RE: 718 Boxster's biggest failure:
Sunday 17th April 2016
The thing that most irritated me about the 718 Boxster S? It wasn't the turbocharged engine. Indeed, I enjoyed the application (and sound) more than many seem to like the idea.
Hang on, shouldn't we be celebrating a manual option in an age where most people think the clutch pedal is as relevant to modern motoring as a starting handle? Yes, and it seems ungrateful to moan. But for all the modern performance cars to maintain a stickshift option - BMW, Corvette and Aston Martin included - it's frustrating they then instantly devalue the purist appeal it implies by fitting default auto rev matching.
This is properly elitist detail. But elitist detail that matters to folks like us and speaks volumes about the real target audience of the car. The real killer on the new Porsches is that the rev-blipping is assumed as necessary when you spec Sport Chrono. It is off in Comfort but if you want to enjoy the Sport or Sport Plus you have paid extra for the only way to disable it is by turning the stability control completely off. This is just daft.
718 Boxster's biggest failure: PH Blog
No, it's not the turbocharged engine...
So I don't think Porsche has dropped the ball with its take on turbos and downsizing. I will, however, call it out on perhaps the stupidest example of 'driver assist' tech found in any modern car, a feature it shares with the new turbocharged Carrera. And that's the self-blipping rev matching on the manual gearbox. Or, more specifically, the hoops you have to jump through to disable it.
When you witness - or perform - a perfectly executed downshift blip it's a moment of beauty by virtue of the fact it's not easy to perfect. I can still vividly remember attempting to pedal off a Pistenklause hangover by taking my mountain bike out to the further flung corners of the Nordschleife. Leaning on the Armco at Fuchsrore the morning air was pierced by the Mezger engine of a fast-approaching 996 GT3 RS. Flat through the dip, its driver performed a rev-perfect heel'n'toe downshift blip as he trailed the brakes into the left-hander before Adenaur Forst. Respect due to the hand at the wheel - that was a committed move demanding skill and coordination, no electronic flattery going on there. If you see the same in a 718 Boxster or turbo Carrera there will be no such wonder. Even if the driver was a proper helmsman you'd shrug and assume they were letting the black boxes flatter to deceive.
Indulge my snobbery but if you need the help of a system like this it should be an opt-in, buried in the menus. Not the default. I'm loath to blow yet more smoke up the 911 R's rear but the fact Preuninger accepted he had to have it but insisted on a simple 'on/off' says a lot.
Like many my heart soared at the news of a new manual V12 Vantage S. And then sank when the press release boasted of AMSHIFT rev-matching tech. An email to Aston Martin confirmed you can at least turn it off. As I write I'm off to have a go in the new BMW M2, which I understand does it too. If I was an owner having to press buttons to turn it off every time I fired it up would wind me right up.
Or maybe I just need to get out more.
Dan
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Discussion
I've tried to heal & toe but I don't think I've ever succeeded - sadly.
I think that auto rev matching / blipping is not a bad thing in itself - its a great thing - but it should be something you can turn off & on independantly of ever other system.
Its a real shame Porsche (bar the 911R) fixes the rev matching with the other systems as when I drive the 991.2 Carrera S the pedal felt perfectly placed for heal toeing.
I think that auto rev matching / blipping is not a bad thing in itself - its a great thing - but it should be something you can turn off & on independantly of ever other system.
Its a real shame Porsche (bar the 911R) fixes the rev matching with the other systems as when I drive the 991.2 Carrera S the pedal felt perfectly placed for heal toeing.
C43 said:
Surely Porsche have done exactly the right thing in fitting rev matching. Porsche buyers will love it.
If you are a purist who wants a proper drivers car you buy a Lotus.
simples
C43
Quite right. If you are a purist who wants a proper drivers car you buy a Lotus.
simples
C43
If this were an article about Lotus, you can be certain there would have been some mention of Porsche. So it's not unreasonable to hope the write would point out that Lotus make a comparable product that provides all the driver interaction you could want.
I love a heel and toeing too - I find it one of the most fun aspects of driving, and one that can be enjoyed just while pottering about on the morning commute.
Systems that interfere are a big turn-off to me, and undermine the main reason for buying a manual - being able to enjoy the skill needed to use it properly. That its set as 'on' by default and tethered irrevocably to most of the driving modes just further insults and frustrates.
Regarding the M2, some sections of the American press suggested the non-switchable blip was a conscious attempt to undermine the skills of the manual driver, to devalue it prior to being removed from sale entirely!
Was interesting to hear an inteview with My. Spyker recently, saying how the majority of orders for the new car were manuals, and that other supercar manufacturers had received increasing numbers of requests for manual gearboxes. Perhaps the tide is yet to turn... and fun is about to make a comeback!
Systems that interfere are a big turn-off to me, and undermine the main reason for buying a manual - being able to enjoy the skill needed to use it properly. That its set as 'on' by default and tethered irrevocably to most of the driving modes just further insults and frustrates.
Regarding the M2, some sections of the American press suggested the non-switchable blip was a conscious attempt to undermine the skills of the manual driver, to devalue it prior to being removed from sale entirely!
Was interesting to hear an inteview with My. Spyker recently, saying how the majority of orders for the new car were manuals, and that other supercar manufacturers had received increasing numbers of requests for manual gearboxes. Perhaps the tide is yet to turn... and fun is about to make a comeback!
The ease/reward of HnT is massively dependent on the pedals themselves - not just the layout but:
- the 'resistance' in the brake pedal (i.e. how stable a platform it is for your right foot during the 'blip') and
- the responsiveness of the throttle (i.e. whether it's a nastily-damped DBW system which does nothing/nothing/nothing/too-much, a computer-says-no nannying system that won't permit brake and throttle applications at the same time, or a properly-engineered system that gives a nice swift, linear, predictable response.
It's also affected by the flywheel, although that SHOULD be well-matched to the engine and the gearbox ratio gaps anyway.
Finally, if we're being pedantic (and this IS PH, after all!
), HnT (or, more specifically, BGOL) is frowned upon in road use by pretty much all advanced driving methods/manuals. Rev-matching should be performed after the braking phase has been completed. Which takes NOTHING away from the point of the article, as these verdammte auto-blip systems are a f'ng gimmick* to flatter your typical (below-) average sports car buyer.
* yes, they extend clutch and synchromesh lifespan, but so does driving a car sympathetically...
- the 'resistance' in the brake pedal (i.e. how stable a platform it is for your right foot during the 'blip') and
- the responsiveness of the throttle (i.e. whether it's a nastily-damped DBW system which does nothing/nothing/nothing/too-much, a computer-says-no nannying system that won't permit brake and throttle applications at the same time, or a properly-engineered system that gives a nice swift, linear, predictable response.
It's also affected by the flywheel, although that SHOULD be well-matched to the engine and the gearbox ratio gaps anyway.
Finally, if we're being pedantic (and this IS PH, after all!
), HnT (or, more specifically, BGOL) is frowned upon in road use by pretty much all advanced driving methods/manuals. Rev-matching should be performed after the braking phase has been completed. Which takes NOTHING away from the point of the article, as these verdammte auto-blip systems are a f'ng gimmick* to flatter your typical (below-) average sports car buyer.* yes, they extend clutch and synchromesh lifespan, but so does driving a car sympathetically...
"I enjoyed the application (and sound) more than many seem to like the idea.
So I don't think Porsche has dropped the ball with its take on turbos and downsizing."
No surprise there Dan. They could make one with eight wheels and cycling components Dan would find the upside.
Sounds like the souless application of too much tech.
So I don't think Porsche has dropped the ball with its take on turbos and downsizing."
No surprise there Dan. They could make one with eight wheels and cycling components Dan would find the upside.
Sounds like the souless application of too much tech.
havoc said:
Finally, if we're being pedantic (and this IS PH, after all! ), HnT (or, more specifically, BGOL) is frowned upon in road use by pretty much all advanced driving methods/manuals.
Clearly anyone sufficient anal to think they are qualified to write a book/course for Advanced Driving on the road will have one foot in their mouth so "proper" driving is probably beyond them and their Saab's capability. ), HnT (or, more specifically, BGOL) is frowned upon in road use by pretty much all advanced driving methods/manuals.If you own a proper, analogue car and you do not rev match somehow (be it H&T or as I prefer "Big Toe/Little Toe") you will appear to be a bit of a twunt as your car kangaroos into bends like a first day learner is at the wheel. The lack of mechanical sympathy necessary for a car to self-match is horrendous and perhaps your average slipper wearing Porsche owner needs electronic assistance to avoid waiving their extended warranty (or because their hip replacement won't allow H&T?)
Perhaps the 718 is just the new MX5, I'll ask a hairdresser?
Synchro Rev Matching first appeared in 2009 on the new Nissan 370z. In the intervening years it has proved to be a real 'Marmite' feature, with I reckon about 50% of owners loving it and the other 50% loathing it. But at least on the 370 it's a simple 'on/off' switch, which defaults to the setting last time you drove the car.
Personally, I don't use it because I sometimes like to use engine braking from higher speeds - and if the Synchro Rev Match is activated you can get some serious short-term over-revving if you're not careful.
Too much nannying technology going on in cars these days. Why don't they just let us drive?
Personally, I don't use it because I sometimes like to use engine braking from higher speeds - and if the Synchro Rev Match is activated you can get some serious short-term over-revving if you're not careful.
Too much nannying technology going on in cars these days. Why don't they just let us drive?
zeeboy said:
Personally, I don't use it because I sometimes like to use engine braking from higher speeds - and if the Synchro Rev Match is activated you can get some serious short-term over-revving if you're not careful.
You would still need to rev match manually? Otherwise you are just dumping the momentum into the clutch? Or am I missing something?
smilo996 said:
Sounds like the souless application of too much tech.
As someone who works in design engineering for a living, it is entirely normal that engineers think up things which may be possible, implement them, then try to convince the end user that they are wrong if they don't want it.Even when "end user engagement" goes on, organisations can be masters of asking the wrong question of the right person, or asking the right question of the wrong person.
Porsche "Would you prefer auto or manual"
Joe Public "Auto"
Porsche "If it was a manual would you like a nanny thing to rev match for you"
Joe Public "Yes I suppose so"
Porsche internally "The manuals need to have rev matching turned on by default"
Joe Public "I'll buy an auto thanks"
Sports car driver "This is crap"
Porsche "We have done market research and engineering says this is superior, so you're wrong"
I do it out of habit , years of riding around in crap old cars that wouldn't tick over properly and the dread of when it cuts out it's probably not gonna start without a push !
I also always leave a car in gear and sometimes I still find myself turning the wheels into the kerb , dodgy handbrake if one worked at all !
I also always leave a car in gear and sometimes I still find myself turning the wheels into the kerb , dodgy handbrake if one worked at all !
tejr said:
zeeboy said:
Personally, I don't use it because I sometimes like to use engine braking from higher speeds - and if the Synchro Rev Match is activated you can get some serious short-term over-revving if you're not careful.
You would still need to rev match manually? Otherwise you are just dumping the momentum into the clutch? Or am I missing something?
The problem arises if Synchro Rev Match is switched on in this situation. As soon as you select 4th (or maybe 3rd) gear the system will often rev the engine really high, thinking it's helping you, when it's not.
Synchro rev matching is really only for those people who dutifully go down the gears, one by one, or for people who do lots of very quick downshifts, or for people with nice loud exhausts who like showing off. That's not me. I just like driving.
Hope this helps.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff