Question about the F1 transmission...

The F1 trans is a huge advantage when it is installed in an F1 car when compared to man shift equipped cars and a couple of 1/10's of a second per lap mean everything. And in those cars, even though the straight line acceleration is slightly better with the F1 the real advantage is in reducing driver workload so that more attention can be paid to the other requirements of driving. In a street car in Ferrari's tests the F1 equipped cars are only marginally faster in straight line acceleration but that in my experience is not why most owners buy them.

 

The f1 tranny doesn't pay dividends at the dragstrip; it's a tool developed for roadracing (i.e., formula 1 & endurance racing)

 

Exactly. The biggest differences will be seen on the track.

 

One thing to note is that when the magazines test they have drivers that are usually ex racers and that can shift a manual incredibly fast thus making times more comparable to an F1 or better. The average Joe can't match it. Possibly on a similar vain, when C&D tested the new 997S they came up with a 0-60 in 4.1 seconds while the manufacturer states 4.6. This guy used to race and knows how to squeeze everything out of a 6-speed.

 

Agree completely with the prior post. Most of us just can't equal the performance of test drivers on manual shifts yet, ironically, the 0-60 and quarter mile times THEY REPORT are exactly what we "believe" our cars are capable of when driven by us. We live a fallacy. For example, my experience in my M5 and late model M6 is that I could NEVER get what the Car and Driver test drivers got, using manual shifts. I was always 10% slower, for example, instead of 5.3 secs, I'd get 5.8, even though I've installed short shifts, chips, and tried time and again.

The great thing about my F1 355 is that it's acceleration from 0-60 or quarter mile in "sport mode" feels like 4.6-4.8 secs, and 13.0 secs, respectively. And, indeed, when measured, those are the figures, time and again. Put a 355 F1 vs. an M3 or M5 -- both of which are supposed to do 0-60 in 4.7-4.8 secs -- and you'll see the F1 driver leave them behind every time. That says, nothing, of course about where the 355 really shines -- on the curves.

Shawsan

 

While we are on the topic of F1 and standard, I thought I would butt in and ask a question.

Does the F1 have the traditional power loss as all other automatics do, or is the lost power pretty much the same between the two? All other cars have a substantial power loss difference between an automatic and standard, but I think we all know a Ferrari is not just another car.

 

The Ferrari F1 is not an automatic, like say the Porsche tiptronic etc.

The power losses are the same between Manual and F1.

Shift speed is not really that fast on F1, so much so that in racing an F1 shifting 360 N-GT is up to 1 tenth per shift slower than a sequential car....and that adds up big time over a decent race distance.

BUT, the F1 doesn't make mistakes and/or buzz engines......

 

Power loss in auto transmissions is usually due to torque converters. The F1 uses a real clutch, not a torque converter.

 

Who wants an F1 anyway?

I didn't say that...

 

F1s may be desirable as long as the car is under warranty. Afterwards, open up your wallet and cry!

 

Didn't they change to a real sequential box in the 360GTC?

 

Yes. The ruling is now that sequentials are allowed in FIA N-GT. The only real advantage the F1 has is that the driver can keep his hands on the wheel for longer and use less effort.

You can also skip gears with an F1 as it is not sequential, but there's only limited advantage in that.