6 speed vs. F1 transmission

[S Brake]

for me it would be a 6 speed, i hear the F1 is just a waste of money for rich people who can't drive a manual transmission.

[Porsche]

That's what you here. Your 50% right. The F1 tranny is for rich people and race car drivers who need to shift up and down very quickly (Like 1/10 of a second) so that they win a race. It is far easier to drive and was originally designed for racing. I have an MP3 of a Mclaren-Mercedes F1 car downshifting from 6th to 1st in about 3 seconds.

[enzo@af]

Although I've heard that Ferrari's F1 can actually be really good once you get used to it (it's got .1 second shifts), I just prefer having a manual.

[Chris]

I have an article about it, which I will read for the facts, then get back here about it

[Heep]

I like a clutch. Better burnouts, you dont have to hold the brake on when stopped at a light (flat surface anyway), you get to pretend you're actually impressing people with your anti-rollback skills , and you don't look like a big ignoramous driving a humdrum auto.

[texan]

You mean you like a manually controlled clutch. The Ferrari and other F1 sequential or semi-automatic transmissions are manuals (meaning nothing like a standard automatic, no torque convertor and direct coupling), they just have electro-hydrolically controlled clutches. You don't have to push down the brake pedal at the stop to keep the car from rolling forward, the clutch automatically disengages once the car drops to very slow speed.

[texan]

Originally posted by Crystallas
f1 trans uses less power than a gearbox. Infact to get more performance and to save weight, some companies are considering F1s in stock mass produced cars.

And what evidence have you heard to support that?

[JD@af]

If this is true, I would very much like to see more about it. Because this is out-of-the-blue data to me, and apparently I'm not the only one who shares in this opinion. And look it up? Where? How? That's a little vague, don't you think? And if they were so cheap, wouldn't Europe be smattered with them by now? Because last time I checked, Europeans take a much more.. shall we say "proactive" approach to motoring than the average American. I'd think they'd be very popular on the other side of the Atlantic; yet save a few Ferraris and other race-inspired cars, I haven't heard hide nor hair of any, except in concept cars and prototypes, for example the RX-8.

Tell you what, you supply a place to look it up, and I'll be sure to do so.. you willing to go even less than halfway here?

[texan]

Originally posted by Crystallas


*sigh* I'd think some of you being car buffs.. that you would know this.. VERY old information.. companys haven't swicthed because people perfer driving with 1 hand, and using a gearbox + plus a lot of other cost reasons.
.. Look it up, and don't be lazy and ask me to prove it. Its not OUT of the blue data :P

Actually I never said it was out of the blue data, personally I think it's non-existent data. I know how transmissions work, and F1 style trannies are no more than manual trans (usually sequential manual trans with straight cut gears, which are unsuitable for road use) wth electro-hydrolically controlled clutches and drive-by-wire systems that allow the ECU to facilitate rev matching on up and downshifts. And I am not some lazy enthusiast, I keep my ear to the ground on all new developments in the automotive. So let's stop evading the question and answer it, shall we?

[Crystallas]

right texan.. riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggght....

i did a search and found quite a bit of info..
but im surprized you know how a transmission works.. want a cookie.. you are in an elite club of smart people who know how transmissions work.

The ultimate answer ends up to be When transmission technology hits a ceiling.. the F1 and ECVT will remain.. infact.. maybe ECVT should be part of this poll.

[Chris]

In the 355 and 360, the F1 tranny can shift faster than the average or fairly good driver. An expert would be better. But in real F1 cars, they shift in .015 seconds, which is faster than any human.
real F1 trannys are very expensive, those touch shifts arent what the Ferrari has. It lacks a torque converter, and is, as others have said, just a manual with no stick and clutch. It makes really fast gear changes, perfectly matching rpms to the load, speed, etc.
Where the F1 tranny is difficult is launches. It is very hard (impossible??) to modulate the clutch to account for some wheelspin, hard to tell the amount of wheelspin. As a result, you cant feed in the perfect amount of throttle, so it is very difficult. People say that the F1 is better once you get used to it, and that 2-3 upshift in Ferraris is not hard anymore.
Plus, it can shift automatically, so in traffic you can relax.

Ah, technology.

PS, price of F1 tranny on Ferrari, $12 000 (I think)

[Chris]

Dont you mean CVT, not ECVT. They are the very best trannys. The engine can be at its peak power forever. I think they should have modes, like economy, stop and go, sport, and oh-my-god-i'm-going-to-die-from-this-incredible-speed modes.

[Dylan_Michael]

I would take the F1 transmission. Its not an auto, but a manual with computer hydraulics. It gives you that race car feel, yet enables you to do it in your everyday Ferrari. Not like Ferrari made an everyday car, but you get the idea.

[texan]

Crystallas- Well once again you have not answered the question, how hard could it possibly be to post a link to one of these many sites that support your claim? Here's a site explaining the basic workings of nearly every current semi-automatic, fully automatic and CVT system currently in cars...

http://www.fortunecity.com/silversto.../tech_gear.htm

So considering the fact that all current "F1" style trannies use manual gearboxes with electronic controll, how exactly can they be more efficient at transmitting power? They are the same mechanicl systems, the only real functional difference is how the clutch is actuated.

[Chris]

F1 tranny's can be MARGINALLY more efficient, as the upshifts and downshift are done (in most cases, with a good system) better than a human driver. So the percent increase in fuel economy could be 2 or 3 %in stop-n-go traffic, or next to nill on a long highway journey.

CVT's give better performance and better fuel economy. The transmission of the future, my friend.