>>Just because a computer may one day be able to shift faster than a human...


It already does on some Ferraris. Something like 0.03 seconds. I could be wrong on a number, but I know it's way faster than human.

 

Only goes to prove the point. I just can't imagine having a Ferrari, or a Porsche, or an MCS and turning over the driving to a computer. What's the point? Is that fun?

What's next, cars with laser assisted fully automatic breaking systems so we never have to hit the brakes again? I bet a computer will be able to beat a human there too. Maybe the car can take over the steering while its at it.

 

now that would be a real spycar!

 

>>Only goes to prove the point. I just can't imagine having a Ferrari, or a Porsche, or an MCS and turning over the driving to a computer. What's the point? Is that fun?
>>
>>What's next, cars with laser assisted fully automatic breaking systems so we never have to hit the brakes again? I bet a computer will be able to beat a human there too. Maybe the car can take over the steering while its at it.
>>
>>
>>
>>


Actually I hate to burst your bubble, but that is the ways cars will go one day. Driver wont do anything except input the destination. This way you can eat, sleep, do whatever while your car takes you to your destination. We may not live to see that, but that is what a lot of the concept cars are based on.

 

>>Actually I hate to burst your bubble, but that is the ways cars will go one day. Driver wont do anything except input the destination. This way you can eat, sleep, do whatever while your car takes you to your destination. We may not live to see that, but that is what a lot of the concept cars are based on.

I'm not saying you are wrong.
But is that a "good thing"?

 

>>Actually I hate to burst your bubble, but that is the ways cars will go one day. Driver wont do anything except input the destination. This way you can eat, sleep, do whatever while your car takes you to your destination. We may not live to see that, but that is what a lot of the concept cars are based on.

That's great and everything, but when the hell are they going to fly?

 

>>Just because a computer may one day be able to shift faster than a human, does that mean we will give up the joy of having command over our vehicles?

Isn't shifting an attempt to keep the car's RPM near max torque which equals max pleasure? Forget shifting. So what's wrong with having max torque always available without shifting or a tranny shifting. Remember a true CVT tranny doesn't "shift".

If I don't have to waste my time thinking about shifting and being sure I'm in the right gear for the speed my car is travelling to get the max accelleration then I'd be spending time on setting up my apex for the next corner and eyeing the next braking point and keeping an eye out for other vehicles and for road hazzards. It'll only make driving more safe right?


* get rid of the starter motor and put in a hand crank.
* get rid of the electronic drive by wire throttle and put in an old fashioned carb with physical linkage to your gas pedal.
* get rid of those hydrolically assisted brakes!
* get rid of those power windows and put in hand cranks.
* get rid of the remote door looks and apply a pad-lock to your door
* get rid of the xenon headlamps and put in a lantern.
* while we're at it get rid of the engine and part of the floor boards and go Fred Flintstone on us!

 

>>>>Just because a computer may one day be able to shift faster than a human, does that mean we will give up the joy of having command over our vehicles?
>>
>>Isn't shifting an attempt to keep the car's RPM near max torque which equals max pleasure? Forget shifting. So what's wrong with having max torque always available without shifting or a tranny shifting. Remember a true CVT tranny doesn't "shift".
>>
>>If I don't have to waste my time thinking about shifting and being sure I'm in the right gear for the speed my car is travelling to get the max accelleration then I'd be spending time on setting up my apex for the next corner and eyeing the next braking point and keeping an eye out for other vehicles and for road hazzards. It'll only make driving more safe right?
>>
>> If you want command of your vehicle????
>>* get rid of the starter motor and put in a hand crank.
>>* get rid of the electronic drive by wire throttle and put in an old fashioned carb with physical linkage to your gas pedal.
>>* get rid of those hydrolically assisted brakes!
>>* get rid of those power windows and put in hand cranks.
>>* get rid of the remote door looks and apply a pad-lock to your door
>>* get rid of the xenon headlamps and put in a lantern.
>>* while we're at it get rid of the engine and part of the floor boards and go Fred Flintstone on us!


put in a lantern thats great!

 

>>put in a lantern thats great!

Make sure it don't tip over or it may cause a fire!

 

that is classic!
isn't there a super hero....BRG/lantern?

 

>>>>Just because a computer may one day be able to shift faster than a human...
>>
>>
>>It already does on some Ferraris. Something like 0.03 seconds. I could be wrong on a number, but I know it's way faster than human.

BMW's SMG comes immediately to mind. I believe F1 cars also use a sequential gear box with an "automatic" clutch.

I think it will be a long, long time before cars are not offered with MT. I for one am happy to trade a couple tenths of a second for the tactile pleasure of rowing through gears and operating a clutch. Some would rather have an auto box, and that's fine with me too.

Interesting data point: I've heard the Corvette equipped with a slush box runs the 1/4 mile quicker than the 6 speed.

 

>>>> If you want command of your vehicle????
Manual tranny - old technology, sometimes lighter and more efficient. It's nice to have the option and *most* enthusiasts prefer these types.

 

This is a specious arguement dominicminicoopers.

Impoved brakes and headlights (much less electric starters and door locks) do not divorce the driver form an active participation in the art of driving. An automatic shifter clearly does.

 

>>This is a specious arguement dominicminicoopers.
>>
>> Impoved brakes and headlights (much less electric starters and door locks) do not divorce the driver form an active participation in the art of driving. An automatic shifter clearly does.

You're not getting it. With a true CVT there is NO shifting. No not even automatic shifting. The cones and belts do their job at a constant RPM. No shifting by human or by machine.

BTW, the art of driving includes starting the car. If you like to have gears for a tranny why not a hand crank to make the engine purrr? Now that's participation.

 

>>>>>> If you want command of your vehicle????
>>>>>>* get rid of the starter motor and put in a hand crank.
>>>>>>* get rid of the electronic drive by wire throttle and put in an old fashioned carb with physical linkage to your gas pedal.
>>>>>>* get rid of those hydrolically assisted brakes!
>>>>>>* get rid of those power windows and put in hand cranks.
>>>>>>* get rid of the remote door looks and apply a pad-lock to your door
>>>>>>* get rid of the xenon headlamps and put in a lantern.
>>>>>>* while we're at it get rid of the engine and part of the floor boards and go Fred Flintstone on us!
>>
>>
>>I think you bring up a great point! Let's talk weight savings:
>>Starter - weighs a fair amount, but I'm willing to accept that weight penalty for the convenience of electric start
>>Drive by wire - arguably offers better performance, so it is a mute point.
>>Brakes - hydraulic brakes offer superior performance, mute point....

AAARRRGGH! MOOT! MOOT! MOOT! It is a moot point.

 

I actually contacted JCW awhiel agom, they said that the package they we're curently devloping for america woudl nto be available for the cvt however, they had already been messign aroudn with boosting the power on the cooper models.. cooper respet the cvt and I'm sure they will coem out with something.. the cvt also weighs less, or at least theorectically can ... than a traditonal transmission because it has less moving parts... I lvoe my cvt.. woudln't have it any other way.

 

I'm not getting it?

It doesn't matter if it is a computer, or a series of belts, or divine intervention, ANYTHING that removes the abilily of the driver to work a clutch and mesh his or her own gears profoundly alters the driving experience. You sacrifice a mystical element of motoring when you move to an automatic transmission. There are plenty of cars where it is not that big a loss, but egads people you are taking about ruining an MCS.

As to participating in starting the car, I used to have a 59 Bug that required I work up a good sweat pushing the car everytime I wanted to run it, so I've been there. I don't wanna go back.

Now that I think of it, wouldn't a handcrank come in handy when the battery dies and we can't open the back hatch to charge it?

 

Check this out!

http://www.technofile.com/cars/cvts.html

 

>>Check this out!
>>
>>http://www.technofile.com/cars/cvts.html
>>

Some highlights of review in link:


?Not surprisingly, driving a CVT-equipped vehicle feels closer to driving an ?old style? automatic than a manual.?


?Well, fans of manual transmissions, who find that even a manual shift mode on an automatic doesn't cut the mustard when it comes to the fun-to-drive factor, probably won't fall in love with the CVT. As with manual shift modes on an automatic transmission, they're more fun than a ?garden variety slushbox,? but it still isn't the same as rowing the shifter.?

Sounds abought right

 

My snowmobile has more horsepower than a stock mcs, and the cvt on it kicks but. There are many types of cvts. The belt type with variable pitch pulleis is probably one of the oldest types. CVTs are hard to set up on turbo engines were there is lag, but on a supercharged engine I can't see the problem. I hate to bring up my snowmobile again, but it is an example of a vehicle that the driver is too busy driving to switch gears... and I don't care how good you are at switching gears and useing a clutch you could never match the performance. Oh, and by the the way cvts do shift, they shift ratios dependant on torque needs and engine out put. And whats the big deal with being able to drive a stick, should mco have a special club for those who can drive a stick?
I think MCS would be an awsome performer with a well tuned cvt, and would love to see the performance increase.

_________________
late

 

>>I'm not getting it?
>>
>>It doesn't matter if it is a computer, or a series of belts, or divine intervention, ANYTHING that removes the abilily of the driver to work a clutch and mesh his or her own gears profoundly alters the driving experience. You sacrifice a mystical element of motoring when you move to an automatic transmission. There are plenty of cars where it is not that big a loss, but egads people you are taking about ruining an MCS.
>>
>>As to participating in starting the car, I used to have a 59 Bug that required I work up a good sweat pushing the car everytime I wanted to run it, so I've been there. I don't wanna go back.
>>
>>Now that I think of it, wouldn't a handcrank come in handy when the battery dies and we can't open the back hatch to charge it?



I find it amusing that the clutch pedal die-hards act and think in the same way like the Talibans do........my way or no f***ck**ng way.

 

Oh yeah and to answer your original question, James Bond, You don't seem to get it at all.

 

And we, in turn, are amused that you have a CVT Cooper, with an S on the way.

 

I hope the MCS is soon fitted with a CVT or SMG. I quite frankly don't give a damn if your "Mystical driving connections" are lost because these are a fickle of your imagination...

 

>>And we, in turn, are amused that you have a CVT Cooper, with an S on the way.


yeah the CVT is a keeper as well as the MCS. The Impala is a goner once the MCS arrives at the showroom.


See my problem stems from people like you that can't stand to be open minded about a fantastic car just because it lacks a clutch pedal. I like both transmissions and appreciate what both have to offer.

I am keeping the best of the 2 worlds.