SteveD

Hi Andy, good to see another friendly face on here.

I didn't realise you had a GT2. Ahh, the 993 my favourite Porsche and the one I wish I hadn't sold.

Adrian

So to be an automatic it has to have a torque converter and without it is manual.
Hmmmm! Question for our expert Steve. Have you ever heard about, Porsche Sportomatic. It has a torque converter. Engine oil cooled. Connected to a manual gearbox. The clutch is vacuum operated. Guess what though, to change gears you have to actuate the gear lever. If you do not touch the gear lever it will stay in the selected gear. It is a semi-automatic.
The CSL has a fully automatic function where the car changes gears at preset rpms without any other input from the driver. This you call manual operation.
I think to be quite honest based on the post you have made about your far superior knowledge of Porsche and BMW than anyone else here that maybe you could explain these things.
I love a great discussion. So lets get this back on track with the facts.
Automatic = torque converter.
Manual = no torque converter.
Semi automatic = ?
No clutch pedal = manual
Steering wheel paddles = manual
This is the argument of the M3 CSL owner.
Oh yes please explain the weights again. Your system is not quite DIN. When weights are published in official documentation they are required to meet a standard. Here in Europe that standard is DIN. According to the BMW brochures the CSL it weighs in at 1420 kgs without aircon and 1460 kgs with. The CSL I drove had a very nice aircon system. Much better than the Porsche one.
Ciao,
Adrian
964C4

PS: Steve lack of tread depth is a universal tyre problem in the wet.

SteveD

I've never claimed superior expertise, just first hand ownership experience which seemed to be a scarce commodity in this discussion.


It was actually called 'SportMatic' and the rights have been bought by Kia I believe for use on their top end saloons It was actually a full automatic as the engineering definition goes, and was one of the earliest examples of a 'self-shift automatic'. It seems that the real technical difference between an automatic and manual transmission is whether it has a clutch or not. A clutch is a mechanical friction device that can provide near instant engagement of drive and hence be responsive to the driver's inputs, whereas an automatic transmission uses a viscous mechanism. The M3's mechanism is the best of the 'sequential' or 'automated manuals' that includes Ferrari's F1 system and Alfa's Selespeed. The only difference between a manual M3 and an SMG M3 is the addition of a clever piece of apparatus that engages the clutch hydraulically rather than by foot pedal. Apart from some intelligent electronics this is very similar in principal to hydraulic brakes, which I don't seem to remember anybody complaining about. If executed well (as in BMW's system) there are many advantages to the performance driver with very few downsides. Rather than debating the semantics of definition the real question is does the driver have control and the answer to that question is yes, unless you wish to break the transmission in which case it won't let you.


Let me quote the published weights again just to make things clear. The DIN weight is the dry weight in road trim without fuel. Porsche publishes two weights for it's cars the DIN weight and the EC standard weight (DIN + 68kg for driver and 7kg for luggage). BMW do not typically publish the DIN weight but instead choose to publish what they call the EU weight (DIN +90% fuel tank +68kg driver +7kg luggage).

For the M3 CSL BMW have published two weights one is the full EU weight of 1460kg, the other is the equivalent of Porsche's EC weight and that comes to 1385kg. This then indicates a DIN weight for the CSL at 1310kg.

For the 996 GT3 for example Porsche quotes 1380kg for the DIN weight and 1455kg for the EC weight.

If you check on the BMW.com website you will find the published figure of 1385kg for the CSL which is the EC weight, unfortunately BMW do not define what this weight is based on, but I have the original technical spec produced by BMW in March 2003 that I can send you if you are interested in confirming this for yourself.

The end result is a power/weight ratio based on the EC weights of 259bhp/ton for the CSL and 261bhp/ton for the GT3, so if you take that into account with the lesser tranmission losses in the 911 then you can see why the GT3 would be quicker than the CSL, but you can also see why that difference will not be such that the GT3 is in a different league. (approx 2 seconds from 0-200km/h).

To provide some context a standard M3 has a power/weight ratio of 229bhp/ton and a standard 996 C2 is 221bhp/ton. Given that in normal circumstances these two cars have near identical performance you can see the difference the lesser transmission losses make with the C2 allowing it to compensate for it's lack of power. Alternatively you can also work out that the improvement in performance from GT3 over C2 is greater than CSL over M3 (18% to 13%) so yet again you can see why the GT3 will be quicker than the CSL.

I trust that clears things up a little.

Steve

Adrian

Dear Steve,
We are mixing up the technical with the opinions. I cannot disagee with you that the transmission in the M3 CSL is very nice and very driver friendly. I was not overly impressed with the upshift but the downshifting was superb. I was impressed that for the ladies and the tired you could select a fully automatic function for city driving right through to the sporty drive. The handling for a front engined rear wheel drive was excellent in the dry. I was not overly happy with it on the skid pan. Yes we can visit the skid pan for test drives.

The weight measurement that is used is contained in DIN 7200. All comparisons to be honest and fair have to be made at this weight. It is the only weight that is inspected and checked under the rules of the TÜV for a basic car. The rest is what I call marketing weights. Porsche also publish empty weight oder leergewicht. Unfortunately the real weight of a Porsche or BMW varies dramatically with the options installed.

Now to your statement about the Sportomatic. I am terribly terribly sorry but you is very wrong on this. If you are correct and the transmission was called Sportmatic then not only am I wrong but so is Porsche, Paul Frere and a host of other authors. The correct name and the name found on the maintenance manual is "Sportomatic".

http://www.wheelerfolk.org/stuff/Default.htm

I will not go any further in this. You will find the full history of the Sportomatic in my new book on the 911SC.

Finally nobody is complaining. I was challenged in fact I was attacked by people when I said this was an automatic. The fact that the primary transmission part is the manual gearbox is irrelevant. What separates a manual and an automatic in my mind is;
From start and gearboxes in neutral.
When I want first gear I have to push the clutch in, move the gear lever into the 1st gear position then let the clutch out and apply accelerator to move off.
In the BMW C3 CSL I have to put my eight foot on the brake to get first gear and my left foot does nothing.
The technology behind these transmissions is a wonder and magnificent. In fact BMW lead the motoring world in many such things. The fact is though in my opinion and from my experience as a driver that if I tell the car I want something and it does it in its own good time, as opposed to me doing an action and the car having no choice but to follow is what I am doing is what separates an automatic or semi-automatic from a manual. There is no way in my mind that you can call the M3 CSL a manual. You can actually call it what you like but I do not have to agree with you and you do not have to agree with me.
Still a nice car though but no way did it make me smile like driving a GT-3 road or Cup car does.
Ciao,
Adrian
964C4

AGSpeed

Weight
If you've dallied with GT3s since 1999, you'll know how jolly heavy they are. CSL and GT3 are close enough in weight for the difference to be "a rounding error". If you've read the specs, then you know that weigh about the same. Neither has many options.

Speed
There is plenty enough testing out there now to see that the two cars are very close on pace. Including my own testing (Spa/Nordschleife).

Manual
The engineering definition is conventional (torque converter or not). However, if you want to define the distinction based on actuation by simultaneous actions of foot and hand / not, that's fine.

So Alessandro Zanardi was driving an automatic BMW320i in the ETCC at Monza because.... he was shifting with his hand only?

And no doubt I am using an automatic in my DTM racer when I don't bother using the clutch on the way up the box?

Ok maybe not so useful.

Future
BTW here comes Zuffenhausen with a fingertip controlled manual themselves.... just wait. Soon the gearstick will be a thing of antiquity.

Adrian

Alex Zanardi was using a specially modified BMW (he did not get far in the first race due to a massive pile up) to allow him to only use his hands for throttle and brake and gear changing. I do not have the details of the modifications but this was a racing handicapped persons auto. What was automatic and what was genuinely manual I do not know.
He did very well starting 11th on the grid and in the second race I think he finished in the top 10. I cannot remember. I was cheering for the Alfas.
No bothering to use one and not having any foot control over one is two very different things.
I still cannot see how you can call any of these things manuals. The word manual requires a manual or physical effort. Unless of course the pressure exerted by a finger on a piece of plastic is called manual labour nowadays. Maybe the definition of the word manual gear changing will have to be changed in future.
"Exert force upon an electronic device so it will change gears for you" Yes it is sarcastic but I would have agreed with semi-automatic with some of this stuff but manual. No I am sorry I cannot agree.
Ciao,
Adrian
964C4

PS: What DTM racer have you got. Audi, Mercedes or Opel?

AGSpeed

Zanardi's 320i has a manual gearbox and clutch. Whilst he brakes with his prosthetic leg (isn't that fantastic?!) he cannot operate the clutch with his leg.

So Ravaglia have rigged up a button in the gear lever which, when pressed, disengages the clutch. He presses the button, moves the lever then let's go of the button again. This is for downshifts. Upshifts can be performed without declutching.

So does the sustitution of a button, in turn electro-hydraulically controlling the clutch slave cylinder and release bearing, make this a manual or an auto?

Obviously you will realise that in a Porsche with a hydraulic clutch, the pedal displaces fluid in the master cylinder which in turn displaces fluid in the slave cylinder and thereby disengages.

So its pedal+master cylinder plays button+electronics+actuator. Slave cylinder is the same.

I think the point is that this debate is taxonomically and semantically oriented, not of fundamental physical import and, moreoever, is rather esoteric.

Call things what you will.

But I know what a clutch is, what a multi-ratio transmission is, what a differential is and, finally, what a viscous-shear torque converting differential is.

What buttons/levers one has to deal with in order to instruct a change of ratio seems to me to be a side issue: each type of control interface is available with each type of underlying mechanical design.

It is the mechanical design which embodies the properties that are relevant to the behaviour of the vehicle.

But having determined what mechanical behaviour one desires, then choose the user-interface one feels most able to interact with.

Now you can't say fairer than that? Can you?!

Regards, Andy.

Adrian

Dear Andy,
Zanardi is a brave soul and an inspiration to all. Not seen the likes of him since Douglas Bader.
However you did not answer the question I posed.
It is too late in the evening to try and make sense of the rest of your post. Too many big words.
Ciao,
Adrian
964C4

Jack Ennuste

Just for curiosity I took 1999 model year GT3, but Cup model.

Nyrburgring lap time 7.49 (new GT3 street version 7.54)

It has less power, 360 hp versus 381 hp in new GT3 street version.
Biggest difference is in transverse acceleration. Cup model has 1,6g, street model has 1,25g with street tires (M3 CSL has 1,4g)

So, its clearly down in the tires and chassis! New GT3 Cup will kill CSL in BIG way.

Look http://www.track-challenge.com/compa...ar1=61&Car2=32

graham_mitchell

Jaak, thanks for the link to that site - interesting!

Roygarth

Can I have some of what you've been smoking?

AGSpeed

It's not available for sale! However with the aid of a dictionary plus a little research into: mathematics/physics/philosophy of scientific method, you won't need any!

Madcaplaughs

Not a very likely result. The Beamer even with the special tyres has not proved faster than the GT3 in any British magazine test, and there have been many.

AGSpeed

They both have special tyres. Actually all the tests are pretty consistent: if the test favours straight line, the Porsche does it, if carrying speed through corners: the BMW.

Feehliks

...