How technology is killing sports cars, by making them faster.

"Spaze" (spazegun2213) 01/15/2014 at 12:20 • Filed to: OPPOSITELOCK, sports cars, technology

7

18

Now I'm sure the title of this article is going to irk more than a few of you. Many will dismiss this as the musing of a raving lunatic (which may not be far off), but hear me out for a moment and continue reading.

The first traction control system was actually developed by Buick, in 1971, called MaxTrac. This system was revolutionary at the time and was an option on most Buick models but it was not without problems. Because of some serious maintenance issues, as well as emissions controls, the system was removed from the entire line up in 1973. Traction control was removed from the market until 1979 when Cadillac introduced their own offering called the Traction Monitoring System.

Over the next twenty plus years traction control systems were nothing more than safety aids. When traction controls started being added to sports cars it was a farce. Most early generation traction controls would simply cut throttle when it noticed a difference in wheel speeds. While it was crude I'm sure it kept many a soul out of harms way on the street. Taking the system to the track resulted in a very different story. As a driver became better the system became an over zealous electronic nanny that would chastise you anytime you approached the cars limit. Turning the system completely off was the only way around the system, and it was easily accomplished with a simple push of a single button.

Fast forward to today and nearly all car manufacturers have traction control systems, vehicle stability systems, dual clutch gearboxes, electric steering and differentials each with tighter and tighter integration into their cars. Each manufacturer is putting these systems in their sports cars and sending them out into the world. Sports cars today are safer than ever, and posting Nürburgring times that would make F1 racers from the 60's blush. While this is amazing technological advancement I believe it's killing the essence of the sports cars, by making them faster.

I recently had the privilege to instruct a friend on track in a brz. Touted as the second coming of baby Jesus sports cars I was very excited to ride shotgun. Now I'm not going to say anything about the outright speed of the car as I'd rather focus on the 7 circles of hell the traction control and vehicle stability systems are. With all the systems on I'm sure my late grandmother could try to drive this car at 10/10's and never actually have a good time. To say the systems are invasive would be like saying a prostate exam is only "mildly discomforting." The fun part comes by hitting the various buttons that control the systems only to discover the various permutations of the systems ability to impede fun. The best part is the NES style cheat code you need to do to actually disable the systems completely. Once the systems are off the car is transformed into that sweet, sweet baby Jesus. However if you are not a trained race car driver you might actually be faster with the systems on, helping you out and keeping you out of the kitty litter. Now add about 500 horses to that brz... What do we have now? The brand new c7z.

Packed with astronomical amounts of power, an eight speed automatic transmission, an electronic differential, and more cool technical doodads than you can shake a stick at. Touted as the fastest and most track oriented corvette yet, even bench racers are giving this car two thumbs up. I do not doubt this car is very capable, but I do doubt it will be fun to drive. Sure 11ty billion horse power sounds like a blast, but where are you going to use it on the street? Hell, where are you going to use it on track? Sure Miller Motorsports park, VIR and other tracks around the country have straights where all of those raging ponies can ravage the asphalt, but that is about it. Ah, "but you can use those ponies in other places" some will say, alluding to the fact this corvette can actually turn. Why yes, you will be able to put more ponies down in that corner, joe track racer, but you'll have to use all of those electronic systems to do so. You as a driver are just to slow to notice the difference between the limit and certain death, but the improved stability system isn't. With its ability to compute readings from all over the car it will make sure you drive like Michael Schumacher.

The new c7z makes more power than the c7r, has less grippy tires and has a substantially smaller aero package. Professional drivers are going to pilot the c7r's with it's messily power and even they are going to rely on the electronic systems to make sure the car is as fast as possible. All of this means you, joe track racer, will probably go faster with these systems on than you ever will trying to manage that power with your archaic right foot. But if the thrill seeker in you does want to turn everything off, I hope you need only press one button. If you think I'm bashing on the corvettes too much I can also tell you that Porsche has done the same thing with the 991 gt3. It has a list of new technology a mile long that includes 4 wheel steering. But why? Because it's no longer a sports car, it's a flagship for performance with every last piece of technology added in to make its lap times fall. While this author has not driven the new gt3, most of the articles out there will expound on how the Cayman is a better drivers car because it's more fun to drive, even if it is slower.

So why buy the c7z, gt3 or other rolling technology experiments if you must rely on all of that techno wizardry, is my question. When you realize just how far outside the loop you, as the driver, really are, where is the fun? I believe technology is killing the classic definition of the sports car. What was once an unruly beast that took every ounce of effort to keep it on the pavement is now more sophisticated than your PC at home. Sports cars today have no horse power ceiling, no weight minimum and with the quest for ever faster lap times manufacturers will continue to lean on technology to make it all happen. We must redefine these new sports cars and we need to do it quickly as this war for technological superiority on the road is just beginning.

CalzoneGolem > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 12:28

0

This sounds like everyone that complains about the GTR.

Should I get off your lawn now?

Casper > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 12:28

0

I actually agree. I'll race a car with tech simply because it's going to average out my mistakes to make a better overall lap time, but if I'm driving a car by choice, it will be something like my 240Z.

The funny thing is, the fastest cars are still not full of technical wizardry. For instance many of the sequential shift manuals run in race series are just a variant of what most people would consider a normal manual transmission mishmashed with motorcycle design for rapid changes (referencing dog tooth sequentials). The gizmos aren't there to make the car much faster than it already had potential for, they are there to make the driver faster, since that has always been the weak link.

Joe_Limon > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 12:32

0

Nice catchy title... but far too many words. On the plus side, next break I have, I'll attempt a more in depth critique of your comment :D

Spaze > CalzoneGolem 01/15/2014 at 12:35

0

I actually didn't say anything about the GTR because its not what I would consider a "sports car." Yes, its VERY fast, and full of tech, but since the R32, its always been that way. So I left it out.

Storz > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 12:36

0

I completely agree. A lot of the newer cars are massively impressive on paper, and the limits so high that they sort of lose the fun to drive feeling that you get in a "lower" performance car. I've hd 25 vehicles and the most fun cars were a C4 Corvette with 240hp and a 91 Miata with a screaming 100hp.

Carlos Lago of Motor Trend did a video review recently of the last generation of RX7, which was produced during Japan's 276hp gentelmans agreement. His summary was basically that because of the horsepower agreement, Japan had to make its sports cars better in other ways other than just having big power numbers, I feel like cars today make so much power than in order for people to actually drive them, whether on track or the road, the engineers have to incorporate intrusive T/C systems.

CalzoneGolem > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 12:42

0

I was comparing what you said about sports cars to what people complain about the GT-R.

RotaryLover > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 12:43

0

This is slowly becoming Future GPX Cyber Formula. All you'll need to do, is cope with the g's and the machine will tell you the rest and do the rest...until a talented guy a la Takumi Fujiwara or Hayato Kazami shows up and uses the system as it's bitch.

YSI-what can brown do for you > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 12:51

0

This is how you do it.

Textured Soy Protein > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 12:56

0

I think there are two different ways to enjoy a fast car:

1. HEY I'M GOING FAST!

2. HEY LOOK AT MY AWESOME DRIVING SKILLZ!

Everybody likes going fast.

Not everybody has AWESOME DRIVING SKILLZ .

I like to think I know a thing or two about driving, and I enjoy trying to drive well. Until I got a car with a DCT ( eeeeeeevil technology, I know) I was the kind of guy who would heel-toe every downshift before a turn, while driving home from the grocery store, and spilling my groceries out of their bags, because I just wanted to practice.

But I also know my limitations. If there were some theoretical 600+ hp car with no driver aids beyond a limited slip diff and ABS brakes, I probably wouldn't be very good at driving it. But in a car like the C7 Z06, I at least have a chance of harnessing the 600+ hp with my skill level.

So basically, yes, the technology is what makes a 600+ hp car accessibly fast. But just because that's the case, doesn't necessarily mean car companies should say "you know what, a car with this much power needs a bunch of gizmos for mere mortal drivers to go fast in it, so we should just not build a car with this much power."

stuttgartobsessed > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 13:01

0

Well done, Sir! You presented a very interesting article with a well laid out argument and I happen to agree with you. I would prefer cars to be available with out all of the nannies (traction control, stability control, lane departure assist, etc etc...) but if not, then at least give me, the consumer, the ability to actually turn these systems 100% off. Another downside I'd like to point out comes from a recent issue of CAR magazine out of the UK: Will the abundance of complicated computer systems in today's cars kill off or severely dampen the popularity of the collector car market and hobby? With modern cars, the average Joe-Mechanic can't do his own maintenance work on his car. The engines are all but obscured by plastic coverings, discouraging the owner to attempt to do any work themselves and instead take it to a certified shop where only certified technicians know how to diagnose and fix the problem. Thats right, technicians, not mechanics, are working on cars now. Usually not with wrenches or hammers but with computer diagnostic programs that tell them what is wrong and then they hook up a laptop to reset the computer system. Granted they still have to get dirty to change the oil or rotate tires or replace suspension components, but the more invasive/complicated mechanical feats that could be done by an ambitious owner a few decades ago can no longer be done today. What does this mean for the future of the collector car hobby? Think about it. Most enthusiasts today got their start by purchasing a cheap old car and set about fixing it up themselves. Learning as they go, just wrenching away and getting covered in oil and grease. On an MG TD or similar simply designed yet popular and fun to drive car, anyone with basic mechanical know how can pull the engine out and rebuild it. Maybe they have to follow a shop manual but it's not the most daunting task. Now fast forward 50 years from today. The Porsche 918 and McLaren P1 are now the Ferrari 250's of the Collector Car market. Or are they? No average mechanic can fix these cars, with their extremely complicated computer controlled hybrid systems, traction management systems, sensors, emissions controls, and even engine controls. This means that it is extremely expensive to restore these cars, if they are even still around. Furthermore, at the rate that computers become obsolete, what will happen to these computer systems in cars? Look at the computers from around 35 years ago. There is more computing power in an iPod mini than those things. Not to mention that computer systems get corrupted and slow with age. Now fast forward 35 years from today: how are the electronically complicated cars of today working out? Are they still around? I don't think so.

This is what CAR magazine pointed out, as well as the fact that as road safety legislation becomes more stringent, cars already integrated with computers and monitoring systems (Didn't Ford's PR guy say they can track how you drive your car already? Scary) can be "updated" to include automatic speed limiting systems to match the speed limit of the road you are on. This is way to 1984 for me and I think will have major implications to the car hobby and enthusiast.

Now, for a personal speculation: I believe that all of these electronic driving aids, weather it be traction oriented or a system designed to notice if you're falling asleep or merging into the path of another vehicle, are making us worse at driving. The more we are able to rely on the car to keep us safe, the less we are doing to watch out whats happening around the car. I don't think there is a new car on the market that is accessible to the average driver that requires its owner to be fully focused on driving. Anyway, I think that's long enough for a reply and most of you won't have read this far so I'll say that CVT is the best transmission. NOT. It a manual. Duh. Because it keeps you focused on the task at hand: driving and not dying.

With-a-G is back to not having anything written after his username > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 13:06

0

What did it take for the market for fixed-gear bikes ("fixies") to take off? Well-placed complaints about 21-speeds, biopace-cranks, and carbon ceramic disc brakes on what are ultimately childrens' toys.

The fixie (as smug and hipster as its proponents may be) actually does deliver on that direct-to-road experience. It's a haptic physics lesson with every ride.

Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight > stuttgartobsessed 01/15/2014 at 13:28

0

Interesting you bring up the tech progression. I had a discussion with some compatriots a few years ago on just this topic. In order to support the collector car community in 10 years (yes 10, cars are already getting there) there will need to be a new industry of retro computer manufacturers reverse engineering these current computers because they will be 1) obsolete, 2) unavailable, 3) current OEMs refuse to release the blueprints for proprietary concerns. There are cars today (I have one) that because of poor economy and poor management at OEM, all the spare parts were disposed of. So now with my 8 year old car with 14 onboard computers, I have to wait for the OEM to get enough orders before they will subcontract a batch of whichever one I need to be manufactured.

Decay buys too many beaters > YSI-what can brown do for you 01/15/2014 at 13:38

0

Yep, doing this finally took away the ghost hesitation I was getting when quickly taking uphill decreasing radius turns even with TC off and STM off (via the button). Turns out the traction control will still try to intervene in some situations unless FULLY defeated via the "cheat code"

stuttgartobsessed > Gizmo - The Only Good Gremlin, but don't feed me after Midnight 01/15/2014 at 13:48

1

Yup thats why I hate computer-laden cars. Are they smarter, cooler, more mystifying, faster, awe-inspiring, and advanced? Hell yes! Yah I want to drive the new S Class with its fancy self-leveling suspension that predicts bumps and potholes. Do I want to own one in 5 or 10 years? Hell No! Thats why, for as long as I can, I will always buy cars built before the tech era. But I think that this is one of the problems not many people have thought about or didn't think about (except for maybe the boards of directors of the major car companies because they want people to keep buying new cars. It'll be the what I call the Apple Strategy) but will be brought up very soon when people start taking their car in to get fixed and they can't be because as you mentioned replacement computer systems are not available.

Mattbob > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 13:49

0

Blame the governments that make traction control systems mandatory. If a company has to have a traction control system, of course they are going to want to have the best one on the market. Having the crappiest traction control on the market isn't a selling point. Write your congressman. It's all the governments fault. Just like those stupid backover avoidance systems.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 14:21

0

MDM is a nice "happy medium" for use on the street without completely disabling the nannies.

r0bot > Spaze 01/15/2014 at 15:46

0

I'm the friend with the brz.

Thanks for instructing me.

We ran the first session with everything on. The rest of the day we ran in VSC sport mode. In a few places the traction kept coming on (and strong) by braking at the outer front tire.

I did an autox last weekend and when I chopped at the wheel and drive like an idiot (read too much steering input too quickly and other autoxer bad habits) I could feel the traction working a lot. In fact, later in the day in one turn I would fling the car in with abandon knowing that it would catch me. This is not how one should drive a car at the limit.

I did try to do the "pedal dance" to unlock the the diagnostic mode with no traction control, but the car wasn't warmed up enough (car has to be warm or the ecu won't allow it).

I now have plans (and code) to have a microcontroller do the dance for me. Warm car, flip switch, restart car, ?, profit.

I had an e36 m3 before and it had no traction control (I removed it). It was very predictable, but felt heavier than the brz. It never got me into trouble, because I knew what it was going to do. I don't know what the brz is going to do after the traction computers kick in. That's the crux of the problem. Once they cut in I know I've hit some sort of brick wall limit and I have to stop doing what I'm doing and figure out how to get back to driving.

Future systems might get this better. I'd love a tuneable traction control system (I know they exist for some cars). I'd like the system to come on gradually. So, say I'm starting to yaw out or starting to have some wheel slip, it should come on a little and then if it keeps moving sideways it should come on more. Part of my issue is that when it comes on in the brz it is jarring. You know it's there. It's like you've hit a brick wall.

Maybe there is a fuzy logic ecu for traction control that can be accessed just like the normal ecu via CAN. hmm....

I'm also a little concerned about "ice mode" abs kicking in during a spirited track drive or autox.

PS SPAZe sent me the link to this article and I read it before even knowing it was written by him.

Joe_Limon > Spaze 01/16/2014 at 13:20

0

I disagree, if you are at a level where the traction aids gain you a net benefit in lap times, then you can't fully appreciate how the car handles without any aids. If you are at a level where the aids hinder you, you aren't hindered by their presence, most of these sports cars offer the ability to turn them off. It even works on a deeper thought process. Say you suck at throttle control, but still want to be able to exceed the vehicles designed slip angle limit for hooning purposes. The new Corvette, and many new vehicles will allow you to disable stability control, and give you enough playing space to do a partially aided drift through a corner.