Auto without LC v Manual: auto speed a myth in real world?

[IanCress]

SimpleSam said:

The reason I ask though is that I'm considering auto vs manual in exactly the same cars, so all other factors apart from weight of the gear system, and mode of transmission would be identical.

In which case i'll go back to my original point, which is that you're really splitting hairs looking for a tenth of a second here or there, and if you say you're not bothered about full bore standing starts and using launch control, then I can't see why it matters.

[SimpleSam]

Thanks again Ian but as I say I'm asking a specific question. I appreciate tenths here and there don't matter (to you) but my question remains as it clearly matters to me, even if you disagree that it should.

To elaborate, which may be helpful, one of the reasons I ask is that I am very much interested in coming off the line quickly (traffic lights, junctions etc *safely*) but don't want to use launch control due to the time it takes to set up. With a manual - despite the lower 0-60s - I'm *guessing* I'll have more control to do a better launch which, whilst it won't be perfect, will at least jump me off the line faster than an auto where I don't use launch control. This is the "grey area" I allude to in my original post.

[Hungrymc]

I think we're at a point where Autos are certainly quicker. I also think that dual clutch boxes will disappear from the market over the next 5 or so years as torque converter / epicyclic boxes have almost closed the gap on speed of change, and are better in many other ways (up to 10 ratios now).

However, Autos and DC boxes completely change how a car feels. For a sports car, I still have a very strong preference for manual. For everything else I prefer an auto and I understand that I'll probably have to learn to like autos in sports cars as manuals gradually disappear.

If you want outright performance (and certainly if you want lazy / easily accessible performance), I think auto is now generally the way to go. If you want engagement and a fully absorbing drive, I still think manual adds a dimension that many will miss.

[Flibble]

A lot of dual clutch cars are almost as fast off the line if you just mash the pedal rather than actually launching it. The turbos are so light (especially on the petrols) that they spool almost immediately so there isn't much advantage of being at higher revs. Not to mention if you gun it big time off the lights you end up really torque limited in first anyway.

Also a 1500 rpm "launch" in a manual would be pretty leisurely, you want 4-5k to really spin up the wheels.

[Geoffrey Boycott]

I remember watching a video of a journalist trying to match the 0-60 in a manual car (think it was a Corvette or similar) and couldn't get close. Then they got the guy who set the 0-60 time and he didn't even use the clutch to change gears, he just rammed the gear shift in really hard some how.

It is ridiculously mechanically unsympathetic and unrealistic to Joe public.

[nct001]

Geoffrey Boycott said:

I remember watching a video of a journalist trying to match the 0-60 in a manual car (think it was a Corvette or similar) and couldn't get close. Then they got the guy who set the 0-60 time and he didn't even use the clutch to change gears, he just rammed the gear shift in really hard some how.

It is ridiculously mechanically unsympathetic and unrealistic to Joe public.

Not unless you are a bit of a driver. You must have noticed how at high revs changing up you hardly have to engage the clutch for it to change.

[HedgeyGedgey]

I've always been very wary of manufacturers 0-60 claims. They launch the absolute balls off the car, anyone with any mechanical sympathy would never do that, and they do it with minimal petrol in the car too. I recall a few years back a magazine was trying to get an Aston Martin close to the claimed 0-60 time, was trying all day and couldnt get even close to the time, only for an Aston Martin test driver to tell them they bounced the car off the rev limiter in 2nd gear rather than change to 3rd in order to get the quickest time. Another one, Mitsubishi launched the fq400 extremely hard on a slight downhill did 3.5secs with next to no petrol in it, did it once and wrote that time in the brochure. The time will never be repeatable by anyone, not even the test drivers could repeat that time. Same with top speeds, remember the mclaren f1. They removed the rev limiter to get to 240mph, did it for the record but sold the cars to the public knowing they'd never be able to to 240mph!!!

[SimpleSam]

Hmmm... so it seems perhaps manual 0-60 times are even more artificial than the auto ones. In fact if anything auto could be regarded a much more accurate and replicable 0-60 because there's only one way to do launch control and only one way to change gear i.e. do LC and then keep your foot on gas. Interesting...

[Hungrymc]

SimpleSam said:

Hmmm... so it seems perhaps manual 0-60 times are even more artificial than the auto ones. In fact if anything auto could be regarded a much more accurate and replicable 0-60 because there's only one way to do launch control and only one way to change gear i.e. do LC and then keep your foot on gas. Interesting...

That is the pro and con of autos in a nut shell.... Pro : Relatively easy to extract the performance. Con : Maybe too easy to extract the performance.

If repeatable and easy 0-60 is where you derive your enjoyment, then go for an auto. If you want a car to be a bit more challenging and involving, go with manual.

[RDMcG]

I have had LC on a number of cars Never used it once. Tried it on a Porsche Turbo S at a Porsche customer event on a track. It just feels so abusive to the car. In any case you can't do it on a public road without looking like an idiot ,quite apart from legal issues. It seems pointless to me.

[HJMS123]

SimpleSam said:

Thanks again Ian but as I say I'm asking a specific question. I appreciate tenths here and there don't matter (to you) but my question remains as it clearly matters to me, even if you disagree that it should.

To elaborate, which may be helpful, one of the reasons I ask is that I am very much interested in coming off the line quickly (traffic lights, junctions etc *safely*) but don't want to use launch control due to the time it takes to set up. With a manual - despite the lower 0-60s - I'm *guessing* I'll have more control to do a better launch which, whilst it won't be perfect, will at least jump me off the line faster than an auto where I don't use launch control. This is the "grey area" I allude to in my original post.

Pulling away full bore from a junction (which you'd need to do to measure/compare or make 0-60 times irrelevant) is never the *safe* option.

I think with most VAG DC boxes all you have to do is left foot brake and hammer the trottle then lift off so it takes 5 seconds to execute. I haven't tried it on my Scirocco but from videos I've seen on youtube that's how it's done, other manufacturers are more complicated.

Edited by HJMS123 on Wednesday 26th April 13:53

[smarty156]

Here's something to ponder regarding Launch Control.
A recent 0-60 test between the Giulia Quadrifoglio (conventional auto), BMW M3 Competition (DCT) and AMG C63S (not sure, auto?) compared the times to manufacturer quoted times.
The Quadrifoglio matched the quoted time exactly (and was quickest) but both the M3 and C63 were slightly slower (2 tenths I seem to remember) than quoted. Interestingly, the Alfa doesn't have launch control whereas both the BMW and Merc were using launch control.

Not sure if that helps much other than to say LC doesn't really seem to aid 0 to 60 times and the Quadrifoglio being auto without LC didn't hinder it.

Edited by smarty156 on Wednesday 26th April 14:02

[HedgeyGedgey]

smarty156 said:

Not sure if that helps much other than to say LC doesn't really seem to aid 0 to 60 times and the Quadrifoglio being auto without LC didn't hinder it.

Edited by smarty156 on Wednesday 26th April 14:02

It depends on how advanced the launch control is, some of these "launch controls" are just stationary rev limits, I believe that's all the German stuff is and nothing more than a sales gimmick and to stop you launching at 7k and breaking it. Others are way more complicated, going into a separate fuelling and timing map in the ecu, build boost etc

[SimpleSam]

smarty156 said:

Here's something to ponder regarding Launch Control.
A recent 0-60 test between the Giulia Quadrifoglio (conventional auto), BMW M3 Competition (DCT) and AMG C63S (not sure, auto?) compared the times to manufacturer quoted times.
The Quadrifoglio matched the quoted time exactly (and was quickest) but both the M3 and C63 were slightly slower (2 tenths I seem to remember) than quoted. Interestingly, the Alfa doesn't have launch control whereas both the BMW and Merc were using launch control.

Not sure if that helps much other than to say LC doesn't really seem to aid 0 to 60 times and the Quadrifoglio being auto without LC didn't hinder it.

Edited by smarty156 on Wednesday 26th April 14:02

Thanks everyone, really engaging discussion so far.

Smarty that's an interesting fact. The thing is though that's comparing auto without LC and auto LC when the quoted times are also done in the same manner. Interesting that LC isn't as precise as just putting your foot on the gas. I'm really interested though in what the difference between not using and using LC is in a car that can do it, and how that compares with the quoted times. Because as I say and others say above, you can't do it on safe legal UK roads without looking like a tit. i.e. how much do you lose by not using the LC.

Similarly, it's now dawning on me that even manual times are with a driver using LC, and again I wouldn't use full LC (4000revs or whatever) in a manual for the same reasons. So in real world driving in otherwise identical cars (non-LC auto and moderate revving on the bite point on a manual) which wins?

Edited by SimpleSam on Wednesday 26th April 15:25

[Poshbury]

I'd say that with the same engine, the auto would be the more consistent winner re; 0-60.
There's a reason that Drag racers use auto's.
Best of all worlds is a 4 wheel drive auto. But I would say that as I have one. Good fun though.

[HappyMidget]

Get a manual with launch control? Mine has it and all I need to do to enable it is put it in race then floor the throttle with the clutch down then drop the clutch. Simples.

[p1stonhead]

HappyMidget said:

Get a manual with launch control? Mine has it and all I need to do to enable it is put it in race then floor the throttle with the clutch down then drop the clutch. Simples.

Why do you need a 'mode' to do that? You can launch any manual like that.

[HappyMidget]

p1stonhead said:

HappyMidget said:

Get a manual with launch control? Mine has it and all I need to do to enable it is put it in race then floor the throttle with the clutch down then drop the clutch. Simples.

Why do you need a 'mode' to do that? You can launch any manual like that.

It holds the revs at a set RPM that is lower than the redline

[p1stonhead]

HappyMidget said:

p1stonhead said:

HappyMidget said:

Get a manual with launch control? Mine has it and all I need to do to enable it is put it in race then floor the throttle with the clutch down then drop the clutch. Simples.

Why do you need a 'mode' to do that? You can launch any manual like that.

It holds the revs at a set RPM that is lower than the redline

But your own foot can do that too by not pressing so hard

[HappyMidget]

p1stonhead said:

But your own foot can do that too by not pressing so hard

Are you deliberately being a 'tard? This is how launch control works on all cars