Rev-Match in .2 w/Sport Chrono: Defeatable in "I" mode?
02-10-2018, 02:00 PM
#16
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by stout
Such a lost opportunity, as it would be cool to be able to stiffen the engine mounts in "I" mode and then toggle the PASM dampers between settings on the center console. But...this also presents an opportunity for a software update. By that, I mean: 1) Porsche has publicly acknowledged that they got this wrong in the 991.2 and will correct it in the next 911; and 2) I was thinking that asking for a fix would be fruitless as there would be no existing button or pathway to accomplish what we are after: independent control of the rev-match. If Porsche is able to update the software to have the "Sports Chassis" box on the screen alter the engine mounts only, problem solved.
A group of 991.1 GT3 owners here on Rennlist approached Porsche with a reasonable request to improve their situation as a group of customers and ended up in a direct dialog with factory personnel via PCNA. The monetary stakes for Porsche were high in that case, but they came to a very good conclusion. The monetary stakes here are much smaller (though not insignificant, as the rollout of an update isn't cheap). Perhaps those costs could be minimized by being piggybacked onto the next update (of course, that would mean waiting). I can ask some contacts I have, but this might be an effort better led from a grassroots level including 911 Carrera, Carrera S, Carrera GTS, and Carrera T customers. The key would be following the standard of professionalism shown by the Rennlist 991.1 GT3 group.
pete
A group of 991.1 GT3 owners here on Rennlist approached Porsche with a reasonable request to improve their situation as a group of customers and ended up in a direct dialog with factory personnel via PCNA. The monetary stakes for Porsche were high in that case, but they came to a very good conclusion. The monetary stakes here are much smaller (though not insignificant, as the rollout of an update isn't cheap). Perhaps those costs could be minimized by being piggybacked onto the next update (of course, that would mean waiting). I can ask some contacts I have, but this might be an effort better led from a grassroots level including 911 Carrera, Carrera S, Carrera GTS, and Carrera T customers. The key would be following the standard of professionalism shown by the Rennlist 991.1 GT3 group.
pete
Every single review of the newer BMW M products says "too many buttons" and "too many combinations" for settings. And yet, I have never once heard that complaint from an owner on the forums.
Every brand that doesn't offer a true individualization of settings, i.e. Porsche, always has owners wishing that settings were decoupled from each other.
BMW's way is the best. Hands down. Especially with the M1 and M2 shortcuts.
02-10-2018, 06:41 PM
#18
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
02-11-2018, 03:57 PM
#19
02-12-2018, 02:07 PM
#20
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
When I read this, I have to laugh at the state of automotive journalists.
Every single review of the newer BMW M products says "too many buttons" and "too many combinations" for settings. And yet, I have never once heard that complaint from an owner on the forums.
Every brand that doesn't offer a true individualization of settings, i.e. Porsche, always has owners wishing that settings were decoupled from each other.
BMW's way is the best. Hands down. Especially with the M1 and M2 shortcuts.
Every single review of the newer BMW M products says "too many buttons" and "too many combinations" for settings. And yet, I have never once heard that complaint from an owner on the forums.
Every brand that doesn't offer a true individualization of settings, i.e. Porsche, always has owners wishing that settings were decoupled from each other.
BMW's way is the best. Hands down. Especially with the M1 and M2 shortcuts.
When iDrive came out, I ended up in a debate with a BMW engineer about iDrive at the E60 M5 launch—noting that you shouldn't have to twist a dial, bump to the right three times, bump forward, and press the dial to achieve what you can by touching a button...especially on a system slower than Windows 2000. He said, "Ah, but you journalists only ever spend a day in the car, or a week. Our customers come to know these systems and love them. And the interior, it's so much nicer looking." To which I said, "So tell me, then, why airplanes don't use iDrive?"
I don't love Porsche's current obsession with the wide/high center console and so many buttons, but I vastly prefer its approach to one-touch functionality at speed.
02-12-2018, 02:08 PM
#21
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Apparently not, brother. But looking into it, as it would be a great solution...
Yes, indeed, and probably the best "solution" for now. Of course, it doesn't really defeat the system because you're compromising your input to keep a computer from intervening vs getting the blip just right for mechanical reasons. A driver's car should serve the driver, not the other way around.
Right on, and may PM you. It might be a while, though, as it'll need to be a right time and place and person with which to raise the question. As for an update's roll-out, it can be costly. I was surprised by the number when I heard it, even for a simple update. There can be red tape, testing, logistics, etc. involved.
You can defeat rev-matching in Sport and Sport+ mode by quickly and/or aggressively executing your heel-toe throttle blip, in essence you manually override the software, since the throttle was blip you executed is higher than what the software would have picked, and you can leave PTM on.
Pete - I'd be happy to participate in this. It should be a very simple software change to the allowed modes in car's control graph. The bigger change might be to the GUI in the dash (depending on how it's implemented). But in any case, once implemented and tested back in Germany, this sort of thing can be easily updated in the field with PIWIS so the rollout cost should be minimal.
FWIW - I sent Porsche a long bug report on the configurator. They were very professional and appreciative of the feedback.
FWIW - I sent Porsche a long bug report on the configurator. They were very professional and appreciative of the feedback.
02-12-2018, 05:38 PM
#22
Rennlist Member
Makes one wonder why all manufacturers don't go OTA the way Tesla is doing it. I'm not a big fan of Tesla in general, but their onboard software platform is undeniably the best in the industry.
10-11-2018, 11:31 PM
#23
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Marineland FL
Posts: 12,409
Likes: 0
Received 3,365 Likes
on
2,308 Posts
I was just reading a different thread on the topic (https://rennlist.com/forums/991/1103...st-to-2nd.html) and saw this one - anything ever come from this discussion?
10-12-2018, 12:08 AM
#24
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I was just reading a different thread on the topic (https://rennlist.com/forums/991/1103...st-to-2nd.html) and saw this one - anything ever come from this discussion?
In an ideal world, rev-match could be defeated with the control stalk under "Vehicle > Settings > Rev Match", separating it from the various drive modes while keeping all of the other functionality in each. Absent that, the PIWIS solution would be okay. Absent that, I'd love to know which pin to sabotage...though I'm pretty sure there's no way I could bring myself to break a connector on purpose!
10-12-2018, 03:06 AM
#25
Instructor
TBD, still, but getting closer. Interesting comments from Tom @ TPC Racing that suggest the function is connected to a single pin on a connector and/or may be possible to code out on the PIWIS. My car goes in for a couple of things next week, and I am going to ask the tech to look into it.
In an ideal world, rev-match could be defeated with the control stalk under "Vehicle > Settings > Rev Match", separating it from the various drive modes while keeping all of the other functionality in each. Absent that, the PIWIS solution would be okay. Absent that, I'd love to know which pin to sabotage...though I'm pretty sure there's no way I could bring myself to break a connector on purpose!
In an ideal world, rev-match could be defeated with the control stalk under "Vehicle > Settings > Rev Match", separating it from the various drive modes while keeping all of the other functionality in each. Absent that, the PIWIS solution would be okay. Absent that, I'd love to know which pin to sabotage...though I'm pretty sure there's no way I could bring myself to break a connector on purpose!
10-12-2018, 04:55 PM
#27
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
TBD, still, but getting closer. Interesting comments from Tom @ TPC Racing that suggest the function is connected to a single pin on a connector and/or may be possible to code out on the PIWIS. My car goes in for a couple of things next week, and I am going to ask the tech to look into it.
In an ideal world, rev-match could be defeated with the control stalk under "Vehicle > Settings > Rev Match", separating it from the various drive modes while keeping all of the other functionality in each. Absent that, the PIWIS solution would be okay. Absent that, I'd love to know which pin to sabotage...though I'm pretty sure there's no way I could bring myself to break a connector on purpose!
In an ideal world, rev-match could be defeated with the control stalk under "Vehicle > Settings > Rev Match", separating it from the various drive modes while keeping all of the other functionality in each. Absent that, the PIWIS solution would be okay. Absent that, I'd love to know which pin to sabotage...though I'm pretty sure there's no way I could bring myself to break a connector on purpose!
Nissan did it right in the Z, and Corvette does it right (albeit very strangely using the shift paddles!) in the C7.
10-12-2018, 04:58 PM
#28
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Marineland FL
Posts: 12,409
Likes: 0
Received 3,365 Likes
on
2,308 Posts
I hated the rev-matching in the Corvette C7 (manual tranny) but I guess I am used to doing it myself, in the car and the bike.
10-13-2018, 09:33 AM
#30
What worries me is that the rev match may be a deliberate engineering decision needed to preserve the longevity of the PDK-derived 7mt..
Pure speculation, but otherwise why in the world would Porsche be so apparently clueless?
Pure speculation, but otherwise why in the world would Porsche be so apparently clueless?