"Depress clutch" placard--IROC cars

[Formerly Steve Wilkinson]

Somewhere in a long thread on Car and Driver's early-'70s test of the IROC Porsches by Bobby Allison--which apparently infuriates Porschephiles today just as much as it did back when we ran the piece (and that was the point of it, at least in part)--somebody posted the message that the IROC 911s haad a placard reading, "depress clutch before shifting gears." The implication was that the rude Southern Nascar drivers were too stupid to know enough to do this.

Which only demonstrates that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

With many full-race gearboxes of the era--maybe it's still true, I don't know--particularly the Hewlands, one routinely shifted without using the clutch. It was much faster. When driving Formula Fords, the only time I ever used the clutch was to start off.

The placards were there to insure that the drivers knew that the 911 gearboxes were _not_ competition boxes and needed clutch use if they were the stay together.

Jeff Gordon and Juan Montoya are scheduled to switch cars at Indy on June 11 or 12, can't remember which, and do laps in each others' cars. (It's a BMW press event.) It will once again demonstrate that if you're a good racecar driver, you can drive anything, and drive it fast.

Stephan

[Wrecked944]

Originally posted by Formerly Steve Wilkinson
With many full-race gearboxes of the era--maybe it's still true, I don't know--particularly the Hewlands, one routinely shifted without using the clutch. It was much faster. When driving Formula Fords, the only time I ever used the clutch was to start off.

That's really cool. I've never understood how race car drivers managed to shift without using the clutch. I assumed they had some sort of psychic connection to the gearbox that told them when to shift. But was it actually incorporated into the design of the gearbox?

I used to own a four speed Rabbit and through years of trial and error (i.e. grinding gears) I learned how to judge the exact moment when you could slip the car out of third gear and into fourth smoothly without depressing the clutch. Is this what race car drivers do? I have extreme ignorance on this topic but I'm really curious.

[masraum]

Janus, that is basically what they do, but the gearbox in a race car can be designed to shift like that where the tranny in cars is not, also the delay between gears is much less in a racecar as the engines rev up and down much faster. I once had the clutch go out in my 911 about 15 miles from home, but I had to make the appointment I was going to, so I had to finish the drive without being able to push in the clutch, and then I had to drive home afterwards. It sucked, but I was able to do it. It's a good thing to know how to do in a bind.

[304065]

Uhh, maybe I'm missing something here. Raceboxes often have non-synchromesh transmissions with straight-cut gears for faster shifts. But there is no reason you need a clutch (other than starting off) with a modern synchromesh transmission, as long as you match exactly the speed of the input shaft (using the throttle) to the speed of the gear being engaged. Put another way, this is the whole point of heel-and-toe. The synchro just takes you the last little bit there.

I drove an old BMW 2002 with a Getrag 246? box like this-- the synchros were pretty shot when I got it, but by matching speeds you could make the thing pretty smooth through the gears. I also thought it made a nice anti-theft measure. . .

[island911]

Originally posted by Formerly Steve Wilkinson
Somewhere in a long thread on Car and Driver's early-'70s test of the IROC Porsches by Bobby Allison--which apparently infuriates Porschephiles today just as much as it did back when we ran the piece . . . .

. . . It will once again demonstrate that if you're a good racecar driver, you can drive anything, and drive it fast.

Stephan

Hmmm. it seem your trying to defend the article and steer the talking points torward anything other than the nascar drivers bias.

. . .or maybe you're just trying to demonstrate that if you're a good racecar writer, you can write anything, and write it fast . . . .& loose.

[speeder]

Stephan, In order to fully understand what you are dealing with on this board, I would suggest a search for a "M3 vs. Carrera" thread. We have members who have never been on a track, yet find it inconcievable that a modern M3 could outperform a stock 3.2 Carrera! Finally, some 911 race drivers had to chime in and break the sad news to them.

[island911]

Originally posted by speeder
. . . We have members who have never been on a track, yet find it inconcievable that a modern M3 could outperform a stock 3.2 Carrera! . .

Yeah, speeder!? . . . Who is that? . . .or are you just imagining that which serves your agenda?

I take it you're refering to '85 911 vs. '99 BMW M3 - Argument . Check it out Denis. . .if you would like to step back to reality.

[BlueSkyJaunte]

Originally posted by island911
I take it you're refering to '85 911 vs. '99 BMW M3 - Argument .

Wow, that was a great thread. I mean, how often do I have the chance to get in a "Muhaha"?

[island911]

Originally posted by BlueSkyJaunte
Wow, that was a great thread. I mean, how often do I have the chance to get in a "Muhaha"?

yeah, blue, I gave you another chance on that thread with "That (track)911 would never "out handle" a WRX on a logging road; for example." . . .definitely a place where the WRX gets a well deserved "Muhaha" . . .we have a lot of logging roads up here in the NW. Flogging a subaru up on those is great fun . . . but be sure to bring a shovel and a winch (just in case )

[speeder]

Yes, that's the thread! Thank you for the link. I just re-read it, (it's a good thread), maybe you should, too, Island. Pay particular attention to the replies from Randy Wells, (a national champion auto-Xer), Tyson and Mike Marshall, (two very fast club racers in 911s). That should clear up any confusion, but knowing you, it probably won't.

[island911]

Originally posted by speeder
. . . We have members who have never been on a track, yet find it inconcievable that a modern M3 could outperform a stock 3.2 Carrera! . .

Yeah, speeder!? . . . Who is that?
--------------
Are you going to answer that?

To sumarize, that thread had guys overstating the performance of the M3, and guys like me saying the two are closely match. . . . .and yet you (Denis) want to make promulgate the notion that "We have members who . . .find it inconcievable that a modern M3 could outperform a stock 3.2 Carrera! "

If you didn't notice; my first post (on that thread) shows an M3 beating out a Carerra, but more to the point, it showed that the performances were (are) close.

What part of that is so tough for you to grasp!?

Even your hero Tyson quickly got it, adding "OK Glen, I will retract the "run circles around" statement. It was meant to bring jbripps back down to reality." . . . but then, Tyson isn't like some of our members . .. whom have ISSUES!

[speeder]

Island, What makes you think that I was refering to you? Actually I was, along with some other people. And please, try to stay calm, they're only cars. Sheesh! Talk about issues.

And Tyson is "my hero"? Why don't you ask him about that next time you see him, I don't have any heroes. Equal is as high as you can go w/ me.