Sports cars with automatic transmissions

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
41

[QUOTE=TheLoadedDog]
Next time you do your mundane commute, try “chaffeur driving” for fun (I saw this recommended in a motoring book once). You don’t have to speed, nor do you have to push anything to its limits. Just imagine you have the world’s most important person in your passenger seat (in this case a nun in a neck brace). You have to get her to an appointment on time, but smoothly. Silky gear changes, safe lane changes, etc. It’s actually really enjoyable driving, and a manual tranny makes it even more demanding. Sometimes you can push the envelope without compromising safety or without a passing cop giving you a second glance.
[/QUOTE]

This is really, really, really hard, by the way. But fun. It also helps you practice your turns very well. It’s a variant on the ‘grape in a collander’ or ‘glass of water’ trick.

42

[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.]
That’s not really the point of a sports car.
[/QUOTE]

When it comes to a quality or high end sports car, I’m not disagreeing – and I may be hijacking a little – but the snobbery has gotten to the point where people get uppity that I drive an automatic firebird. Come on, it’s a firebird! I’m 99% sure that the car (late second/early third generation at least) was only built to look cool in while blasting hair metal. A friend of mine drives an elantra and I once witnessed someone getting on HER case because it was automatic, fer cryin’ out loud.

43

[QUOTE=kawaiitentaclebeast]
All of this will be a moot point once the Borg Warner DSG transmission becomes more popular. You can get it in virtually all VAG products, from the VW Golf to the Bugatti Veyron (not quite the same, but similar technology), even BMW is rumoured to be abandoning their own SMG trannies and licensing DSG for their next generation M cars. A Diesel Audi with DSG transmission is pretty much the pinnacle of automotive technology at this point.
Direktschaltgetriebe - The way of the future!
[/QUOTE]

OMG! This LOOKS a LOT like that infamous dual-clutch tranny used in the late (unlamented) Porsche 944! Those THINGS lasted at best 30,000 miles-repair (clutch replacement-upwards of $2400.00!)

44

I’ve never heard of the 944 having a dual clutch tranny, or any kind of tranny other than a conventional one. Neither Wiki nor the linked 944 FAQ makes any mention of such a thing, and $2400 doesn’t even sound like such an unreasonable amount for a complete clutch job (It’s a Porsche, they’re not exactly cheap to maintain).

45

[QUOTE=Tuckerfan]
I dunno what WRC is…
[/QUOTE]

World Rally Championship: not sure if you have it in the States, but it’s big in the, well, world. Tremendous fun to watch actually, mostly because the cars resemble real cars and the driving resembles real driving, especially with the cockpit cams - you can actually see them drive: I can identify with what the drivers are actually doing, even if there’s no way in hell I could ever replicate it, whereas open-wheelers are a tremendous yawn. I’m sure there’s a frightening amount of skill involved, but it it still resembles threading coloured beads onto a a string and sliding them back and forth.

46

Personally, I’ve always felt that the sequential manual gearbox was the ultimate expression of a performance transmission setup.

All the control of a manual, but with no clutch you can try left-foot braking and REALLY feel like an F1 driver.

47

[QUOTE=Tuckerfan]

I dunno what WRC is, but I’ve watched F1 races (under protest) and I can’t say I find watching a bunch of guys driving around in a circle until they disappear up their own assholes all that exciting. Nor do I really want to drive one of those cars. There’s no real art to them, IMHO. The teams are given enormous budgets to work with, and can basically make/buy anything they want within the rules.
[/QUOTE]

Okay, gotta take exception here! Formula One is NOT roundy roundy racing–you’re thinking of NASCAR, which is indeed boring, bloated with money and the cars bear about as much resemblance to “stock” cars as a drag queen does to a soccer mom… In F1 the teams are allowed a strict limit of chassis, parts and engines–you wreck your car too many times and you are out of the circuit for the rest of the year. The car you start the season with is the car you race, period. The cars have an upper displacement limit, (currently 2.4L, V8 and naturally aspirated with an option for V10 3.0L) so you can’t just come in with a huge ass supercharged 8L W16 or something like that, so the engines are running at max tolerances to put out that much HP per liter displacement. Here is a Wiki link to the current F1 regulations for the cars. As you can see, these are pure old style cars, no fancy schmancy crap allowed in F1–these are old style beasts which are engineered to fine tolerances.

The tracks are quite often marked out on streets rather than being run on special tracks, and the cars have to be able to deal with manhole covers, chunky asphalt, bumpy bits and all the attendant issues attendant on racing on real streets. Races aren’t called due to rain, and there are limits to how many times you can change tires in a race. Go watch the Grand Prix de Monaco for the finest example of this type of course. Not only do F1 drivers have to know how to turn to the right, they have to deal with hills, bumps, chicanes, up to 90-degree turns, rain, snow, slick spots, different surfaces complete with transitional areas, sheep on the track, you name it, F1 has to deal with it! The only more gruelling roadracing possible is Le Mans, but that’s only one race, whereas once a team is done with one race in F1 it’s off to another country and a whole 'nother set of problems for the driver and car.

F1 racing is the epitome of fine driving linked with fine machinery–no computerized, drive by wire, “throw money at it 'til you win” racing here!

Carry on! :wink:

48

[QUOTE=E-Sabbath]
This is really, really, really hard, by the way. But fun. It also helps you practice your turns very well. It’s a variant on the ‘grape in a collander’ or ‘glass of water’ trick.
[/QUOTE]

As an elderly woman, my late aunt (God rest her soul) was told by her doctor that she had to wear a neck brace when in a car. I loved her dearly, but she was very proud, and never wore it. In fact I only knew because my mum told me (my aunt never would). Anyway, I used to ferry her around the shops after her husband died. It was hair-raising, especially with Sydney’s speed bumps, pot holes, etc. Good practice though, I guess. I got pretty good at silky smooth driving. I had to.

49

[QUOTE=garygnu]
My wife’s MINI Cooper has that config. The computer will keep the transmission in one “gear” until A) you shift it. B) it hits redline C) it would stall if not down-shifted. Mind you, the “gears” on a CVT will manual override are just preset gear ratios, I prefer the infinite gear ratios of the CVT by itself.
[/QUOTE]
My parent’s Intrepid has an auto-stick: and does the same thing. It also has a “you’re a freakin’ IDIOT who doesn’t know how to shift so I’m taking back control” mode where if things are starting to overheat (may be a few other conditions that I can’t remember at the moment as I’m not about to meander outside to look at the manual) it’ll revert back to standard automatic mode in an attempt to save itself from you. So you’ll still be able to put it into neutral, etc., just not tell it that you wanna be in 1st gear and just under the redline for hours on end or be constantly slamming it back and forth from 1st to 4th.

But I do have to agree, one of the things that I like about sporty cars is that you have more feel for what is going on and more control over what happens and when. Having an automatic transmission in such a car runs counter to this purpose: while yes, I can tweak things by using ‘2’ and ‘3’ in addition to ‘D’ while in an automatic you still don’t have quite the amount of control.

And I’m possibly one of the few people for which a Miata actually is a practical car. Just don’t ask me to pick someone up at the airport. :wink:

<< Zoom - Zoom! >>

50

[QUOTE=SmartAleq]
Okay, gotta take exception here! Formula One is NOT roundy roundy racing–you’re thinking of NASCAR, which is indeed boring, bloated with money and the cars bear about as much resemblance to “stock” cars as a drag queen does to a soccer mom… In F1 the teams are allowed a strict limit of chassis, parts and engines–you wreck your car too many times and you are out of the circuit for the rest of the year. The car you start the season with is the car you race, period. The cars have an upper displacement limit, (currently 2.4L, V8 and naturally aspirated with an option for V10 3.0L) so you can’t just come in with a huge ass supercharged 8L W16 or something like that, so the engines are running at max tolerances to put out that much HP per liter displacement. Here is a Wiki link to the current F1 regulations for the cars. As you can see, these are pure old style cars, no fancy schmancy crap allowed in F1–these are old style beasts which are engineered to fine tolerances.

The tracks are quite often marked out on streets rather than being run on special tracks, and the cars have to be able to deal with manhole covers, chunky asphalt, bumpy bits and all the attendant issues attendant on racing on real streets. Races aren’t called due to rain, and there are limits to how many times you can change tires in a race. Go watch the Grand Prix de Monaco for the finest example of this type of course. Not only do F1 drivers have to know how to turn to the right, they have to deal with hills, bumps, chicanes, up to 90-degree turns, rain, snow, slick spots, different surfaces complete with transitional areas, sheep on the track, you name it, F1 has to deal with it! The only more gruelling roadracing possible is Le Mans, but that’s only one race, whereas once a team is done with one race in F1 it’s off to another country and a whole 'nother set of problems for the driver and car.

F1 racing is the epitome of fine driving linked with fine machinery–no computerized, drive by wire, “throw money at it 'til you win” racing here!

Carry on! :wink:
[/QUOTE]
You must be watching a different F1 than what I’ve seen. In the F1 I’ve seen (with a guy by the name of Michael Schumacher driving for Ferrari), the cars are all carbon fiber, have a dozen or more guys staring at computer displays which are showing real time data being generated by the computers installed in the cars, the average team’s budget is about the same as the total amount of money spent by all teams in NASCAR, and the race ends at the same point where it begins (hence, a circle). The paddle shifting trannys are all computerized, and the engines are all titanium, magnesium, and other alloys. Not a cast iron or aluminium block among 'em.

Oh, and the WRC folks are trying to get interest in the sport started here, but they’re not having much luck, AFAIK. Personally, I find all sporting events boring, so unless they do something to make it really interesting, like adding machine guns and the like to the cars, I ain’t gonna watch.

51

[QUOTE=Tuckerfan]
You do realize that for cars like the MG, 80 MPH’s the limit? A car doesn’t need to be capable of doing 190 MPH+ to be considered a sports car.
[/QUOTE]

Depends on the MG. An MGB has a top speed of 103 or 107 mph, depending on your source. Midget Mk.IIIs had a published top speed of 93 mph.

And yes; as Road & Track said 40 years ago, handling is a much more important attribute for a sports car than top speed.

I think there is a basic philosophical difference between American ‘spots cars’ and other sports cars. In Europe roads tend to be narrow and twisty. In the U.S. roads tend to be wide and straight. The Firebird (which has been mentioned) is, or at least started out being, a ‘muscle car’. It goes fast in a straight line, but not as good as a sports car in the twisties. And automatic transmissions are popular in the U.S. Why? IMO driving licenses are possibly to easy to get. In other countries they’re more difficult, or at least more expensive. It’s easier to drive an automatic. Fuel costs have always been higher in Europe and other places, and standard transmissions are more fuel-efficient. So I think that the American desire for cars that are easy to drive, the lack of instruction on good driving skills, and the relatively low price of gas give automatic transmissions the edge in the U.S. (When BMC offered autmatic transmissions for the MGB they were accused of ‘pandering to the Americans’. Ironically, more auto MGBs were sold in England than here.)

So I’m guessing that there are a lot of drivers out there who have never learned to drive a car with a standard transmission. When they decide to get a sports car, standard transmissions are just not an option for them. Too bad, too, since as others have posted an automatic transmission is one more barrier between the driver and the driving experience.

52

To understand what a sports car is all about, it might help to know what makes any car sporty.

I thought about it downtown driving my Mum’s Rover 45. Outwardly and inwardly, its cosmetically quite similar to my own Honda Civic (Domani). The Rover has a CD player, A/C, much more padding in the seats and other “refinements”, but the Honda remains much more fun to drive.

The engines are each manufacturer’s own, AFAIK the Honda has a shorter stroke, so despite giving away roughly 200cc, it revs a lot more smoothly and with more eagerness. Blipping before a downchange is easier and more satisfying. The drop in power is only evident when motorway cruising at 60-70 mph, below that the eagerness of the 1.4 Honda engine makes it feel sportier. The gearboxes must be the same as they share an awkward reverse change, but the Rover’s is muffled under a large gear stick, a small addition that makes it harder to whip through the gears. Everything about the controls is clumsy, the steering wheel is chunkier too which adds to the effective.

Neither one is a sports car, but its quite clear which is sportier :slight_smile:

53

[QUOTE=Tuckerfan]
The paddle shifting trannys are all computerized, and the engines are all titanium, magnesium, and other alloys. Not a cast iron or aluminium block among 'em.

Oh, and the WRC folks are trying to get interest in the sport started here, but they’re not having much luck, AFAIK. Personally, I find all sporting events boring, so unless they do something to make it really interesting, like adding machine guns and the like to the cars, I ain’t gonna watch.
[/QUOTE]

Tuckerfan, you have always been on my “favorite poster” list, but I’m starting to think you are an IDIOT! (or at least don’t drink as much beer as me when you post. Or possibly much more!) :wink:

The first part of the your quote: Pretty much proves “real sports cars” have automatics.

The second part: If you don’t thing WRC is, at least, NOT boring, then you are a hopeless case. These guys do shit fighter pilots don’t do regulary, fer christs sake!