Incorrect, downshifting at the proper time is done to have the proper gear selected for corner exit AND allow deeper braking through use of proper engine braking use and thus allowing much shorter braking distances.

The Audi is an unfair comparison, how many guys really have tried to transplant a clutchless manual into their “G” machine?

i agree with both arguments, the lack of being able to control clutch "slip" for engine braking and acceleration during corner entry/exit is the big drawback to the auto, but by changing the driving style to rely more on the brakes, and clicking down a gear for the exit....... i think a more consitant lap time can be achieved. by "learning" to drive the auto in max effort conditions, i feel that there is less chance for the variables that hurt the lap times, ie... missed shifts, over engine braking(compression scratches), and whatever else that may come up that makes you change your focus to it... rather than dealing with the "line" in an effort to throw down the best lap you can.

now obviously there is still room for driver error with the shirfter, like double clicking a down shift..... but, overall, consitancy with the manu-matic trans should be vastly improved over traditional heel/toe gear rowing.

every other "spirited driving" vehicle i own has a manual trans, im a die hard "row your own" kinda guy, BUT, my all out g-machine shop truck will be getting a paddle shifted 4L80E, because i want to try something new, which in theroy SHOULD be better overall. now obviously im not affraid to piss off anybody or hurt their feelings, and if i dont like it, or dont like something about it, i will be the first to give an honest opinion of it...good or bad.

obviously this argument can go on and on and on..... im just throwing in my $.02 on the deal.

btw... i will let dennis try it out.... as long as he promises to keep it outa the dirt :lol:

Sure, I'll take it out for you :unibrow:

Dennis,
Please re-read my post. Note that it has not been edited in any way. I am AGREEING with you. At no point do I state that engine braking is un-important. I am stating that the limitations of available aftermarket manumatic systems are such that engine braking--with a manumatic--is not reasonable such that the gear change with a manumatic is only used to select exit gear
I'm fully aware that engine braking is useful as a means of helping the car to decelerate to entry speed without upsetting the chassis (excessive nose dive under braking).
On a regular basis, I explain to people (or disclose if you wish) that manumatic control is merely better than traditional automatic function in that it guarantees that the selected gear is available as soon as you get back in the throttle. And that's all that my post states.
Believe me, I welcome this discussion because it takes the matter beyond the typical snappy comeback of "I like banging gears".

Race,
Depending on which computer you use and/or which mode you select, there are safety measures built in to prevent double downshifts based on user defined mph limits.

I make sure that every customer is fully aware of what the system can and cannot do before accepting any money. To date, no one has been disappointed. If you accept it for what it is:
1) Better than any non-electronic automatic in every respect except price.
2) Better than a manual in some respects (i.e. traffic, consistency, etc.)
Then you too will come away satisfied.

I was referring to this Steve-o...

I may have read too much into though.

I'll try again:

With currently availabe aftermarket manumatic systems, downshifting in turns is done solely to select the proper gear for corner exit--not for engine braking.

And the "Audi DSG" content was introduced solely to clarify that there are in fact some great software programs that match revs and provide engine braking. More accurately: Mechatronic solutions exist that perfectly match revs with each and every downshift. So I just wanted to clarify that your statement "...no amount of software..." is technically wrong.

But "big picture", you are right. It will be a long time, before a true mechatronic manual solution can be marketed to hot rodders. Hot rodding is about diversity. So producing a system that can be adapted to a wide range of applications is near impossible. There are countless hardware AND software issues--mostly software. The right calibration for one application is near useless for another. If it happens, it will cost at least five figures.
We're working with a fella who is installing a Shrifter™ on a Pingel equipped Hayabusa sandrail. 900 lbs, 300HP and the motorcycle sequential transmission. Our disclaimers didn't bother him one bit. We'll see what happens.

Allow me to clarify: and no amount of software can program the automatic transmission (vs. a clutchless manual with electronic modules to control shift points) to match RPM's on the downshift while still providing 100% engine braking


:thumbsup:

Look! We made the exact same clarification.