+- Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org)
+-- Forum: Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Lounge (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: SMG or no? (/showthread.php?tid=5167)
- Ginger - 12-11-2006
As far as driving fun goes - well, if you think that it can only be had with something traditional then that's your cake. But remember that there's nothing that makes it "better"... it just happened to have come first.
As far as SMG goes - it seems like it's addressing the going quick problem with a whole butt load of super expensive toys. Why do that when you might be able to get the same results out of something simple?
- G.Irish - 12-11-2006
.RJ Wrote:Your argument is that removing the clutch pedal is the benefit from the SMG system.Well you don't usually pull in the clutch while you're turning unless you're trying to get thine slide on.
If you use the same shift-it-yourself system are you going to use a handclutch? What if you are trailbraking into a turn in the middle of a pack of cars in a race? Will it still work well then?
- G.Irish - 12-11-2006
asteele2 Wrote:As far as driving fun goes - well, if you think that it can only be had with something traditional then that's your cake. But remember that there's nothing that makes it "better"... it just happened to have come first.The SMG is not going to screw up a downshift and lunch your engine (hopefully) or select the wrong gear on the front straight. There is something to be said for simplicity but cars are far from simple anymore anyway. If were sticking to simple we'd still be driving air-cooled carbeurated cars that you have to hand-crank to get started.
As far as SMG goes - it seems like it's addressing the going quick problem with a whole butt load of super expensive toys. Why do that when you might be able to get the same results out of something simple?
In a way this feels like the same battle that Porschephiles had when they went to water-cooled engines.
- .RJ - 12-11-2006
G.Irish Wrote:The SMG is not going to screw up a downshift and lunch your engine (hopefully)
Tell that to the guy that ended up on his roof with a SMG M3 at Mid-Ohio 2 years ago.
I almost followed him in in the trail of his oil.
- G.Irish - 12-11-2006
.RJ Wrote::lol:G.Irish Wrote:The SMG is not going to screw up a downshift and lunch your engine (hopefully)
Tell that to the guy that ended up on his roof with a SMG M3 at Mid-Ohio 2 years ago.
I almost followed him in in the trail of his oil.
Yeah I definitely don't wanna drive the first generation of anyone's sequential manual.
- ViPER1313 - 12-11-2006
dogbox > *
- .RJ - 12-11-2006
ViPER1313 Wrote:dogbox > *
:?: Thank you for that worthwhile contribution :?:
- ViPER1313 - 12-11-2006
anytime
- Evan - 12-11-2006
.RJ Wrote:Do you need less clamping force at 12,000 rpm pushing 200+ hp than a car?torque, and low weight is the key. and how much weight that torque has to move (which would be the "reverse torque" for lack of a better word, that the clutch has to channel through it from the engine to the drivetrain). A 400 pound bike with next to no torque isnt going to need much clamping force on the clutch.
I really dont know the answer, so yes that is a question.
*edit
- Ginger - 12-11-2006
Evan Wrote:Harley sturggled with that for a long time... somebody came up with a unique mechanism that mounted on the clutch to lighten up the pull a while ago. I'll see if I can't dig it up..RJ Wrote:Do you need less clamping force at 12,000 rpm pushing 200+ hp than a car?torque, not weight is the key. and how much weight that torque has to move (which would be the "reverse torque" for lack of a better word, that the clutch has to channel through it from the engine to the drivetrain). A 400 pound bike with next to no torque isnt going to need much clamping force on the clutch.
I really dont know the answer, so yes that is a question.
*edit* I can't find it.. but whatever it was I remember that you suffered a parasitic loss by using it.
- Feersty - 12-11-2006
Has anyone driven an SMG on the street, much less on track? I think that might give one a better prespective instead of talking from the outside looking in.
- Mike - 12-11-2006
Feersty Wrote:Has anyone driven an SMG on the street, much less on track? I think that might give one a better prespective instead of talking from the outside looking in.
you think? stop posting, your your 10 in the last 5 minutes have been worthless.
- G.Irish - 12-11-2006
He has a point. I don't think anyone here has driven a SMG equipped car. From the one person I know who did drive one (a 360 at a press event at Road Atlanta) he said he liked it but it was a bit jerky for a street application. Perfect on track though.
- Mike - 12-11-2006
no shit he has a point, it's called common sense. "hey, if you lick my balls you might have a better idea what they taste like!"
edited by mikey: toned down the imagery a little
- Evan - 12-11-2006
Mike Wrote:no shit he has a point, it's called common sense. "hey, if you lick my balls you might have a better idea what they taste like!"_thats_ toned down?
edited by mikey: toned down the imagery a little
*puke*
- Mike - 12-11-2006
