Type of shifter

[sticky667]

Oh, for the last, it would need my ESERU, which on a bike would be tiny.

can we prohibit this guy pushing his damn idea on every thread? geezus f'ing christ it's annoying.

[Krispy]

Oh, for the last, it would need my ESERU, which on a bike would be tiny.

can we prohibit this guy pushing his damn idea on every thread? geezus f'ing christ it's annoying.

To be honest, while it is clogging up a bunch of threads, I am intrigued. I keep reading about it with interest.

He seems to know what he is talking about (based on other threads) but he should just start his own thread an let that be that. I bet he would have better results than his usual thread hijack (although it vaguely is on topic most of the time)

[Jersey Tom]

He seems to know what he is talking about

Those are the folks I am most skeptical of.

On the earlier subject of sport bike shifters though.. I would not call that an inefficient system. Sequential manual boxes are very quick, and very easy. I like em.

[Scotracer]

why did F1 go to paddle shifters and what's wrong with the floor shifter?

It started with John Barnard in the Ferrari 640.

His primary objective was to allow the smallest possible tub for aero reasons. Also, the much faster gearchange allowed other benefits too.

He also introduced flexible suspension mounts in place of the then common spherical bearings.

So, they save space, allow faster gearchanges (less disturbance to the chassis and reduced accleration downtime).

Clever guy.

Very clever.
They were knife edge mountings.
'Reduced acceleration down time'? Sorry but the speed that the gearbox changes gear is limited by the mechanical components. The control system, including the driver simply applies a 'demand for operation' at a certain speed.
Modern shift systems (with or without paddles), are very fast and down in the milliseconds but there is still a time delay when torque is not transmitted to the output.
My ESERU can be configured to transfer torque during the shift overlap.

Considering current seamless shift 'boxes shift in 4ms, I don't think any 'down time' is much of a problem and it. Also, by the regulations torque between the engine and wheels must be broken during shifts.

Oh and your post about them using buttons on the wheel to shift is factually wrong - they still use paddles on the back of the wheel, to free up more real-estate on the front of the wheel - and it's more ergonomic too.

[autogyro]

'Considering current seamless shift 'boxes shift in 4ms, I don't think any 'down time' is much of a problem and it. Also, by the regulations torque between the engine and wheels must be broken during shifts'.

I can only suggest you read the F1 technical regulations again for 2010.

It specifically states a device for the purpose of transferring toque between two wheels. This is applied to differentials and traction limiting not gear changes.

Seamless shift is not a good definition as these gearboxes do have a distinct gap in torque transfer, which presumably can be described as a 'seam'.
Just because they are very fast shifting and usually smooth during the change, it is no excuse to apply a wrong definition in the name.

4ms may be a small time period but during it the engine has to be controlled to smooth the transition and this can upset the power delivery and other factors by much longer than 4ms.
A gear system that powers through the shift (I shall not mention any names), will give many other benefits other than just saving 4ms.

[autogyro]

Oh, for the last, it would need my ESERU, which on a bike would be tiny.

can we prohibit this guy pushing his damn idea on every thread? geezus f'ing christ it's annoying.

I can understand that you find it annoying but unfortunately it is unavoidable as the system answers many of the questions answered on here.
I was under the impression that the forum was exactly for technical ideas.
Perhaps I was wrong and it is yet another 'old boys network' for self congratulation.
Technical truth does not include emotion sticky667, deal with it.

[Mystery Steve]

I was under the impression that the forum was exactly for technical ideas.
Perhaps I was wrong and it is yet another 'old boys network' for self congratulation.

Perhaps you would like to share some actual technical information then, rather than simply promote your idea for self congratulation.

We are indeed interested in hearing about technical developments. If you really do have a great idea, get a patent and then discuss it and maybe even prototype it. Otherwise, leave it alone.

[autogyro]

I was under the impression that the forum was exactly for technical ideas.
Perhaps I was wrong and it is yet another 'old boys network' for self congratulation.

Perhaps you would like to share some actual technical information then, rather than simply promote your idea for self congratulation.

We are indeed interested in hearing about technical developments. If you really do have a great idea, get a patent and then discuss it and maybe even prototype it. Otherwise, leave it alone.

You really should go back and re read my posts. I have posted a number of answers to technical questions. I have yet to read any posts to discredit my opinions.
I welcome it and such criticism is one reason for posting.
Just because I will not fully describe one of my projects does not negate the usefulness of on going debate on the subject.

[xxChrisxx]

You really should go back and re read my posts. I have posted a number of answers to technical questions. I have yet to read any posts to discredit my opinions.
I welcome it and such criticism is one reason for posting.
Just because I will not fully describe one of my projects does not negate the usefulness of on going debate on the subject.

Look im going to say what everyone else has said in a slightly less polite manner.

Either post some hard data for us to acutally comment/discredit or shut the --- up about it. It's impossible to discredit what you've said becuase you've said nothing of value. All you've basically said so far is that its a 4 inch cube, the best thing since sliced bread and as far as I can tell runs off hopes and dreams.

And you've answered no technical questions at all, you've just said "All the top guys think its great, ARENT I CLEVER!" You've not even tried to explain how it works, just name dropped and deflected with bullshit.

If you really want to discuss it, start your own thread, stop hijacking others.

To quote the internet

PROOF OR IT DIDN'T HAPPEN

[Jersey Tom]

You really should go back and re read my posts. I have posted a number of answers to technical questions. I have yet to read any posts to discredit my opinions.
I welcome it and such criticism is one reason for posting.
Just because I will not fully describe one of my projects does not negate the usefulness of on going debate on the subject.

No one is discrediting your opinions, because they are just that - opinions and seemingly conjecture, i.e. what you THINK your design will do.

If there's one common thread I've seen in pro motorsport, it's skepticism, and for good reason.

Bottom line is this: You have an idea. It might be great. It might not. However, you don't have a prototype. You don't even have a quote for a prototype. I think you even mentioned something to the effect of, building one would require technology that doesn't exist. You have no idea if it works at all.

However, you're parading this thing around like it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. It gets a little annoying.

Looking in from the outside, if professional powertrain engineers have seen this, including those in F1, and if there was a reasonable chance of success, they would have jumped on it - no?

[xxChrisxx]

Also can I just point out.

Spam is not tolerated under any circumstance. This includes advertising your own projects...... If any of those are found not to be in the interest of other members, the post will be changed or removed and the poster may receive a warning.

I think posting in every thread available counts as spam.
Not only that hijacking is terribly bed etiquette

[Ciro Pabón]

Cut it out, guys. Go back to thread or all of you become guilty of the sin you're trying to correct, right?

Autogyro, yes, the forum is right: your posts are drifting. When you catch yourself drifting out of thread, please, use the NEW TOPIC button.

I won't paddle your posts anymore, enough said.

Any other posts about turbines and batteries and buttons on steering wheels could be moved to the "Incredibly Out of Thread Posts" thread.

[compo]

[autogyro]

in wss they pre engage the selecter with the foot as normal and have the horn button wired to the ignition so when the stab the button the ign is cut and the next gear is selected and it costs nothing

goony

Close but no bag of nuts.
The first ERA's in the 1930's used a Wilson pre selector gearbox, the concept of which was streets ahead of any modern design.
The late Tony Rudd used to drive one up the Goodwood hill climb until fairly recently. It is called Remus.
When ERA replaced it with a conventional layshaft box, they stopped winning races.
OK so it was heavy and slow in shifting (it was thee 1930's) but it had a 'real' seamless shift and not a marketing tag.