The New 911

[Eye of the Tiger]

Have you driven a car w/CVT? They suck. I mean, they do what they're supposed to do, but they add another layer of viscous coupling in the interface between the driver and the car. For a DD penalty box for someone who drives for no reason other than to get from point A to B, sure. For someone w/any driving for pleasure bone in their body, no freaking way.

There's a good reason there hasn't, isn't, and prob never will be a sports car w/CVT. And no, torque limits are not the reason (see: Nissan V6 transmission).

The only things that I know of that use viscous CVTs are tractors. As far as I know, most automotive CVTs use variable pulley designs combined with a traditional torque converter. That is completely different from a eCVT, of course, which has no viscous coupling or anything in common with actual CVTs.

I agree that most CVTs feel sluggish like they are going through about five more torque converters before anything happens, but that is mostly due to the mechanical limitations of the variable pulley system, combined with the ability to control the squeezing pressure of each pulley without slipping, or binding up the drive chain/belt. It requires a very precise control, that is entirely computer controlled and has no inherit mechanical ability to function on its own.

[sportyaccordy]

DSG, SMG, well sorted autos, that stuff trickled down from the racetrack. So emotionally there is a connection there. And the stuff still works there. CVT prob would work better if they could make it work reliably... but I personally wouldn't want a car that drones at a single RPM for hours at a time. Much of the appeal of sports cars is in the sounds that they make, and a CVT at full tilt is anything but sporty. I'll pay the 1MPG penalty in exchange for response + my sanity.

[2o6]

DSG, SMG, well sorted autos, that stuff trickled down from the racetrack. So emotionally there is a connection there. And the stuff still works there. CVT prob would work better if they could make it work reliably... but I personally wouldn't want a car that drones at a single RPM for hours at a time. Much of the appeal of sports cars is in the sounds that they make, and a CVT at full tilt is anything but sporty. I'll pay the 1MPG penalty in exchange for response + my sanity.

The only time that even happens on the freeway, and all cars drone at constant RPM's.

[Eye of the Tiger]

The only time that even happens on the freeway, and all cars drone at constant RPM's.

I don't know what freeway you're driving on. Maybe somewhere in South Dakota?

[cawimmer430]

Just give the damn the thing a Mercedes 7Gtronic. 7-gears being selected for you. Period.

[Raza]

Nah - the 996 was the worst by a mile. The 993 was about the pinnacle for the 911, but the 997 was at least a big step in the right direction after the 996, IMO.

I like the looks of this, but it's losing it's beetle profile that the 997 still pulled off.

The 993 was very good looking, but as large a departure from the original design language as the 996 was.  I consider the 964 to be the pinnacle; the last 911 to be both modern and hold true to the original design. 

[sportyaccordy]

The only time that even happens on the freeway, and all cars drone at constant RPM's.

No, if you floor a CVT car it will hold steady at peak power RPMs.

Just give the damn the thing a Mercedes 7Gtronic. 7-gears being selected for you. Period.

If MB made a CVT, you'd be all for them

[Raza]

Well, for starters, that's quite clearly a picture of a 997 interior, a pre-facelift 997 if I'm not mistaken. 

If it were up to me, I'd go with a traditional 6-speed setup with a computer activated 7th only when you're in 6th.  But that's just me. 

Give me six forward, no more, no fewer. 

[GoCougs]

Porsche engineers may have sacrificed some of the action in exchange for increased economy and performance. Everyone will have a different opinion on that. To some it might not be worth the loss in feel if the gains aren't large enough. Others may find the closer ratios pointless and bothersome if they were already satisfied the car's performance.

More gears = more parts. A better question would be why did Porsche engineers wait until now to do this if it was such a good idea? Could it be that these transmissions were too big/expensive/complex/infeasible until now? Are we so sure that their first attempt will be super-duper-awesome? Hmm, I wonder...

If CVT is the pinnacle of transmissions, why didn't Porsche engineers use it?

"Action?" What is meant by this?

The more you can keep an engine in its power band both the quicker/faster it will be; ergo, more gears. Plus, what with modern tire and traction technology cars can put monster torque effectively to the street enabling more gears lower down in the speed range. For example, the 7sp Panamera has a max speed of less than 30 mph in 1st gear and is well into 3rd gear at 60 mph for a 0-60 time of 3.3 sec. Not bad for a 4,400 lb car and only 500 hp which easily bests the 505 hp Z06 that weighs a shocking 1,300 lbs less. For reference, the Z06 has a max speed of 59 mph in 1st and 88 mph in 2nd...

The more you can keep an engine closer constant RPM the more efficient it will be. Also, there is a TON of engine technology (VVT/L, multi-stage induction, VG turbos, etc.), and the cost and size/weight penalty that comes with it, to broaden engine power band. More gears/CVTs lessens the requirement for engines to operate across a wider power band. In the future, as CVT technology gets better, I would not be surprised to see a lot of the his type of engine technology being ratcheted down if not left behind.

More parts, but they are very, very simple parts. As with All Things, advancement takes time. Why didn't Porsche debut the PDK 10 years ago or a 500 hp TT 15 years ago? Not everything happens right away for a multitude of reasons.

As noted, retail CVT tech is still not good with big power (but will be).

[SVT666]

I had a CVT for 3 years and it is the furthest thing from being fun or sporty.  I will never buy a CVT again.

[SVT666]

Give me six forward, no more, no fewer. 

Damn right.

[NomisR]

I had a CVT for 3 years and it is the furthest thing from being fun or sporty.  I will never buy a CVT again.

Because they're not properly tuned and I still see a lot of emulation of geared transmissions...

[68_427]

Damn right.

Dude you had a Freestyle with a 3.0L?

[SVT666]

No, if you floor a CVT car it will hold steady at peak power RPMs.

Yup. And acceleration sucks until you get up to a certain speed. Under that speed it feels lkke the car is spooling up and then it hits that magic speed and the car feels like it has finally caught up to the engine. It feels like the transmission is slipping all the time.

[SVT666]

Because they're not properly tuned and I still see a lot of emulation of geared transmissions...

CVTs with simulated gears kinda defeats the purpose of a CVT.

[SVT666]

Dude you had a Freestyle with a 3.0L?

That's right. I think I may be the only guy on here who has had a CVT.

[68_427]

I have one on my snowmobile and it's great. 

[Tave]

"Action?" What is meant by this?

Shift action. The feel of the linkeage and the ease/fluidity with which you can shift between gears. I'm guessing it will suffer a bit in the lower gears to make room for the extra gates.

The more you can keep an engine in its power band both the quicker/faster it will be; ergo, more gears. Plus, what with modern tire and traction technology cars can put monster torque effectively to the street enabling more gears lower down in the speed range. For example, the 7sp Panamera has a max speed of less than 30 mph in 1st gear and is well into 3rd gear at 60 mph for a 0-60 time of 3.3 sec. Not bad for a 4,400 lb car and only 500 hp which easily bests the 505 hp Z06 that weighs a shocking 1,300 lbs less. For reference, the Z06 has a max speed of 59 mph in 1st and 88 mph in 2nd...

The more you can keep an engine closer constant RPM the more efficient it will be. Also, there is a TON of engine technology (VVT/L, multi-stage induction, VG turbos, etc.), and the cost and size/weight penalty that comes with it, to broaden engine power band. More gears/CVTs lessens the requirement for engines to operate across a wider power band. In the future, as CVT technology gets better, I would not be surprised to see a lot of the his type of engine technology being ratcheted down if not left behind.

More parts, but they are very, very simple parts. As with All Things, advancement takes time. Why didn't Porsche debut the PDK 10 years ago or a 500 hp TT 15 years ago? Not everything happens right away for a multitude of reasons.

As noted, retail CVT tech is still not good with big power (but will be).

I didn't disagree that more gears leads to better performance, in fact, I admitted they do. I simply raised some issues about practical application.

It's interesting you bring up the Panamera's automated 7-speed. Notice I said my gut reaction is that the 7-speed PDK will be more liveable than the 7-speed manual. Do you think Jow Blow rowing his own gears is going to get anywhere near that 3.3 mark?

[Cookie Monster]

"Action?" What is meant by this?

The more you can keep an engine in its power band both the quicker/faster it will be; ergo, more gears. Plus, what with modern tire and traction technology cars can put monster torque effectively to the street enabling more gears lower down in the speed range. For example, the 7sp Panamera has a max speed of less than 30 mph in 1st gear and is well into 3rd gear at 60 mph for a 0-60 time of 3.3 sec. Not bad for a 4,400 lb car and only 500 hp which easily bests the 505 hp Z06 that weighs a shocking 1,300 lbs less. For reference, the Z06 has a max speed of 59 mph in 1st and 88 mph in 2nd...

The more you can keep an engine closer constant RPM the more efficient it will be. Also, there is a TON of engine technology (VVT/L, multi-stage induction, VG turbos, etc.), and the cost and size/weight penalty that comes with it, to broaden engine power band. More gears/CVTs lessens the requirement for engines to operate across a wider power band. In the future, as CVT technology gets better, I would not be surprised to see a lot of the his type of engine technology being ratcheted down if not left behind.

More parts, but they are very, very simple parts. As with All Things, advancement takes time. Why didn't Porsche debut the PDK 10 years ago or a 500 hp TT 15 years ago? Not everything happens right away for a multitude of reasons.

As noted, retail CVT tech is still not good with big power (but will be).

I do agree that more gears is better but not when it's manually controlled. Even the 8 speed Lexus auto has been said to hunt gears a lot. Imagine having to do that by yourself. I'm sure the PDK is a great transmission with 7 speeds, but I wouldn't want more, closer ratios that necessitate even more shifting.

Also, the Panamera's 3.3 second time doesn't have to do just with more gears. The PDK can shift much faster than a normal person in the Z06 (or any other MT car) could. With a 7 speed manual in the same car, I doubt it would be able to get that 3.3 second time, with two shifts in between.

Plus the Panamera is AWD. That helps a lot.

[cawimmer430]

If MB made a CVT, you'd be all for them

Eh, not sure what this has to do with my SARCASTIC COMMENT.

And MB already makes a CVT transmission. It's called the Autotronic and is available on the current A/B-Classes.

[GoCougs]

Shift action. The feel of the linkeage and the ease/fluidity with which you can shift between gears. I'm guessing it will suffer a bit in the lower gears to make room for the extra gates.

Probably not; the method of actuation of the shifter; rods, cables, direct mount; is much more the determining factor.

I didn't disagree that more gears leads to better performance, in fact, I admitted they do. I simply raised some issues about practical application.

It's interesting you bring up the Panamera's automated 7-speed. Notice I said my gut reaction is that the 7-speed PDK will be more liveable than the 7-speed manual. Do you think Jow Blow rowing his own gears is going to get anywhere near that 3.3 mark?

Missing the point a bit. The point is not absolute raw performance but that other modern technologies enable the effective use of having many more gears. There is virtually zero utility in putting a 7-sp M/T in an old-school muscle care (whereby you're well into 3rd gear by 60 mph) simply because you can't get all that torque to the street.

[sportyaccordy]

Probably not; the method of actuation of the shifter; rods, cables, direct mount; is much more the determining factor.

Missing the point a bit. The point is not absolute raw performance but that other modern technologies enable the effective use of having many more gears. There is virtually zero utility in putting a 7-sp M/T in an old-school muscle care (whereby you're well into 3rd gear by 60 mph) simply because you can't get all that torque to the street.

There's not much added utility in having 7 speeds over in a base 911 either. At least when coupled with the potential for disaster. And actually given the peaky nature of OHV motors, there could be something to more gears.

The 911 F6 isn't exactly a peaky motor. So having a super close ratio box would not really help matters. And like I said, the potential for disaster is that much greater. What was once a 5 to 3 downshift might become a 7 to 3. Or 5 to 4 could become 7 to 2, accidentally. At cruising speeds for a Porsche, that would be murder she wrote for that engine, unless they have some computer guided shift lock solenoids... at which point you might as well just get the PDK.

The old 6 speed's final gear topped out at about where the top speed was (180ish MPH). W/a 7200RPM redline that meant 60 came in around 2400, which was admittedly a little high. But to me if better gas mileage was the objective, they should have just stretched out 6th gear. But w/e.

[GoCougs]

There's not much added utility in having 7 speeds over in a base 911 either. At least when coupled with the potential for disaster. And actually given the peaky nature of OHV motors, there could be something to more gears.

The 911 F6 isn't exactly a peaky motor. So having a super close ratio box would not really help matters. And like I said, the potential for disaster is that much greater. What was once a 5 to 3 downshift might become a 7 to 3. Or 5 to 4 could become 7 to 2, accidentally. At cruising speeds for a Porsche, that would be murder she wrote for that engine, unless they have some computer guided shift lock solenoids... at which point you might as well just get the PDK.

The old 6 speed's final gear topped out at about where the top speed was (180ish MPH). W/a 7200RPM redline that meant 60 came in around 2400, which was admittedly a little high. But to me if better gas mileage was the objective, they should have just stretched out 6th gear. But w/e.

Sure it helps matters; they didn't do it just because.

If you do that to your car you deserve everything that happens to you and your car. But that will never happen. In practical terms, between traction/stability control and rev limiters it would be a lot less dramatic than you're letting on.

[MX793]

Sure it helps matters; they didn't do it just because.

If you do that to your car you deserve everything that happens to you and your car. But that will never happen. In practical terms, between traction/stability control and rev limiters it would be a lot less dramatic than you're letting on.

Neither stability/traction control nor electronic rev limiters will prevent you from valve float and the subsequent engine damage associated with over-rev caused by shifting into too low a gear for the vehicle speed traveled.

[SVT666]

Sure it helps matters; they didn't do it just because.

If you do that to your car you deserve everything that happens to you and your car. But that will never happen. In practical terms, between traction/stability control and rev limiters it would be a lot less dramatic than you're letting on.

Are you kidding me? Rev limiters and traction control? You don't have a clue.

[Colonel Cadillac]

I don't know, I think I've maybe once tried to put my car in a gear too low and it just wouldn't let me And/or it becomes painfully obvious you're in the wrong gear when it comes time to let out the clutch.

[GoCougs]

C'mon guys. Haven't you abused cars in your impetuous youths?

By down shifting at speed from 7th to 2nd or whatever in a base 911, the most likely scenario IMO is one is going to lock up the rear tires and stall the engine. From there, the traction/stability control will make sure the car doesn't lose control. At any point in the process if the engine doesn't completely stall and the driver gets back on the gas when out of gear in trying to recover, enter the rev limiter.

But then again, if one is prone to inadvertently downshifting into too steep a gear or automotive ignoramus-based trolling, it's going to happen with any gated transmission irrespective of the number of gears and otherwise the risk doesn't increase with the number of gears.

[Cookie Monster]

I don't know, I think I've maybe once tried to put my car in a gear too low and it just wouldn't let me And/or it becomes painfully obvious you're in the wrong gear when it comes time to let out the clutch.

Really? My car will go 5th to 2nd if I really want it to. Obviously it won't go into first (easily) since first is unsynchronized but otherwise nothing's stopping you from shifting into any gear you want.

And when you're driving/shifting fast it's very easy to misshift and not realize before letting out the clutch.

[Cookie Monster]

C'mon guys. Haven't you abused cars in your impetuous youths?

By down shifting at speed from 7th to 2nd or whatever in a base 911, the most likely scenario IMO is one is going to lock up the rear tires and stall the engine. From there, the traction/stability control will make sure the car doesn't lose control. At any point in the process if the engine doesn't completely stall and the driver gets back on the gas when out of gear in trying to recover, enter the rev limiter.

But then again, if one is prone to inadvertently downshifting into too steep a gear or automotive ignoramus-based trolling, it's going to happen with any gated transmission irrespective of the number of gears and otherwise the risk doesn't increase with the number of gears.

Why would the engine stall rather than over revving and blowing out?

And the more gates you have, the easier it is to mis shift. There are more possible gates to go to by accident especially when driving fast.

[Colonel Cadillac]

Really? My car will go 5th to 2nd if I really want it to. Obviously it won't go into first (easily) since first is unsynchronized but otherwise nothing's stopping you from shifting into any gear you want.

And when you're driving/shifting fast it's very easy to misshift and not realize before letting out the clutch.

Hmm...maybe you're right and mine is the same.


Doesn't change the fact that once you go to let out the clutch, it's obvious you're in the wrong gear.