|
|
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Crusty Conservative
|
Sequential manual gearboxes
So, Porsche has had versions of automanual gearbox, used in racing vehicles for many years. Called PSK, or PDSK something like that, correct?
I am wondering why everyone has now beaten Porsche to the marketplace with a F1 or SMG-type gearbox? Anybody have input, or information, here?? Ferrari F1, Maserati, BMW M3, Toyota MR2, etc... is what I am talking about - NOT a automatic with tight shifting re: Tiptronic, etc... 
__________________
Bill 69 911 T Targa, 2.4E w/carbs (1985-2001) 70 911 S Coupe, 2nd owner (1989- 2015) 73 911 T Targa, 3.2 Motronic (2001- ) |
||
11-18-2002, 06:09 AM
|
|
|
Registered
|
Sequential gearboxes have been around for decades...in motorcycles.
The idea of putting a cam operating sector next to the fingers is not new...just delayed or re-discovered by the auto crowd. In extreme cases like the Scott....it had 11 speeds in the main gearbox...and a hi-low transfer case behind that. A true sequential would shift 1-2-3-4-5-6-1. There would be no stop at the high end. Bob
__________________
Bob Hutson |
||
|
11-18-2002, 07:08 AM
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,612
|
Bill, Bill, Bill...what a stupid question....just kidding
because Porsche is Porsche and only the Porsche way is the right way. Because our customers are still buying our cars without it. Because we spent all our R&D on a SUV Because we have no racing program to test new technologies. (BMW and Ferrari perfected their SMG in F1). On a happy note, it is rumored that the next 911 will have a SMG.
__________________
Neil '73 911S targa |
||
|
11-18-2002, 07:43 AM
|
|
|
Moderator
|
It appears to be because they don't want to - Ruf has been putting clutch pedal-less gearboxes in its cars for years (since early 90s, I think).
Note clutch pedal-less - not sequential. Sequential is another thing on top of this.
__________________
1975 911S (in bits) 1969 911T (goes, but need fettling) 1973 BMW 2002tii (in bits, now with turbo) |
||
|
11-18-2002, 12:32 PM
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Roseville, CA
Posts: 393
|
A shift pattern of 1-2-3-4-5-6-1???
"The experience driver will remember he's in 6th gear...the inexperienced driver will be sweeping engine and transmission parts off the road after revving to 20K RPMs..."  -Boyo
__________________
'48 Willys CJ-2A / '55.1 Chevy 3600 / '66 Austin-Healey 3000 / '72 Porsche 911T |
||
|
11-18-2002, 02:01 PM
|
|
|
Crusty Conservative
|
Boyo-
I think that sequential designed gearboxes top out at 6, not roll over to one. Like a motorsickle, you know...  Cam - I hear you, but I still don't get Porsche's strategy (or lack thereof) here...they have the GT2, and twin turbo cars to keep moving up the price ladder with the Italians - why no Automanual? Damn, we likely would never be able to retro fit the technology in our old tubs anyway, guess I'll have to get an M3 if I want to play with one of those...
__________________
Bill 69 911 T Targa, 2.4E w/carbs (1985-2001) 70 911 S Coupe, 2nd owner (1989- 2015) 73 911 T Targa, 3.2 Motronic (2001- ) |
||
|
11-18-2002, 02:33 PM
|
|
|
|
Too big to fail
|
Re: Sequential manual gearboxes
Quote:
__________________
"You go to the track with the Porsche you have, not the Porsche you wish you had." '03 E46 M3 '57 356A Various VWs |
||
|
11-18-2002, 02:52 PM
|
|
|
Moderator
|
I guess the R&D (or talking Getrag into making it) was going to be too much effort (ie for a gearbox for a flat six).
That said, Ferrari managed.
__________________
1975 911S (in bits) 1969 911T (goes, but need fettling) 1973 BMW 2002tii (in bits, now with turbo) |
||
|
11-18-2002, 02:57 PM
|
|
1970 Porsche 911S 2.2l MFI
Harley
1975, 1969 Porsche 911S, 911T 2.7S CIS, 2.0T ca
