turn the boost down . You will have much more fun with less boost . Also, your car is undertired for the HP so be very careful coming out of corners. It will want to come around on you.

Yes, gonna turn the boost down, and I got some R888's..

What if both are good drivers?

What Mako said

 

Then the tire wear on the cars, or amount of gas in each of the car's tanks, or the driving style of each person, or any of another 20+ things would come into play as being more impactful to a laptime than any 40ms time savings on tranny shifts.

 

However the smoothness of DCT versus SCT could be argued as a track benefit much more convincingly than time savings. Because when the e-gear shifts in corsa so goddamned violently that most average drivers are quickly too scared to engage it at high-g mid-turn due to fear that the whole car will come unglued from the impact then you're losing to the DCT "empowered" driver who feels free to do what they want.

 

You're missing the point.

 

 

Then please do enlighten me.

 

I thought we were talking about the difference in a few ms shift time. A pro-driver in a SCT/manual will easily handle a novice with a DCT transmission.

I know you're thinking "well if you have 500 shifts per race and each one saves 40-50ms then you save 25 full seconds over identically-equipped cars". And you're right as long as the two cars are absolutely identical down to the molecule, with robots driving each of them with identical styles.

 

 

If I'm reading that right, it's completely false even if everything was 100% the same.

 

50 ms * 500 shifts does not yield 25 s over a car with 100ms shift. That would only be true if during that 50 ms difference, the non-DCT car's velocity went to zero and then instantly back up after the shift. Lap time = distance/avg velocity. What will happen is the DCT car will reach the higher velocity 50 ms sooner, but that change in velocity is a very small percentage of total velocity. You effectively have an average velocity that is a certain % higher for 50ms. So if you went from 100 mph to 101 mph, you'd have gone 1% faster for 50 ms.

 

Now, you could model a situation in which the difference in shift times could be reflected exactly in the lap time, but that would require ideal speeds, accelerations, and distances all selected in harmony. 100% impossible in real life, imo.

Not necessarily. Everyone is always raving about DCT, but the Corsa mode isn't exactly a slouch. Sure, you get a tad of interrupt, but it's not like for those 100 ms V -> 0. I think it would help a little, but it's not like it would walk away from it.

 

DCT big difference.