New Corvette 10 sec faster than GT3 RS 3.8 at VIR?
06-26-2013, 06:04 PM
#61
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: West Des Moines, Iowa
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cylinder deactivation? You sound really desperate even bringing that up....
Heated and cooled seats? Are you kidding?
In bridging the gap between comfort and speed, and considering the average age of the typical Corvette buyer is almost 60 years old, which is why the seats SUCK, it makes sense that Corvette has added these systems. Magnetic suspension is hardly different from variable rate springs, and a great selling point. I don't care for it, but I'd definitely take the list of Corvette nannies way before the GT3 ones as would almost every person who does not care for the GT3's over the top changes.
But you are only fooling yourself if you think taming 475 hp and 300 ft lbs with a super long rev range is anything like taming 640 hp and 600 (almost DOUBLE) ft lbs of torque with a low revving SC (which comes with lag) V8.
Electronic rev matching can be turned off. Plenty of Heel/Toe driving!
Stability Control is mandated by the government.
2 Categories for Electronic steering? Those straws are out of reach man. That is about feel anyways, at the end of the day, it's not going to keep you on the track. I don't really care about that.
And no one is mistaking a ZR1 for a car you can get on the track and not take seriously or that is driving for you. Putting almost 700 hp and 600 ft lbs of torque down on street tires is work for any driver.
I think GM did a great job minimizing the nannies for the type of guys they are generally selling the car to. Otherwise, they would have been handing older people Vipers to crash every other day while driving gently down the street.
The two directions are not even remotely comparable. Not even a worthy try.
Oh, I forgot to add, Magnetic ride and PTM are OPTIONAL on the new Corvette..... Another point where GM>Porsche.
Heated and cooled seats? Are you kidding?
In bridging the gap between comfort and speed, and considering the average age of the typical Corvette buyer is almost 60 years old, which is why the seats SUCK, it makes sense that Corvette has added these systems. Magnetic suspension is hardly different from variable rate springs, and a great selling point. I don't care for it, but I'd definitely take the list of Corvette nannies way before the GT3 ones as would almost every person who does not care for the GT3's over the top changes.
But you are only fooling yourself if you think taming 475 hp and 300 ft lbs with a super long rev range is anything like taming 640 hp and 600 (almost DOUBLE) ft lbs of torque with a low revving SC (which comes with lag) V8.
Electronic rev matching can be turned off. Plenty of Heel/Toe driving!
Stability Control is mandated by the government.
2 Categories for Electronic steering? Those straws are out of reach man. That is about feel anyways, at the end of the day, it's not going to keep you on the track. I don't really care about that.
And no one is mistaking a ZR1 for a car you can get on the track and not take seriously or that is driving for you. Putting almost 700 hp and 600 ft lbs of torque down on street tires is work for any driver.
I think GM did a great job minimizing the nannies for the type of guys they are generally selling the car to. Otherwise, they would have been handing older people Vipers to crash every other day while driving gently down the street.
The two directions are not even remotely comparable. Not even a worthy try.
Oh, I forgot to add, Magnetic ride and PTM are OPTIONAL on the new Corvette..... Another point where GM>Porsche.
06-26-2013, 06:12 PM
#62
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: West Des Moines, Iowa
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, prev-gen Corvettes had 6-stage traction & stability control, and supposedly in some modes it was achieving better times than Tommy Milner could do with all off: http://www.roadandtrack.com/go/news/...t-how-it-works
So it was already more nannified than 991.
So it was already more nannified than 991.
06-26-2013, 06:21 PM
#63
Race Director
RWS is more like a crutch for the engine being in the wrong place. The 991 chasis improvements (vs 997) could be summarized as:
- push the engine a wee bit forward
- RWS
- widen the front base
PAG should just widen the front of a Cayman, stick the 3.8L ("GT3") engine in it and just get this gradual "improvement" process over with. This car would have very little (if any) benefits from RWS.
RWS Is a veritable dynamic improvement, which will slowly trickle down to other brands and vehicles. I would not put it on the same level as aABS, EBD, Tc, ESP And other actual "nannies"
06-26-2013, 06:22 PM
#64
Race Director
06-26-2013, 06:32 PM
#65
Race Director
That's a gross oversimplification. In the last 20 years more than 40 different cars have had active RWS and only 2 of them (the 991 GT3 and new TT) have rear mounted engines. Moreover, virtually every car, including the Corvette, has a passive RWS system. To quote the article on the subject in Wikipedia:
On many vehicles, when cornering, the rear wheels tend to steer slightly to the outside of a turn, which can reduce stability. The passive steering system uses the lateral forces generated in a turn (through suspension geometry) and the bushings to correct this tendency and steer the wheels slightly to the inside of the corner. This improves the stability of the car, through the turn. This effect is called compliance understeer and it, or its opposite, is present on all suspensions. Typical methods of achieving compliance understeer are to use a Watt's Link on a live rear axle, or the use of toe control bushings on a twist beam suspension. On an independent rear suspension it is normally achieved by changing the rates of the rubber bushings in the suspension. Some suspensions typically have compliance oversteer due to geometry, such as Hotchkiss live axles or a semi-trailing arm IRS, but may be mitigated by revisions to the pivot points of the leaf spring or trailing arm. Passive rear wheel steering is not a new concept, as it has been in use for many years, although not always recognized as such.
Active RWS is simply a more effective way of achieving the goal that the suspension on the car you're driving today is trying to achieve.
On many vehicles, when cornering, the rear wheels tend to steer slightly to the outside of a turn, which can reduce stability. The passive steering system uses the lateral forces generated in a turn (through suspension geometry) and the bushings to correct this tendency and steer the wheels slightly to the inside of the corner. This improves the stability of the car, through the turn. This effect is called compliance understeer and it, or its opposite, is present on all suspensions. Typical methods of achieving compliance understeer are to use a Watt's Link on a live rear axle, or the use of toe control bushings on a twist beam suspension. On an independent rear suspension it is normally achieved by changing the rates of the rubber bushings in the suspension. Some suspensions typically have compliance oversteer due to geometry, such as Hotchkiss live axles or a semi-trailing arm IRS, but may be mitigated by revisions to the pivot points of the leaf spring or trailing arm. Passive rear wheel steering is not a new concept, as it has been in use for many years, although not always recognized as such.
Active RWS is simply a more effective way of achieving the goal that the suspension on the car you're driving today is trying to achieve.
06-26-2013, 06:52 PM
#67
Race Director
Look man, I'm not about to sit here and argue over the definition of nanny. When it's mentioned, you guys know what it is RWS, PDK, PDCC ad yes including ABS and PASM, Power Steering etc. All considered nanny's as well. Nannie's to not just fix problems, they make tasks (even trivial ones) easier and require less effort.
There is an acceptable amount of them and a non acceptable amount. There are also several ones required by the governement, so out of Porsche's hands.
AC is not a nanny, I'm sure you have heard of creature comforts. There are also an acceptable amount of those as well. I wouldn't want back massaging on a GT3 but it sure felt good in a 745.
But go ahead. Nit pick away..........
There is an acceptable amount of them and a non acceptable amount. There are also several ones required by the governement, so out of Porsche's hands.
AC is not a nanny, I'm sure you have heard of creature comforts. There are also an acceptable amount of those as well. I wouldn't want back massaging on a GT3 but it sure felt good in a 745.
But go ahead. Nit pick away..........
It's not nit picking; it's just trying to keep the ground from shifting on this discussion. To me a nanny is something that compensates for the mistakes of the driver. That means it's not AC, or power windows or any other creature comfort, nor is it RWS, PASM, wider tires, sway bars, adjustable shocks, or any other performance related system.
06-26-2013, 07:13 PM
#68
Race Car
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both cars have the following safety nannies:
ABS
Traction control
Stability control
Both cars have the following performance/comfort nannies:
power windows
power electric steering
electronic fuel injection
drive by wire throttle
electronic suspension
e-diff
automatic rev matching
launch control
Porsche has the following additional electronic performance enhancements:
electronically controlled rear steering
electronically controlled clutch; PDK (but vette has the rev matching part)
Vette has:
electronically controlled variable ratio electric steering
electronically controlled variable resistance electric steering
So all this bitching and moaning is all about RWS and MT (auto rev match) v. PDK. All on a car you've not driven? Or did I miss something that should be added to the GT3 column?
I'm just trying to identify what exactly makes the new GT3 so nannified relative to the vette.
[and you keep citing pdcc but that's not in the gt3]
06-26-2013, 07:24 PM
#70
Three Wheelin'
Cylinder deactivation? You sound really desperate even bringing that up....
Heated and cooled seats? Are you kidding?
In bridging the gap between comfort and speed, and considering the average age of the typical Corvette buyer is almost 60 years old, which is why the seats SUCK, it makes sense that Corvette has added these systems. Magnetic suspension is hardly different from variable rate springs, and a great selling point. I don't care for it, but I'd definitely take the list of Corvette nannies way before the GT3 ones as would almost every person who does not care for the GT3's over the top changes.
But you are only fooling yourself if you think taming 475 hp and 300 ft lbs with a super long rev range is anything like taming 640 hp and 600 (almost DOUBLE) ft lbs of torque with a low revving SC (which comes with lag) V8.
Electronic rev matching can be turned off. Plenty of Heel/Toe driving!
Stability Control is mandated by the government.
2 Categories for Electronic steering? Those straws are out of reach man. That is about feel anyways, at the end of the day, it's not going to keep you on the track. I don't really care about that.
And no one is mistaking a ZR1 for a car you can get on the track and not take seriously or that is driving for you. Putting almost 700 hp and 600 ft lbs of torque down on street tires is work for any driver.
I think GM did a great job minimizing the nannies for the type of guys they are generally selling the car to. Otherwise, they would have been handing older people Vipers to crash every other day while driving gently down the street.
The two directions are not even remotely comparable. Not even a worthy try.
Oh, I forgot to add, Magnetic ride and PTM are OPTIONAL on the new Corvette..... Another point where GM>Porsche.
Heated and cooled seats? Are you kidding?
In bridging the gap between comfort and speed, and considering the average age of the typical Corvette buyer is almost 60 years old, which is why the seats SUCK, it makes sense that Corvette has added these systems. Magnetic suspension is hardly different from variable rate springs, and a great selling point. I don't care for it, but I'd definitely take the list of Corvette nannies way before the GT3 ones as would almost every person who does not care for the GT3's over the top changes.
But you are only fooling yourself if you think taming 475 hp and 300 ft lbs with a super long rev range is anything like taming 640 hp and 600 (almost DOUBLE) ft lbs of torque with a low revving SC (which comes with lag) V8.
Electronic rev matching can be turned off. Plenty of Heel/Toe driving!
Stability Control is mandated by the government.
2 Categories for Electronic steering? Those straws are out of reach man. That is about feel anyways, at the end of the day, it's not going to keep you on the track. I don't really care about that.
And no one is mistaking a ZR1 for a car you can get on the track and not take seriously or that is driving for you. Putting almost 700 hp and 600 ft lbs of torque down on street tires is work for any driver.
I think GM did a great job minimizing the nannies for the type of guys they are generally selling the car to. Otherwise, they would have been handing older people Vipers to crash every other day while driving gently down the street.
The two directions are not even remotely comparable. Not even a worthy try.
Oh, I forgot to add, Magnetic ride and PTM are OPTIONAL on the new Corvette..... Another point where GM>Porsche.
06-26-2013, 09:12 PM
#71
Rennlist Member
We already have a passive RWS type rear suspension on the 996 and 997. Porsche came up with that to tame the rear end.
I have a video of the rear wheel movement (toe in and out) of my 996 on the track from back in 2000. Is that a nanny too!
I have a video of the rear wheel movement (toe in and out) of my 996 on the track from back in 2000. Is that a nanny too!
06-26-2013, 09:28 PM
#72
Race Director
Just as a point of interest the latest Panorama has an article on how the Boxster and 993 came into being. Porsche designed the rear sub-frame on the 993 specifically to accommodate a 4 wheel steering system but Bosch wanted $40 million to develop the electronics and at that time Porsche was strapped for cash and decided to pass. They went ahead with the sub-frame for production anyway because the found it to have other advantages. Clearly they've been interested in RWS for quite a while.
06-27-2013, 01:33 AM
#73
Rennlist Member
Just as a point of interest the latest Panorama has an article on how the Boxster and 993 came into being. Porsche designed the rear sub-frame on the 993 specifically to accommodate a 4 wheel steering system but Bosch wanted $40 million to develop the electronics and at that time Porsche was strapped for cash and decided to pass. They went ahead with the sub-frame for production anyway because the found it to have other advantages. Clearly they've been interested in RWS for quite a while.
06-27-2013, 04:35 AM
#74
Race Car
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: With A Manual Transmission
Posts: 4,728
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Nanny is a real word; let's not invent new definitions for it and then pretend it doesn't matter in the context of the argument. It refers to being "overprotective" as in "nanny state". ABS and stability management can be considered to fit that definition. PDCC, RWS, PDK, and power steering do not. If we used your definition that nannies make tasks easier and require less effort we'd have to include things like starter motors and engine management systems which I don't think is the point.
It's not nit picking; it's just trying to keep the ground from shifting on this discussion. To me a nanny is something that compensates for the mistakes of the driver. That means it's not AC, or power windows or any other creature comfort, nor is it RWS, PASM, wider tires, sway bars, adjustable shocks, or any other performance related system.
It's not nit picking; it's just trying to keep the ground from shifting on this discussion. To me a nanny is something that compensates for the mistakes of the driver. That means it's not AC, or power windows or any other creature comfort, nor is it RWS, PASM, wider tires, sway bars, adjustable shocks, or any other performance related system.
Common Pot.......
The word is open to interpretation being applied to something it wasn't originally intended. But most of the car world considers paddle shifts nannies and would consider RWS them as well.
The fact of the matter is that they are taking control away from the driver, and fit right in with the other ones. You can keep arguing semantics all you want, but the GT3 hasn't been coined a nanny mobile because of ANYTHING short of PDK and RWS, and you know that. Take those two things off the car (or add as an option), and the world is a much happier place.
Period.
06-27-2013, 04:43 AM
#75
Race Car
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: With A Manual Transmission
Posts: 4,728
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
YES, DING DING DING DING............
You don't honestly think people would be trippin' so much if there was a manual an no RWS (or making them optional) would you? What else is there that people are complaining about? No Mezger and Electric steering. Engine is not related and most people would not pass on the car for steering only.
STOP.....TRYING......SO......HARD
You don't honestly think people would be trippin' so much if there was a manual an no RWS (or making them optional) would you? What else is there that people are complaining about? No Mezger and Electric steering. Engine is not related and most people would not pass on the car for steering only.
STOP.....TRYING......SO......HARD
OK got it. Nannies are electronic safety, performance and ease-of-operation improvements. " Nannie's to not just fix problems, they make tasks (even trivial ones) easier and require less effort." But you also said nannies are not creature comforts, so we can skip stuff like AC. So let's see (I'm using generic language here as PAG loves acronyms).
Both cars have the following safety nannies:
ABS
Traction control
Stability control
Both cars have the following performance/comfort nannies:
power windows
power electric steering
electronic fuel injection
drive by wire throttle
electronic suspension
e-diff
automatic rev matching
launch control
Porsche has the following additional electronic performance enhancements:
electronically controlled rear steering
electronically controlled clutch; PDK (but vette has the rev matching part)
Vette has:
electronically controlled variable ratio electric steering
electronically controlled variable resistance electric steering
So all this bitching and moaning is all about RWS and MT (auto rev match) v. PDK. All on a car you've not driven? Or did I miss something that should be added to the GT3 column?
I'm just trying to identify what exactly makes the new GT3 so nannified relative to the vette.
[and you keep citing pdcc but that's not in the gt3]
Both cars have the following safety nannies:
ABS
Traction control
Stability control
Both cars have the following performance/comfort nannies:
power windows
power electric steering
electronic fuel injection
drive by wire throttle
electronic suspension
e-diff
automatic rev matching
launch control
Porsche has the following additional electronic performance enhancements:
electronically controlled rear steering
electronically controlled clutch; PDK (but vette has the rev matching part)
Vette has:
electronically controlled variable ratio electric steering
electronically controlled variable resistance electric steering
So all this bitching and moaning is all about RWS and MT (auto rev match) v. PDK. All on a car you've not driven? Or did I miss something that should be added to the GT3 column?
I'm just trying to identify what exactly makes the new GT3 so nannified relative to the vette.
[and you keep citing pdcc but that's not in the gt3]