Fair enough... I thought I'd mention the Turbo S because two things were brought up as aids to a launch off the line:

AWD
Launch control

Since the Turbo S has both of those, I saw it appropriate to compare a practically equivalent Turbo S and GT2 (RS). I mean, if that isn't a perfect comparison, I don't know what is - the GT2 RS has less weight, more power, manual shifting, and RWD. It is everything the Turbo S is NOT. But somehow the Turbo S has faster 0-60 & 1/4 mile times.

 

See - that's exactly my point! ANYBODY can get in a Turbo S or GT-R and get 0-60 in 2 secs. Press brake, press throttle, release brake - hold on!

Done.

My wife went 0-60 in 2.7 secs. Stock, she went 11.4 in the 1/4 (4 years ago). There is no internet racing. EVERYBODY can get the same time. There isn't any discrepancy about shifting, which RPM to dump the clutch, how long should the slip take, etc...

A monkey could get a 2.9 in a Turbo S (provided altitude and traction are there - obviously, on ice, in the mountains, going uphill, in the snow, both ways, would net slower times).

That's the beauty of it all - years ago, there was manufacturer released times, magazine times, and then customer times. And they were all different. No longer the case. With AWD, dual clutch cars, with launch control - everybody gets the same time. So you don't have to wait years to perfect and research launching techniques. Just purchase a better engineered car that actually does everything you wanted it to do in the first place.

 

It's interesting to me because the manual vs. computer times you see now really emphasize the point that the car isn't any more capable in terms of HP, tires, etc., it's quicker by taking the human (or expert-system monkey?) out of the loop whether in full launch control or just in terms of shifting.

Definitely great for more consistent benchmarks, and there's no doubt computer controlled is going to be faster for 0-60 times in most any case (and for tracking it), but... Sadly, the point where sports cars don't even offer manuals probably isn't that far off. :/ [Or cars in general - with higher efficiency it's just a matter of time before they're legislated out?]

And yes, I get more than enough computers at work all day long.

 

And then one day a person has an epiphany and peace can finally be achieved; there will always be someone faster than you.

Here is a truth: During my lifetime I was lucky enough to own some of the nicest cars that I'd desired. There was a vast contrast in models, and my fastest was an eight-second Malibu, which my kid brother continues to race.

That being said, I've tried several of the top contenders in the last few years, including the ZO6, ZR1 and the Nissan GTR. Yes, I do waste a lot of money trading cars, but it's still better than spending it on cocaine.

Here is where I'm going with all of this: My latest edition, the 2013 Carrera S is by far the best automobile I've ever owned. The car keeps a constant smile on my face whenever I take her out.

Now, my kid brother is still faster than I, but somehow it doesn't matter any more. After almost fifty years of being obsessed with numbers, I finally managed to get my hands on a car that makes me truly happy.

And don't take Ranger's driving skills too lightly. I've seen him take a ZR1 and pull a faster sixty-foot than anyone else without using the traction control option (in person, not on the internet).

 

There are always people who care about other characteristics than speed. That is why Ford, Maybach, Honda, Toyota, VW, etc... are still selling cars.

For those are that are concerned about speed - more specifically drag racing, or daily performance, launching (or other take off) is pretty important.

 

Definitely, for raw speed it's great what the computer can add and it gives a more consistent number for how that vehicle can perform than benchmarks using a MT. I'm just glad there are options for more fun (where that's clearly based on personal preferences) as well.

 

Agreed, but I wouldn't draw the line between dual clutch manuals, and single clutch manuals - as the difference is not the automated clutch shift time vs manual clutch shift time, but rather there are two clutches and would most likely not be used properly if there were two clutch pedals.

Basically - I'm suggesting the fact that there are two clutches makes the PDK faster than a single clutch, regardless if it is automated (computer controlled) or not. Because in a single clutch - there is a release, then a reengage. Whereas in a dual clutch setup, the second clutch is ready to engage about 0.1secs after the first clutch disengages... So I wouldn't say manual vs computer controlled - I'd suggest single clutch vs dual clutch (just so happens every dual clutch is computer controlled).

 

There are some very fast single-clutch auto setups as well (new Aventador ISR comes to mind) - and there's essentially no chance a driver could shift with a single clutch in 50 milliseconds - that's why I attribute the speed difference to software. Same hardware (PDK/ISR/whatever), I don't think a person can shift it as quickly anymore, particularly if it means choosing the gear, double-clutch shifting & rev-matching, and being there in .05 or .1 seconds. Bam!

It's really quick, drives very nicely, gives you great control, and handles all the details.

That said, it doesn't float my boat. I started driving on a MT in the 80's and was on one until the late 90's and miss one every time I drive. (Well, for another 2 weeks!) Clearly PDK with LC makes for better launch benchmarks, there's a huge market for it for DD commuters now that it's been really polished, many people prefer it.. and yet...

Like I say, I'm just glad there's [still] an option, and I wholeheartedly agree that I would enjoy manual with 2 clutch pedals a lot less. I don't think claiming there's a Toyota, Ford or VW out there for people just because shaving an extra .5 sec off of 0-60 isn't someone's top priority is quite fair.

 

I don't disagree, but I'll add that some people can shift almost as fast. I don't think that (PDK) makes up for all .5secs difference between the GT2RS and the heavier, less powerful Turbo S. I attribute that towards AWD and the ability to launch.

My comment regarding VW's, Fords, Toyotas, etc... existing because some people don't prioritize as much, was intended to be simultaneously inflammatory - but true. Because someone driving a Prius is clearly not that concerned with speed..., as much as they are economy, or carbon footprint (all actual data of environmental damage aside), or perception of environmental consciousness.

Basically - everyone prioritizes differently. For some, luxury is number one (stereotypically - Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, Lincoln, etc...). For others straight line performance - Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, etc... For others cornering/tracking, FR-S/BR-Z, MX-5 (Miata), Corvette, GT3, etc... Some cars have multiple traits, Z06, 911, GT-R, etc... It all depends on what you are looking for, giving up something. You can't have Bugatti top speed, with Honda reliability/maintenance, in Ford prices. Always a compromise. Every manufacturer does it differently.

As you stated, I'm glad their are options. I think we all agree on that.

 

 

That's funny. Two fat boys eating cookies and a mile high.
Thanks!

 

A 997.2 tt pdk I doubt you would see a 2 sec increase with 2 people on board at 1mile high. I find that most Porsche NA cars are greatly affected with extra weight, even at sea level you will see the 0-60 would be very poor.

Seeing a 991s hit 0-60 in under 4sec, they must have a tank of gas almost on empty and a very light person driving.

Would love to see a 997.2 tt pdk times at 1mile high, I can't imagine the time from 0-60 would be greatly affected compared to a NA engine.

 

Time to put down the greasy pork chop, "peoples." Eat something healthy.

 

I seem to recall a drag race between a fighter jet and a lambo.....yes, someone will always be faster, but no one will have a more fabulous 991 than I because it's mine.

 

Nothing like talking about your new CF hood, shaving 4 lbs off your car, over a supersized combo meal...