Clutch is 100%. I shift at 7,000 minimum on the way up and I often needed 2 downshifts to help with braking. If you hit rev limiter on the way up the car shifts automatically. The tricky part is that if you are shifting close to rev limiter, if you shift at the same moment that the rev limiter hits, you get 2 shifts. It is fastest to shift just before rev limiter rather than let the rev limiter hit. Takes some practice
Very real. I was so lucky. My friend in another 599 ran out of gas on the upside of the hill so he could not coast in like me. He was maybe 2kms short. I shut off my a/c, stereo, etc a little earlier and that made all the difference! Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Car in "Race Mode" should not shift up automatically; makes shifts truely manual. Using engine to "help with braking" is not a good idea if engine longevity is a consideration -- "engine is for going, brakes are for stopping".
Wow that is awesome that another 599 made the run! I feel sorry for your friend with leaving his car out there with no gas.
LOL, what are the odds!? Two 599's down with no gas. DM, you are the man and this thread continues to rock!
Completely disagree. At rev limiter car in race mode should shift up automatically. Engine braking is a crucial part of braking at higher speeds. It does not hurt the car or the clutch at all as the electronics do perfect heel toe. Engine longevity is enhanced compared with short trips where the car is at 3,000rpm and barely warms up before being shut off. My car did not burn one drop of oil over 3,000kms with much of it above 6,500 rpm.
BritBlaster, I reread your post and you may be correct regarding the shifting. I drive in Sport mode only on the road. I think Race mode is dangerous. I need all of the electronic help available. So I have no comment on how the car shifts in Race mode at rev limiter as I have no experience. I also use Rain mode a lot. I find the softer suspension settings are excellent in low grip situations. Car handles tremendously well even at high speed. BriBlaster, I enjoy your thoughtful posts and next time I will read more carefully before my fingers start to work
For my 900th post, a number that seemed incomprehensibly high to me until recently, I would like to post a fantastic picture taken by a friend. We were stopped at a toll booth in rural China waiting to go through the toll booth as a group together. I gave this lady my lunch box and a lai see and her smile is more beautiful than any Fcar. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Please don't take my word for this, go chat with a racing instructor or professional driver. Engines are designed for propelling the vehicle forward, brakes are designed for stopping the car. Engines are *not* designed for stopping cars, especially light high-performance engines with high-compression ratios. You are placing an enormous amount of stress on the engine as the drivetrain forces the pistons to unwillingly travel through their cylinders without the aid of combustion. Now, a certain amount of engine braking is unavoidable and even desirable -- a perfect downshift will probably raise the RPMs to 4,000 to 5,000 -- right in the power zone for exiting the braking zone. But forcing the engine into 7,000+ RPM is exponentially worse than 5,000 RPM (I don't understand the physics of this, but it's easy to "feel" on the track). Believe it or not, but F1 is much worse than a manual if engine-braking -- yes, it nails the perfect heel/toe throttle-blip for you, but it engages the drivetrain to the engine without your control and it does it very quickly. With a clutch, the driver has fine control over how much the drivetrain is introduced to the engine. I found this description on the 'net which I think expresses it quite well: Not only that... but its MUCH harder to modulate and synchonize brake/downshift/engine brake/rev match. If the clutch is engaged abruptly, especially if you're in too low of a gear, at best will cause the drive wheels to lose traction; the engine back pressure won't let them spin as fast as the asphalt wants them to, they lose grip, allowing the brakes (which are being applied heavily at this point) to slow the wheels enough to cause actual lock-up. OR if someone is running R-comps, the asphalt will win the battle and the pistons and valves will pay the price, if not rods. Your brakes are the most powerful system on your car -- much more powerful than the engine. They are certainly sufficient to completely stop the rotation of the wheel (until the ABS kicks in to prevent such shenanigans). With engine-braking, you can cause the tires to lock-up, and the ABS can NOT help you in this situation (ABS disengages brakes, but cannot disengage drivetrain). I've experienced this on the track where I've downshifted a fraction of a second too early and felt the rear tires lock up momentarily. Additional braking from the engine should never be required -- this is something pro drivers look to avoid whereever possible. BTW, love the stories and the photography; the pic of the old Chinese lady is superb. Enjoy your car -- she's a beaut!
Just had that entire Conversation with a race instructor when I was driving in England. Very well put and to the point. DM18, how are those ceramic brakes? Rock solid after a long, fast drive? Thanks for the recent photos, great job!
I race Formula Renault and the brakes are more than adequate to lock up. Downshifting helps when the car is going straight and it is proven by the data. The better drivers can downshift and blip perfectly and the effect in the first 50 metres of the braking zone is clear. My Formula car is equipped with a sophisticated data logger including brake pressure sensors and our team is large enough that there are several drivers on the track driving identical cars with identical tyres. My driving instructor is a former French champion and I have a world of confidence in his advice. Of course improper downshifting can destabilise the car at best and induce a spin at worst. The rules are different in the wet when the brake bias is more to the rear and grip is more fragile. Downshifting will be later and more gentle. 599 is a heavy car and the carbon ceramic brakes are fantastic. Downshifting at higher speeds, e.g. from 6th to 5th at 270 under braking, helps a lot as the car gets more out of the rear wheels. There is little chance of making a mistake downshifting a 599 as F1 Superfast will not let you downshift too early and the blip will be perfect
Now that's a bold rude mean statemet but that comes from somebody who actually owns a vintage Ferrari. P.S. BTW i much much prefer your second silver 599 as I hate red Ferraris
Thanks for the compliment on the silver. I much prefer silver too. I loved the 550/575 series. I thought it was deadly good looking and I spent a lot of $ on my 550 improving its' performance. I put 35,000kms on it. But reality is reality. The suspension was agricultural with little motors whirling behind your head and the ASR badly let down the car but was no doubt pretty cutting edge for 1996. Even the HGTC, the highwater mark of the series, felt underpowered and suffered from the ASR. There is no doubt that the 599 is in a different league from the ground up and in every way. Statement is not intended to mean at all. Technology moves on and the gap between the 550/575 and the 599 IMO is gapping. As an experienced owner of both and a few other cars, I wrote it as I saw it. I would say the same between the 996 GT3RS and the 997 GT3RS for exactly the same reason. The 997 is light years advanced rendering the 996 a stiff twitchy sled
Man, is it me or has f-chat become a huge soap opera? Please don't cry us a river. Martin please understand that the reason why this thread has become so successful is because DM has been telling us like it is and has been giving us 1st hand info and experience as he gets it. From the first 1000KM service to double 3M-ing a car (first time i've heard this) to even running out of gas! Sorry for my rant, just tired of too much negativity around here lately.
Good shot,looks like a lovely lady - probably made her day. I was in Shanghai recently and saw a crippled old lady begging in the street, I gave her all the money I had in my pocket - she tried to give me some back!!! I guess I look poor, but when she realised I was serious her face lit up. God Bless her!
I had the standard stereo in my first 599 and the Bose with iPod hook up in my second. Bose is worth it IMO and the iPod hook works well.
"French Champion" -- Is that meant as an oxymoron ? In any case, a materially false fact remains so despite it's source of origin. So, you're saying that the brakes alone are unable to slow the car down sufficiently ? Try pressing the left pedal a little harder ;-) If that doesn't work - well, your brakes are broken. Keeping the driveline engaged under braking is desirable. Keeping the revs up sufficiently to help keep the engine in its power-band for corner exit is also desirable. Both of these factors mean that a modest amount of engine braking is natural and unavoidable -- it's all a matter of degree to which the engine becomes involved in the braking process. The amount of engine braking you describe sounds like too much, and over using the engine for braking will *eventually* cause engine failure. Whether you keep the car long enough to see that failure, or whether it's experienced by the next owner is unknown ...
I did mention data logging and other drivers on the track at the same time. My brakes are fine and I have become reasonably accomplished at managing my brake pressure to within a hair of the ABS. 8,000kms of high speed driving in 599's is useful practice. The electronics in Superfast F1 do a fantastic job of protecting the engine and drivetrain. They will not allow "too much" engine braking "eventually" leading to engine failure IMO
Don't wanna harp on, or hijack this thread, any more than I've already done, but I asked the question in the "Racing / Tracking" forum, whether engine-braking is good or bad, and I encourage you to read it here: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?p=137139148 The overwhelming informed opinion basically confirms what I've been told numerous times; it's cheaper to replace brakes than an engine. "SRT Mike" had the best point, which I quote here: There is only one thing that slows a car down - the tires. If a car has a large amount of engine braking, it's still the tires that's stopping it. If you get (just pulling numbers from the air) 0.25g's of engine braking, and the tires can support 1g of total grip, then if you apply anything more than 0.75g's of brake pedal, you will lose traction. Many people don't think this - they think engine braking is over and above what the tires and brakes can give them, but this is not so. It's ALL the tires, no exceptions.
I understand very well the concept of grip. I have done over 10,000 kms in my Formula car with full data logging and a professional coach. I have front and rear brake pressure sensors which are part of my data. I am talking about balance and bias at high speed. With the standard front-rear bias of touring car brakes, the full potential of the rear tyres is not utilised under heavy braking at high speeds when traveling in a straight line. Engine braking definitely helps when the rear tyres have more to give. This is my actual experience with the 599 based on more than 8,000kms of high speed driving over a year. Maybe others with actual experience have a different viewpoint and that would be helpful. General statements like it is cheaper to replace brakes than engines are not helpful. Engines that are over-revved are in danger. The F1 Superfast is fantastic at managing the blips and will not allow excessive RPMs. There is therfore no excessive wear on the drivetrain. An aside - I put over 35,000kms on my 550 with many many high RPM downshifts over the years. My heel/toe pales in comparison to F1 Superfast. I was fussy about my cambelts but aside from that only regular maintenance. I sold the car to a friend who has had it for 2 years and another 10,000kms with no problems at all. To be clear, tooling around at 130kph engine braking is irrelevant. Scrubbing off speed north of 250kph when braking in a straight line, engine braking can help a lot. I don't bang through my gears on the way up or down unnecessarily. But there are times when I shift within 100 rpms of rev limiter on the way up and times when I need all the help I can get from engine braking on the way down.
This is the key point from above. Once at maximum brake pressure, engine braking helps. It would not help if the grip in the rear tyres was already fully used
Had a good look at my car today after my return from Europe. Double 3M works! I will post some pictures of a pretty big impact from a rock but no damage to the paint. So happy that paint is still perfect. Big improvement over my first 599 which needed a lot of touching up before I sold it. Did in my windshield again but it is still usable so i am not going to replace it yet. Coke bottle washed up on beach effect seems inevitable at 250+
Is the double 3M coating the coating Ferrari offers as an option now? I was surprised to see a coating in the 599 option list.
