Article why we are stuck with a computer to shift exotic cars

Very old news http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/lamborghinichat-com-sponsored-cats-exotics/500925-lamborghini-confirms-end-manuals.html

 

They do make everyone (appear) an expert at downshifting, perhaps this is the attraction.
I'll take my clumsy heel/toe untill I get it right.

 

It's the Euro's fault. They come up with some slick invention which they think makes them closer in skill to their F1 heros and the technology sticks. This is not reserved for manual transmissions, but all the computer controlled "go fast" parts of a modern exotic. Then they cannot understand why we true enthusiasts don't jump on the band wagon in favor of all this technology. In exotics, it makes the cars more accessible to affluent drivers who lack the skill to drive a manual transmission car or want to delude themselves into thinking that they are really skillful drivers.

 

I'm buying my first manual gearbox car in ten years in a few weeks. Funny thing is, I really didn't miss it at first, but now that I've had DCT's and F1 gearboxes, I'm looking forward to adding a manual sports car for the raw feel.

 

I dunno, the lambo article kind of makes sense to me.

I just think it would be nice if manufacturers had 2 lines...an ultra performance line with all the state of the art go fast gizmos, and a café racer line....less power, more raw etc.
I just don't need the car I cruise around town in to do 0-60 in 3 seconds.

Obviously the italians are too arrogant for this, but I could potentially see Porsche having the resources to do this. the 911 vs Cayman dichotomy seems perfect for this.

 

X1000. 'Poseurs'.

 

Montemozolo indicated this much when he gave his speech at Stanford. They're not making a car to be the fastest on the road and they want the drivers of their cars to have the best experience possible.

When you have that much power to weight, you NEED the computer to control the car. Sure most idiots (myself included) can drive the car at 4/10 or 5/10's the cars capabilities and then smugly think when a new Corvette comes by "I COULD toast them.. but I just don't want to".. but to TRULY drive at 8/10 the cars capabilities.. many aren't going to like it, but only 2% of drivers can consistently operate their cars at that level or above without crashing.

Just look at all the "deer jumping out in front of the car" bull**** you read about on here. Most FCar drivers can't drive their car at the upper limits. All the exotic manufacturers know this and that's why they've gone to paddle shifters. It let's the computer control the car and lets nitwits think they're better drivers than they really are. It's a brilliant strategy actually.
All the people stepping up to the plate to convert their cars (even F1) to stick reinforces this.

With Hybrid cars allocating electric torque and gas engine to the wheels.. it's never going back to stick. Too complicated for a manual clutch to consider in the algorithm. That's what I read from part of his response.

 

You don't "need" a computer to control the car, especially with Lamborghini's awd system. Traction control and vehicle skid control works just fine with a manual trans anyway.

Plenty of manual trans turbo Gallardo's out there with insane power and those guys aren't dying on a daily basis.

Servo assisted clutches/can't get a clutch to hold the torque bla bla bla. Easy to make a multi plate clutch with no assist have a light pedal and nice engagement.

Lots of interesting excuses that have nothing to do with reality. Would prefer the truth, that they just don't want to build them anymore.

 

I love my manual cars (911, 246, 550) and wouldn't want them any other way, but I also appreciate my autos (Merc x 2, Granturismo) for what they are. I wouldn't buy a new car with a manual box if a 2-pedal option were available.

 

Because they're only driving their cars at 2/10 or 3/10 on the road. And even then too much power and not enough talent behind the wheel..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rQzumq-fzo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWC_cUJF5F0

 

LMAO, you think they are driven at 2/10 or 3/10 on the road and not WOT up to crazy speeds? Are those manual or e-gear? Doesn't matter as the result would be the same.

Funny I managed to survive driving a 1200hp Corvette with the traction control off for years. Same with a 1000hp Camaro.

Sure, 100mph burnouts might be "too much power" to some but doesn't mean it needs to be paddle shift or it has to be crashed.

 

I'd love to see all those here bashing the DCT systems drive a manual TdF in a spirited fashion - especially with all the systems off.

Thing is that cars are now getting so fast and responsive that it makes little to no sense to making them manual.

And to blame Europe? That's ridiculous. We've been using the manual tranny a lot more than the US. If we had liked the auto trans as much as the US, the manual would have been dead way before now. Also, to say that Euro drivers are poseurs is just wrong. Generally speaking, it seems like Euro exotics have more kilometers on then that their US counterparts.

 

It's not just about the power. I have had some pretty powerful muscle cars over the years, but they are completely different animals. I think it's the overall response of the car that make the difference. A Camaro or Corvette usually don't have as fast a steering input or as fast a throttle response as a modern Ferrari like a 458, F12 or the like. If my muscle cars had been as fast and agile in the steering department and throttle response as a 458, they would have been close to un-drivable.

 

Agreed that vehicle type/chassis will make a difference but I don't think a -better- chassis and steering would hurt control.

Just saying that all the safety systems in place now still work with a manual trans. There are still high horsepower manual transmission cars being produced so to say it's not possible because you need more computer control? Just can't agree with that.

 

Mid-engine is different than transaxle. You know that. 1000 hp in a Vette with an engine on one end of the car and a transaxle on the other and a camaro with that weight up front... completely different than a mid engine. (Which is why Enzo didn't want to offer one with a lot of HP if you recall.. ) I don't want to write one more sentence about the Carrera GT so I'm going to stop here.

 

Yes I'm quite sure everyone knows the difference between a front and mid engine chassis.

So what is the argument, a 20 year old torque arm solid axle Camaro is a better platform for a high horsepower stick car? Just can't get behind that theory.

Besides, again, traction control systems still work with a manual trans.

So Lamborghini can build LP550/560 and LP640/670 in stick but now here's the Huracan with similar chassis and power/weight ratio but now it's impossible?

Sorry, makes no sense.

 

"If you want to control the chassis, you must control the power. If you want to control the power, the clutch must be under the control of the brain of the car, not your brain."

It's not the straight line with all that power, it's curves in the road that require more careful control of power input, not just spin of the wheel or braking of the wheel to control the car after the input. I've driven a LP560. It's not as balanced to put the power down in a turn as say a 246 Dino. The car will put you in the bushes in a heartbeat if you're not careful with power input... Even with TC turned on. Older Camaros were never known for their handling. I guess my point is even with TC and nannies, a high HP car done well in a stick is too much a Paul Walker experience for their drivers. Or that's the their perception at least. I haven't seen much to refute that.

 

"...Would prefer the truth, that they just don't want to build them anymore. ..."

and why would that be?

 

holy crap!

 

This gets brought up pretty often recently. It's very simple, the people who are BUYING these new high performance cars, don't want them with 3 pedals. Whether that's because they don' know how to drive them, they're poseurs, they like the technology, etc. it doesn't matter. Money talks and bull**** walks.

I'm actually starting to feel bad for Lamborghini and Ferrari at having to hear this stuff all the time. I'm a manual guy but realize once you get over a certain level of performance, the best way to handle it is with DCT. When you factor average drivers using these high performance cars you bet a computer is going to be very helpful.

If you're still yearning for a high performance 3 pedal car, go buy a Viper. Oh wait, nobody was really buying those either...

 

Why do cars no longer have a starter handle?
Why do cars no longer have drum brakes all round?
Why do cars no longer have carburettors?
Why do cars no longer have cross ply tyres?
Why do cars no longer have lap belts?
Why do cars no longer have tungsten headlight bulbs?

It's called: "Progress!"

Whilst all of the above were once the height of technology, progress has made them obsolete - Why? Because they are no longer efficient enough.

The likes of Ferrari's and Lamborghini's are all about going as fast as possible, and to do that in the most efficient way today means having a semi-auto gearbox.


The funny thing is, we have people still bemoaning the rise of semi-automatic gearboxes when we are about to enter an era of self-driving cars!

I can't help thinking that people complaining about the rise of semi-automatic gearboxes are the modern day version of those who back in the late 1890's complained about those new fangled horseless carriages taking over from the horse and cart! _ They too struggled with the concept of progress!

 

Exactly. While I relish the manual gearboxes on my older cars (and used to swear by the drum brakes on my '57 Bentley Continental), I would not order a new car with a manual gearbox in preference to a 2-pedal option.