you think anyone will ever develope a launch control? - Page 3

madcows · Jul 7, 2009, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

I think he just lined the existing ducting.

I just read a post in the SST forum where the guy resolved his overheating issue by creating a more substantial duct with tape, foil, and some other junk since the stock duct leaves plenty of passageways for the air to go around the cooler.

StateOfTheArt · Jul 8, 2009, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

If you're five, sure, when you get older, doing stupid things gets really old, especially when it can cost you big time (your license, your life, your transmission, etc). If you're willing to risk those things for a ****ing street race, have at her.

I don't think he was serious...

StateOfTheArt · Jul 8, 2009, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

Umm...no, the MR tranny ****s the bed at the track, ie. the road course, have you heard of a GTR doing that? At the past weekend's Solo1 event (time attack basically), the MR owner was getting very frustrated at the car's inability to sustain it's performance after numerous hot laps. It seemed like every 10 laps or so, the car had an issue whether it be the transmission or the brakes.
Mitsubishi isn't going to get hurt by the transmission, they can and do deny warranty claims readily. If they suspect you're brake launching the car, they'll deny you. If they suspect you installed launch control, they'll deny you.

You took once instance and generalized it to all MRs and their trannies.

I read the Evo Battle (I think in SCC or Modified) had 10 Evos. 7 were GSRs, 2 were MRs and 1 Evo IX. The MRs held their own, not as fast as the GSRs, but they raved over the MRs transmission and S-Sport mode shifts thru turns etc. Two professional drivers driving each car to get a fair and accurate laps from each car, the MRs suffered from mostly the availability of upgrading the tranny and of course being different from manuals.

The majority of transmission failures that occurred to the GTR transmissions were caused by the owners failure to properly use the launch control option and why Nissan did not honor the warranties of those who abused it. Simply launch control was never intended for stand still launches for drag use. It also said so in the GTR's owners manual.

As far as launch control for the R/A's, I like a little less throttle delay from stand-stills, especially when merging into traffic. $300+ is a little pricey for a throttle controller that may or may not be what people want specifically in mind.

jazket · Jul 8, 2009, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StateOfTheArt

I don't think he was serious...

don't mind amby, he takes all for granted; thats why we love him

ambystom01 · Jul 8, 2009, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StateOfTheArt

You took once instance and generalized it to all MRs and their trannies.

I read the Evo Battle (I think in SCC or Modified) had 10 Evos. 7 were GSRs, 2 were MRs and 1 Evo IX. The MRs held their own, not as fast as the GSRs, but they raved over the MRs transmission and S-Sport mode shifts thru turns etc. Two professional drivers driving each car to get a fair and accurate laps from each car, the MRs suffered from mostly the availability of upgrading the tranny and of course being different from manuals.

The majority of transmission failures that occurred to the GTR transmissions were caused by the owners failure to properly use the launch control option and why Nissan did not honor the warranties of those who abused it. Simply launch control was never intended for stand still launches for drag use. It also said so in the GTR's owners manual.

As far as launch control for the R/A's, I like a little less throttle delay from stand-stills, especially when merging into traffic. $300+ is a little pricey for a throttle controller that may or may not be what people want specifically in mind.

Read through the Evo forum or even here, it's hardly the first time the transmission has been an issue. Hell, I believe it was in a C&D review where they managed to get the car to go into limp mode.
The comparison was in Import Tuner and I'm looking at it right now.
If launch control wasn't intended for launching, what's the point in having it?

StateOfTheArt · Jul 8, 2009, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

If launch control wasn't intended for launching, what's the point in having it?

The GTR's has something to do with either wet conditions and loss of traction issues or engaging during traction loss to regain traction. The rep said that its intended purpose and was clearly printed in the owner's manual, thus the broken transmissions were due to abuse of the system and not defective transmissions.

I haven't read the Evo's manual and not sure if the purpose is the same as the GTR or if it is intended for quick launches.

I do feel that the MR's TC-SST should be as stout as the 5-speed, the intended purpose and design philosophy of the TC-SST is derived from racing transmissions of the same type, if the TC-SST can't handle a day at the track then I don't know how you justify a MR over a GSR.

ambystom01 · Jul 8, 2009, 11:59 AM

How? Engaging launch control isn't automatic, you have to deselect various things including traction control. The broken transmissions were the result of people wanting to achieve the same 0-60 times as Nissan, who used the built in launch control.
Are you sure you're not thinking of the traction control system?
The TC-SST using a similar system as a racing transmission but you're still comparing apples to oranges. A true race-ready transmission costs more than most people's houses.

Ladogaboy · Jul 8, 2009, 12:10 PM

Interesting...

http://blogs.motortrend.com/6356422/...ged/index.html

StateOfTheArt · Jul 8, 2009, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

How? Engaging launch control isn't automatic, you have to deselect various things including traction control. The broken transmissions were the result of people wanting to achieve the same 0-60 times as Nissan, who used the built in launch control.
Are you sure you're not thinking of the traction control system?
The TC-SST using a similar system as a racing transmission but you're still comparing apples to oranges. A true race-ready transmission costs more than most people's houses.

I wasn't comparing the two, I was under the assumption that the MR should be capable of a weekend at the track, and that it should perform as well as the next car in its class.

Reading more and more about the GTR seems safer and cheaper to buy a Evo, even an MR, than have to worry about the GTRs warranty and sensitivity issues.

hibby · Jul 9, 2009, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StateOfTheArt

The GTR's has something to do with either wet conditions and loss of traction issues or engaging during traction loss to regain traction. The rep said that its intended purpose and was clearly printed in the owner's manual, thus the broken transmissions were due to abuse of the system and not defective transmissions.

A convenient cover story they put together as legal protection before the car released, because they knew the LC broke transmissions.

ambystom01 · Jul 9, 2009, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StateOfTheArt

I wasn't comparing the two, I was under the assumption that the MR should be capable of a weekend at the track, and that it should perform as well as the next car in its class.

Reading more and more about the GTR seems safer and cheaper to buy a Evo, even an MR, than have to worry about the GTRs warranty and sensitivity issues.

Get the Evo to the same power as the GTR and then say that. You're kidding yourself if you think the MR won't have transmission and thus warranty issues if it's modded to produce high HP.

jazket · Jul 9, 2009, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

Get the Evo to the same power as the GTR and then say that. You're kidding yourself if you think the MR won't have transmission and thus warranty issues if it's modded to produce high HP.

Reason why Mitsu went for the 5-speed only on higher output units such as the FQ-360 and FQ-400;

I know Mitsu's TC-SST (or let's say Getrag's TC-SST) is brand new... Is the GT-R's also brand new? I assume...

StateOfTheArt · Jul 10, 2009, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

Get the Evo to the same power as the GTR and then say that. You're kidding yourself if you think the MR won't have transmission and thus warranty issues if it's modded to produce high HP.

80k vs 40k, and 20k vs 9k(?). Both transmission will be beefed up by after-market support. As for the MR getting GTR power and being able to deliver it through the transmission, eventually. Either way both transmissions are unpopular.

We will either see the TC-SST being beefed up by Mitsubishi or ignored completely by serious weekend track enthusiasts, except for those not wanting a manual.

Domolution · Jul 10, 2009, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

And how can you do that at the track?

LOL!!

ambystom01 · Jul 10, 2009, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StateOfTheArt

80k vs 40k, and 20k vs 9k(?). Both transmission will be beefed up by after-market support. As for the MR getting GTR power and being able to deliver it through the transmission, eventually. Either way both transmissions are unpopular.

We will either see the TC-SST being beefed up by Mitsubishi or ignored completely by serious weekend track enthusiasts, except for those not wanting a manual.

Compare stock to stock, get an MR up to 450 HP and see how long the transmission lasts.