Auto rev-matching in driving modes

[DevonK]

There's a very curious statement in Honda's press release yesterday about the rev-matching functionality in R+ mode:

The throttle ‘blipping’ effect from the rev-matching function is also enhanced.
​

That seems very odd. Either rev-matching is optimized or it's not - that is, the rpms on both the engine and transmission sides of the clutch match when the clutch plates are re-engaged or they don't. This statement implies that the "un-enhanced" rev-matching in the non-R+ modes must be sub-optimal (i.e. only partial) in those other modes. That would be very hard on the transmission in the long run if drivers come to fully rely on it, due to the repeatedly mismatched speeds on the two "sides" of the clutch as they come together. Be interesting to hear a Honda engineer's take on this.

Sponsored

 

[Boostlag]

i believe it means more aggressive rev for fast downshifting. Honestly, this is a feature that will not be used. I prefer to do my own heel toe, not the halfass auto. If i wanted the computer to revmatch for me, i'd just buy a auto.

 

[DevonK]

I guess it could match the revs more quickly in R+, although I see no reason why that speed would not be desirable in any driving mode.

For those who don't want it at all, Honda has obligingly provided a "kill switch". Personally I loved it when I tried it in a Camaro SS, you can concentrate on optimizing your braking and turn-in without unwanted distraction, all without losing the pleasures of manual shifting. It's one of the major pluses of the CTR for me. YMMV.

 

[MonkeyBoost]

I guess it could match the revs more quickly in R+, although I see no reason why that speed would not be desirable in any driving mode.

For those who don't want it at all, Honda has obligingly provided a "kill switch". Personally I loved when I tried it in a Camaro SS, you can concentrate on optimizing your braking and turn-in without unwanted distraction, all without losing the pleasures of manual shifting. It's one of the major pluses of the CTR for me. YMMV.

Agreed! Its great on my 370Z. There is no downside to it other than "i don't like change, i wanna do it myself." It also will greatly prolong your clutch. If it functions the same as the Z then even upshifts are smoother as well since it will hold the rpm for the next gear until you release the clutch, so if you hesitate for a sec the rpms wont drop too low and there will be no jarring effect when the engine is trying to catch back up to the tranny speed.

 

[tuxmonkey]

Agreed! Its great on my 370Z. There is no downside to it other than "i don't like change, i wanna do it myself." It also will greatly prolong your clutch. If it functions the same as the Z then even upshifts are smoother as well since it will hold the rpm for the next gear until you release the clutch, so if you hesitate for a sec the rpms wont drop too low and there will be no jarring effect when the engine is trying to catch back up to the tranny speed.

Leisure car enthusiast here: The CTR will not only be my first sports car, but the first manual I own. I know how to drive manual and I enjoy it, but I'm not into the whole heel-toe stuff and would be surprised if I am even able to take the CTR out to the track with my current schedule. I just wanted something really fun to drive, take it to the back roads on the weekends, and needed to be a sedan so I can fit my son's car seat in the back. I test drove the 370Z years back when it first came out and I loved the rev matching. It's just smooth shifting fun, and personally think it's great to have for someone like me who will be getting on a manual like riding a bike again. Who knows, maybe I'll get more into the track thing if time magically appears.

I joined this forum because like 99% of the users seem to have a lot of experience with cars and it's been a great community to learn from so far. Figured sharing a slightly different perspective would be nice.

 

[nyuofa]

...Who knows, maybe I'll get more into the track thing if time magically appears.

I know how this goes haha! As a father of 2 little people under the age of 3, I sometimes wish there would be more time each day!

 

[Reno]

I'll be honest. As someone who is 6'4 with size 14 feet this is a big selling point for me. I can heel-toe but it's at best an adventure in most cars I've done it in. It's damn near impossible in my s2000. I've actually turned the ignition off more than once trying to do it. I am glad it's defeatable for people who can do it though.

 

[Phantisy]

I'll be honest. As someone who is 6'4 with size 14 feet this is a big selling point for me. I can heel-toe but it's at best an adventure in most cars I've done it in. It's damn near impossible in my s2000. I've actually turned the ignition off more than once trying to do it. I am glad it's defeatable for people who can do it though.

I'm 6'2" and a size 15 feet. I tried to heel toe once and my shoes got in the way.

 

[DevonK]

Weird constraints on the rev-matching per the owner's manual, pg. 243:

• No rev-matching when downshifting into 1st. (WTF? Honda doesn't seem to grasp a basic axiom of UX (user experience) design: consistency. You don't want the driver to be making a call on every downshift about whether rev-matching is going to engage, and getting a nasty jolt (and possibly a dangerous loss of traction) when he makes the wrong call or forgets about this stupid limitation.
• No rev-matching when engine revs are low and you are downshifting into the next-lower gear. How limiting this will be depends on the functional definition of "low revs" they've chosen to go with. If it's just off-idle it should not make much difference, but if it's say 2500 rpm or higher, this is another inconsistency of application that will create driveability issues.

 

[Harlaquin]

So yeah, ive read in a couple places and ine video. Thst the rev match, whether on or off, also affects the sound of the car. With it on you get the crack and pops from the exhaust. With it off you don't, just normal.

 

[All-Knowing]

Deleted

 

[js4square]

REV match specifics...

Ok ... is it just me or the car should just rev match everytime like the porsche system or the GM one on the Camaro and Corvette ? But I'm pretty sure in everyday life situation and on the track it will just work fine

 

[DevonK]

REV match specifics...

So it will rev match a downshift provided the engine is above 2000 rpm when you initiate the downshift - that seems workable, you'd rarely let the revs slip below 2300 or so in "enthusiastic" driving anyways.

But I'd like to know why there is no rev-matching at all shifting down into first. I know a lot of folks won't go down into first gear unless they are stopped, but I'm not one of them.

Also how well will the system cope with skip shifts (e.g. 5 to 3)?

 

[pdiizeru]

So it will rev match a downshift provided the engine is above 2000 rpm when you initiate the downshift - that seems workable, you'd rarely let the revs slip below 2300 or so in "enthusiastic" driving anyways.

But I'd like to know why there is no rev-matching at all shifting down into first. I know a lot of folks won't go down into first gear unless they are stopped, but I'm not one of them.

Also how well will the system cope with skip shifts (e.g. 5 to 3)?

Even with really good engine mounts, I would never downshift into first. Maybe I was racing for a million dollar prize.. lol

 

[uncleben]

No rev-matching when downshifting into 1st. (WTF? Honda doesn't seem to grasp a basic axiom of UX (user experience) design: consistency. You don't want the driver to be making a call on every downshift about whether rev-matching is going to engage, and getting a nasty jolt (and possibly a dangerous loss of traction) when he makes the wrong call or forgets about this stupid limitation.

But I'd like to know why there is no rev-matching at all shifting down into first. I know a lot of folks won't go down into first gear unless they are stopped, but I'm not one of them.

I think you just answered your own questions

Sponsored