I totally agree, nothing is uncrackable, but we're not talking about mass-produced consumer electronics here. The time & effort required to defeat the security wouldn't be economically viable. Besides, the guys who are smart enough to unlock it would probably be smart enough to design their own ECU from scratch or piggyback an additional ECU to perform auto function.Originally Posted by mousecatcher
i've never seen problem with upshift
again, help and (engine, transmission) protection that's available to driver during downshifts is brilliant... but is it still by the rule?... system pre-select rpm range within which driver can shift into the lower gear, so no matter how many times driver attempts to downshift he will end up in proper power range for exit out of the corner
so system pre-selects rpm range and the gear, driver can be at the same time in, during downshifting... that's what i consider pre-selected gear change
again, it's brilliant and it should be allowed for sake of engines and transmissions but the way rule is written now i don't consider it legal
advantage... the most busiest time for driver is before entering the corner... braking, downshifting, left foot on clutch, right foot on brake and blipping the throttle, trying to get perfect corner entrance...
every driver would agree that exit out of the corner is 100% dependant on entrance in the same
so with this brilliant system driver needs to do only braking, downshifting without worrying which gear he's in, no worry about clutch, right or left foot working only with brake and both hands on steering wheel for perfect entrance
that's where the advantage is... on some tracks more on some less
That is incorrect. It does not pre select. If you are in 6th gear, and need to get to 2nd for a corner, you must click the paddle exactly 4 times while braking. The only thing the system will do is reject an unsafe shift, in which case you would have to hit the paddle again. It will not decide which gear you want, and it will not save a rejected (i.e. unsafe) shift for later. So if you click the paddle too fast for that 4th downshift for example, you would have to wait for the rpms to fall more, and then click the paddle again or else you won't get that shift. Also, it is possible to get too excited and hit the paddle 5 times and get 1st (or neutral) by accident. So it is not just click once and get the correct number of shifts, or click indiscriminantly and get the correct number of shifts. The driver must click the paddle the exact number of times (i.e. 4 clicks for 4 shifts), at a cadence that is slow enough that none will over rev.
hehe... i agree... it does not preselect... it just doesn't allow downshift execution unless you're in pre-selected rpm range
and yes, system won't help you if you forget to downshift
are we talking about race car drivers here or ... ?
thx for making me smile
It will allow any shift that keeps the motor below 13,000 rpm. Just because you selected your overrev RPM prior to going on track does not make it a preselected shift.
and if you can end up in neutral how's that going to save the engine if you press the throttle exiting the corner?
Last edited by mario_zgb; 09.27.10 at 10:41 AM.
That would not be good on the engine. The way you end up in neutral is if you accidentally call for a shift to 1st, and that shift fails and only makes it to neutral because it is between 1st and 2nd. This has happened to us. The short answer is don't try to shift into 1st on track. I'm sure they could tweak our 2-1 shift parameters to make sure it never gets neutral by mistake, but since we never need 1st while at speed, I just tell the driver to be more careful.
Absolutely not. I'm sorry, but your understanding of preselect is incorrect. Pre-select means just that - the driver pulls the paddle and the system makes the shift at some point afterwards. That is absolutely not what this system does unless the auto features are enabled (and paid for incidentally). If the driver pulls the paddle and the revs are OK then the shift is made immediately. It's no different to a stick in that respect. If the revs are too high then the call is rejected. It makes no difference how many times the paddle is pulled, there will either be a shift at the exact point of the request, or there will be no shift at all. The driver still needs to time the downshifts to match the road speed or balance the car or whatever.
It is not a preselected rpm range, if you forget to pull the paddle you won't get a gear - the minimum rpm is ZERO.
I'm loving Dixon's Citation. Nicely done! I wish I could have seen it race.
If the box is in good condition and the internal shift parameters are set correctly, this should never happen. But, if it ever does happen then the GCU 'knows' that 2nd to 1st is a special case.
Under normal circumstances, the only way to select neutral is to hit the neutral button from 1st. When neutral has been selected intentionally, the only way to get to 1st is to press the button and call an upshift. Yes, I know that 1st is down from neutral, but the GCU re-orders them logically so that 1st is up from neutral. However, if the shift from 2nd to 1st fails and you end up in an unintentional neutral, the GCU allows a re-call of 1st. A similar thing happens if an upshift from 1st to 2nd failed. If you found yourself in neutral then you can call again and make what would otherwise be an illegal shift from neutral to 2nd.
You seem to think that the driver is just going in to a corner and indiscriminately pulling the lever a bunch of times. That is not what is happening. You would get every safe shift that you requested and end up in first, which is not a usable gear.
The driver must select the exact number of shifts they want. The shifts happen when the driver pulls the lever, not before and not after. It's an air shifter that keeps you from mechanically overrevving the engine, not some magic box that lets the driver just use gas and brake in the corner.
I am aware of all of this. I was using the accidental neutral as an example that it is still the driver that is doing the decision making as far as what shifts to make when. It happened after an engine change and before Nicholas Belling tweaked some of the parameters to clean up the neutral strategy and the 2-1 shift. We had changed from a higher mileage used engine to a zero mile engine taken out of a new 07 bike. I think the spring on the shift lever had more tension due to being new. I still tell the driver that if he never hits the downshift paddle 5 times consecutively, this will never be a problem.
hehe... no... i'm talking about the driver that knows what he's doing and most of the time will pull the lever exact amount of times, but if he pulls the lever too early system won't allow execution... so there are elements of pre-selected gear change
rule is not explicit enough, that's why we're going in circles
i'm talking about the driver that knows what he's doing and most of the time will pull the lever exact amount of times, but if he pulls the lever too early system won't allow execution... so there are elements of pre-selected gear change
rule is not explicit enough, that's why we're going in circles
Pre-selecting means calling for a shift that will happen in the future when certain conditions are met. How is rejecting an unsafe shift pre-selecting? If it would automatically try again later, I would be with you, but it will not do that.
and as i could see there's more than one manufacturer out there... do they all use the same algorithm in their software? probable not
so yes i am probable wrong in explanation of some of the sequences of algorithm... even some of you guys are not on the same page about how it works... and just because of so many variations in functionality rule needs to be much more explicit
I am speaking only of the Geartronics system, which I purchased from Nicholas Belling at Firman West Cars and installed on Tom Schwietz's car. It does not pre-select downshift or auto upshift.
Rejecting a shift is not a pre-selected gear change. For something to be a pre-selected gear change, it requires the gears to actually change.
Your explanation would make all of the manually shifted cars illegal also, as there are times when you can push on the gear change lever of a manually shifted car and nothing will happen.
Guess, I'm a little confused at following the logic. Not arguing whether it is good/bad/legal/illegal etc. Just trying to learn about the technology.
If you just pulled the lever indiscriminately a bunch of times you would NOT end up in 1st IF first would result in an overrev. Therefore, couldn't some knucklehead just keep grabbing gears while braking for a corner and every bad choice rejected, every good choice accepted and voila, you're in the right gear for the road speed you are travelling?
Again, How? Let's say that Brandon is in car A and I'm the wanker in car B.
.1 seconds Brandon grabs 5th and gets it.
.1 seconds I grab 5th and get it.
.2 seconds Brandon does nothing because he doesn't need 4th yet.
.2 seconds I grab a gear and the system rejects because road speed still too high for 4th.
.3 seconds Brandon grabs 4th and gets it
.3 seconds I grab another gear and get lucky 4th is accepted.
.4 seconds Brandon does nothing because he doesn't need 3rd yet.
.4 seconds I grab another gear and the system rejects because road speed still too high for 3rd
.5 seconds Brandon Grabs 3rd and gets it
.5 seconds another lucky guess stab at the lever and I get 3rd as well
.6 seconds Brandon does nothing because he doesn't need 2nd yet.
.6 seconds I grab another gear and the system regects it because road speed is still too high for 2nd
.7 seconds Brandon grabs 2nd and gets it.
.7 seconds last lucky stab and I get 2nd as well.
.8 seconds I grab another gear and it gets regected because road speed too high for 1st
Brandon shifted 4 times all during safe periods.
I just wailed away pawing at the lever 8 times, got the same 4 gears that Brandon did, no over revs and didn't end up in 1st gear.
It's not pre-selecting, but the downshift abilities would seem to be pretty idiot proof.
you said there are times... nothing will happen
does that mean 50%-50% or any other ratio?
so there are times when it will happen... and it does... and when it happens it's disadvantage
in your case it will never happen (too early downshift) because it's controlled by additional device that contain pre-selected parameters needed for gear change within desired rpm range
don't you guys feel dizzy going in circle all the time? hehe
have you seen Coop's video and advantage of old fashion shifter? ... up to the first corner hehe... too bad... it was excellent start by Jeremy
Going along with Daryl as I'm curious about the system.
I assume they are paddles on the wheel/column that get pressed to shift the car.
What happens if you just hold the button down into the brake zone and you are above the safe RPM range of the lower gear?
It is possible to get the wrong gear. You are assuming that the gear you want is the lowest possible gear that wouldn't allow an over rev, and therefore you can just click repeatedly until it stops shifting. Not the case. If you want 3rd for a certain corner, let's say, and you keep slamming the paddle, you will end up in 2nd because you were intending to be at 10,000 rpm in 3rd to accelerate out of the corner, and at that same speed, 2nd gear would correspond to 11,9xx rpm, which is still safe and therefore allowed, but not desired because that only leaves 600 rpm till your 12,500 shift point. Schwietz has more than once gotten over eager and hit the paddle one too many times and gotten an extra down shift.
mario, pre-selected does not mean you set parameters in the software ahead of time. With all due respect, you seem to have a misunderstanding of the term pre-selected gear change. Also, there is no set desired rpm range, it is merely question of whether or not the shift will put the engine over the cutoff rpm. If the answer is no, the shift is allowed. That is all.
You would not get a gear change. Since you clicked it at an unsafe time, no shift would occur, even though you held it down till after the rpms dropped. Release the paddle and try later.
I don't think that you would be happy to just wail away at the gear lever and just accept the results. In T5 at RA my entry speed will allow 1st gear to not over rev. I think that 2nd gear is the best gear for the corner, however. I would be out of revs in 1st before I get to the exit curbing and I think that the extra downshift revs overslow the car.
In several of the corners, you have a choice of entry gear. For some corners I like the lower gear and sometimes I like the higher gear. If there is traffic or the car handling is off a bit, I may change my strategy.
For these reasons, IF the system did a "fully automatic" mode and IF it were legal, I would prefer the system to be set up the way that it is now. I feel that the user can make better choices than an automated system could. I don't upshift at the same RPM every time either. There are times and places that I want to run just past my shift point to hold the current gear for the next corner and sometimes it's best to short shift.
The downshift rejection part is really only a safety. I try to never make use of that "feature". I have only used it a couple of times in braking zones. Things are happening so quickly that I didn't necessarily realize that a shift was rejected until I was a gear too high at corner entry. I don't have the spare cognative resources to confirm every downshift was accepted and still drive the car into the corner hard.
I have, however, bumped the lever in the middle of the straight while trying to adjust the ARB or some such. I was real glad that it didn't downshift!
From Schwietz's data, the braking zone into T5 goes as follows. Get on the brakes. Wait just a beat. Click, click, click, click, at an even cadence. A little more than a second passes from first click to the fourth click. You simply cannot go clicking willy nilly and have the system decide you really wanted 2nd even though you clicked 11 times. If you did that, as Brandon said, you'd be in 1st, which is the wrong gear for that corner.
ETA: more like 1.5 seconds, not 1 second.
Electronic Gear Changes
I have been developing my own gear shift system for a time now. I have a working prototype but stopped a few months ago when I came to the conclusion that the electronic systems would have to be banned sooner rather than later. After looking at it I think the only option is to either ban the Electronic systems or just go ahead and allow fully automatic changes. I really don't want to race an auto car but I'll make the system if it all shakes out that way.
I think the Electronic systems will be banned because with an electronic system there is not way to enforce the rule preventing preselected or fully automatic gear changes. It is far to easy to hide the code. The manufacturer can give bogus copies of the code to the SCCA, can activate the code behind the GUI. I could go on all day on how it could be hidden, how certain "works" customers could be given special code access etc. so I'll just stop here.
Formula 1 finally learned this. They spent millions trying to stop things like traction control. Teams had to give full access to the boxes, and code... at still they could not enforce the rules. So finally they went with spec electronic packages. With electronics you will never know what the system is actually capable of. There are so many different types of processors, encryption etc. that at the club level it just can't be done.
I don't know Neil at Geartronix. But looking at him and his system alone in a vacuum is a bad Idea. You have to look at all electonic systems, and what can/will happen with other manufactures. Just because he may be a standup honest guy does not mean that another manufacturer is also. Neils explanation that the system is capable of being fully auto, but locked is like an engine builder saying: Yes I built an engine with nitrous, yes the nitrous is connected, yes the bottle is full, yes there is a button on the steering wheel, but the button has a lock on it and only I have the key... so everyone should be able to run fully capable nitrous as long as they claim there is a lock on the button so it can't be used.
Finally has anyone actually protested the electronic systems? If you look at rule H.8.D it states: [FONT=Univers][SIZE=1][FONT=Univers][SIZE=1]
" All gear changes must be initiated by the driver. Mechanical gearchanges are prohibited."
shifters, direct-acting electric solenoid shifters, air-shifters and
similar devices are permitted. Devices that allow pre-selected gear
There is no mention of electronic devices at all (electric and electronic are not at all the same thing), unless it is interpreted that "similiar devices" includes electronic.
[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]
Proposition 65 warning:
WARNING:The preceding post (and everything else in existence) is known to the State of California to cause cancer or other reproductive harm.
So,
Nobody has asked this question yet.
What happens if you press and hold the down shift button in? Will it continue to search for the next gear shift sequence?
Why would the system need to know the shift barrel position if it is only a rpm requirement to make the shift happen?
Someone asked that question above, and I answered it. No, it will not search for the next gear change.
The shift barrel sensor lets the system know what gear it is in, if the shift is complete, etc. etc. On an upshift, for example, the power is cut, the barrel is moved the correct angle for the next gear, and power is restored. It is a bit more complicated than that, but that is what the sensor is for, to provide feedback so it knows what is happening in the gearbox. So, for example, the system is not assuming a gear change has happened just because the lever was moved, it knows based on the angle of the barrel.
The instant of the button press is when the shift happens. Holding the button is just one button press.
The system uses the barrel position to do a good job during the shifting process, i.e. once the barrel has rotated far enough the power can be reapplied. With this feedback the sysem can be smooth and feels easier on the drivetrain. The ignition cut is not a constant amount of time, it varies depending on actual conditions during the shift.
That's a valid point, but we would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by favouring a particular individual or team. If it was discovered that a systems manufacturer was colluding with a cheat then the systems would certainly get banned.
Sounds fine by meSo finally they went with spec electronic packages.
That won't be happening in the near future, because the other players at this level of the sport are literally years behind. One outfit that likes to think they are the market leader (I don't know Neil at Geartronix. But looking at him and his system alone in a vacuum is a bad Idea. You have to look at all electonic systems, and what can/will happen with other manufactures.) don't even know enough to understand how far behind they are. Besides, it's been pointed out that the auto function would not necessarily be an advantage, and in some situations it would actually be a hinderance. I can verify this from personal experience while testing with UK customers. Until we get to the point of using artificial intelligence in the GCU, there's no way that a fairly simple microprocessor can make a better judgement than the driver.
I think that's taking things to the extreme. In your scenario, the engine builder has deliberately added something, so it would be perfectly reasonable to ask the question why. However, the GCU in my shift system already has the capability as standard which was developed in other markets. The functionality is actually disabled in firmware, not the GUI, so in effect, it's not there to be enabled.like an engine builder saying: Yes I built an engine with nitrous, yes the nitrous is connected, yes the bottle is full, yes there is a button on the steering wheel, but the button has a lock on it and only I have the key... so everyone should be able to run fully capable nitrous as long as they claim there is a lock on the button so it can't be used.
[FONT=Univers][FONT=Univers]No room for interpretation there.[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Univers][FONT=Univers]All gear changes must be initiated by the driver. [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Univers][FONT=Univers]direct-acting electric solenoid shifters, air-shifters and[/FONT]
[FONT=Univers]similar devices are permitted. Devices that allow pre-selected gear [/FONT][FONT=Univers]changes are prohibited.[/FONT]The phrase "direct-acting" could be open to interpretation, but not in the context of the whole paragraph. If the intention was to outlaw all electric/electronic devices then there would be no reason to specifically outlaw pre-selection. A simple "no electronics" would leave no room for doubt.
[FONT=Univers][/FONT]electric and electronic are not at all the same thing
True, they mean different things to an electronics engineer, but not to the layman or, I suspect, a lawyer. So, by default, all shift systems other than a manual stick would be outlawed because all have some element of electric/electronic control.
[/FONT]
why? As I have already pointed out, the cost of these systems is very much in line with what is being spent on drivetrains in other, supposedly cheaper classes. A $7k gearbox is likely more consumable than this system, although only time will tell.
more conspiracy theories?I think the Electronic systems will be banned because with an electronic system there is not way to enforce the rule preventing preselected or fully automatic gear changes. It is far to easy to hide the code. The manufacturer can give bogus copies of the code to the SCCA, can activate the code behind the GUI. I could go on all day on how it could be hidden, how certain "works" customers could be given special code access etc. so I'll just stop here.
Actually, it is nothing like that. Nitrous is a clear advantage. As has already been pointed out, running the system in fully automatic mode is unlikely to be an advantage. I watched Tom S. and one of the Firman west guys argue about this sometime on Saturday. Tom believes the system is worth zero time on a one lap/qualifying basis, but is worth something in a race setting where the driver can focus on other things.I don't know Neil at Geartronix. But looking at him and his system alone in a vacuum is a bad Idea. You have to look at all electonic systems, and what can/will happen with other manufactures. Just because he may be a standup honest guy does not mean that another manufacturer is also. Neils explanation that the system is capable of being fully auto, but locked is like an engine builder saying: Yes I built an engine with nitrous, yes the nitrous is connected, yes the bottle is full, yes there is a button on the steering wheel, but the button has a lock on it and only I have the key... so everyone should be able to run fully capable nitrous as long as they claim there is a lock on the button so it can't be used.
I am not sure if there was an actual protest or not. I think the answer is no. But, the CRB was certainly on a fact-finding mission and did designate a representative to go and get more information from the teams and from the dealer. We heard nothing else about it after it was made clear that the system does not allow pre-selected shifts.Finally has anyone actually protested the electronic systems? If you look at rule H.8.D it states: [FONT=Univers]
[FONT=Univers]" All gear changes must be initiated by the driver. Mechanical gear[/FONT]
[FONT=Univers]shifters, direct-acting electric solenoid shifters, air-shifters and[/FONT]
[FONT=Univers]similar devices are permitted. Devices that allow pre-selected gear[/FONT]
[FONT=Univers]changes are prohibited."[/FONT]
[FONT=Univers]There is no mention of electronic devices at all (electric and electronic are not at all the same thing), unless it is interpreted that "similiar devices" includes electronic.[/FONT][/FONT]
Trying to draw a line between electric and electronic is a bit of a stretch. Does the driver need to have a battery in his lap and short some wires across it to activate the solenoid? Maybe a quarter turn ball valve to initiate shifts? If an air shifter runs an accumulator tank and has some simple logic to turn the pump on and off, is that ok? Do we need to build everything with mechanical relays? Will solid state be ok?
Can someone please explain to me what the big deal is? These systems are far from an unfair advantage.
Okay, I lost it at "quarter turn ball valve." You win today's internets.
In our research, it has consistently been found to be a disadvantage to shove the rods through the block, spray the headers down with oil, and set the car on fire. Feel free to do your own research and report back.
Incidentally, a driver in the runoffs field estimated the cost of his one and only engine fire at around $6k. Sal with Philly motorsports lost a motor pretty close to the runoffs because of a driver wanting to downshift too early. The motors don't like to turn 4k over redline.
It doesn't take long for the system to start to make sense.
Preventing motors from blowing up is not an advantage, it's a good idea. I was specifically told by a FSAC member that no one has a problem with systems that have a safety feature in them.in your case it will never happen (too early downshift) because it's controlled by additional device that contain pre-selected parameters needed for gear change within desired rpm range
We are going to mount it right next to the ARB adjuster.
Another thing about the Geartronics is that it weighs probably 16 pounds or so after you install, wire, and plumb it. Maybe a tad more. The components themselves weigh 13 pounds, which excludes bracketry, hoses, wire, connectors, etc. I believe the reason you don't see a lot of DSR guys running it because they don't feel any advantage is worth the weight.
I think the solution to this is to institute a new minimum class weight of 950 pounds. Then people will really have to make a decision about whether or not they want the shifter.
950? You are bound and determined to force me to replace my 246 pound "driver."
if you never noticed, i said few times before the system is brilliant and i like the features and benefits
problem is in the rule... as soon as we start having the same rule interpreted different ways we need to talk about it and see what was the primary intent of the rule, which way, FB members want class to go and what needs to be changed in order for everybody to be on the same page
i heard cars were protested bc of those shifters... and it was only matter of different interpretation (no cheating)... so i'm glad nobody was affected for runoff race
Personally it's not a big deal, like I said I already have a working prototype. My input was more for my own curiosity about the state of the rules, and to give others more information.
I think why others believe its such a big deal is that someone is willing to spend 7k on it when a whole engine only cost ~1k, and people are defending it with great passion. Then we have a rule limiting ECU to stock units in the attempt to prevent people from spending 3-4k on a standalone ECU, meanwhile were gonna spend 7k on a gear shifter. Logic dictates there must be an advantage beyond merely not over-reving so I don't think its that hard to understand.
Last edited by KodaBear; 09.27.10 at 5:55 PM. Reason: update
Proposition 65 warning:
WARNING:The preceding post (and everything else in existence) is known to the State of California to cause cancer or other reproductive harm.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote