or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › My new F430
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My new F430 - Page 12

post #166 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkNWorn
The counter argument is that this system is faster than the fastest human being on earth. So, if you really want to drive fast, then you get the paddles. If you want to have fun, stick with the stick.

It is somewhat misleading to say 'if you really want to drive fast.' The difference is minor. We are talking about tenths of a second on a road course, and most people don't live at a race track. I'd much rather get the daily enjoyment out of my manual than the extra tenths of a second at the track.

There are other disadvantages to the automated clutchless gearboxes. For example, they are somewhat jerky and unnatural. The best I've driven or ridden is the Borg Warner DSG currently in Audi and VW cars. This much better than the SMG in the BMW's, but it's still got a strange feeling about it.
post #167 of 181
Outside of an F1 car, I don't buy the speed of shifting argument for using semiautomatic transmissions. An F1 car makes sense because of how fast their engines rev. A valid reason might be reliability of shifting: you can't do the money shift (eg. accidentally downshifting to 2nd when you try to upshift to 4th from 3rd), but speed of shifting in street cars doesn't really matter.

You're usually downshifting during braking, and that's basically forever compared to how long it takes to execute a rev-matched downshift. Upshifting can be made faster by power-shifting, and that has the same detrimental effect on your gearbox whether a computer or your hand is forcing the gear in. That video of Hans Stuck's lap around the Nordschleife I posted a couple of weeks ago shows how quickly one can shift an H-pattern gearbox.

But this doesn't mean there's no good reason for using semiautomatics, just that speed isn't one of them.

--Andre
post #168 of 181
Thread Starter 
No, on the contrary, speed is the one thing that it does do. The F1 shifts faster than I could possibly ever shift. Just because it's a road car doesn't mean you aren't sometimes going to floor it and want to accellerate quickly. With the F1, I can do so more quickly than I could with a manual.

It also blips the throttle on downshifts, something of which I am not capable, as I cannot heel-toe. Again, this permits me to go harder into a corner, downshift while braking hard, and power through the corner. This is not something I could do with a manual.
post #169 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by zjpj83
No, on the contrary, speed is the one thing that it does do. The F1 shifts faster than I could possibly ever shift.

No doubt. I would never say otherwise. VAG's DSG does something like 8 milliseconds. Which I think is still about 10 times faster than Ferrari's (it's been a while since I looked into this, so the numbers might have changed)

Quote:
It also blips the throttle on downshifts, something of which I am not capable, as I cannot heel-toe.

Well, thats certainly no excuse. It takes 30 seconds to learn! Your pedals are set up perfectly for it, too. There's nothing worse than a performance car with a super soft brake pedal or laggy throttle that doesn't allow proper heel-toe down shifts. I blip on every down shift, and heel-toe on every turn. It's just natural... it's just like shifting from first to second.. my feet just know what to do. Although, I don't really use my heel, I just rock the ball of my foot over the throttle after applying the brakes for a quick blip.

Ah... makes me wish it were still track season.. hehe. I hate Michigan winter. Off topic, but I just got some footage back from the track. It had just rained, so the track was still a bit slippery, but watching this today makes me long for next spring. If you listen around 0:20 you can hear some heel-toe in action

http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...attan72706.flv
post #170 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Full Canvas
For many years throughout the 1960s, Dr. David Love drove his pontoon-fendered 1958 Ferrari Testarossa to work each day at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories. The car had regulation California license and registration at that time.



You can probably see David Love's car at the Monterey Historic races each year. I do not know with certainty because it has been so long since we attended Monterey. The image above was taken at Sears Point.

When I originally posted in this thread, I just couldn't find the other photos of David Love's 1958 Pontoon Fendered Ferrari Testarossa at Sears Point/Infineon Raceway. Well, if I wait long enough, all such missing items show-up.

Today, in a mislabeled file the missing photos were discovered. For the sake of continuity, I felt the photos did not deserved a new thread. So, a month later, here are some additional photos.

Just imagine the fellow driving this to work and to the racetrack!



This is what they mean when the say Testarossa. That is some redhead bristling with actual carburetors! Yes, there was life before fuel injection.




This is quite Spartan when compared to zjpj83's engine compartment.


____________________________

By the way, here are two more images of the car at another event. That is Phil Hill sitting in the cockpit of Mr. Love's car with Mr. Love leaning in. Phil drove one of the other 1958 Testarossas in many races back in 1958 and 1959. Until Mario Andretti won the Forumula 1 Driver's Championsip in Colin Chapman's Lotus, Phil Hill was America's only Formula 1 Champion. Who is giving whom a pointer?


________________________


______________________________________
post #171 of 181
the porsche 997 turbo is also faster in triptonic then the manual version driven by professional drivers ... idk but what makes a ferrari better then a porsche? id rather have the f430 (just cuz its a ferrari) then the porsche turbo but it seems as if porsche is out performing ferrari with the turbo vs f430 for a whole lot less money and it kinda sucks when you have a ferrari and a porsche could embaress you
post #172 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghulkhan
the porsche 997 turbo is also faster in triptonic then the manual version driven by professional drivers
... idk but what makes a ferrari better then a porsche?
id rather have the f430 (just cuz its a ferrari) then the porsche turbo but it seems as if porsche is out performing ferrari with the turbo vs f430 for a whole lot less money
and it kinda sucks when you have a ferrari and a porsche could embaress you

I'd never feel short changed by an F430, which I believe is one of the best valued super cars for performance and luxury.
post #173 of 181
Full Canvas:

Great pics! What a beauty.
Now my measly lowest denomination coinage on the semiauto:
While I love manual transmissions (blipping the throttle right before you go in to a corner and hearing the engine growl and the grab of the transmission...aaaah!) I cannot say I would necessarily opt for a manual myself. I guess I'd have to drive both before deciding but frankly if I were in the financial position to afford a F430 I cannot see any reason I would not occassionally track it (cannot afford the tyre costs to take my Celica for autocrossing) - in that case the ease and speed of the semiauto would be a blast to have!
And I would not use the auto program on it so the jerkiness there would not be a concern of mine.
post #174 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by briancl
I'd never feel short changed by an F430, which I believe is one of the best valued super cars for performance and luxury.


well yea same here, but idk..it just kinda sucks when the porsche can out perform you
post #175 of 181
The Porsche is faster in a straight line, which isn't very interesting. The auto is faster to 60 because of the slushbox's torque multiplication and different gearing.

A 911 is a very different concept than an F430, and the cars will feel very different when driven: the numbers don't begin to say everything about the cars.

And we'll all make fun of you for buying a Porsche with an automatic.

--Andre
post #176 of 181
Thread Starter 
I have a friend who got out of a 997 Turbo (after having 5 911 Turbos in a row) into a much slower 360 Modena and couldn't be happier. Speed isn't everything, it's the smile it puts on your face.
post #177 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by zjpj83
I have a friend who got out of a 997 Turbo (after having 5 911 Turbos in a row) into a much slower 360 Modena and couldn't be happier. Speed isn't everything, it's the smile it puts on your face.

I think you are right. If speed were everything, people buying F430s, DB9s, Gallardos et.c. would just cross shop or (maybe get) Vipers, Ford GTs or Z06s instead. There are intangibles at that end of the market that are past plain performance IMHO. Hell, it is not like Ferrari has anything to prove to anyone
post #178 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew
The Porsche is faster in a straight line, which isn't very interesting. The auto is faster to 60 because of the slushbox's torque multiplication and different gearing.

A 911 is a very different concept than an F430, and the cars will feel very different when driven: the numbers don't begin to say everything about the cars.

And we'll all make fun of you for buying a Porsche with an automatic.

--Andre
by all means id rather have a f430 ..i cant afford either..im a poor college student but theres a lot of rich kids that go to my school and ive seen people with ferraris here and you know kids go out and try race eachother on the highway..ive never seen a f430 around campus but ive seen 360's and they cant keep up with a porsche
see i always thought the porsche wasnt as good handling wise because it cant be..most of the weight is in the back of the car like 65 percent..the weight distribution isnt as good as a ferrari or even close..but some people tell me that the rear engine design is better because it helps prevent understeering and lets you over steer with ease idk..ive also seen videos of a f430 getting beat on the track by 997 gt3's..in the end ya id still have a ferarri cuz its a ferrari i mean im guessing msot peopel would but i dont know it just kinda pisses me off that id buy one and then a porsche could whip me
post #179 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by zjpj83
I have a friend who got out of a 997 Turbo (after having 5 911 Turbos in a row) into a much slower 360 Modena and couldn't be happier. Speed isn't everything, it's the smile it puts on your face.

That's the whole game right there. For some (me included) the sound of the drivetrain matters as much as straight-line speed, so long as it's at least decently quick, and handling/ride balance matters more than both of the others.
post #180 of 181
Quote:
see i always thought the porsche wasnt as good handling wise because it cant be..most of the weight is in the back of the car like 65 percent..the weight distribution isnt as good as a ferrari or even close..but some people tell me that the rear engine design is better because it helps prevent understeering and lets you over steer with ease idk..

The static weight distribution of both cars are actually very close, however, the rear engine design of the 911 makes for all the difference, because the car is dynamically impaired. It's amazing to me how Porsche could polish a turdy design like the 911 and make it one of the fastest cars in its class today, sort of like what Intel did with the x86/Pentium line.

In classic racing technique, different forms of handling neutrality have their uses. For example, on entry to a corner, you want some mild understeer so that the car is a little more forgiving of your input as you transition from full braking to turn-in --- it helps stabilize the car and gives you more room for error. You want pretty close to neutral through the apex, and a slight bit of oversteer on the exit so that the car isn't scrubbing off much speed by plowing as you apply full throttle. The 911 typically gets this sequence backwards, but they may have fixed it in the recent ones. The skidpad numbers reported in magazine reports reflect mostly the apex behavior, and can make for evil-handling cars for those cars that try to optimize just for the skidpad number.

Also in cars of this caliber, people should only be worried about too much understeer and oversteer after they learn how to drive a car properly. Lots of first time performance drivers (on the track or autox) complain that their car has too much understeer, but typically they just didn't slow down enough for a corner.

Quote:
ive also seen videos of a f430 getting beat on the track by 997 gt3's..in the end ya id still have a ferarri cuz its a ferrari i mean im guessing msot peopel would but i dont know it just kinda pisses me off that id buy one and then a porsche could whip me

For this level of cars, it's the driver that's limiting the car. I've gone faster than a 996 TT in my stock BMW 328Ci on a racetrack, but I've also had very fast drivers pwn me with a Toyota Tacoma, so YMMV.

--Andre
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › My new F430