Mike in CA

An "unencumbered driving experience". Nothing ambiguous about that!

fast1

Intelligent sensors anticipate gear selections and match engine speed for smooth transitions during both upshifts and downshifts. Active Rev Match unencumbers the driving experience by simulating a heel-toe shifting method automatically."

Your second sentence makes perfect sense. I'm still struggling with the first. Depending upon gear ratios, you can drop a thousand rpm when you upshift. So what happens with this new option? You lose fewer rpms on an upshift? If so it will certainly improve the C7's 1/4 mile time.

chuckbdc

Not my sentence- cut and pasted from the Vette web site.

Downshifts seem obvious- just rev the engine to match the speed of the lower gear. What I don't understand is if there an auxiliary power source to spin the gear to which you are about to shift up some higher engine speed e.g., to match revs. I get how the side by side gear sets and dual clutch system in PDK achieves that. I don't get how to arrive at that mechanical outcome otherwise. It seems not so useful if it adds complexity for this alone.

WCE

Lift off the gas and press the clutch during an upshift, revs can drop all the way to idle depending on how slow you shift. The new corvette will apparently limit this rev drop to the right rpm for the gear selected and allow that no lift shift feature also. I like the PDK and have driven but never owned a manual and didn't think I'd ever want to, but if Porsche offered these features I probably would have gone for it. If I was buying the vette and had to choose between this manual or their 6 speed automatic, I'd be the manual for sure!

chuckbdc

Ah- that would do it. Thanks.

PDK is something else. I drove nothing but manuals for about 50 years. Then I drove the 991 with PDK and would never go back. Any dual clutch trans - of which PDK is currently the best- takes power transmission to a whole other level. The only time power is not going to the wheels is the <100 milliseconds it takes to declutch one side of the trans and engage the other, up or down with sensors preselecting the next desired gear. Between that and the engine maps for different modes, any thing else strikes me as desirable as going back to carburetors, distributors solid lifters. In an air cooled S, ok, but I did that for a loooong time, and have moved on.

FORENN

I owned a C5. I couldn't possibly have less interest in another vette.

LastMezger

Why?

jumper5836

I'm guessing probably because the new ones don't have pop up head lights.

jmm

Changing the subject back somewhat: To all of you so-called "armchair engineers" that are criticizing the Corvette's leaf springs (actually a single, transverse composite spring), check out Wikipedias study on this.

Advantages

Less unsprung weight. Coil springs contribute to unsprung weight; the less there is, the more quickly the wheel can respond at a given spring rate.

Less weight. The C4 Corvette's composite front leaf weighed 1/3 as much as the pair of conventional coil springs it would replace. Volvo reported that the single composite leaf spring used in the rear suspension of the 960 Wagon had the same mass as just one of the two springs it replaced.[8]

Weight is positioned lower. Coil springs and the associated chassis hard mounts raise the center of mass of the car.

Superior wear characteristics. The Corvette's composite leaf springs last longer than coils, though in a car as light as the Corvette, the difference is not especially significant. No composite Corvette leaf has ever been replaced due to fatigue failure, though steel leafs from 1963 to 1983 have been. As of 1980, the composite spring was an option on the C3.

As used on the Corvette, ride height can be adjusted by changing the length of the end links connecting the leaf to the suspension arms. This allows small changes in ride height with minimal effects on the spring rate.

Also as used on the C4 front suspension, C5, and C6 Corvettes, the leaf spring acts as an anti-roll bar, allowing for smaller and lighter bars than if the car were equipped with coil springs. As implemented on the C3 and C4 rear suspensions with a rigid central mount, the anti-roll effect does not occur.

Packaging. As used on the C5 and later Corvettes the use of OEM coil over damper springs would have forced the chassis engineers to either vertically raise the shock towers or move them inward. In the rear this would have reduced trunk space. In the front this would have interfered with engine packaging. The use of the leaf spring allowed the spring to be placed out of the way under the chassis and while keeping the diameter of the shock absorber assembly to that of just the damper rather than damper and spring.

Disadvantages

Packaging can be problematic; the leaf must span from one side of the car to the other. This can limit applications where the drivetrain, or another part, is in the way.

Materials expense. Steel coils are commodity items; a single composite leaf spring costs more than two of them.

Design complexity. Composite monoleafs allow for considerable variety in shape, thickness, and materials. They are inherently more expensive to design, particularly in performance applications.

Cost of modification. As a result of specialized design and packaging, changing spring rates often requires a custom unit. Coil springs in various sizes and rates are available inexpensively.

Susceptibility to damage. Engine fluids and exhaust modifications like cat-back removal might weaken or destroy composite springs over time. The leaf spring is more susceptible to heat related damage than conventional steel springs.

Perception. Due to its association with spring-located solid axles, the leaf spring has a stigma unrelated to the spring itself.

Franklin229

Bingo-Probably the biggest reason right there.
Sometimes logic is not a big factor when it comes to purchasing a car that's a "luxury" item (in this case a "sports car").

fast1

JMM - I understand that you are trying to introduce logic into the discussion, but I believe that you are on a hopeless quest. Buying high end cars is more of an emotional than rational exercise. When Nissan and Toyota introduced their luxury cars back in the early 90s, they invested billions in setting up new dealership networks for Lexus and Infiniti. Why? Because they knew that luxury car buyers in 1992 weren't going to spend $60K+ for cars with Toyota or Nissan name plates.

I would expect that the majority of Porsche buyers would never consider a GM product, regardless of how well it performs or its build quality. They crave brand status just as much as they crave what the car offers in terms of performance or styling. Want to see Porsche sales plummit. Replace the Porsche name plate with VW.

JohnnyBahamas

Such bull****.

Has nothing to do with the brand for me. In fact, I DISLIKE the status attached to the brand as I like to live under the public's radar.

It is a BETTER CAR for the purpose.

Porsche makes BETTER CARS.

Deal with it.

FORENN

Great on a straightaway, but I didn't enjoy driving it otherwise and didn't like the way it handled. After about 8 months, I traded it in on my first 911 (996) and never looked back.

FORENN

^^^^This.

meine911

Wow! 12 pages in six days on a Vette.

One can compare speed, style and handling to the 911 of similar vintage and it' probably close. I've had a C5 and C6. Great cars. I'm sure the C7 will be better.

My belief is that the Vette will bring more economy and the 911 will bring more smiles.