Message from CEO of Ferrari on Manual Transmission

I 'fancy' manuals because they are fun. As to your last sentence, I'm not sure why everyone things this honestly. Having driven manual cars with more than double the power of an F12 I really think a manual F12 would be nothing other than epic.

 

Yes, I did see that. Really amazing. I am impressed. But it does not make me any less confident in my skills with a traditional rifle and irons or glass.

All I can say is:

WHEN IT WORKS ....... It Works.


And when it doesn't ...... Then WHAT?


The battlefield is a really bad place to find out the "Then WHAT?"

 

In "another line of business", shall we say, some clever old pros have already gone "back to manuals"...

Kremlin returns to typewriters to avoid computer leaks - Telegraph

Rgds

 

Call product support.

 

As an ex Army Officer, I can tell you that there are multiple redundancies for such eventualities. In tanks for example we had optic scopes, hand cranks and piezoelectric triggers for manual firing in case the main sight, hydraulics, electronics, laser range finder and firing computer got damaged. Needless to say that the modern way was WAY more effective... and easy.

 

"Product Support. It is a great day in Bombay! How can we help you?

Sir, Sir, there is a lot of background noise today. Sounds like Incoming is Fair to Moderate and Outgoing is near a stand-still.

Can you speak louder, Please?"


"I'm sorry, What Theater(of War) and Foxhole # are you in again .......?"

 

Cali was a stupid example he should quote F430 production numbers then we can
see if it makes sense. Meanwhile Porsche are bring manual option back on the next GT3

 

It seems like the engines today are designed around the transmission and not the other way around.
I remember when BMW put a Manual transmission in the E60 M5 only for the U.S market because of "high demand"... it was total rubbish..... It was not meant to work with a manual transmission.

 

Any engine can be mated to an unsuitable manual transmission and vice versa. No such thing as an engine that is not compatible with a manual. Truck transmission ratios do not work well on high rpm performance engines and the inverse is true as well.

 

For the 991, the three-pedal manual was derived from the PDK, both with seven forward gears. I haven't driven it, but reviews were generally poor.

I foresee a lot of missed shifts and damaged gears in the name of nostalgia.

 

They didn't do this with the GT4 and I suspect won't for the GT3 either -- they will focus on making sure that is a very useable, very engaging transmission. I have no doubt about that. They had the same approach from what I recall for the 911R project too.

 

Agreed, i drove a 7 speed 991 and it was rubbish, the bestw e can say is it was some sort of stick. Perhaos that si why the 991R is rumored to have the previous 6 speed.

As other have said you also need a motor that works with a stick layout, ultra high revs, relatively narrow powerbands work well with paddles to keep them always ont he boil, a stick requires maybe less Hp for more tq across a wider pwerbad, and this comes is acheived at the expense of hp and revs.

Given the power nature of a SBC its not coincidental the stick(a good stick) still works so well in the vette.

offering a manual on many of todays hot paddle motors is probably more than just a different transmssion then, it probably meas different cams and engine tuning.

 

Yep.

No way a fat smoker is going to be able to tolerate 3-5 G's for an hour.

 

As Rifledriver mentioned, with the correct trans it shouldn't matter.

F355 is all high rpm power. Shifting at redline means the engine never drops -below- 7000 on a gear change. So, if you are going for max acceleration more midrange power isn't going to help, as the engine only passes through it once, in first gear.

I for one would not want a detuned engine with more midrange/earlier peak HP only because it's mated to a manual. Just build it with the right ratios

 

True, but the newer NA motors are aor were designed for 7 closely packed ratios and a relatively tight peak powerband, this si dififerent to what would be reasonable for human shifting which is 5 maybe 6 close ratios with time speed gaps in between.

Therefore on the latest NA mtors you are likely to fall out of the powerband somewhere on a 6 speed with a motor designed around 7 and lightening shifts. Additionaly the shift quality of 7 manual speeds is poor. Lastly if there was a period criticism of the 355 it was that it lacked Tq and needed revs in the stick setup, fine if you are on track on the boil, less so on road where you are not running up the rve range all the time.

Paddle transmssions are easy to downshift whenver you jab the pedal to acclerate.
On road more Tq somewhat lower down better suits the realities of a manual where reasoanble accleration can be acessed in normal driving with less downshifting or lkeepign the motor always screaming.

A 9k redline motor like in the Gt3 works with 7 speeds and paddles, but try shifting 7 short manual gears fast enough to stay in the powerband, or try having to downshift manualy 2 gears everytime you want to even moderatly take a gap on road.

So I imagine a Gt3 motor retuned for a manul may have only an 8 or 8,5K redline from more torquey cams. It would styill be a vibrant more peaky engine, just bettr suited to 6 speeds the gear gaps, the time gaps for shifts and human cog swapping realities.

Interestingly the power and Tq charateristics of the new ferrari turbo motors look like they woudl work very well with the realities of a 5 or 6 speed stick, those motors being lower rev and having lots of midrange tq.

 

I don't think GM has a a dual clutch gearbox for the Corvette (or any of its cars). Either automatic or three-pedal manual, probably due to the development costs. I'd like to think it was an engineering or sentimental decision, but I suspect it's mostly to keep costs down.

 

Agreed,

But given the powerr charateristcs of the SBC the manual does not hold the car back in the way i think a manual would on a speciale or GT3. The motor does not require being kept at high revs to extract imediate power on street, something which would work against against a manual in new Gt3 or speciale.

Or put another way. I think a new Gt3 or the 458 if they came with a 6 speed or 7 speed manual and unmodified motor, given their pwer characteristics would be pretty sub par if not bad on street. The vette and viper motors mate well to a manual even if paddles might be quicker on track. In fact given all that Tq I woder how much quicker a DCt would be in a z06 over the auto. Dowshifts for sure would be better and quicker, not so much the rest.

Its not just about offering a manual transmssion, the motor power characteristics really need to suit the limitations and nature of manual use. Mechanicaly cams are easy to do, but as most motors today are elctronicaly cotrolled and and integrated part of an overall power/transmision/chassis dyanmic package its quite a development to do properly if you are starting with a high rev low tq na paddle motor which is totaly integrated with chassis dynamics transmision etc...

 

I agree that a manual trans with too many gears is a problem. I also believe that all of the modern engines would work perfectly with a 6 speed manual trans with proper gear ratios.

If it doesn't have enough midrange power I don't think the lack of 1 gear is going to kill it. DCT or manual you would need to downshift either way.

Lets look at a 458 for example.

As it's geared from the factory you reach 47mph at 9000rpm in 1st gear, or slightly less mph than the top of 1st in an F355.

So, kill some final drive, from the original 5.14 to a 4.4, you can now keep the same 1st-6th ratios in a manual trans, pull more mph per gear (now 55mph at 9000 in 1st) and still reach 203mph in 6th.

(actually ideally I would have a slightly shorter 1st gear and slightly more overdriven 6th but the above would work).

Just saying that if older cars with peakier engines worked fine with a 6 speed manual there's no reason that modern engines with variable valve timing and intake manifolds bolstering mid range would not work just as well if not better.

 

If you see my post above its not just the transmssion, everything is integrated from chassis dynamics stability sideslip control etc. Yes the 355 worked but it was not ideal, and there was fair criticism in period about the need for so many revs and low tq.
A paddle car in auto mode downshifts endless gears at the flick of a pedal, and even a few flicks of the paddle are easy.

However the power charateristics of a v12 works great with a manual, assuming you can get past the development of the overall powertrain in todays electronic world where everything is integrated.

From my undertansding the variability in human sifting even with the same driver would freak out the integrated electronic powertrain and chassis chassis dynamic overlords in the modern cars brain.(gT3 and 458) One has to reprogram the whole thing to work with the imperfection and variances of human shifting. Thats a large part of the reason its so hard to do and manufactuerers unwilling.

It will be interesting to see what are the powertrain and chasis dynamic differences programed into the 911r over the Gt3. Contradicting myself, porche saw it worthwhile enough to do for 700 cars, but I suspect this powertrain will show up on a manual Gt3 and GT4 so the investment may make sense. I expect porche has done it right, contrary to the regular 991 manual.

ferarri apprently sells enough cars with enough margin to stay lazy here. I think the turbo mtor would go well with a mamual, but then they have to sort out all the other functions too, better then to just claim to be tech and offer no choice.

I also agree with others here, cali buyers are the last type of ferrari buyer who would be manual people, so cali sales are indicative of what, its like saying no one buys a mercedes sl in a manual.

 

I reckon it's because if you can hit sixty in two point nine, or thirty to ninety in the equivalent, in a modern car with paddles, then trying to do so while changing gears with a lever and a clutch means you are very unlikely to match these times, and quite likely, even as a good driver, to reduce the zero to sixty by a significant %, to, say, four seconds to sixty, on average. And add that up over all the gear shifts you do.
Lowe gearing/closer ratios exacerbate this. I have a 430 MT and a 575 MT. The 575 I feel 100% at home with. The 430 I always feel, darn, I just know the paddles would have done that better than me. Maybe still learning..but I have been driving fast manuals for decades.

 

You know I didn't consciously think about the torque and power dynamics of the engine versus the transmission.. The converse is my 928. GOBS of torque down low, but the first gear just "lacks". It has to be the right ratios per the available torque and power. The 997 does it fairly well with torque kicking in at 2-2500 ish. It "feels" about right when you drive it. With the turbo adding that torque lower in the RPM spectrum.. I think you're right. The mini cooper S I had did have the right feel when powering through the gears, again carried by the turbocharger.

 

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

Manual trans cars can be skip shifted into whatever gear you want as well and there are current high horsepower manual trans cars available with traction control/active handling that seem to work.

You're saying the engines are designed for a 7 speed, remove one gear, average the loss of it across the other 6, it's not going to crutch the car.

My 355 example was not that it's ideal, just that if you can take a 3200lb 375hp 6 speed manual car and end up what is in my opinion a great driving car, how am I going to be handed the keys to a manual 458 that's lighter with 600hp, a broader torque curve and a 6 speed manual and say "this is really lacking" or "this is so mismatched it's horrible".

Just not possible.

 

Anyone want to sell me a CGT at scrap price? You do know you have a car with a better power to weight ratio than a 458 and it's crutched by a 6 speed manual. Who could possibly want that.

 

You assume everyone cares if it slows the car by a few tenths, or even more. It that single property matters so much to you why do you drive any of them? There are other cars with better straight line performance. Always has been. Some liken it to the difference of driving a car vs operating a machine.

 

Your correct But at least give consumers the choice ?