Uncooked Truth: A Sad State of Manual Transmission Affairs
09-10-2013, 04:11 PM
#512
Race Director
For some reason,in my humble opinion,I just can't fit the GT3 along any of the cars you've mentioned...and I think that's exactly why it is unique. The McLaren doesn't do it for me,even if I had the money,I'd love a 458 though,just like I'd love a Pagani or the Aventador. But all these cars are different than the GT3,they provide excitement thru looks,sounds and exclusivity. The GT3 is different,it involves you more in the driving experience,it makes you work hard to get performance,the hard clutch,the engine behind you,tight steering and chassis,the raw sensation of a car you see dominating local tracks,zooming all day without a problem. You do not see many/if any Ferraris or McLarens at the track.
My point is,all of the above worked great as a package with a Manual transmission since 1999 and the new car lost a few bits of that package and surely is heading towards the market the cars you've mentioned fit in.
My point is,all of the above worked great as a package with a Manual transmission since 1999 and the new car lost a few bits of that package and surely is heading towards the market the cars you've mentioned fit in.
09-10-2013, 06:47 PM
#513
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Mid-Atlantic (on land, not in the middle of the ocean)
Posts: 13,398
Received 4,576 Likes
on
2,599 Posts
Personally, I don't think we can quantify how much less involving PDK is versus manual - it's a subjective and qualitative thing. And I do agree that involvement can be increased by going faster, closer to the limits. BUT, that can't realistically be done even on good roads, so manual can especially add a lot to involvement there.
09-10-2013, 09:05 PM
#514
Three Wheelin'
Personally, I don't think we can quantify how much less involving PDK is versus manual - it's a subjective and qualitative thing. And I do agree that involvement can be increased by going faster, closer to the limits. BUT, that can't realistically be done even on good roads, so manual can especially add a lot to involvement there.
The involvement is probably also a function of the road and driver skill. I didn't mind the PDK on some challenging unknown back roads. I am just an average driver, so someone more skilled than me probably would have found it less involving even there and probably prefered a manual. On the other hand even I found PDK boring on the off/on ramps on my normal commute that I am very familiar with. Unfortunately that is where I would be driving most of the time.
09-11-2013, 06:34 AM
#515
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I don't think we can quantify how much less involving PDK is versus manual - it's a subjective and qualitative thing. And I do agree that involvement can be increased by going faster, closer to the limits. BUT, that can't realistically be done even on good roads, so manual can especially add a lot to involvement there.
Nevertheless, there are other things at this car which dont convince me..
PS: for me there can be nothing more involving then driving a GT3 at 9000rpm, manual - in a mountain area..
09-11-2013, 08:59 PM
#516
Nordschleife Master
I'm just gonna throw some fuel on the fire:
http://jalopnik.com/manual-transmiss...-of-1294864532
Well, I can offer you some insight from my experience fighting for this from the inside of an OEM.
To develop, test, homologate, and certify an MTX [manual transmission - Ed.] variant of a vehicle platform is very costly. Probably more costly than the borderline MTX enthusiast might be willing to pay. It's not just the hardware which can get costly for a well synthesized box - It's the software. Whether we like it or not, software drives modern day cars. Engine, Transmission, and ESP/ABS/TCS systems all run on software. Sure, the base software for the control systems can be carried over, but the calibration for these systems is not trivial by any means, and requires significant man-years of development and several prototype test properties in multiple environments to develop, test, and certify performance and safety.
I knew a seasoned vehicle calibrator in the company, and he showed me a graph with an exponential curve fit through several data points. The X-axis was vehicle model year. The Y-axis was the number of calibration set points required for _just_ the engine calibration. In the 1980's it was up to 10. By the late 1990's it was in the 10,000's and the trend was climbing steeply. This didn't even consider yet the ESP/ABS/TCS systems which have also grown in complexity over the past decade. Add several tens of thousands more calibration points for them.
Most of the auto manufacturers do a 'value added' calculation to assess vehicle program feasibility / profitability. Unfortunately, when you consider the cost of the per-vehicle parts and development/test/homologation/certification amortized over the volume of a low take-rate option like MTX, it doesn't paint a good picture.
I fought long and hard for enthusiast oriented content during my career there, only to find that it was difficult to (believe it or not) get some product planners to appreciate the importance of the enthusiast market since enthusiasts serve as taste makers for the main stream.
So, all of you MTX fan boys and girls out there, keep buying new cars with MTX's. That's the only way to ensure that product planners can justify this kind of content. When the take-rates fall below 5%, it becomes a tough sell.
http://jalopnik.com/manual-transmiss...-of-1294864532
Well, I can offer you some insight from my experience fighting for this from the inside of an OEM.
To develop, test, homologate, and certify an MTX [manual transmission - Ed.] variant of a vehicle platform is very costly. Probably more costly than the borderline MTX enthusiast might be willing to pay. It's not just the hardware which can get costly for a well synthesized box - It's the software. Whether we like it or not, software drives modern day cars. Engine, Transmission, and ESP/ABS/TCS systems all run on software. Sure, the base software for the control systems can be carried over, but the calibration for these systems is not trivial by any means, and requires significant man-years of development and several prototype test properties in multiple environments to develop, test, and certify performance and safety.
I knew a seasoned vehicle calibrator in the company, and he showed me a graph with an exponential curve fit through several data points. The X-axis was vehicle model year. The Y-axis was the number of calibration set points required for _just_ the engine calibration. In the 1980's it was up to 10. By the late 1990's it was in the 10,000's and the trend was climbing steeply. This didn't even consider yet the ESP/ABS/TCS systems which have also grown in complexity over the past decade. Add several tens of thousands more calibration points for them.
Most of the auto manufacturers do a 'value added' calculation to assess vehicle program feasibility / profitability. Unfortunately, when you consider the cost of the per-vehicle parts and development/test/homologation/certification amortized over the volume of a low take-rate option like MTX, it doesn't paint a good picture.
I fought long and hard for enthusiast oriented content during my career there, only to find that it was difficult to (believe it or not) get some product planners to appreciate the importance of the enthusiast market since enthusiasts serve as taste makers for the main stream.
So, all of you MTX fan boys and girls out there, keep buying new cars with MTX's. That's the only way to ensure that product planners can justify this kind of content. When the take-rates fall below 5%, it becomes a tough sell.
09-11-2013, 09:23 PM
#517
Race Director
09-11-2013, 10:24 PM
#519
Race Director
I suspect the 5% is a number derived from the overall take rate for MT's in the US market, which is in fact, about 5%. I don't know what the break even point would be for a model run of 2000-3000 total cars, but I'd bet its a lot more than 100-150 cars.
But that's beside the point of the article which is, I think, that the process of engineering, design, construction, and certification isn't as simple as some believe it is.
But that's beside the point of the article which is, I think, that the process of engineering, design, construction, and certification isn't as simple as some believe it is.
09-12-2013, 01:09 AM
#520
Rennlist Member
Suspect it's probably a little different for, say, a BMW M3, BMW M5, Porsche 981, Porsche 991, etc. than, say, a Ford Fusion, Honda Accord, Mazda 6, or even "sporting" coupe. BTW, Mike, suspect the take rate of 5% is on a per-model basis given the passage quoted.
Perhaps more importantly: How does the above work out for Porsche when it can and does charge a significant premium for PDK—vs. those manufacturers in segments who cannot charge a premium for an automatic, DCT, or CVT—where such transmissions are expected as standard equipment? In other words, what's a better business model for Porsche? Continue selling PDK + Sport Chrono as optional equipment to a high percentage of buyers while keeping MT around to justify that healthy premium for PDK, or eliminate MT, save the development dollars, and/or raise base prices across the board to cover the lost revenue on highly popular options? Finally, there's the "heart" matter when it comes to cars for enthusiasts, and especially cars that reinforce a company's ethos—which the OEM insider above notes as important and this thread is all about.
09-12-2013, 01:14 AM
#521
Rennlist Member
Personally, I don't think we can quantify how much less involving PDK is versus manual - it's a subjective and qualitative thing. And I do agree that involvement can be increased by going faster, closer to the limits. BUT, that can't realistically be done even on good roads, so manual can especially add a lot to involvement there.
Completely agree.
09-12-2013, 02:03 AM
#523
Race Director
Nice post, Joe, and good input, for sure.
Suspect it's probably a little different for, say, a BMW M3, BMW M5, Porsche 981, Porsche 991, etc. than, say, a Ford Fusion, Honda Accord, Mazda 6, or even "sporting" coupe. BTW, Mike, suspect the take rate of 5% is on a per-model basis given the passage quoted.
Perhaps more importantly: How does the above work out for Porsche when it can and does charge a significant premium for PDK—vs. those manufacturers in segments who cannot charge a premium for an automatic, DCT, or CVT—where such transmissions are expected as standard equipment? In other words, what's a better business model for Porsche? Continue selling PDK + Sport Chrono as optional equipment to a high percentage of buyers while keeping MT around to justify that healthy premium for PDK, or eliminate MT, save the development dollars, and/or raise base prices across the board to cover the lost revenue on highly popular options? Finally, there's the "heart" matter when it comes to cars for enthusiasts, and especially cars that reinforce a company's ethos—which the OEM insider above notes as important and this thread is all about.
Suspect it's probably a little different for, say, a BMW M3, BMW M5, Porsche 981, Porsche 991, etc. than, say, a Ford Fusion, Honda Accord, Mazda 6, or even "sporting" coupe. BTW, Mike, suspect the take rate of 5% is on a per-model basis given the passage quoted.
Perhaps more importantly: How does the above work out for Porsche when it can and does charge a significant premium for PDK—vs. those manufacturers in segments who cannot charge a premium for an automatic, DCT, or CVT—where such transmissions are expected as standard equipment? In other words, what's a better business model for Porsche? Continue selling PDK + Sport Chrono as optional equipment to a high percentage of buyers while keeping MT around to justify that healthy premium for PDK, or eliminate MT, save the development dollars, and/or raise base prices across the board to cover the lost revenue on highly popular options? Finally, there's the "heart" matter when it comes to cars for enthusiasts, and especially cars that reinforce a company's ethos—which the OEM insider above notes as important and this thread is all about.
Anyway, I probably didn't say what I was trying to get at very clearly. There have been suggestions that Porsche could still put a MT in the 991 RS we've seen testing in what appears to be near-final form. There have even been some who've said it's still not too late to put a manual in the GT3. What the article Joe posted reinforces for me is that developing a gearbox of any kind, and integrating it into a new model is not as quick and easy an exercise as some have imagined, especially for a worldwide manufacturer subject to global regulations as opposed to a tuner with a limited market. Despite the concerns and valid frustration expressed in this thread, it's why I believe afa Porsche is concerned the MT train has already left the station, at least for this GT generation.
09-12-2013, 08:30 AM
#525
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Mid-Atlantic (on land, not in the middle of the ocean)
Posts: 13,398
Received 4,576 Likes
on
2,599 Posts
This. And I don't buy the argument that Porsche can't afford to put both manual and PDK in the GT3. They did it for the Boxster, Cayman, and other 991 variants. They're making a lot of money overall (as purchaser of three new Porsches in recent years, a non-trival chunk of that money came from me). Didn't they have something like 4x the development budget for this GT3 compared to the 997 GT3? What about broader loss of Porsche sales because people are disappointed with Porsche's decision and leave the brand, for example the guys who wanted a manual GT3, but won't now accept a manual 991S because it's not as a good a value as the GT3? And let's not forget that the new Vette is offered with both manual and automatic, and costs half the price ...