[ying, chung]

i was pleasantly surprised today that the rev match feature in our m2 does not interfere with double clutch downshift. i really haven't played with downshifting much, so maybe i'm just crazy, but maybe some of you noticed the same thing.

one of my pet peeves with our m2 was that you can't turn off rev match in "normal" driving modes. since i bought the car last week, i have been slowly getting used to/accepting this feature. as the matter of fact, i realized that the computer does such a good job in rev match i don't have a strong urge to fight it; i just let it do its rev matching while thinking the timeline in which human beings getting replaced by computers and robots. this morning, i felt playful on my way to work, so i would occasionally downshift (sometimes one gear lower, other times two gears lower) just to hear the car. i noticed that when i double clutched and rev matched myself, the computer doesn't rev again, doesn't attempt to rev match, and it let me do my thing, which pleasantly surprised me. my commute isn't very long and i only played it in sport mode with dsc on, so i don't know if this applies to other driving modes, but i intend to find out on my way home

has any one of you guys noticed the same thing?

[Elwood74]

I've noticed that if your throttle "blip" get's the RPM above what the computer says is the ideal amount, it will not interfere.

[Klippe]

Originally Posted by ying, chung

i was pleasantly surprised today that the rev match feature in our m2 does not interfere with double clutch downshift. i really haven't played with downshifting much, so maybe i'm just crazy, but maybe some of you noticed the same thing.

one of my pet peeves with our m2 was that you can't turn off rev match in "normal" driving modes. since i bought the car last week, i have been slowly getting used to/accepting this feature. as the matter of fact, i realized that the computer does such a good job in rev match i don't have a strong urge to fight it; i just let it do its rev matching while thinking the timeline in which human beings getting replaced by computers and robots. this morning, i felt playful on my way to work, so i would occasionally downshift (sometimes one gear lower, other times two gears lower) just to hear the car. i noticed that when i double clutched and rev matched myself, the computer doesn't rev again, doesn't attempt to rev match, and it let me do my thing, which pleasantly surprised me. my commute isn't very long and i only played it in sport mode with dsc on, so i don't know if this applies to other driving modes, but i intend to find out on my way home

has any one of you guys noticed the same thing?

Why would you want to double clutch in this car rather than rev match?

[swagon]

Originally Posted by Klippe

Why would you want to double clutch in this car rather than rev match?

You double cluch and rev match.

[Klippe]

Originally Posted by swagon

You double cluch and rev match.

What is the benefit of double clutching in this car or any modern performance car?

[MechEE]

Originally Posted by Klippe

What is the benefit of double clutching in this car or any modern performance car?

Because you want to shift slow and clunky.

[chris719]

It helps if you have a bad synchro. Other than that not much.

[ClothSeats]

Originally Posted by Klippe

What is the benefit of double clutching in this car or any modern performance car?

Not granny shifting.

[pruettfan]

I have to say I think its kind of funny that folks get upset about technology use in cars. Technology has made cars far better in terms of performance, reliability and safety and we buy new cars versus old low tech cars for those very attributes. I have had cars from the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and the 2000's and there is not a chance I would go back to a "low tech" car again.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by pruettfan

I have to say I think its kind of funny that folks get upset about technology use in cars. Technology has made cars far better in terms of performance, reliability and safety and we buy new cars versus old low tech cars for those very attributes. I have had cars from the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and the 2000's and there is not a chance I would go back to a "low tech" car again.

I don't get upset about use of technology...

I get upset about the dumbing down of drivers who *rely* on technology.

When " drivers " are happy that they don't have to learn how to shift gears because of DCT, that they don't have to learn how to operate a clutch , learn what the clutch friction point is, and when to use the clutch to shift gears , or even know what gear to be in (or what gear that they should be in) - that frustrates me.

When " drivers " have no idea of the physics of driving , and have no desire to develop any driver skill but are more concerned/solely focused on lap time or drag strip times ... that's also a concern for me.

When " drivers" have no idea that downshifting in a corner is something that one should do carefully, or that trail braking isn't optimal for most braking situations , and instead drive a car around a track letting the car do all the driving ... it makes me


Aren't you a person that feels like traction control systems are a waste and therefore you switch it off immediately ?

Which side of the fence are you on again ?
Actually it doesn't matter. Because one shouldn't have to make a choice for or against technology per se.... the technology is here.

For example.

One can ask your smartphone to calculate 5 + 6 X 10 -3 ... and it will come up with the correct answer. But if you don't know HOW it came up with that answer or even how to do the math yourself and you consider yourself a mathematician .....

[Elwood74]

Originally Posted by MechEE

Because you want to shift slow and clunky.

Or you want to manage a failing transmission till the end of a race. :P

[ying, chung]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

I don't get upset about use of technology...

I get upset about the dumbing down of drivers who *rely* on technology.

When " drivers " are happy that they don't have to learn how to shift gears because of DCT, that they don't have to learn how to operate a clutch , learn what the clutch friction point is, and when to use the clutch to shift gears , or even know what gear to be in (or what gear that they should be in) - that frustrates me.

When " drivers " have no idea of the physics of driving , and have no desire to develop any driver skill but are more concerned/solely focused on lap time or drag strip times ... that's also a concern for me.

When " drivers" have no idea that downshifting in a corner is something that one should do carefully, or that trail braking isn't optimal for most braking situations , and instead drive a car around a track letting the car do all the driving ... it makes me


Aren't you a person that feels like traction control systems are a waste and therefore you switch it off immediately ?

Which side of the fence are you on again ?
Actually it doesn't matter. Because one shouldn't have to make a choice for or against technology per se.... the technology is here.

well said, sir.

and i double clutch because i'm old school and i feel like to

[andrettifan]

Originally Posted by ying, chung

well said, sir.

and i double clutch because i'm old school and i feel like to

What you said. Me too. I know it's slower and unnecessary, but I've been doing it for 45 years (I'm 61 and learned to drive on a 1964 Renault R4 that I had to double clutch) and after that long it's just part of how I drive. As a result, I drive all the time in Sport Plus with the traction control turned off. Plan to do so this winter too.

[dpfaber]

Originally Posted by andrettifan

What you said. Me too. I know it's slower and unnecessary, but I've been doing it for 45 years (I'm 61 and learned to drive on a 1964 Renault R4 that I had to double clutch) and after that long it's just part of how I drive. As a result, I drive all the time in Sport Plus with the traction control turned off. Plan to do so this winter too.

If the car is going to rev-match for you, why not have it shift the gears for you also?!! BMW does not understand the whole point of a manual transmission. There is no logical reason for it, but BMW fails to realize that there is no logical reason to buy an M2 in the first place. The only reason for both decisions is because the customer enjoys it. Taking away any part of the manual shift process reduces that enjoyment, almost to the point of souring me on the car altogether. It is the only glaring horrible fault with this car that I can find. Turning off DTC is no different than unbuckling your seat belts, not acceptable for street driving. Does BMW want to end manual transmissions by killing off their customers?

[PrematureApex]

Sans a mid corner downshift, or trying not upsetting the car under threshold braking, people are rev matching to prevent excess clutch wear (at least a good portion of the reason for doing it).

Double clutching prevents synchro wear.

Point being, neither of them are needed to drive the car.

If you want to be easier on equipment, especially on very expensive things to replace like synchros, who am I to say that rev matching to save your clutch is somehow fine, while rev matching to save your synchros is stupid? One could argue a clutch is cheap and easy to replace compared to your syncros.

Plus, it's just plain fun.

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by MechEE

Because you want to shift slow and clunky.

Maybe yours...

[Zippster]

I think it just interferes with the heel toe shifter types. They rev match while pushing in the clutch pedal. For the rest of the crowd, it just makes you shifts perfectly match the engine RPM so there is no engine braking drag on the tranny. I was not sure if I would like it or take away from the driving experience. For me it does not as I am not a heel toe shifter.

This is how I understand it anyway.

[PrematureApex]

If anyone has owned a 5-speed Subaru in the last 25 years, you'll know you need the double clutch to get it into first from anything other than a DEAD stop (and even then...yikes), particularly in the cold.

[chambolle]

Originally Posted by Zippster

I think it just interferes with the heel toe shifter types. They rev match while pushing in the clutch pedal. For the rest of the crowd, it just makes you shifts perfectly match the engine RPM so there is no engine braking drag on the tranny. I was not sure if I would like it or take away from the driving experience. For me it does not as I am not a heel toe shifter.

This is how I understand it anyway.

I personally have found the rev matching feature a bit unnerving, but I'm getting used to it. I've been rowing my own gears for about 45 years, and perhaps I've developed some bad habits along the way.... but I like to downshift and let the engine brake the car a bit, which is more or less impossible to do in the M2 other than in Sport Plus mode. Hearing the engine do its own thang when I'm shifting is a bit disconcerting as well - did my right foot just have a spasm or something?

I'm not 'anti-technology,' but I do wonder aloud, do we really need this? What is it supposed to accomplish? A little 'lurch' on downshift is part and parcel of driving a manual, is it not? If you wanted a CVT, you could buy a car with a CVT. Quite obviously, I chose not to do so.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by chambolle

I personally have found the rev matching feature a bit unnerving, but I'm getting used to it. I've been rowing my own gears for about 45 years, and perhaps I've developed some bad habits along the way.... but I like to downshift and let the engine brake the car a bit, which is more or less impossible to do in the M2 other than in Sport Plus mode. Hearing the engine do its own thang when I'm shifting is a bit disconcerting as well - did my right foot just have a spasm or something?

I'm not 'anti-technology,' but I do wonder aloud, do we really need this? What is it supposed to accomplish? A little 'lurch' on downshift is part and parcel of driving a manual, is it not? If you wanted a CVT, you could buy a car with a CVT. Quite obviously, I chose not to do so.

How come you can't engine brake with rev matching turned on? Seems like totally separate functions unless I am misunderstanding something.

[Zippster]

Originally Posted by chris719

How come you can't engine brake with rev matching turned on? Seems like totally separate functions unless I am misunderstanding something.

You can. You just don't feel that initial RPM mismatch and the since the engine is already at the matched RPM and does not have to climb, it does not slow the car down as much, but to some degree the higher RPMs will engine brake the car. Does that make sense?

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Zippster

You can. You just don't feel that initial RPM mismatch and the since the engine is already at the matched RPM and does not have to climb, it does not slow the car down as much, but to some degree the higher RPMs will engine brake the car. Does that make sense?

Yeah, I know what you mean, but that's sort of like clutch braking. It's not something you should want to be doing in any car.