Why a Stick Shift Defines the Driver

It makes perfect sense if you understood how gearing AND acceleration works which is obvious that you do not.

I'll prove it to you.

First of all...it's quite obvious most car companies have stuck with 6 forward gears and reverse related to a 3 pedal stick shift for a very long time. It's due to physical limitations of the gates.

So yeah...obviously you bringing up the ridiculous example of a 10 speed gated shifter wouldn't work.

7 thru 9 speed DCT transmissions do indeed work and they are obviously in place in the most highest technologically advanced cars today.

Also...you would not be skipping gears in your 5 speed manual if you were trying to perform maximum acceleration in your car and you had the right type of diff ratio for your specific car. If you are skipping gears you obviously have no clue how to race and/or no clue how to build a proper race car.

I'll explain further to you. Two main components make up gearing:

1. Transmission gear ratios
2. Final Drive Ratio (Diff)

a 3rd can be added here which overall tire size.

To give an example of how improvement in acceleration performance can be made by having extra transmission gears...here are the gear ratios of an BMW E46 M3:

Transmission:
1st Gear 4.23
2nd 2.53
3rd 1.67
4th 1.23
5th 1.00
6th .83

Diff 3.62

Notice the gap in numbers between 1st and 2nd gear. If a 7th or 8th gear was added then transmission ratios could be like this:

1st Gear 4.93
2nd 3.73
3rd 3.03
4th 2.23
5th 1.40
6th 1.00
7th .83
8th .68

You could then change the overall Diff ratio from 3.62 to a lower numerical gear such as 3.15.

Look at how much closer the gear ratios are now. This specifically benefits of low torque high revving car like the BMW E46 M3 or even most NA V8 Ferraris.

Hopefully this makes sense to you because this is exactly what car manufacturers have been doing to improve performance AND fuel economy.

Any additional weight related to gears is minimal and the benefits one gets related to the extra gears are obvious.

And CVT works best for fuel economy. Please do some research.

 

Pretty good post... let me add some other points

CVT would work best for turbocharged cars if they could hold the power. There litterly would be nothing faster or better. It would hold boost... peak power etc... and the car would be ridiculously fast. There would be virtually zero lag and no down time between shifting as ****ty as CVTs are... if you could make a robust one...every single drag racer would use them.

Now as far as your gear ratio expliination..

Take a look at why we have more gears now in automatic and dsg boxes and not in manuals...

Its because of the shift times.

The other guy is correct. The average guy if he had to row through 9 gears would probably be quicker skipping a gear every now and then.

With DCT and these lightening fast gear changes and NEVER EVER a mistake or misshift we have added more gears and become more efficent in acceleration and economy.

Context is always important

 

There is no fight, really. It's a silly argument to begin with because if people let their car define them then they've got bigger problems.

 

Yes you will never be skipping gears on upshifts unless you are just cruising along on the street.

On the track/street however you would certainly be skipping downshifts for the best lap times/efficient speed.

Cruising on the street in 6th or coming up to a tight corner at the end of a straight on track you'll just skip 6th to 2nd (or whatever gear you need) rather than shifting 6-5-4-3-2 of course.

As for gearing, yes another gear properly spaced (7 vs 6) is of some advantage but again, not a make it or break it scenario.

I posted this on another thread once to illustrate the difference-


With the 458 7 speed DCT you have-

1st gear 47mph 9000rpm -drops to 6400 on the 1-2 shift (-2600)

2nd gear 66mph at 9000rpm -drops to 6700 on the 2-3 shift (-2300)

3rd gear 90mph at 9000 -drops to 7100 on the 3-4 shift (-1900)

4th gear 113mph at 9000 -drops to 7200 on the 4-5 shift (-1800)

5th gear 142mph at 9000 -drops to 7300 on the 5-6 shift (-1700)

6th gear 174mph at 9000 -drops to 7400 on the 6-7 shift (-1600)


Now lets figure a manual trans with the following ratios and a 4.5 final drive-

1st 3.10, 2nd 2.16, 3rd 1.61, 4th 1.27, 5th 1.02, 6th .82 We now have-


1st gear 54mph at 9000 -drops to 6300 on the 1-2 shift (-2700) -100rpm more drop

2nd gear 77mph at 9000 -drops to 6700 on the 2-3 shift (-2300) SAME

3rd gear 104mph at 9000 -drops to 7100 on the 3-4 shift (-1900) SAME

4th gear 131mph at 9000 -drops to 7200 on the 4-5 shift (-1800) SAME

5th gear 164mph at 9000 -drops to 7250 on the 5-6 shift (-1750) -50rpm more drop

and 6th can still reach 204mph at 9000


Highway cruise-

7 speed DCT 60mph 7th gear- 2,550rpm

6 speed manual above ratios/final drive 60mph 6th gear- 2,650rpm



There really isn't a -huge- difference in functional gearing between a 7 speed and 6 speed if the ratios are spaced out properly. Carries out more mph per gear but still keeps it in the correct rpm range.

Especially for a 458 engine that makes peak torque at 4000rpm and peak horsepower at 9000rpm.

 

Ain't that the truth.



Mark

 

agree

 

You may not always be skipping gears on a downshift. Some races are endurance tests and you would simply heat up the brakes if you consistently perform what you described. Some use the engine speed to help slow down the car to save/cool down their brakes on certain laps.

And as for your 458 scenario with only 6 gears....you do realize that you will be accelerating at a slower pace with the wider gear ratios...with all else being equal...correct?

That is the key difference and benefit of having the additional gears in today's world. In the past...with a manual shifter...additional gears wasn't necessarily a benefit because often times the actual "manual shift" slowed down the acceleration of the car.

In other words...allowing the car to accelerate up to your provided example of 54 mph in 1st gear (6 sp scenario you provided)...it's doing so at a slower rate than that of when it's accelerating to 47 mph (9k rpm peak hp).

All gearing is doing is allowing the engine to wind up to it's peak hp capability faster or slower. There is a sweet spot to be found in that if you gear the car with too high of numbers then you may actually be spinning the tires which slows down acceleration times.

What I just explained related to 7 or 6 gears is already proven in the real world. Compare an BMW E92 M3 or even look at the current BMW M2 model. A 6 speed 3 pedal is slower for sure than its 7 speed DCT counterpart. The actual "shift times" isn't the main difference in the acceleration times...it's the additional gear and how each gear is numbered (7 sp closer ratios) which provides the biggest advantage in acceleration times.

As I mentioned earlier, my E46 M3 is a 6 sp 3 pedal. I've beaten plenty of SMG transmission M3's. I can easily slam it into gear and speed shift. I still can't claim to shift faster than an SMG but in real world scenarios...this isn't a deal breaker since both have 6 gears and are geared identically.

The irony is that with the F430 3 pedal...the owners never claim they can out accelerate or even outperform an F1. If people feel it's more fun then that's perfectly fine.

 

I didn't say you would -always- be skipping gears but you would at times, even more so on the street.

And yes I'm aware taller gearing/less mechanical advantage reduces acceleration (given traction) but as you can see, there isn't a phenomenal difference here.

The ratios I listed are nearly identical to the F355. If that car can pull those gears with 375hp I think the 458 would be ok as well.

So yes, no one is saying a 6 speed manual would have a slight disadvantage to a 7 speed dual clutch in acceleration but it would be close and it would 100% be driveable.

 

I can't believe how long this debate is going on for.

 

Me either and at the end everything will be the same as it is.

 

I can, it is the classic: People who lover to drive versus people who think they can drive.

 

Are we talking about street use or track use? I do 100% of my driving on public roads, so numbers on paper mean next to nothing to me.

We can talk absolute numbers and ratios all day, but in the end, I don't really care. The differences in gearing between a six speed manual and a seven+ speed automatic are minor enough that you are going to have be pushing at least 8/10ths to actually find a measurable difference in performance, and nobody needs to be doing that on public roads.

A CVT can allow an engine to produce maximum power at ALL times, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. It was banned from F1 before a CVT-equipped prototype was even allowed to complete a single lap. Transmission technology instead went into automated units like the F1.

And I skip shift because I don't feel the need to do a pull from every single stop. Obviously if I was on a track (or a winding back road) I would not be skipping gears.

 

Meh....12 pages of rambling....both have merits, so get one of each.

 

You managed to summarize it very well!

Agreed!

 

This same topic comes up about every 6 months or so and the debate will never end. I will chime in every time as the paddle shifting phenomenon is responsible for my loss of love for sports cars. Trying to defend lack of driving skills is like 'see the glove doesn't fit you must acquit' And what about Chewbacca? 8/10ths, don't forget 8/10ths on the track that the car will never see.

 

Gotta love the rambling/silly/repetitive comments and yet here you all are reading and commenting

 

fixed

 

-You- was in reference to those making the comments I listed, therefore I would not be included in that statement.

 

The irony is the vast majority of these cars will never be driven anyway. Don't want to hurt the value by driving them. [emoji12]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I put 1800 miles on my Lambo the first month I owned it. I intend to drive the heck out of that car.

 

Way to go! I'll never understand guys who buy high end sport cars and let them sit in the garage. Presumably they have the financial strength to buy the car, but not enough to drive it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I think it's a combination of a) people with the money to buy those cars typically don't have a lot of free time, b) the car is bought as a trophy/status symbol not a mode of transportation, c) it's a 2nd/3rd/4th/etc car so they have a number of cars with low miles.

 

Perhaps, but I bet there's more than a handful of F40s out there with less than 1,000 miles, not to mention Enzos.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I think the problem is that there really are two totally different types of vehicles that we are talking about and so some of the discussion really doesn't make sense as it applies to the other category.

In one category you have the F40s and Enzos. Those are clearly trophies/investments. I get why people wouldn't want to drive them. I also certainly would not want to own one.

In the other category are all the more normal day-to-day Ferraris where there are lots of them and they are never going to really significantly appreciate, the only issue is the rate of depreciation or maybe staying even. Admittedly in this category if you put mileage on it, it will cause the car to more rapidly depreciate but we're not really talking about a lot of money here. That is the category I want to be in because then you can drive the car. I don't want to be in the position of worry about putting mileage on it or having it damaged. I want to enjoy it.

 

I agree with you. But there probably a number of F360s with less than 5K miles and these cars are over 10 years old. Doesn't make any sense to me, but then again, who says things have to make sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk