CGT Design Flaw??

Kuzi,

The TC function on the CGT is definitely none existent. Why even have the on-off button mounted on the dash? The rear end can fish tail at mid to hard acceleration in any of the first three gears. I have never felt any input from the car's TC computer. It seems that it simply does not work at all! The outside temperature has a lot to do with how "safe" the car is. In cooler weather the CGT has very poor traction and is most dangerous. Have you ever had the TC kick in on your car? Does the car need to be side ways for that function to wake up?

Geno.

 

Porsche's TC kicks in VERY late...probably too late for a CGT. even in my lowly 997, I've only hit the TC once, when I intentionally went full throttle in 2nd gear on very wet roads. Never hit the TC on track (in sport mode, but PASM still on). Manageable with 355 bhp....probably not with near twice that.

 

TC is just traction control which works under acceleration; Moraldo said he swerved, presumably without flooring the throttle, so TC would not be active. What the CGT needs is PSM (stability management), and yes that is a design flaw since the technology existed at the time the CGT was developed but they didn't put it in the car. It needs it.

 

Not meaning to offend anyone here but - there used to be a time when cars had 500+ horses and no TC/PSM/etc. and people drove them. Now, design flaw or car characteristic....? So it's a car where you really need to know what you're doing, nobody said it's for everyone... no? You hear people moan and groan about the old times when cars didn't have the e-gadgetry - Porsche goes ahead and makes one (sort of...) and people start crashing all over the place and calling it flawed. So what's the deal?

 

the 427 cobra never had any form of tc other than ones right foot...nor did the 930 turbo.

you make a fair point.

pcb

 

it's a well established fact that the CGT and the 996 GT2 were both aimed at the very experienced driver/track enthusiast. these cars were not aimed at weekend warriors...hence many of them ended up in a ditch.

if one fancies these cars and gets into them one should be fully aware just what they are.

i am glad that i have psm on my 997 GT2 and porsche decided to add it to the GT2 line after the predecessor was nicknamed widowmaker.

when i take my 560hp cobra out for a spin I am constantly reminding myself that this car will not provide assistance in any way. if i get foolish with my right foot it will result in direct consequences.

treat these cars for what they are meant to be and you get limitless pleasure.

it's more fun to go 7/10th unaided than 9/10th with the car doing it all for you.

 

I drive lightweight cars with a lot of hp that have no TC/ACR/etc. and have the following thoughts.

I really think that it's important to take one of these cars to a giant skid pad/closed parking lot and find out how the car reacts when it lets go.

A touch of rain helps this test.

Once you experience the letting go and learn how to deal with it you'll be better prepared to deal with it should you encounter it.

Over the years I've come to feel that it's sudden moves that get you in to trouble.

 

yes I know, I drive an F40, lots of power and not even power steering or assisted brakes

my only point is the CGT is a modern supercar, and a German one at that. There was also a time when cars didn't have airbags either, or seat belts.

technology can be a good thing

 

I got in trouble with my first CGT and learned really quickly that the TC on the CGTs is not to be trusted. I think that Porsche should have made it more intrusive when it is on and when its off then God be with you. It's almost a false sense of security with it on.

 

!!! Chas...don't do that.

 

It was a test....in the name of science.

 

Is it possible that there is something more than just TC issues going on with this car?

I know of several high-speed spins that seem to have been brought on by trailing-throttle snap oversteer. Do I recall correctly Jay Leno having such a moment, and was this not part of the cause of a fatal race-track incident?

 

I got into trouble (but saved it) with a 930 Turbo once before I finally figured out how to drive it near, not at, the limit and respect how it bites. Not saying that is what happened here as I wasn't in any of the CGT's in question, nor am I taking shots at the driver's abilities as I do not know any of them.......but like has been stated a few times in the thread already......Porsche and many other companies have manufactured lightweight high HP cars before electronic traction aids existed with great success.

FWIW Porsche 917's were driven down the Mulsanne straight at 230 MPH at or past the limits of aerodynamic stability and the laws of physics by human beings who were capable of doing so.........with some serious design flaws that were later rectified.

There is no design flaw issue IMHO in the CGT.

 

It possibly should have come with defeatable PSM like the 997GT2's and 996 and later TT's.

Like some-one mentioned 996GT2's didnt come with it (or traction control for that matter) as it upset the desired characteristics that Porsche was aiming for.

IMO many veiw TC and PSM as if they are magic wands that can overcome physics.

 

The OP mentioned that he went over a Steel (not steal) plate. Surprised that no one has picked up on this, how many have tried the the traction on a wet steel plate...there is none and TC is irrelevant, at that point the laws of physics rule.

There is no flaw in the car (imo)..What is designed in was designed in; and as someone pointed out earlier it requires smooth inputs.

The Leno incident was pure physics (at extreme speed)...he lifted when he shouldn't. I discussed this in detail with him, and he was lucky.

The Fontana incident, while sad and unfortunate, was something (imo) that might possibly have been seen coming for a long time (if you paid attention to various blogs), and many innocent people got caught up in it.

For those you who got laps at Leipzig in the CGT it was apparent that this car had it all in capable hands, with and without traction control.

In fact I had Roland Kausmaul (sp?) demonstrate, through the "bus stop" traction control on and off..and it worked. Now again this was on a known surface, with known grip....but on a wet steel plate.... you are in God's hands!

There is an old adage around (and while it might not apply to the OP's case)...a bad workman blames his tools.

And in today's World, too many people are looking for the "excuse"

There are no design flaws in the CGT, there may be omissions but they were deliberate and there to reward the truly capable.

 

May I remind everyone that the Stig on Top Gear had to make MANY laps to get a clean lap without spinning the CGT.

It's not easy to drive in the hands of a race car driver either.

I still want one.

 

But since we don't know the Stig.. who is to say the Stig can "really" drive?

 

I found the limits of my CGT on a track. That involved one mega spin miles into the kitty litter and lots of sideways once I figured out why I went onto the beach. No damage and I chose corners with massive space (Shanghai F1 track has a few). I would be really wary of the CGT if I did not have the benefit of that experience. It is a highly rewarding car that can bite.

 

Lucky you on the F40

As to the rest - if airbags/belts etc weren't a legal must nowadays, who knows, maybe some company would be making cars without them - for pure style if anything. Then again airbags and belts don't really take away from the driving 'purity', while electrical aids are considered to do exactly that according to many.

And maybe something to consider. A design flaw would imply that at some (quite easily identifiable if you're doing hundreds of hours of testing) point Porsche didn't know what they were doing when making this fine tuned machine. Do you really think that? Porsche???

 

I do not mean to sound insulting, but all you need to buy a high performance machine is money, not the skill to drive it.

 

PogueMoHone, well put.
I also don't think there is a design flaw. Those German engineers are just too good to let some thing like that get by in a half million dollar car! It's just the nature of the car. The CGT is very light with over 600 HP flowing to the rear wheels. If the CGT had the "viscous traction" like the Murcielogos, we would be talking about the car being a hand full to drive. I think almost any car out there, low slung exotic, super light and with that much power to the rear wheels as the CGT will have similar traits. As many have said, it takes a capable person like Tanner Foust the drift racing champion to tame the CGT.

Geno.

 

IMO, no flawed design, only flawed drivers.

 

Michael Schumacher CAN drive...