Quote:
Originally Posted by thebmw
Nice defense of the DCT, but you're missing a few key components...least of which is your left leg is still dead weight with DCT. How in the world is that as, or more, engaging? Answer: it is not.
|
Specifically with regards to shifting no it's not more engaging but it also is not significantly less. With regards to the overall experience of driving it simply allows more (of our limited) mental bandwidth to be consumed on things computers can't quite do as well as we can such as corner set up and entry, foreaft and side to side car balancing, throttle steering, perfect braking and trail braking, choosing the best lines, etc.
With DCT one can indded use the left leg! For braking! Not quite yet a skill I have mastered but it's certainly possible and there are some subtle benefits. Even if you don't do that I find DCT plenty plenty engaging. In the manual mode, again, one decides the point of every up and every down shift. That's not different than with a MT. When attempting to go very fast in a MT car how often does one really need to do anything with the clutch except operate it as fast as possible? It's exceptionally rare. In rally or offroad (and I've done plenty of motocross and off road motorcycling) the use of the clutch is way more critical and I'd simply never want a DCT in such an environment. There it is hands down too much loss of control. In a car, at the drag strip or on a road coarse, it's just not a significant or consequential loss.
As a thought experiment one should imagine with DCT that the pull of the lever operates the clutch and the release of the level operates the shifter. Now technically it does not work that way, but it easily could be programmed to do so. Then I am operating both the clutch and shifter. How is that not a manual transmission? Oh yes, the throw of the lever is too short, oh and the lever is too easy to pull, oh yeah and you can't slip the clutch it is only open or closed, oh yeah and you don't have to use a leg, oh yeah and the level is electronic no mechanical. Sorry but those arguments are entirely weak sauce.
Before the M-DCT I too was a lifelong MT guy, every car I've ever had (and I tracked quite a few of them) was MT. Sure rowing the gears and stomping the foot is mildly entertaining but it just isn't significant enough to worry about it being gone. I think for many pro MT/anti DCT it's an issue of pride and a feeling of superiority over all of those who only know how to drive an automatic. Just like with losing points and distributors, hand crank starting and lap (only) belts the days of the MT are pretty well gone. Are we less in touch with our cars because starting them takes no cursing and sweat, perhaps because many systems have become maintenance free? Maybe we need to get rid of all of our acoustic and NVH treatments so we can really hear and feel every rumble and roar of the car. Surely that will make us more "in touch". Maybe we can also go with no air conditioning because it saps precious crank power and add unnecessary weight? To all of those I think not and neither do you, MT fan or not.
Thank you again Porsche for the bravery in the decision for PDK only in the GT3. I am seriously thinking about ending my good long run of M cars for something new along this line. No not because of this bold transmission decision, but I still applaud the decision. I wouldn't own a car that did not have a dual clutch option.