Dodge Viper ACR runs a record-breaking 7:22 lap around the Nurburgring

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

why is it that you almost immediately move to personal attacks when challenged?

PLEASE point out my personal attack. Another blatantly false accusation from you Bruce. It is simply fact. If you say you did not misrepresent my statement you can not read. I said "MORE" you replaced that with "PREEMINENT". That my friend is a MISREPRESENTATION, and you do it often. Perhaps I should have said "interpret the context, meaning and relationships between simple sentences in a debate" instead of "read", but heck with something this simple "read" was appropriate. As well, I thought your other reply was either arrogant or insecure. Those are fair calls when you use statements and diction like that littering your post #38. If I think you sounded massively arrogant and if you don't that is OK, however, it was not an attack.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

PLEASE point out my personal attack. Another blatantly false accusation from you Bruce. It is simply fact. If you say you did not misrepresent my statement you can not read. I said "MORE" you replaced that with "PREEMINENT". That my friend is a MISREPRESENTATION, and you do it often. Perhaps I should have said "interpret the context, meaning and relationships between simple sentences in a debate" instead of "read", but heck with something this simple "read" was appropriate. As well, I thought your other reply was either arrogant or insecure. Those are fair calls when you use statements and diction like that littering your post #38. If I think you sounded massively arrogant and if you don't that is OK, however, it was not an attack.

When is an attack not an attack? When Swamp the Sanctimonious makes it. In his case, it's always an appropriate response, or a "fair call".

I rest my case.

Bruce

[footie]

No wonder I finished with this thread a page ago.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by footie

No wonder I finished with this thread a page ago.

Hey, having to put up with assholes (both of us, in this case) is just part of the rich tapestry of content in these here threads. Just smile and move on.

Bruce

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

When is an attack not an attack? When Swamp the Sanctimonious makes it. In his case, it's always an appropriate response, or a "fair call".

I rest my case.

Bruce

1. Pot, kettle, black.

2. Diversions, diversions, diversions. Typical for you.

3. I would call a very sarcastic "sanctimonious" an insult at best and an attack at worst.

I rest my case.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

1. Pot, kettle, black.

2. Diversions, diversions, diversions. Typical for you.

3. I would call a very sarcastic "sanctimonious" an insult at best and an attack at worst...

#1 is way wrong. The difference is that I am quite fine with attacking and admitting it if accused - as if there could be some confusion when I attack.

Don't know what #2 means.

#3? Pick one. I'm comfy with either.

Bruce

[lucid]

Bruce, Swamp,

As usual, you've initiated a solid/interesting discussion. This time about shifter wiggle/vibration/rattle/transmission vibration, or whatever you might want to call it. Although I don't have bandwidth participate, I am interested in reading/learning more. I suggest, if I may, that we retain focus on the technical issue.

Although I agree with Bruce's point about the shifter vibration somewhat designed into the product, I find it hard to believe they would want that much of it. It really "seems" a bit extreme although I have not driven a bunch of special purpose cars with such engine outputs. It would seem that the vibration could even get in the way of performance: isn't there a risk of the not being able to grab the shifter quickly/properly when it is moving around that much if you decide to end it and shift up? Also, I don't understand how solid engine mounts would resolve this particular problem at redline (Bruce's suggestion). Shouldn't the engine operating at constant rpm at that point due to the rev limiter kicking in? In that case, what exactly is causing that level of vibration? Would that level of vibration be present, say, if the driver held the throttle steady to maintain engine operation a few hundred rpms below redline? Is this the artifact of some strange interaction between throttle position/driver input and the rev limiter control software? I am assuming the driver input is "maintained" at a high lever than what the computer would allow to prevent an over-rev at those points. And it is possible that the software is reducing throttle to prevent the over-rev, stepping out, the driver input, which causes increase in revs, kicking in, the software taking control again and reducing throttle, and cycle repeating itself in relatively high frequency, and hence the strange vibration. If that is the case, one would think that the software can monitor driver input, determine that it is still at a level that would cause an over-rev, and rather than stepping out, retain control and hold revs steady at redline until it detects a decrease in driver input to the extent that it would not cause increase in revs.

Just a theory...I am basing this theory on the observation that the shifter movement seems to have similar displacement amplitude during the rest of the ride, but not at the high frequency that is observed during rev-limitation. If that is the case, the frequency of the vibration should have nothing to do with how the engine/transmission is mounted while the amplitude might.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

#1 is way wrong. The difference is that I am quite fine with attacking and admitting it if accused - as if there could be some confusion when I attack.

Don't know what #2 means.

#3? Pick one. I'm comfy with either.

Bruce

Brilliant, whine about an attack when you readily admit doing it yourself. Then defend yourself as not hypocritical. Unreal Bruce, unreal. You're a real piece of work.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Brilliant, whine about an attack when you readily admit doing it yourself. Then defend yourself as not hypocritical. Unreal Bruce, unreal. Your a real piece of work.

Whine?

No, I was just questioning your modus operandi, but of course I know it's from being confidence-deprived, as already described some ages ago. Your attacks (on me at least) seem ineffectual for that reason. Your steadfast refusal to recognize your own attacks as such is definitely annoying, however. Thus the "Swamp the Sanctimonious" label, which I found to be not only accurate, but mildly amusing.

Bruce

PS - Feel free to come up with a label for me, although I admit it's a bit of a challenge to do something punchy around "bruce.augenstein@comcast."

Bruce the Bastard? Maybe a little strong. How about "Augie the Acerbic". Work for you?

[footie]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Whine?

No, I was just questioning your modus operandi, but of course I know it's from being confidence-deprived, as already described some ages ago. Your attacks (on me at least) seem ineffectual for that reason. Your steadfast refusal to recognize your own attacks as such is definitely annoying, however. Thus the "Swamp the Sanctimonious" label, which I found to be not only accurate, but mildly amusing.

Bruce

PS - Feel free to come up with a label for me, although I admit it's a bit of a challenge to do something punchy around "bruce.augenstein@comcast."

Bruce the Bastard? Maybe a little strong. How about "Augie the Acerbic". Work for you?

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by lucid

Bruce, Swamp,

As usual, you've initiated a solid/interesting discussion. This time about shifter wiggle/vibration/rattle/transmission vibration, or whatever you might want to call it. Although I don't have bandwidth participate, I am interested in reading/learning more. I suggest, if I may, that we retain focus on the technical issue.

Although I agree with Bruce's point about the shifter vibration somewhat designed into the product, I find it hard to believe they would want that much of it. It really "seems" a bit extreme although I have not driven a bunch of special purpose cars with such engine outputs. It would seem that the vibration could even get in the way of performance: isn't there a risk of the not being able to grab the shifter quickly/properly when it is moving around that much if you decide to end it and shift up? Also, I don't understand how solid engine mounts would resolve this particular problem at redline (Bruce's suggestion). Shouldn't the engine operating at constant rpm at that point due to the rev limiter kicking in? In that case, what exactly is causing that level of vibration? Would that level of vibration be present, say, if the driver held the throttle steady to maintain engine operation a few hundred rpms below redline? Is this the artifact of some strange interaction between throttle position/driver input and the rev limiter control software? I am assuming the driver input is "maintained" at a high lever than what the computer would allow to prevent an over-rev at those points. And it is possible that the software is reducing throttle to prevent the over-rev, stepping out, the driver input, which causes increase in revs, kicking in, the software taking control again and reducing throttle, and cycle repeating itself in relatively high frequency, and hence the strange vibration. If that is the case, one would think that the software can monitor driver input, determine that it is still at a level that would cause an over-rev, and rather than stepping out, retain control and hold revs steady at redline until it detects a decrease in driver input to the extent that it would not cause increase in revs.

Just a theory...I am basing this theory on the observation that the shifter movement seems to have similar displacement amplitude during the rest of the ride, but not at the high frequency that is observed during rev-limitation. If that is the case, the frequency of the vibration should have nothing to do with how the engine/transmission is mounted while the amplitude might.

First, a basic definition. That shifter movement would not normally be called a vibration, even though there's a definite cyclic frequency as the engine keeps hitting the rev limiter. As the driver, one might feel an actual vibration when gripping the shift ball at any time the engine is running, and that vibration is dictated by individual power pulses. The transmission, which is solidly bolted to the engine, faithfully carries these pulses throughout, and if the shifter unit is bolted to the the transmission with solid bushings (common in a race car), those vibrations would then be very palpable indeed to the driver, who would probably also be able to hear them, given a quiet cockpit. As an example, my son's 600 HP GTO has a "competition" aftermarket shifter, and you can hear and feel vibration through it, which obviously varies with throttle setting and rpm. It's quiet at cruise, and less so when accelerating moderately. At full throttle, you can't hear it, but can definitely feel it.

The shifter movement in the Viper is caused by the compression/stretching of the engine mounts and the transmission mounts, all of which are in place to insulate the occupant (and even the rest of the car) from NVH. Under power or deceleration, the engine and transmission are trying to twist or rotate within the vehicle, so the "give" in the mounting system (necessary as part of the power-pulse damping) allows a certain amount of that. Only a relatively small amount of rotation is allowed, however, or you'd have the engine bouncing off the inner fenderwells, which is a no-no, even in a Viper.

Still, with the shifter ball so far away from the centerline, even a relatively small amount of rotation, degree-wise, results in quite a noticeable amount of lateral movement. In the film, it's most obvious as the driver repeatedly bounces off the rev limiter, which in the Viper seems to be almost an all-or-nothing device. That is to say, rather than kill many or most injectors to more or less hold the engine right at the limit, it seems as if the Viper system pretty much kills everything, letting the engine decelerate, then applies full power when it senses a low enough engine speed (or perhaps when enough time has passed). Therefore, you get this all-on rotation in one direction, followed by an all-off rotation in the other direction, followed by...

You get the picture. An amazing amount of back and forth as the driver "holds the engine against the limiter".

You and Swamp are correct in that a "softer" limiter, capable of fueling/firing only enough cylinders to more or less maintain the engine at that rpm would certainly be smoother. It would also be kinder to the drivetrain.

In my experience, including my first new car - a '64 GTO - my son's GTO, and many others in between, a somewhat portable shift lever has zero effect on the driver's ability to either reach the lever properly or shift. Not only that, but I think it's likely that many drivers wouldn't even notice the movement, even in that Viper. The only time you would be very likely to notice is if you're simultaneously making the power transition while holding the shift lever, preparing to shift. This is a fairly atypical event, even on a race track. If you leave it late on the shift, this is the car's way of telling you you're an idiot, in which case you say you're sorry (if you're you or me), or you say "Shut up and get on with it, I meant that", if you're the driver in the video.

Bruce

[lucid]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

First, a basic definition. That shifter movement would not normally be called a vibration, even though there's a definite cyclic frequency as the engine keeps hitting the rev limiter.

Technically, any motion that has a frequency associated with it, even or uneven, can be called a vibration. So if the shifter starts oscilating at some kind of amplitude and frequency, that can be termed vibration.

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

As the driver, one might feel an actual vibration when gripping the shift ball at any time the engine is running, and that vibration is dictated by individual power pulses. The transmission, which is solidly bolted to the engine, faithfully carries these pulses throughout, and if the shifter unit is bolted to the the transmission with solid bushings (common in a race car), those vibrations would then be very palpable indeed to the driver, who would probably also be able to hear them, given a quiet cockpit.

I am very much familiar with the operating principles of an IC engine, so I know that the uneven torque output of the engine and the inertia effects are also a cause of vibration.

The point is there are several sources of vibration in this scenario, and we are simply observing their combined effect. However, I am saying that the vibrations due to uneven power strokes of the engine do not explain the large amplititude of the shifter displacement; that should not result in that much shifter displacement. I am also saying the large amplitude shifter displacement is most likely a function of how the engine/transmission is mounted. I made that clear in my previous post. Do you agree of disagree with this?

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

In the film, it's most obvious as the driver repeatedly bounces off the rev limiter, which in the Viper seems to be almost an all-or-nothing device. That is to say, rather than kill many or most injectors to more or less hold the engine right at the limit, it seems as if the Viper system pretty much kills everything, letting the engine decelerate, then applies full power when it senses a low enough engine speed (or perhaps when enough time has passed). Therefore, you get this all-on rotation in one direction, followed by an all-off rotation in the other direction, followed by...

You get the picture. An amazing amount of back and forth as the driver "holds the engine against the limiter".

This is pretty much what I said in my previous post, but in your own words, which is fine. I am also saying that this "loop" seems to dictate the frequency of the large amplitude shifter displacement.

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

You and Swamp are correct in that a "softer" limiter, capable of fueling/firing only enough cylinders to more or less maintain the engine at that rpm would certainly be smoother. It would also be kinder to the drivetrain.

Agreed. Speaking of "soft", I don't necessarily like the way BMW handles this either though where the limiter just kind of "sucks" the power out of you gradually while you try to do something about it.

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

If you leave it late on the shift, this is the car's way of telling you you're an idiot, in which case you say you're sorry (if you're you or me), or you say "Shut up and get on with it, I meant that", if you're the driver in the video.

Yes, this does send a clear message. Riding the rev-limiter for an extended time was probably not a very acceptable behaviour to the designers or they would have done something about how the rev-limiter kicks in.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

No, I was just questioning your modus operandi, but of course I know it's from being confidence-deprived, as already described some ages ago.

Every time you try to analyze me and my character you get it about as wrong as possible. I find it just as amusing as the technical points you get wrong. Lack of confidence is not one of my problems, nor is my ability to gain confidence from others (couldn't tell what you were getting at from your unclear diction).

Feel free to choose your own little pet names for yourself. I find it childish and insulting.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by lucid

Technically, any motion that has a frequency associated with it, even or uneven, can be called a vibration. So if the shifter starts oscilating at some kind of amplitude and frequency, that can be termed vibration.

Swamp, what have you done with lucid, and why are you posting in his place?

OK, point taken. Still, if you use that term with a typical car nut in this context, they're likely to think about a tingle in the palm of their shift hand rather than a broken wrist.

Originally Posted by lucid

The point is there are several sources of vibration in this scenario, and we are simply observing their combined effect. However, I am saying that the vibrations due to uneven power strokes of the engine do not explain the large amplititude of the shifter displacement; that should not result in that much shifter displacement. I am also saying the large amplitude shifter displacement is most likely a function of how the engine/transmission is mounted. I made that clear in my previous post. Do you agree of disagree with this?

I absolutely agree. Thought I said that, but perhaps (what are the odds?) I used just a few more words than absolutely necessary, thus blurring my intent.

Originally Posted by lucid

This is pretty much what I said in my previous post, but in your own words, which is fine. I am also saying that this "loop" seems to dictate the frequency of the large amplitude shifter displacement.

Missed that. Perhaps you used more words than absolutely necessary?

I distinctly remember having to reapply my ChapStick while reading.

Originally Posted by lucid

Agreed. Speaking of "soft", I don't necessarily like the way BMW handles this either though where the limiter just kind of "sucks" the power out of you gradually while you try to do something about it.

Huh. Haven't sampled that, but I'll check this out at some point.

Originally Posted by lucid

Yes, this does send a clear message. Riding the rev-limiter for an extended time was probably not a very acceptable behaviour to the designers or they would have done something about how the rev-limiter kicks in.

Can't speak with authority about what they had in mind, but rev limiters (of whatever design) are of course not rocket science.

Bruce

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Every time you try to analyze me and my character you get it about as wrong as possible. I find it just as amusing as the technical points you get wrong. Lack of confidence is not one of my problems, nor is my ability to gain confidence from others (couldn't tell what you were getting at from your unclear diction).

Feel free to choose your own little pet names for yourself. I find it childish and insulting.

Ah. Another non-attack attack.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Huh. Haven't sampled that, but I'll check this out at some point.

My experience with the M3 rev limiter on the track has been a gradual loss of power and resulting deceleration. Nothing dramatic, but the only thing that's missing is a "sucking" sound if that makes sense as if the power is being drained by an invisible load.

Maybe T Bone can chip in here as he was describing something similar in the M6.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Ah. Another non-attack attack.

If you call anything there even remotely an attack you win the Mr. Over Sensitive of the Decade prize. And you are not whining, yeah right. Give me a freaking break. Truth hurts that much huh?

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

If you call anything there even remotely an attack you win the Mr. Over Sensitive of the Decade prize. And you are not whining, yeah right. Give me a freaking break. Truth hurts that much huh?

And yet another...(sob)

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by lucid

My experience with the M3 rev limiter on the track has been a gradual loss of power and resulting deceleration. Nothing dramatic, but the only thing that's missing is a "sucking" sound if that makes sense as if the power is being drained by an invisible load.

Maybe T Bone can chip in here as he was describing something similar in the M6.

I suppose there's no actual "good" way to kill the fun.

Bruce

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

And yet another...(sob)

In keeping with your insistence to get the last word I offer the following.

[UltimateBMW]

We should adopt the 'Top Gear Standard' for cars they test on their track.

If it can't go over a speed bump, it doesn't count.

That Viper I doubt would meet such a simplistic standard.

[UltimateBMW]

As far as the heated debate going on above. Bruce, why do you react to it so much? Its text over the internet. Half of your responces have just been purely complaining about Swamp attacking you.