Fastest gearchanges were pre-1990's

[autogyro]

I have noticed that on a number of other technicaly based forums, there appears to be an incorrect belief that during racing gearchanges in race and performance vehicles prior to the current 'seamless' systems, the engine had its ignition cut during the shifts.
This practise was only used experimentaly until after the late 1980's.
All racing gerchanges in main competition including F1 before this time were undertaken without any artificial control over any part of the powertrain.
Control was solely under the drivers control.

Full throttle 'power on' upshifts were undertaken with no disengagement of the clutch or engine control.
The 'manual' shifting was so skilled and so fast that NO artificial control was needed.
The dog rings in the shift mechanism were moved so fast from one gear engagement to the next highest, there was NO perceived increase in engine rpm.
Heel and toe downshifts sometimes also with no clutch use were equaly as fast.

Sadly almost all of this driver skill has been lost today.
Back then it constituted at least half of the skill and stamina needed for a proper fully rounded racing driver.

[Steven]

Until I see real numbers from a reliable source, I will never be able to accept that gear changes with a manual shifter were quicker, even in the most optimal conditions, than the current paddle-operated quickshift boxes.

I cannot believe you can perceive this as reality. It would mean that a lowly ranked team could still use such a simple box, but strangely they were all very happy to get their hands on a quickshift version. They surely aren't doing that because shifts are slower...

[WhiteBlue]

You also have to consider that they were not having power assisted steering at that time. So sometimes they could not afford to take one hand off the steering wheel to do the shifting. Those guys used to have strong arms. They had to do a lot more work.

[Tim.Wright]

Yea I don't believe this either. Until there is some data showing the torque gap we can only listen. For example;
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfKjGs_g ... re=related[/youtube]

Sounds a lot slower than the shifts today

Tim

[autogyro]

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1075 ... heel-video

So who needs a skilled driver?
It is possible to upshift gears manualy WITHOUT eny artificial control over the power train at full power and maximum throttle.
I can do it and I know many other proper racing drivers from old who still can.
All you have to do is to set up the challenge with the all singing all dancing modern 'seamless' layshaft gearboxes.
The choice is all yours.

[autogyro]

Until I see real numbers from a reliable source, I will never be able to accept that gear changes with a manual shifter were quicker, even in the most optimal conditions, than the current paddle-operated quickshift boxes.

I cannot believe you can perceive this as reality. It would mean that a lowly ranked team could still use such a simple box, but strangely they were all very happy to get their hands on a quickshift version. They surely aren't doing that because shifts are slower...

The reason they use the modern 'seamless' shift systems is not because they shift faster, it is because they take less effort to operate and there is less chance of a missed shift.
It does away with the need for driver skill.

[autogyro]

You also have to consider that they were not having power assisted steering at that time. So sometimes they could not afford to take one hand off the steering wheel to do the shifting. Those guys used to have strong arms. They had to do a lot more work.

I remember that RB, yes by comparison modern drivers are simply archade game pilots.

[flynfrog]

In God we trust all other bring data.

You made the claim autogyro now back it up. No bs stories where is the data.

[autogyro]

Yea I don't believe this either. Until there is some data showing the torque gap we can only listen. For example;
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfKjGs_g ... re=related[/youtube]

Sounds a lot slower than the shifts today

Tim

No it doesnt.
To start with all you hear with any shift is the engagement spike of the high gear, you hear nothing of any engine or clutch modulation before or after the spike that is not occuring in this example.
Next issue is that the driver has FULL control over the gear shift, which he uses to MANUALY modulate the shift, including the shift speed and technique to balance the car, which is a proper car without huge downforce masking the mechanical grip.

[autogyro]

In God we trust all other bring data.

You made the claim autogyro now back it up. No bs stories where is the data.

Ask the current F1 teams for it.
I do not have an F1 team at present.

I am prepared to prove it in fact however and I know a number of OLD drivers who would love to.

Yes I made the claim and the claim stands unless you can disprove it.
Come on it shouldnt be that difficult, there are lots of clever engineers, mathamaticians and technical experts posting on here.

If you discount the challenge FF it proves how things are done today.
That realy would be bs.
Clarkson is the boy to check it out, he hasn't yet fully sold his soul to computer games.

[autogyro]

Oh and Tomba, in my first post I did not refer directly to over all shift speeds.
I do say that manual gear shifts can be faster however.

[Steven]

Everybody seems to agree that numbers are what is needed here.

Unless anybody can prove anything, this thread will soon be closed...
A yes-no discussion is pretty pointless

[Belatti]

I do data acquisition for a guy that has two 80s F1 cars. Gear changes in upshift takes arround 0,2 secs. You can notice clearly the instant without acceleration in the GPS speed trace and also see the rpms steps.

I also have TC2000 touring car data with secuential 6 speed gearbox that uses powershift (ignition cut) and the time for a gearchange is reduced to half of that (barely more than 0,1 sec) and its difficult to see that with ONLY a GPS speedtrace.

I bet current F1 gearchenges occur in less than 0,05 secs...

[autogyro]

I do data acquisition for a guy that has two 80s F1 cars. Gear changes in upshift takes arround 0,2 secs. You can notice clearly the instant without acceleration in the GPS speed trace and also see the rpms steps.

I also have TC2000 touring car data with secuential 6 speed gearbox that uses powershift (ignition cut) and the time for a gearchange is reduced to half of that (barely more than 0,1 sec) and its difficult to see that with ONLY a GPS speedtrace.

I bet current F1 gearchenges occur in less than 0,05 secs...

Nowhere near enough data.
The manual gearshift is reliant on the drivers capabilities and the drivers modualation of the shift for any of a number of shift and car balance requirements.

The shift speed you quote 0.1 is almost certainly for the actual shift over lap which does not take into account any modulation of the engine torque output or clutch disengagement control pre or post overlap, as used in seamless 'sequential' operation, that reduces torque transfer.

The ignition cut you quote, on its own contitutes a complete break in torque transfer and therefore must be calculated into the shift speed efficiency result.
You only hear the upshift engage spike, not the modulations.

0.2 of a second for a manual shift over lap is VERY VERY slow. I can exceed this time with a standard baulk ringed gear shift using a racing change, without any need for ignition cut or clutch modulation and without any increase in engine rpm.
Simple. No increase in engine rpm means the shift must be at least as fast as any 'seamless' shift. The sequential is purely geometry not relevent to the shifts.
Your friends F1 cars must be severely limited by their slow gear shift speeds Belatti. I expect they are rarely used in anger however.

I would expect .03 to .05 for a modern F1 shift but this is ONLY the shift over lap and again does not 'time' the efficiency losses of the pre and post powertrain modulation needed to prevent a 'sledgehammer' shift that would damage the gearbox.
A missed shift by Button hurt his kneck off the start line this year and that was because shift modulation was not progammed correctly to soften and 'lengthen' the shift.

A manual dog slider assembly moves in a strait line, modern selector mechanics move in multi directions, the dog mechanism will ALWAYS be potentialy faster.
It is only this movement that is directly relevent to shift speed.

[flynfrog]

Oh and Tomba, in my first post I did not refer directly to over all shift speeds.
I do say that manual gear shifts can be faster however.

they only thing that really matters is the overall gear change why even bother bringing up a debate on technical terms so you can argue that the tractor transmission will changes gears the same speed as an F1 car. We all know it's BS.


Lets see the data prove that the "gear shift" is faster.