Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
Just curious. After reading some recent reviews of the newest from Lamborghini, Ferrari, and to a lesser degree, the GT-R, it seems the dual clutch (or the other variety, can't think of it's term) is the way to go. Shifting in less than a tenth of a second versus 1/2 a second at best, hard to beat that. Should Chevy aim in that direction? Think about it. Take your average road track, figure out how many shifts you make. Half a second per shift. Now change that to a tenth of a second. 5 to 10 (maybe more) seconds of acceleration per lap. Adds up pretty quick.
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
i dunno if the GT-Rs tranny is lesser than much, from what i've read its pretty awesome.
Yes, Chevy should have put one in the ZR-1. And it should come out in '09 as an option on the Z06.
The reasons for this are it would give us customers a reason to trade in, and while I can upshift pretty slick, downshifting sometimes causes me to feel like someone flying off of water skis looks in that moment just before they hit the water.
Chevy: I will buy a new '09 or '10 Z06 if you give it a good paddle shifted manual. No paddle shifted slopomatics, please.
__________________
Just a moment son, Dewey Cox has to think about his entire life before he plays
This makes sense on a race track, where every second counts. Also, the media is putting ridiculous pressure on manufacturers to squeeze every last ounce of performance from their cars for the sake of magazine comparisons, which sadly a lot of drivers regard as gospel. Things are pretty bad when a car is considered a POS for being 2/10ths of a second slower in the quarter than its competition. But dual clutch would make up that difference for sure. The numbers are all some people care about. It’s human nature to want to be better than the next guy.
On the street, however, I can't think of anything more boring than a paddle shifter, except maybe a full-blown automatic. Manual transmissions (MT) are more satisfying, sans the day I start taking street driving too seriously. It’s a sports car, not a Formula 1 race car.
On another note, through exhaustive research I've discovered a particular area of the hypothalamus responsible for MT stimulation. Unfortunately, this area of the brain is underdeveloped in a particular segment of the population, who prefer paddleshifting over a real clutch pedal. The condition is known as "Schumacher-wannabius". Sadly, medical science has found no cure to date.
__________________
3 good Toyo T1Rs / CAGS Defeat / Tint / Soon to be Lowered / DEAD Braille, now --> Walmart Battery / Seat Bolster Mod / HPDE Checklist
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vant
This makes sense on a race track, where every second counts. Also, the media is putting ridiculous pressure on manufacturers to squeeze every last ounce of performance from their cars for the sake of magazine comparisons, which sadly a lot of drivers regard as gospel. Things are pretty bad when a car is considered a POS for being 2/10ths of a second slower in the quarter than its competition. But dual clutch would make up that difference for sure. The numbers are all some people care about. It’s human nature to want to be better than the next guy.
On the street, however, I can't think of anything more boring than a paddle shifter, except maybe a full-blown automatic. Manual transmissions (MT) are more satisfying, sans the day I start taking street driving too seriously. It’s a sports car, not a Formula 1 race car.
On another note, through exhaustive research I've discovered a particular area of the hypothalamus responsible for MT stimulation. Unfortunately, this area of the brain is underdeveloped in a particular segment of the population, who prefer paddleshifting over a real clutch pedal. The condition is known as "Schumacher-wannabius". Sadly, medical science has found no cure to date.
that was funny as he!!, but I must counterpoint (in fun)
Magazine comparisons are fun because its fun to argue and debate and talk and ponder and dream. Lets face it, I have a Z06 and not an S-class benz because of those magazine comparisons that I read and dreamed about and debated and pondered...
... when I was 10. My hypothalamus was preoccupied with a bicycle.
Its fun. To many folks i'm sure their 'Vette is something they baby, they stare at out a window with a grin and drive on sunny days. Like my neighbor with his. He'll probably never spin its tires or go above 3000 rpm, but he knows everything about it, and mine, he!!, more than I know about mine. And he's proud of it, and it makes his life a ltitle bit better i'd wager. And he brings me all the reviews of my Z06 going faster than Ferarri's or 911 Turbos or wahtever, and thats fun to talk about over some BBQ.
To him is the challenge or manliness or whatever of a stick on the street worth more than the fun of having something just that little bit closer to the best? Probably not. I won't tell him that the paddles on his C6 link to an automatic and that its not nearly the same as whats in a Ferarri if you don't.
I got my first stick shift when I was 22. In a honda. With 110hp. It was alot cooler then to have a jap car with a stick than a big 80's era american boat. my hypothalamus, what little of it wasn't saturated with ethanol and THC, was preoccupied with the local hooters staff. I sucked at downshifting that too, so I simply didn't.
Its natural beyond natural to want our things to be "good" or even "the best", and its fun. Do hardwood floors make a house any more fun to live in? Not beyond the "Shumachus wannabius" factor. Or the "richusan famis" factor.
My cars not a race car and I'm not anywhere near a racecar driver (but i'm 100% willing to go for top speed, come death or a ticket, if I can find a road that is somewhat practical to try this on). My hypothalamus is currently preoccupied with the 54 year old guy I fired just. He cried. Skipped work 4 days got 3 last-warnings,a nd then bawled his brains out when he finally got canned. You know how unnerving it is to watch grown men cry? What the he!! is wrong with them?
I don't have any race driver fantasies, my biggest fear about going to a racing school isn't that i wont be great, its that if i loaf around the corners on a nice slow learning curve i'll wind up being in everybodies way... and if I unleash the LS7 on a straight they'll be in mine. I'm way to busy/full to try to be serious about a hobby.
But I want a paddle shifted manual. I want the ZR1 to be the magazine king. Its good for me as a reborn vette lover, i'm proud of it. Its good for america to have something to shut american-hating liberals up, and its good for everybody who owns a ZR1 to read about and feel good.
Magazine racing is good. Its no different than 99% of the people in las vegas suffering from "bigshotus pretendus", and they are pretending. They can't afford to go, I can, but I don't judge them harshly for it (and i don't gamble). I assume that adds something to their life or they wouldn't do it. All the power to 'em. Its no different than any guy with a hot chick thats not his in an avatar or a poster on a wall. Its no different than a bunch of high school girls screaming at nice cars from their dads buick, and its at the core of the single greatest attribute of the human animal - the drive to be great. Thats what built the bridge you drove over to work, the keyboard i'm typing on, and the shiny black 'Vette i'm going to go stare at for a minute when i'm done with this post. And the shorts my g/f is wearing today too.
Of course, going to a track is one step up the ladder of what makes the human animal great - actually trying something - but whatever.
Bring the paddle shifted manual, leave the regular stick as an option for people who want to come up with some Jeremy Clarkson on Top Gear back-ass old school logic for why its better. But me, i'll take progress, please, with a side of bernaise. Especially in America's Heartthrob.
Fair enough. I can't explain it, and I don't expect anyone else to either. It's honestly a mystery to me why I prefer the MT, but I try not to overthink it. There's a part of my brain that feels really good when I nail that perfect heel and toe downshift. It's a man/machine type of connection, call it "Automo-Chi"? (That's the last word I make up today, I promise).
Hey, some guys like blondes, others, brunettes. If we were all the same the world wouldn't be interesting, right? But you're absolutely correct that the paddleshifter, dual clutch, whatever, is more advanced and superior to MTs from a numbers point of view.
That reminds me of an example I mentioned in an earlier thread about progress and technology making things better than they were before. Velcro straps on shoes are far "better" than back-ass old school laces. They're faster and easier to strap than laces, never come unstrapped accidentally and trip you, and they even make a really satisfying sound when unvelcro'ed. And yet I'd be willing to bet you're wearing laces right now, despite the clear and overwhelming advantages of velcro.
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vant
Fair enough. I can't explain it, and I don't expect anyone else to either. It's honestly a mystery to me why I prefer the MT, but I try not to overthink it. There's a part of my brain that feels really good when I nail that perfect heel and toe downshift. It's a man/machine type of connection, call it "Automo-Chi"? (That's the last word I make up today, I promise).
Hey, some guys like blondes, others, brunettes. If we were all the same the world wouldn't be interesting, right? But you're absolutely correct that the paddleshifter, dual clutch, whatever, is more advanced and superior to MTs from a numbers point of view.
Automochi has a good ring to it, be a good title for someones autobiography or something.
Part of why I'd rather have one is lack of talent, part is maybe laziness (fitting time/energy for learning a new trick isn't as easy as it was when my hypothalamus was interested primarily in rum and cleavage, lol), part is magazine-racing, but mostly its just cool technology... a case where machine can be greater than man.
But totally the option should be available in a 'vette to get a manual. especially a 'vette as its been around awhile and no doubt has a bigger following among traditionalists than, say, a GT-R.
But I think GM would do well by itself if it made the vette a rolling technology showcase the way Ferarri's sort of are. I don't mean GT-R the thing out, I just mean keep the pinnacle vette at the top of the sports car heap.
And seriously, the small-block V8 is always going to offer what it takes to do that. Greatest motor ever made. Its in my truck, my work pickup, my 'vette, my old pickup, most of my offroad pals's jeeps, probably in some race car that won some title AND some offroad truck that won some title AND some pickup that won some pulling contest, all in most any day in the summer...
Quote:
That reminds me of an example I mentioned in an earlier thread about progress and technology making things better than they were before. Velcro straps on shoes are far "better" than back-ass old school laces. They're faster and easier to strap than laces, never come unstrapped accidentally and trip you, and they even make a really satisfying sound when unvelcro'ed. And yet I'd be willing to bet you're wearing laces right now, despite the clear and overwhelming advantages of velcro.
Actually - and i do see your point - I have velcro sandals on. That smell curiously like a swamp.
Why did society abandon velcro? Marketing? We saw it first on cheap shoes, while expensive shoes still had laces, which gave it that cheap and crappy aura rather than new-and-better?
Plastics were high end once, weren't they? Then they got too cheap to be cool? Or was it because plastics just don't age taht well back in those days and the shiny new cool plastic stuff was all messed up ina decade?
The way "soft ice cream" probably didn't serve Dairy Queen (or whoever invented it) marketing as well as "fresh ice cream" may have?
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
Last evening a couple of friends came over for some grill and chit chat and we got to talking about this kind of thing. automochi, and the feeling of being a aprt of something and working at it/making it work -vs- it just easily happening.
And we got to the topic of Boxsters. And ultimately, I came to this thought:
There is no doubt that the Porsche Boxster makes you feel, immediately, like a good driver. Take all cars and put someone who is maybe interested in spirited driving, but has no real experience with spirited driving, and I'd guess the Boxster would be very near the top of the how-much-they-tried-to-drive-and-corner-quick and how-much-people-liked-it lists. It makes you feel smart as a driver, and capable. You just want to drive that car around some twisties and feel some sideways forces, and its good at it.
But, to the point, I think that part of why the Boxster is that way - seems so nice/rewarding/easy to drive - is that its just not fast. Part of why it seems so balanced is that its not powerful enough to really distress itself. Porsche keeps their cars slow to help give people a false sense of automochi. If the Boxster had, say, an LS7 like, I don't know, a Z06, you could most certainly distress yourself, and the mirage of competence as a driver would diminish. Guess I have some practicing to do.
I suppose thats pretty dull to read on a message board, but it was a fun convo.
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
Well, I guess opinions are like asses and everybody is entitiled to at least one so here's mine...
I'm gonna have to agree with Vant on both of his premises on this particular topic. Magazine articles and stats may be fun to argue and disagree over as mentioned above, but there are too many folks that make too many decisions based upon the rarely unbiased numbers or opinions set out by one car mag or another.
When the day comes that I can believe that the old saying "it must be true, I read it in the paper" isn't prevelant with 85% of the populace, then perhaps I can look at the car mag numbers as tongue-in-cheek and harmless to all.
Unfortunately election year rhetoric and internet forums have shown me that we are still far away from that particular nirvana.
Owning two Z's, one a true gear rower and the other a clutchless gear rower, I can say that the 6 speed manual is still the most fun to drive on a day to day basis...no question. If my power levels and burnt out clutches and trannies would have allowed it, both of my Z's would still be manuals.
The paddle shifter is certainly more high tech, probably a track time saver and I'm sure has other great qualities. However the pure fun of driving a hi-po car is, and IMHO, will always be enhanced by rowing through the gears, improving only through practice and mistakes and giving back the real joy of 'driving' rather than just providing transportation.
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikesZ06
Well, I guess opinions are like asses and everybody is entitiled to at least one so here's mine...
I'm gonna have to agree with Vant on both of his premises on this particular topic. Magazine articles and stats may be fun to argue and disagree over as mentioned above, but there are too many folks that make too many decisions based upon the rarely unbiased numbers or opinions set out by one car mag or another.
One thing about magazine #'s is that they tend to be biased FOR any given car at least once, and then against it at least one other time.
And at the end of the day, whatever criteria someone wants to set to buy whatever, all the power to 'em... If too many people use magazines to select a car... maybe its just because most people don't have much opportunity to find something else to go on.
I mean, some people want Vipers , all the power to them too. At least the magazines give them fair warnings.
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
There is some satisfaction from performing the perfect heel & toe downshift (hey, a man's gotta have goals). You lose that with paddle shifters - the "real" ones do it for you. I like to be fully involved when I drive a sports car. The less the car does for me the better. Like stated above, magazine numbers are just that. If someone beats me by .5 second, I'm not going to run home and sell my car. Maybe we should add the automatic parallel parking option too (ok, that is a bit of a leap, but you get the jist).
__________________
You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline. It helps if you have some kind of football team or some nuclear weapons, but at the very least you need a beer. --- Frank Zappa
'04 MS/Blk - Z06Fest IV, V, VI & VII - WinterFest I "Bus Driver"
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
I get the minimal-is-more perspective, but I must disagree.
In the Hummer world there's a similar thing. Guys that offroad trucks with open differentials by riding the brakes and throttle in a complicated way. Its called brake-throttle modulation if anybody is curious.
Quite a big deal is made on message boards and in conversations about how much better that is, how connected with the machine, how fun it is to work to get to the top of the hill, how locking differentials detract from the essence of the experience.
Same stuff. But in a few trips of watching a few dozen Hummers try to go up some obstacle or hill... I can't help but point out that the ones with front/rear lockers almost always go up easily, the ones riding Torsen differentials fight and struggle ... at least some of the time.
Me, and I think alot of other people (schumacher wananbius and magazine racing aside) just want to get up the hill.
If someone wants to ride their brakes, awesome, but i'd prefer the easiest way up, please.
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric_Rav
I get the minimal-is-more perspective, but I must disagree.
Me, and I think alot of other people (schumacher wananbius and magazine racing aside) just want to get up the hill.
When you say you disagree, what you're really saying is that you personally don't feel the same way. I'm sure you're not saying or implying that everyone else should feel the same way.
You might find more people who own a Z06 are into the 'driving experience' that would be somewhat minimalized with an auto (paddle shifter) than you think.
Why not put up a poll and let folks give here their personal choice?
Re: Does the Z need paddleshifters, 1/10 second shifts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikesZ06
When you say you disagree, what you're really saying is that you personally don't feel the same way. I'm sure you're not saying or implying that everyone else should feel the same way.
of course not, no, I don't mean to imply that anybodies opinion or preference is "wrong".
But I did interpret a bit of that tone - "paddleshifters are wrong" - in a post or 2 in this thread, so I replied.
Behind this I do firmly stand: it'd be good for 'vette and GM and all to have the option. One less thing for the magazine racing web posting GM hating crowd to bash on about ... and less bashing of GM will benefit them in the long run.
AutoForums.com is the premier network of enthusiast-owned
enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
We operate more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share
experiences and opinions as a community.
Especially in America's Heartthrob.
Fair enough. I can't explain it, and I don't expect anyone else to either. It's honestly a mystery to me why I prefer the MT, but I try not to overthink it. There's a part of my brain that feels really good when I nail that perfect heel and toe downshift. It's a man/machine type of connection, call it "Automo-Chi"? 
(That's the last word I make up today, I promise).
Linear Mode
