The new Boxster - the triumph of technology over skill?
 

Yes, the new Boxster is both an incredible value for the money and a show-case for modern technology. Pedro, of Pedro's Board, notes that in testing he has found the automatic to be faster than the standard on track; not surprisingly, virtually all versions that have been made available for testing have also been automatics.

I have little doubt that a modern automatic can be made to shift faster than any human can shift a standard transmission. I also have no doubt that it can also be made to downshift more smoothly and quickly. In the same vein, I have little doubt that within the next 20 years we will see cars with computer programs that will not only allow them to steer and brake without human imput (simple verions are already being tested), but that especially on circuits with pre-determined and programmed corners, they will be able to do so faster and more consistently than a comparable care using human control.

Am I the only one who sees this a retrograde step (or steps) for the driver who takes pride in developing his skill. Who enjoys a perfectly (or more realistically, close to perfectly) executed double-clutch downshift? So what if a computer can do the same better - what pirde is there in that? Who wants a car that can be driven more quickly by an unskilled driver using computer controls, than one driven less quickly by a highly skilled driver using considerable skill? The unskilled driver, that's who!

The music industry has changed so that it is no longer necessary for singers to be able to even carry a tune. Autotune programs allow terrible singers to maintain (or at least, to appear to maintain) perfect pitch, even during 'live' performances. The result are labels eager to sign untalented artists who suit the image - the only important thing - that they want their artists to convey. Is there anyone else here who hates the dillution of talent that has been brought about by this modern technology?

I will continue to muddle my way through, driving a car with a standard transmission, no traction control and care less if my times are beaten by some unskilled 'driver' who can only perform with computer-aided shifting and traction.
To me, that is the essence of a 'sprots car'. It rewards those who make the effort to hone their driving skills.

Brad

It's a valid argument but I don't see a lot of guys still running these cars:
http://www.vanderbiltcupraces.com/black_beast

My great grandfather was a Studebaker dealer from 1911-1925 and also a race promoter in those days. It was the beginning years of motor racing and required a great deal of skill and courage. If you got it wrong, you were killed.

I have appreciation for both driver skill and marvelous technology. My current car has no nanny controls other than ABS and a rev limiter which purists still consider a technology crutch. I enjoy the freedom and simplicity of these cars buy my next one just might have to be PDK. It really is that good. YMMV

Brad - I am with you brother! I posted a similar statement in this thread: http://986forum.com/forums/general-discussions/35816-picked-up-987-week.html

The future will have SkyNet… You won’t have to drive. No more Truck Drivers, big loads will be going down the road by themselves. You will jump into your Porsche and tell it (vocally) your destination and away you go. Cars will communicate with each other over Radio Frequency links, and to the SkyNet, providing important positioning and speed data to each other. No more traffic jams. People can text to their hearts content, or take a nap (that’s what I will be doing), and not have to worry about a thing.

Not so simple versions have been tested extensively. Google has logged a couple hundred thousand miles on public roads with cars that had a person in the drivers seat but provided no input at all.

I got a wrench to throw into the works!

The next time you, or your wife/kids, fly commercial... do you want them flying in a plane with simple controls from a 1940s Cub? Or the automation of a modern aircraft? :)

But really, it's all about the tools. We should be able to choose what tools we want and what we don't want. From what I've been reading in the current Porsche rags, the hardcore racing heritage Porsche drivers don't mind the modern electronics in Porsches, just as long as it's an option and they can opt-out.

I was flying in an Avro Lancaster 2 years ago, and I had a chance to chat with the pilot who is a commercial pilot for Air Canada.

He tells me he will take the Lanc every. single. time if he chooses between that and a commercial airliner. You had to literally fly that damn plane, like you know, a real pilot.

Talk about feeling the soul of an airplane...

porsche is already working on this. i posted an article last year on it. they're calling it "acc innodrive" (adaptive cruise control, innovative drive) GPS maps out the route, it takes things like corner radii, traffic, elevation changes, posted speed limits, etc. and the computer manages throttle, gear changes, etc. (though currently you get to steer)...

http://986forum.com/forums/general-discussions/29496-porsche-acc-innodrive.html

I am all for present and "engaged" driving with limited crutches. Skill mastery and involvement is where the fun interest and fascination is. Even sound and smell are key to a driving experience...it will be a sad day when there is no exhaust note talking back to you.

I fear that PDK will removed a little too much of the involvement; but certainly there skill involved, perhaps a new skill in place of the old...left foot breaking. I am pretty sure a fair bit of PDK speed will come from guys riding the brakes, blazing into a corner hard on the left foot...ceramic/or? rotors will become a major track item....perhaps

Agree entirely. PDK totally kills the driving experience.

However, it does allow unskilled drivers to jumo in a sports car and ping up and down the gearbox like a pro. So commercially, it's a no brainer - most people love PDK.

So long as they keep doing the manual, let them have PDK. Only problem is that the 991's manual gearbox is compromised by being based on the PDK box. So they is a downside to this new tech, even if you don't opt for it.

At least the 981 has the proper manual carried over from the 987.

Well I suppose one could rip out that modern new fangled fuel injection and install carbs and while your at it bolt up some drum brakes and really let us see your skill? Seems like you decide where you want to be with a vehicle and go from there. Disparaging those that like the TIP or the PDK is just an opinion and we know opinions are like A**holes, everyone has one. Also chuck those damn balloon radial tires and go back to some solid rubber, makes sense, no? Something is lost and something is gained. Just ease up on the folks that enjoy honing a "More perfect" line that the PDK might let you achieve. And that is MY opinion, for what it is worth.

AKL

Now think about the next generation of kids who are growing up .. as PDK and such technology becomes prevalent in the affordable used cars market .. the manual shift transmission will be looked at as a tool of the dinosaurs .. its sadly the only logical outcome.

Why would a younger newer driver go buy a manual shift car .. then spend a bunch of time / money / learning to drive a manual shift car .. then probably still lose in a race to his friend who probably just got a license but drives a PDK car that cost 'almost the same'. He's gonna look like the biggest idiot in the world to all his friends. Most teen ego's can't handle that, so most will stay away from the 'hassle' of an manual gear box.

Eventually no demand will result in manufacturers no longer wanting to supply, and the manual gear box WILL become a tool of the 'dinosaurs'. We'll be the ones telling stories about the good ol days where a man had to learn to master his tools.

F'it .. this makes me sad .. I'm swapping back out to non ABS brakes this weekend .. LOL

Yup, which would always be accomplished in front of your 986, I wonder if the Ferrari drivers that use it in races feel that way?

Ummm, what?

Its all a slippery slope. When synchromesh transmissions were invented, the purists said it was an unfair advantage in a race. Today, F! cars have all kinds of automation, but it still comes down to a guy going through the gears, turning the wheel and hitting the brakes. Someone still wins and loses in the most technologically advanced racing in the world. So the human element is still there.

What I don't like is technology that takes away the fundamentals from the driver, like the I No Drive Porsche development, that takes away braking and acceleration from the driver and only allows him to steer.

Its just one more step to cars that drive themselves completely, so that we can just sit back and go online and drink Lattes and have no imput in driving.

I don't see how it being PDK negatively effects acceleration at all, there's a reason the new cars are quicker than the manual. It's also six speeds in sport plus so choosing gears for driving conditions is not an issue, especially with the sport wheel and paddles. I would never say manual sucks, it doesn't, it's fun and so is PDK. It's just my opinion but the spyder is awesome fun to drive, I shift as much as ever I just don't need my left leg.

...and with power steering, electronic fuel injection, ABS, stability control, variable valve timing, electronic brake distribution, and a host of other technologies that improve the driving experience.

Interesting input from the pilot. I flew UAVs in the military and over 90% of the human factor was removed with minimal input from the operator, flying a mission is now completely safe for the pilot but if I had the chance to fly my missions in a "real" plane I would have taken my chances in it.

I'll drive a manual transmission over any Tip or PDK any day. I know the PDK is faster and more economical but to me the enjoyment is in the process of driving and not just the end result of performance numbers. Automation and system control logic gives us many things, especially safety but I fear we may be losing more than we realize.

I fear we may be losing more than we realize.



I've read a lot of the same worries about cursive writing, there are few cash register employees who know what counting change back means or why you gave them $5.25 for a $5.22 tab. Everything changes nothing is static, manual box is awesome and according to a yahoo story making a resurgence. PDK is a lot more fun than ANY other selected manual I have driven, my mom's subie has a tip style box too, worlds apart from the Boxster.

But that's precisely the point. Treat each technology on its merit.

Gear synchros? Don't detract from involvement, do improve gear changing. Tick.

ABS? Rare cuts in on the road when pressing on unless you're hamfisted, possibly a bit more intrusive on track. A qualified tick.

Power steering? Another one that's a bit in between depending on the system in question and preferences.

PDK? Removes gearbox and clutch control from the driver. Reduces involvement. Cross.

We can of course argue the details for each technology. But it's just not true to make this a binary argument in which you must either embrace any new technology or reject it. In other words, it's perfectly logical and reasonable to reject PDK but embrace gear synchros.

Like I said, each on its merits. PDK makes driving so much less fun.

Simply stated this is wrong, in the right hands a PDK car would kick your butt no matter how close to an Andretti you might think you're shifting.

Eh, who said anything about being fast? Not me. I'm interested in maximum enjoyment. Whether I'm fast or no is a separate matter.

Also, it's not wrong that you lose control of the gearbox and clutch. This is a very simple, very demonstrable fact. They are controlled by computer actuators. The end.

I'm completely groovy with people preferring PDK, but I don't understand why they so frequently talk utter nonsense in defence of it.

For some people it's hard to separate the two, apparently.

Well, if we want fast we'd all be driving vettes won't we?

I'd rather have my balls pounded flat with a hammer than drive a vette.:barf:


But if top speed was the goal.....there is a model or two of Porsche's that would do the trick!

I bet that doesn't have a 3rd pedal.

Woman Driver Breakes Into Grocery Store With Her Porsche - YouTube

No, that would require a labotomy. Instead we'd all be driving 997's. :D

If the pilots of Air France FLT 447 had spent more time in a 40's era aircraft, they'd have not ended up riding a stalled aircraft into the sea killing 216 passengers. That is a notable example of users focusing on technology rather than skill. Dreadful outcome due to a technological malfunction an out come that could have been avoided using basic aeronautical concepts learned in private pilot training...

I see the same thing happening as personal aircraft become more technologically advanced, safety improves statistically, but skill sets atrophy as technology is increasingly relied upon. Most pilots I know are heavily dependent on GPS. Their ability to use other navaids and or dead reckoning has suffered as a result.

There's a balance, and each technological advance must be analyzed on it's own merits...

PDK is cool, but...
 

I went to the Porsche World Road Show on 6/8/12 at Monticello Car Club Racetrack. We drove the new 2012: 911, 911s, Boxster S, Cayenne, and Panamera. All of them had PDK.

Although I can really appreciate the PDK for what it does and how well it does it (i.e. excellently), I still have a fondness and preference for the manual gearbox in my 2002 Boxster. I have no doubt that the PDK is faster than I am, but for me, shifting is a great part of the fun and experience of driving.

The new Boxster S is amazing, though. A little longer, a little wider stance, and lots more power. Still a VERY nimble and agile sports car ... but then, so is mine. :)http://986forum.com/forums/uploads01...1339349494.jpg

All the electronic bells and whistles in the world wont put you on the right line through a corner. Nor will they compensate for the lost momentum coming out of it.

To me driving a sports car should be engaging. Having the shifter in your hand and blipping the throttle as you heel and toe on the downchange while you push the lever forward is a well sychronsied event, and a learned skill. A manual gearbox is as engaging as it gets when you are drving in a sporting manner. I am at the moment teaching my 16 year old how to drive a manual in my Boxster. How to approach a corner and when to downshift, accelerating out of a corner and using the steering and throttle inputs to exit quickly. He loves it. He also realises you don't have to be going at break neck speeds to have fun. A good old manual gearbox is just plain fun.

And for the road nannies, my son's race karts and have a very good idea of speed and reading the 'ahead' road conditions. So please no ' should you be teaching your kids to drive fast' speeches. If more people taught their kids to drive fast properly there might'nt be as many useless deaths.

bar10dah, I agree that I would rather fly with my family in a modern aircraft - but that is hardly the point. In that case, I and my family are passengers; my concerns about the new technology are purely from the perspective of driving enjoyment and the trend towards making new Porsches dummy-proof. Although I must admit, that as we progress towards auto-pilot technology, we will likely all become nothing much more than passengers!

It seems that even if the rarefied world of Formula 1 there are some who share my opinions. As you may recall. several years ago the cars had traction control - something which made effective starts (or effective exits from corners) much easier. Regardless of driver skill, the best car then became the fastest to the first turn and the best at accelerating out of turns. Formula one has now dropped this and the result is that driver skill has once again been placed at a premium. Watch the start to a number of grand prix and it will become apparent that a driver such as Fernando Alonso is generally able to pass one or more cars into the first turn - not because his car is faster or has a better program for traction control, but because he is able to maximize acceleration and avoid tire spin. Indeed, I believe that yesterday's Canadian Grand Prix was the first race this season in which he did not gain positioins (albeit he did not lose any either). Tire wear is also a huge factor this year in Formula 1 and it requires drivers who have the skill to run a fine line between being fast, and not overheating the tires through wide slip angles or wheel spin out of corners.

PDK and modern traction control (and Vector technology) do make for a faster car that is also easier to drive. And while I know that you can't stop progress, I for one think that it is beginning to turn sports cars into something other than 'driver's' cars.

Brad

I'm surprised we haven't seen a transmission with an optional clutch pedal yet. The third pedal is there but the driver can opt to let the car shift if desired. They've already put a manual version of the PDK transmission in the 991, how much of a leap could it be to add a mechanical interface to the computer control? I still wouldn't like the loss of feel, but considering the throttle and steering have already gone that way, why not?

No, if you drove my car you would realize it is super fast in its own right, if you looked on top gear you would see it can beat SOME models of the vette and a couple Ferrari's too.

Blue, I love that idea! A true stick-shift when you want it; Stuck in traffic?.... It's a PDK.

Simmer down there, GR310; no offense intended here but you're really starting to sound like you're on the playground arguing about who's daddy can beat up who's. We all know you have a Spyder. Great car. We've all read the reviews, and some of us have spent extensive time test driving them before deciding against for various reasons. But it remains a fine car. It stands on its own. It doesn't need you coming along defending it and talking about how fast it is every time that subject can be brought up. It's a pretty quick car, and very well balanced, but frankly, it's not that fast by today's standards of fast cars. Which is fine -- it's also not very expensive so I wouldn't expect it to be a world dominator. Just let it stand on its own.

I don't mean to sound that way because frankly I don't give a ____ if he or anybody else believes it. I'm only trying to get across that the car accelerates in launch control at 4.2 60 mph, that is vette speed I don't need to pretend I have vette speed, my only point any my last one on this subject. And as far as a dominator it sure sounds like TC Kline is DOMINATING. I'm taking a page out of Jake's playbook, peace out have a nice summer everyone.

Jeesy chreesy, an appeal to Top Gear? Bleh.

I have little doubt the average driver in a PDK Spyder would blow off an average driver in most Corvette models. To be fair, the Spyder is a very quick car, point to point. Much quicker than most people realise. There's little that will be significantly quicker in the real world on public roads. But who cares? That has nothing to do with driving enjoyment.

No doubt an entirely computer controlled Spyder would be even quicker than a human driven PDK Spyder. But that wouldn't make sitting there doing nothing but going faster more fun than actually driving but going slower.

This is the key difference that most PDK fanciers seem to miss. It's not about frigging lap times. It's about involvement and enjoyment. If PDK gives you that, fair enough. But the speed thing is totally irrelevant.