997 TT beats GT-R at Ring. Nissan accused of cheating.
997 Turbo / GT22004–present Turbo discussion on the current model Porsche 911 Twin Turbo. Sponsored By SharkWerks, Inc
Welcome to 6SpeedOnline.com!
Welcome to 6SpeedOnline.com.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join 6SpeedOnline.com today!
But you wont find any race drivers that prefer TC, and stability control, or even AWD (except steve millen).
Bet you a dollar that, where allowed, every racer would use each of those if legal. Not in the street car variant, but tweaked/calibrated race cars. Exception might be F1 where I think they would pass on AWD. Downforce is the key there.
Hey-- guess what-- F1 currently allows Traction Control.
Do you think any teams omit it or turn it off? I think not.
Why did they allow it after banning it? According the linked article it is because teams wantd so badly to use it that they "cheated" by simulating TC in their ECU software mappings.
How do you explain that?
Oops. Looks like FIA banned it for 2008 by using standard ECU software. Must be to make the drivers faster, no? Rules usialy ban things that people don't like because it makes them lose races, right?
Looks like ALMS also bans AWD and TC (except LMP1 allows ECU-style TC). Why ban things that drivers don't want and that make you slower?
This ad is not displayed to registered and logged-in members. Register your free account today and become a member on 6SpeedOnline!
The author said that the 959 did not wag it's tail, oversteer outrageously, or require constant steering correction to extract big speeds. He said the 959 was a "point and squirt" supercar that was marvellously efficient and enormously fast, but it was also a touch "soulless" and more "engineering showcase than drivers delight". He said the 959 was the car that begat all the electronically controlled engineering-rich supercars of today, but the 911 purists did not like the car because it forgot to involve the bloke behind the wheel. This article was written a good two years before all the arguments we are having about the 911 vs. the GTR, but I think it explains why Porsche did not develop a car with all the computer control that characterizes the GTR.
Explains why the 959 was a flash in the pan, and not very appreciated. Explains why they are readiliy available on Ebay for $20K.
Also explains why it didn't form the basis for the 993 and all future 911s, especially the 4/4S/TT class cars....
Dude: all Porsche cars have all the same controls as the GT-R (obviously AWD stuff only in the AWD cars). Only difference is that the GT-R does it BETTER. Explain again why that is bad?
Explains why the 959 was a flash in the pan, and not very appreciated. Explains why they are readiliy available on Ebay for $20K.
Also explains why it didn't form the basis for the 993 and all future 911s, especially the 4/4S/TT class cars....
Dude: all Porsche cars have all the same controls as the GT-R (obviously AWD stuff only in the AWD cars). Only difference is that the GT-R does it BETTER. Explain again why that is bad?
The author said it , not me, although I agree. The 911 purists wanted a car that challenged them, not one that you could point and shoot and do the skill stuff for you.
Dude: all Porsche cars have all the same controls as the GT-R (obviously AWD stuff only in the AWD cars). Only difference is that the GT-R does it BETTER. Explain again why that is bad?
I was looking through some "CAR" magazines I had purchased. In the August 2006 issue on page 99 there is an article about the Porsche 959 by Gavin Green, one of the writers for that magazine. He was referring to an article he had written about that car 19 years ago, which would be 22 years ago now. He indicated that in it's time, the 959 was a technical tour de force, pioneering variably split computer-controlled 4x4 and computer controlled damping stiffness. It was the fastest car of it's day, doing 0-60 in 3.7 seconds and topping out at 197 mph. He then added that the Porsche purists had a problem with the car because it wasn't as much fun to drive as a 911. The 911 purists complained that all that new-fangled electro-trickery took away the animal, and did not challenge the good drivers and intimidate the poor ones as the 911 was famous for. The author said that the 959 did not wag it's tail, oversteer outrageously, or require constant steering correction to extract big speeds. He said the 959 was a "point and squirt" supercar that was marvellously efficient and enormously fast, but it was also a touch "soulless" and more "engineering showcase than drivers delight". He said the 959 was the car that begat all the electronically controlled engineering-rich supercars of today, but the 911 purists did not like the car because it forgot to involve the bloke behind the wheel. This article was written a good two years before all the arguments we are having about the 911 vs. the GTR, but I think it explains why Porsche did not develop a car with all the computer control that characterizes the GTR.
Good stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisn
Bet you a dollar that, where allowed, every racer would use each of those if legal. Not in the street car variant, but tweaked/calibrated race cars. Exception might be F1 where I think they would pass on AWD. Downforce is the key there.
Hey-- guess what-- F1 currently allows Traction Control.
Do you think any teams omit it or turn it off? I think not.
Why did they allow it after banning it? According the linked article it is because teams wantd so badly to use it that they "cheated" by simulating TC in their ECU software mappings.
How do you explain that?
Oops. Looks like FIA banned it for 2008 by using standard ECU software. Must be to make the drivers faster, no? Rules usialy ban things that people don't like because it makes them lose races, right?
Looks like ALMS also bans AWD and TC (except LMP1 allows ECU-style TC). Why ban things that drivers don't want and that make you slower?
What are you talking about? You changed points of view 3 times in your own posts. Are you confusing yourself?
F1 cars are ~1900 lbs and ~900 hp, the reason engineers are putting TC in the mix is because max and bernie keep adding the stupid street course that have hairpin low speed turns that make it very hard to put power down with that weight/power ratio. TC came about because the cars had become too fast and were going too fast to be safe. With big V10's and speeds up to 230 mph and full slicks, when they let go, they let go in a big way.
But as you can see, the only difference between 07 and 08 was TC, and the cars still got faster.
You bet money that every racer would want AWD and TC?
You obviously dont watch much racing.
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
But as you can see, the only difference between 07 and 08 was TC, and the cars still got faster.
You bet money that every racer would want AWD and TC?
You obviously dont watch much racing.
So do you contend that the reinstatement of the ban on TC made cars faster? I suspect it was other changes. Again, rules ban things that might give one tam an unfair advantage or make cars in general too fast or unsafe. If TC made cars slower, no team needed to have it (and yet all used it-- why?). So why ban it?
My point is: computers are faster than humans and can do things we can't in terms of manipulating inputs and separately controlling dozens of systems simultaneously. I fully understand the "purist" perspective that we should stop the forward march of technology, but it just won't happen.
Modern cars are get more and more "drive by wire." It is simply too tempting for designers to add systems that make the car better than any human at certain tasks (ABS for example, or automatic brake pressure balancing). Stability control is quickly entering this realm.
Take planes for example. Many high performance jets have embraced fly-by-wire in their complete design cycle. They are hard to fly with the computer assist stability systems turned off. And they are higher-performance / better war machines because of the computers. Doesn't mean a monkey can fly it.
This is the way performance cars are going as well. Embrace it.
You bet money that every racer would want AWD and TC?
You obviously dont watch much racing.
All things being equal, they would be silly to not want it (you can always tune it to rarely be used). Now, with AWD in F1-type cars, all things will not likely be equal and might be tough mechanically to implement. And, as I mentioned above, at F1 speeds, aero downforce prob reduces much of the advantage of AWD. Nonetheless, in your hairpin turn example, I am quite sure that all drivers would love a magic button that would put some TQ upfront to help power out of those tight turns.
But for GT2/3 class stuff, I would think that all would want it. Again, with computer controlled center diff it is logically impossible for it to make you slower (as long as you get the weight balance right).
All things being equal, they would be silly to not want it (you can always tune it to rarely be used). Now, with AWD in F1-type cars, all things will not likely be equal and might be tough mechanically to implement. And, as I mentioned above, at F1 speeds, aero downforce prob reduces much of the advantage of AWD. Nonetheless, in your hairpin turn example, I am quite sure that all drivers would love a magic button that would put some TQ upfront to help power out of those tight turns.
But for GT2/3 class stuff, I would think that all would want it. Again, with computer controlled center diff it is logically impossible for it to make you slower (as long as you get the weight balance right).
Or how about using the car's mechanical grip, suspension setup, precision and skill to get you out of those same corners, it can be done, and quite easily on the race track..
AWD FTL!
__________________
02 RUF R-GT2 590+ Track Beast To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
So do you contend that the reinstatement of the ban on TC made cars faster? I suspect it was other changes. Again, rules ban things that might give one tam an unfair advantage or make cars in general too fast or unsafe. If TC made cars slower, no team needed to have it (and yet all used it-- why?). So why ban it?
My point is: computers are faster than humans and can do things we can't in terms of manipulating inputs and separately controlling dozens of systems simultaneously. I fully understand the "purist" perspective that we should stop the forward march of technology, but it just won't happen.
Modern cars are get more and more "drive by wire." It is simply too tempting for designers to add systems that make the car better than any human at certain tasks (ABS for example, or automatic brake pressure balancing). Stability control is quickly entering this realm.
Take planes for example. Many high performance jets have embraced fly-by-wire in their complete design cycle. They are hard to fly with the computer assist stability systems turned off. And they are higher-performance / better war machines because of the computers. Doesn't mean a monkey can fly it.
This is the way performance cars are going as well. Embrace it.
No TC does make the cars faster, no interuptions when you dont want them. Unless the computer is driving the car, it cant determine every situation. When your tires go or the rain comes, then what??? You have more computer interference that you would have otherwise. It makes driver error more prevelent, but that's what makes racing fun. F1 has the most amount of technology and computers on the cars and the least amount of passing and fun until recently when they removed TC, and they are still at the bottom of the list, but that will change with the new rule changes.
Racing, top levels = No ABS
Racing, most top levels = no TC
Racing Top levels = no AWD
Why? Because then it would be remote controlled racing with the guys controlling the cars from the pits instead of the ****pit. If we took a poll of pro race drivers I'd bet you they do not want a bunch of nannies. When you are dealing with the levels of grip they are its not like street tires where they gradually give way, it's snap into spin.
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
OK, so bringing this back home to our street cars, since electronic drivers aids are apparently bad, would you guys prefer that cars not have them (or have a defeat switch for PSM, ABS, AWD, etc) even if they made you faster and safer?
PSM/VDC can be switched off, but are you mad that Porsche does not include a switch to defeat ABS and AWD (100% TQ to rear wheels at l times)? Are people who buy C4 and C4S's in areas where it doesn't snow idiots? (I'll bet the sell 2X more 4's and 4S's in CA and FL than in the snow belt states).
I am consistent: I like the aids that make me faster and safer. I also realize that I am not a pro driver and my cars are not race cars. I also recognize that the GT-R doesn't have any more/different aids than the TT-- it just seems to implement them better.
No one said drivers aids are bad for street cars, nothing about driving on the street has been mentioned here. Care to exaggerate a little more? AWD and all the nannies in the world may make novice and intermediate drivers faster, but once you start pushing the limits of the car, factory settings for stability will not cut it. When you get to that point, you'll know it.
But all the faster drivers in any car will want the nannies OFF (other than ABS).
The GT-R may not have more aids in title but it has more utilization of said aids in driving. Oddly enough even the GT-R is faster without the aids on, but you cant turn them off anyways without consequence unless you're the media.
And your assessment of better is aweful at best. PSM cannot control having less grip from it's tires now can it? PSM also cannot control slower shifting from the Tip or a Manual driver can it? The only way to judge two systems is under similar criteria. Not to mention we are talking about two different Chassis here. So your simple reasoning, as before with your track efforts, has come up short once again.
__________________ The GT-R is harder to drift than a 997 TT or 997 GT3, therefore if you are trying to drift, the GT-R will consequently get a faster lap. Normal apexing and driving not included.
Those who think that drivers can drive cars faster without any computer aid are definitely smoking something...
Geesh... you need to do some homework... start with a GOOGLE search. Your statement above is simply ignorant.
Articles are writen about the advantage/dis-avantage about using traction control systems @ the track. Some articles go all the way back to the beginning of ABS and the first generation's electronic gizmos. Start there and work your way forward... then you might have a better understanding as to how this "Stuff" works.
There is a lot more involved in this discussion than whats been presented in this thread. There are advantages/dis-avantages in using "Electronic Gizmos"... one needs to understand the inter-action of these systems before making "Blanket-Statements".
Last edited by trumperZ06; 01-02-2009 at 07:04 AM.
Geesh... you need to do some homework... start with a GOOGLE search. Your statement above is simply ignorant.
There is a lot more involved in this discussion than whats been presented in this thread. There are advantages/dis-avantages in using "Electronic Gizmos"... one needs to understand the inter-action of these systems before making "Blanket-Statements".
Linear Mode
