Cars.com compare the PP1 vs PP2

[Norm Peterson]

I am a little confused with your mindset on the matter, at some points you are agreeing that the AT is faster and gives more performance, and then at others you elude to the driver of ATs as inferior to those who row their own gears.

You're reading way more into what I've been posting than was ever intended. I'm not trying to put ATs down or convert anybody who favors them. But given the history of MT vs AT threads here and elsewhere, I can see where people on the AT side can get a bit sensitive should they think they see any implied inferiority.

As simply as I think I can put it . . . the fact that a transmission either partly or wholly controlled by a computer is faster down the straights does not magically make me a better driver. Not even if a comparison of AT vs MT lap times makes it look like that was the case.

I guess I just don't get the constant disregard for performance over preference.

Perhaps my preferences are for finding better performance on the human side of driving and on the vehicle side for cornering and braking over better straight-line performance. Perhaps I really am that much a corner-carver and not a drag racer.


Norm

Sponsored

 

[thehunterooo]

Auto vs manual opcorn: (we need the popcorn emote back)

Tires make such a big difference but some people will never figure it out.

 

[dman]

Auto vs manual opcorn: (we need the popcorn emote back)

Tires make such a big difference but some people will never figure it out.

...also wonder how much difference in wheel weight between pp1 (34lb) and pp2? un-sprung weight, another big factor on track.

 

[Norm Peterson]

I agree with your first comment wholly, Norm. I just don't see it relevant to my point in any measurable sense. There are all kinds of "filters" in sports and race cars. I would contend that you are not directly making the shifts happen either case, MT or AT...just more work with a MT.

Have to disagree here. Your effort on the shift lever directly disengages one gear and engages whichever other one you've chosen. There's nothing but mechanical linkage between your hand and the sliders and (generally) synchro rings.

I always talk in the context of road racing where power launches occur out of most all turns. ATs shine over MTs here too. In fact, MTs are a huge liability in road racing compared to ATs, but that's another debate.

If you're "power launching" out of the turns, you're probably doing something wrong. You should be operating as close to the so-called "friction circle" as possible the whole way through the turn, meaning you wouldn't ever have enough surplus grip to do a "launch". Well, I suppose you could if the car was set up with a sufficient amount of understeer.

I hear you on wanting it to be more challenging for lap times with an MT...that's still a style choice.

Let's get something straight here . . . I'm about the least style-conscious person you're likely to encounter. I can't think of anything I want from or for my cars that is done with regard to how others might view the choices involved or to fit some cultivated public personna.

I just hear so much bashing of ATs that seem to move the idea of driving at the limit is something it's not. It pervades auto journalism as well.

Kind of what I was suspecting (and hinted at in the previous post) - it's a nerve that's probably been rubbed pretty raw at this point. I don't bash the AT - I've repeatedly posted that I recognize and understand its advantages even while remarking that those advantages aren't particularly important to me personally.

IMO, the dying manual must be merely a discussion style

But I guess it's OK to bash the MT because it has gone out of fashion with the majority of engine-centric car enthusiasts (not to mention the car-buying public at large).


I get that the MT-82 has had its problems - that's one of the reasons I'm looking at a T56 instead of an early MT-82 to replace the TR3650 in my '08 (another is the generally closer gear spacings and the availability of a 5th gear that's actually usable on the track). The MT-82D4 has gone back to wider spacings between some of the gears, which takes that one off the table for me.

You won't ever hear me defending things like computer-controlled rear axle steer or using computer control to cover for basic flaws in suspension tuning (such as the consumer-unacceptable levels of drop-throttle oversteer initially found in certain years of the Lexus GX460 that was corrected via reflashing the stability control software instead of fixing the basic mechanical issue).

I've actually had ABS go AWOL on me at the track . . . whereupon I set the top two (and three of the fastest four) lap times that day with it out.

I do like this discussion. I love pure driving. I dig both transmissions, AT and MT, I just feel the open debate of it has gotten mixed with people's personal preferences, not the true physics of driving...again, in my humble but impassioned opinion.

Peoples' personal preferences - we all have them. They just show up differently ↓↓↓.

My argument is merely the point that ATs are still pure like that of MTs because the purity of driving at the limit doesn't rest with operating a third pedal and a gear lever at all, IMO.

Norm

 

[dman]

Have to disagree here. Your effort on the shift lever directly disengages one gear and engages whichever other one you've chosen. There's nothing but mechanical linkage between your hand and the sliders and (generally) synchro rings.
i'm waiting for...the AMT, auto mindset tranny. I "think it" it shifts!


If you're "power launching" out of the turns, you're probably doing something wrong. You should be operating as close to the so-called "friction circle" as possible the whole way through the turn, meaning you wouldn't ever have enough surplus grip to do a "launch". Well, I suppose you could if the car was set up with a sufficient amount of understeer.



Let's get something straight here . . . I'm about the least style-conscious person you're likely to encounter. I can't think of anything I want from or for my cars that is done with regard to how others might view the choices involved or to fit some cultivated public personna.



Kind of what I was suspecting (and hinted at in the previous post) - it's a nerve that's probably been rubbed pretty raw at this point. I don't bash the AT - I've repeatedly posted that I recognize and understand its advantages even while remarking that those advantages aren't particularly important to me personally.



But I guess it's OK to bash the MT because it has gone out of fashion with the majority of engine-centric car enthusiasts (not to mention the car-buying public at large).


I get that the MT-82 has had its problems - that's one of the reasons I'm looking at a T56 instead of an early MT-82 to replace the TR3650 in my '08 (another is the generally closer gear spacings and the availability of a 5th gear that's actually usable on the track). The MT-82D4 has gone back to wider spacings between some of the gears, which takes that one off the table for me.

You won't ever hear me defending things like computer-controlled rear axle steer or using computer control to cover for basic flaws in suspension tuning (such as the consumer-unacceptable levels of drop-throttle oversteer initially found in certain years of the Lexus GX460 that was corrected via reflashing the stability control software instead of fixing the basic mechanical issue).

I've actually had ABS go AWOL on me at the track . . . whereupon I set the top two (and three of the fastest four) lap times that day with it out.



Peoples' personal preferences - we all have them. They just show up differently ↓↓↓.



Norm

 

[jake_zx2]

for the way Ford forces you into packages to have the pp2 shocks and "big wheel package" seems like a...pp match. money honey!

You can get the PP2 shocks and "big wheel package", its called "performance package, Level 2"
I mean, lets be real here... once you option PP1 and magride, its only, what, $800 more for PP2? That's more than reasonable for the bigger wheels, wider (and MUCH more expensive) tires, aero revisions, suspension tuning, etc.

 

[dman]

You can get the PP2 shocks and "big wheel package", its called "performance package, Level 2"
I mean, lets be real here... once you option PP1 and magride, its only, what, $800 more for PP2? That's more than reasonable for the bigger wheels, wider (and MUCH more expensive) tires, aero revisions, suspension tuning, etc.

check your build numbers. pp2 plus the "required" 401a package upgrade totals $8700.00 or a difference of...$4700.00. my issue is not with cost of pp2 but having to buy...
401a, non of which really interest me or has anything to do with performance at a cost of $2200.00. re-read my post...you missed the message.

 

[dman]

PP 2 only costs $810 more than an equally equipped PP1.
Do you want to sit lower, & have a more track tuned suspension, or not..? Almost a no brainer if you are use to having a tire rack in your garage.

actually...$3000 more with required 401a package. Ford track tune...Multimatic it's not, but sells product.

 

[jake_zx2]

It’s 301a package, and really, I don’t see many people who actually want a mustang without at least 301a. But even at that, it’s still only about $800 more than a PP1 with 301a and magride

 

[dman]

PP 2 only costs $810 more than an equally equipped PP1.
Do you want to sit lower, & have a more track tuned suspension, or not..? Almost a no brainer if you are use to having a tire rack in your garage.

actually...$3000 more with required 401a package. Ford track tune...Multimatic it's not, but sells product.

It’s 301a package, and really, I don’t see many people who actually want a mustang without at least 301a. But even at that, it’s still only about $800 more than a PP1 with 301a and magride

401a is GT Premium. 301a...GT, which does give Mode toggle and costs $2000.00. you're looking at tigers and leopards, both cats but...whatever. it's the Ford spin,
welcome to the dance.

 

[w3rkn]

No, like i said, the PP2 only cost $810 more than an equally optioned PP1. It is a no brainer for track peeps who want magneride. (which is everyone).

 

[WildHorse]

In fact, MTs are a huge liability in road racing compared to ATs, but that's another debate.

According to who? You? AT's and complexity and weight with the required RACING coolers and such, which all tracked hypercars have with there SEMI AUTO transmissions. Don't confuse the 18+ a10 equipt Mustangs as super/hypercars.

 

[jake_zx2]

401a is GT Premium. 301a...GT, which does give Mode toggle and costs $2000.00. you're looking at tigers and leopards, both cats but...whatever. it's the Ford spin,
welcome to the dance.

I mean, if the $2000 between 301A and 401A is a drop in the bucket, then why are you complaining about the $2000 premium to get an upgrade package for PP2?

Ultimately, this point is moot, because we're talking about similarly equipped mustangs. PP2 is only about $800 more than a 301A PP1. 401A is not a requirement for PP2.

 

[WildHorse]

Just the PP2 option clicked. comes with 265/275 tires on the 19x10.5/19x11 wheels. Added $3500 worth of crap I don't want on the $5000 PP2 option. This is in Canada however

 

[jake_zx2]

Just the PP2 option clicked. comes with 265/275 tires on the 19x10.5/19x11 wheels. Added $3500 worth of crap I don't want on the $5000 PP2 option. This is in Canada however

In America, PP2 is a $6500 option and only requires 301A ($2000) to be added. It also comes with 305 tires all around. There might be an error with the Canadian configurator, because a 265 tire would have a tough time even fitting on a 10.5" wheel haha

Sponsored