G80 M3 to Type S what do you think?

[tmperez]

Going to try to keep this short.

Wanted to get some opinions about my potential change up

I currently have an individual g80 M3 comp X drive. Basically all options with the exception of the carbon brakes. The car is bad ass. The issue is it’s really not all that fun to drive. It’s very very fast, almost too fast for what i need. It’s expensive in every aspect, from insurance to gas it’s expensive. It’s big, it’s heavy, it’s very fancy it’s just very extra. Don’t get me wrong It is awesome to have that power on hand but i rarely use it. Even when a broke Mustang tried to push me i never bite (i hate mustangs)

I have been thinking about trading the M3 for a Type S. I’m a Honda fan. I have an s2000 and a dc2 Integra that is k swapped also had a GSR back in the early 2000s so I’m not new to Honda.

I drove the Type S the other day and was surprised, it was definitely quicker than i thought and it was fun to drive. The car felt familiar, it felt smaller, lighter and more agile. There are some things that I’m miffed by ie. No home link, no shift lights l, but regardless the car seems pretty fun. The icing on the cake is i could get into the car for less than half what im paying for the M3.

So the question is, any other M3 owners that went to a Type S? Even if not, what do y'all think about going from an M3 to the Type S? Does the Type S hold up? Is it still a fun car after owning it for a while? Test drives are always exciting…but that excwearent can ware off.

Appriciate the feedback back.

Sponsored

 

[s219]

The Type S is far more cohesive feeling than modern BMW M cars and I think that makes it more enjoyable and rewarding to drive. I have an M2 Competition which I love, but it really lacks the overall integrated feel you get with the Type S. It's like the BMW's front suspension, rear suspension, steering, brakes, clutch, shifter, and engine are all good/great by themselves, but they really don't communicate or gel together like you expect in a true sports car. The Type S really pulls it off though, even more remarkable considering it's front wheel drive.

That said, the BMW's power is intoxicating, the engine is smooth and sophisticated, and the car lunges forward in every gear with just the slightest press of the throttle. The Type S doesn't come remotely close to that feeling of power or sophistication in my experience. That's about the only characteristic where the BMW is far superior. I've been critical of the Type S engine for being somewhat appliance-like in character and I wish it was a little more like Honda's VTEC engines of old. I too have an S2000 (2005 AP2), and despite being even more down on power, the character of that engine is in a whole other league than the Integra Type S powerplant.

 

[tmperez]

The Type S is far more cohesive feeling than modern BMW M cars and I think that makes it more enjoyable and rewarding to drive. I have an M2 Competition which I love, but it really lacks the overall integrated feel you get with the Type S. It's like the BMW's front suspension, rear suspension, steering, brakes, clutch, shifter, and engine are all good/great by themselves, but they really don't communicate or gel together like you expect in a true sports car. The Type S really pulls it off though, even more remarkable considering it's front wheel drive.

That said, the BMW's power is intoxicating, the engine is smooth and sophisticated, and the car lunges forward in every gear with just the slightest press of the throttle. The Type S doesn't come remotely close to that feeling of power or sophistication in my experience. That's about the only characteristic where the BMW is far superior. I've been critical of the Type S engine for being somewhat appliance-like in character and I wish it was a little more like Honda's VTEC engines of old. I too have an S2000 (2005 AP2), and despite being even more down on power, the character of that engine is in a whole other league than the Integra Type S powerplant.

Very well said. It’s kind of the crux of it.

 

[Braun]

I came from an Audi S5 Coupe. The Type S is a significantly more fun car, and it never gets old. I miss some of the luxuries and build quality of my Audi, but the driving experience more than makes up for any shortcomings the vehicle has in regards to niceties.

 

[elh0102]

Different cars with individual characteristics. I've been retired a few years now but did a lot of track events for 12 years. During that time, I had a number of great cars, M3, 911, ZO6, Cayman, and my favorite, a Porsche GT3. Most of these cars were significantly faster than the ITS, and each had very different handling dynamics. Cars like the GT3 and ZO6 demand your attention to detail when driving near the limit, but they are immensely satisfying when you get it right. It's a feeling of accomplishment that you never get in the ITS, simply because the Integra is so easy to drive and forgiving of any but the most egregious of mistakes. That said, as a daily driver that offers a reasonable fun-to-drive component, the ITS is hard to beat. I can't put it on the same level as some of the others, but it's not meant to be there, and it's not a fair comparison. For someone who is a serious student of driving, and who has the time and money to pursue driving at a high level, there are more rewarding cars. But the Integra is a very good car on its own merits.

 

[Victorofhavoc]

I track drive a lot, and until recently I had a dedicated racecar so when I was shopping around for a new street car it came down to the ct5bw, G80 m3 (manual only), and its. My local race mechanics (one is a bmw guy and the other a Porsche guy) both strongly suggested I stay away from the G80. They both told me to choose the elantra n or civic type r (to add on to the racecar) as my instructor and easy DD car. The bw is just too much everywhere and a caddy...

Recently i test drove some G80 again (this time the wrap around screen ones). After getting used to the its, the G80 felt like a huge boat. Heavy doesn't even begin to describe it.

The bmw is a much better daily driver overall. It's quieter, smoother, much more luxurious, much better materials, many more features, options galore, and the tech... Bmw is so far ahead in tech that Acura has no business using the term "luxury" for anything.

The its is a much better driver overall. Where the clutch in the bmw feels like something you'd find in Dave and busters, the one in the acura is slightly better and feels like a Sim rig (but that's par for course since 2010). The shifter in the bmw is long, rubbery, but somehow oddly precise and very disconnected, while the acura one is slick, notchy, and feels like a gear lever. Steering in the acura is much more precise and responsive, but it's still electric steering numb and not hydraulic steering or manual rack responsive. The jumbo steering wheel in the G80 was an atrocity... It's like BMW M forgot people use it. My plan was to rip that thing out the first chance I got. With the new screen the wheel also felt like it was blocking visibility to the traditional dash and the infotainment both. The G80 display itself is much nicer than the acura screen that seems to have come from circa 2009. The G80 display is also a pain to use while driving though.

As far as handling characteristics go, I feel bmw lost it with the e46. The G80 is, to me, one of the worst BMW ever made for track use. Good grip, lots of power, and can keep a decent pace with decent factory alignment spec. Beyond that it offers little in terms of steering feedback, chassis feedback, brake feedback, and drivetrain feedback. The acura has a much greater tendency for rotation, oversteer, and the chassis responds almost immediately to input.

As a bonus (or detriment), everything on the acura is dirt cheap parts bin stuff. New Alcantara steering wheel? 300$. New brakes? The fronts are standard old brembo design like the c7 stingray. Baffled oil pan? They make drop in baffles for 200$! Everything is just cheap compared to the German world, and sometimes by a factor of 5x+.

The bmw still makes a better daily... It's a true luxury car. I'd take the Integra for any trip less than 50 mi though.

 

[akoza]

I haven't owned an M3/M4 but I've driven a few of them long distances on numerous occasions. I do prefer the shifter feel of the Type S and think it's overall a better daily driver (more space inside, lighter, easier to drive in snow, etc). While it doesn't come with HomeLink, you can easily install a HomeLink mirror from the 2023+ Accord in one evening. It would be nice to have certain creature comforts and more of a luxury experience like the M3 has, but I haven't really complained after 2 years.

Yes, there are occasionally times where I may get bored of the ITS and wish I had something faster. Then I'll go on vacation and rent a slow or big car for a few days, and all my doubts go away when I get back. It feels like a brand new car and all the original excitement comes back.

 

[s219]

I track drive a lot, and until recently I had a dedicated racecar so when I was shopping around for a new street car it came down to the ct5bw, G80 m3 (manual only), and its. My local race mechanics (one is a bmw guy and the other a Porsche guy) both strongly suggested I stay away from the G80. They both told me to choose the elantra n or civic type r (to add on to the racecar) as my instructor and easy DD car. The bw is just too much everywhere and a caddy...

Recently i test drove some G80 again (this time the wrap around screen ones). After getting used to the its, the G80 felt like a huge boat. Heavy doesn't even begin to describe it.

The bmw is a much better daily driver overall. It's quieter, smoother, much more luxurious, much better materials, many more features, options galore, and the tech... Bmw is so far ahead in tech that Acura has no business using the term "luxury" for anything.

The its is a much better driver overall. Where the clutch in the bmw feels like something you'd find in Dave and busters, the one in the acura is slightly better and feels like a Sim rig (but that's par for course since 2010). The shifter in the bmw is long, rubbery, but somehow oddly precise and very disconnected, while the acura one is slick, notchy, and feels like a gear lever. Steering in the acura is much more precise and responsive, but it's still electric steering numb and not hydraulic steering or manual rack responsive. The jumbo steering wheel in the G80 was an atrocity... It's like BMW M forgot people use it. My plan was to rip that thing out the first chance I got. With the new screen the wheel also felt like it was blocking visibility to the traditional dash and the infotainment both. The G80 display itself is much nicer than the acura screen that seems to have come from circa 2009. The G80 display is also a pain to use while driving though.

As far as handling characteristics go, I feel bmw lost it with the e46. The G80 is, to me, one of the worst BMW ever made for track use. Good grip, lots of power, and can keep a decent pace with decent factory alignment spec. Beyond that it offers little in terms of steering feedback, chassis feedback, brake feedback, and drivetrain feedback. The acura has a much greater tendency for rotation, oversteer, and the chassis responds almost immediately to input.

As a bonus (or detriment), everything on the acura is dirt cheap parts bin stuff. New Alcantara steering wheel? 300$. New brakes? The fronts are standard old brembo design like the c7 stingray. Baffled oil pan? They make drop in baffles for 200$! Everything is just cheap compared to the German world, and sometimes by a factor of 5x+.

The bmw still makes a better daily... It's a true luxury car. I'd take the Integra for any trip less than 50 mi though.

Outstanding summary. The G-series M cars really do make it feel like the driver is isolated from everything. It could almost be a virtual drive if you weren't physically sitting in the car. I don't understand how they work so hard to put the whole package together with some very impressive specs, yet somehow miss knitting it together for driver interaction and engagement. I guess this is what their engineers are going for, but it makes me think they must not compare or benchmark against other sports cars. Then again, the M cars are all adapted from sedans and coupes and don't sit on a true sports car platform, so maybe this is what they are going for.

 

[ChromaPop]

I think you are looking to financially downsize as you realize cars like the M3 comp are probably not worth the money that they cost. I've said it before and I will say it again for folks like you, you would have more fun owning both a new Ford Maverick truck and a new Mazda Miata than just that BMW and it would cost you about the same.

 

[MNTeggy]

Interesting thread! I’ve actually been thinking of going from my Type S to a G80 M3. I like my car and have done some modifications to it, but the overall quality (seats, interior materials), engine, and AWD of the M3 have me strongly considering it as my next car. I live in a state where it can snow quite a lot, so AWD with winter tires would be great! I’m sure I’d miss my ITS, and I probably wouldn’t be able to have both cars.

I very much enjoy the ITS. Sure, there are some annoying things about it, build quality being one, but it’s fun and engaging to drive. If it had more HP that would be good, I think. But even without a tune and just an intake, downpipe, and frontpipe it gets a little torquey when I step on it. With more power it may be too much for a front drive car. Maybe.

That said, both cars are great and it comes down to what you want and expect out of a driving experience.

 

[Fred 930]

I track drive a lot, and until recently I had a dedicated racecar so when I was shopping around for a new street car it came down to the ct5bw, G80 m3 (manual only), and its. My local race mechanics (one is a bmw guy and the other a Porsche guy) both strongly suggested I stay away from the G80. They both told me to choose the elantra n or civic type r (to add on to the racecar) as my instructor and easy DD car. .....

I'm a vocal critic (on other threads) of the ITS nasty "Over-Rev" (some call it rev-hang, but it's worse than that) problem. I used to do a fair amount of track driving, most recently with a low HP but great handling VW Scirocco race car (full cage, lightweight, no interior, fire system, belts, seat, etc.).
Have not tracked my ITS, but even spirited street driving suffers when making high RPM up-shifts. Rather than allowing revs to drop (perhaps) 500 RPM like it should on upshifts, the ECU actually applies throttle to increase revs, perhaps 1000 RPM. So even modestly fast gear up-changes results in a rough clutch / driveline "lurch", since the engine is about 1500 RPM higher than it should be for the next higher gear.

But since neither of the above descriptions from experienced track people have mentioned this, it makes me wonder if perhaps my car may be exhibiting more of this undesirable behavior than that experienced by others? I would expect every track 2-3, and 3-4 up shift would result in a nasty driveline "shock" in my car, unless one waited an unacceptably long time before clutch re-engagement for the revs to actually fall (not rise like mine does). So a question to the track guys - isn't the ITS Over-Rev issue a problem for you versus manual transmission German performance cars??

BTW - I've driven manuals my entire life. Only one other Japanese car (a loaner driven several years ago) exhibited this problem, which others have speculated is related to Honda's emission control system. My 2023 VW GTI 6MT has no such issue.

 

[Victorofhavoc]

I'm a vocal critic (on other threads) of the ITS nasty "Over-Rev" (some call it rev-hang, but it's worse than that) problem. I used to do a fair amount of track driving, most recently with a low HP but great handling VW Scirocco race car (full cage, lightweight, no interior, fire system, belts, seat, etc.).
Have not tracked my ITS, but even spirited street driving suffers when making high RPM up-shifts. Rather than allowing revs to drop (perhaps) 500 RPM like it should on upshifts, the ECU actually applies throttle to increase revs, perhaps 1000 RPM. So even modestly fast gear up-changes results in a rough clutch / driveline "lurch", since the engine is about 1500 RPM higher than it should be for the next higher gear.

But since neither of the above descriptions from experienced track people have mentioned this, it makes me wonder if perhaps my car may be exhibiting more of this undesirable behavior than that experienced by others? I would expect every track 2-3, and 3-4 up shift would result in a nasty driveline "shock" in my car, unless one waited an unacceptably long time before clutch re-engagement for the revs to actually fall (not rise like mine does). So a question to the track guys - isn't the ITS Over-Rev issue a problem for you versus manual transmission German performance cars??

BTW - I've driven manuals my entire life. Only one other Japanese car (a loaner driven several years ago) exhibited this problem, which others have speculated is related to Honda's emission control system. My 2023 VW GTI 6MT has no such issue.

I've heard so much about this topic recently so I want to clarify a few things. It's a topic that seems to cause a lot of confusion for people, just like turbo lag vs turbo threshold. I believe the general car media outlets are also doing car enthusiasts a disservice from assumptions and incorrect use of certain language (again also true for turbo lag vs threshold).

Rev hang is the specific electronic throttle body action of leaving the throttle open so that unburned fuel in the manifold can burn during the next cycle. You know you have a Rev hang specific tune or problem if it occurs in neutral when you rev the engine. If the rpm stays for a second and then falls, that's rev hang. The throttle was left open and the rpm hung around before the throttle closed. Simple, direct, observable, repeatable.

Overrev as it's being described, is the throttle plate intentionally not closing fully between gears.

Why might you WANT Overrev?
Smoother gear changes from less shift shock
Keeps boost from dropping because the turbo keeps spinning (turbo cars)
Keeps lag down because the turbo keeps spinning (turbo cars)
Keeps engine momentum up (flywheel are heavy now and changing rotational speed of a large mass is time consuming and takes energy)
Sudden throttle closing can cause compressor surge (if the wastegate can't keep up)
Prevents surge against the pcv system

Why might you NOT WANT overrev?
Reduces engine braking when engaging a lower gear
Consumes more fuel
Creates more emissions
Preference for more traditional throttle closing and revs falling to feel the "shift shock"


Let's define turbo lag and turbo threshold for a sec... Lag is how long it takes for the turbo to spin up and build boost AFTER you press the throttle and the difference between throttle application and power delivery is known as lag. Threshold is the limit at which a turbo starts to build noticeable(often peak) boost. On this car we're looking at right before 3k rpm stock.

So why do we care? The throttle plate deal is part of several factors, including lag management. Most of what it's trying to do is keep you from feeling surge and lag. Smoothing out shifts and keeping the flywheel mass from impacting shock is part of the strategy as well, but arguably more minor parts.

Why do people who frequent tracks not care so much? In short, it's controllable by your brain and foot. I know we're all perfect drivers here who have driven manual for years, but no matter how perfect we may be, driving to the car is a FUNDAMENTAL skill of progressing from beginner to intermediate in regard to driver track skill. I absolutely will not pass a DE1 driver to DE2 or DE2 to DE3 if they cannot prove to me that as tires, engine, trans, brakes get hot that they can adapt and keep the car and driving line consistent. Every car is different and will behave differently. Even when I've had an Fl5 on track next to my De5, it felt very different. Same car, similar pace, but the Fl5 would understeer mildly at low speeds and understeer aggressively at high speeds... Mostly because of their factory alignment (and mildly because of the wing). Does that mean I needed to go immediately align the car before it was drivable? No... It means I added brake pressure on turn in and had to brake much harder and later to keep balance and pace. We're taught (and I teach) that we adapt as drivers first and then make changes to the platform when the driver skill or adaptation doesn't align with the vehicle. As the saying goes, "the best way to ruin a great track car is to modify it".

I can tell you I've had it happen on track when shifting "early" at the 5500-6k range. After it happened the second time, I adjusted so that my foot came off the throttle slightly earlier and I smoothed out my clutch release on the 2 to 3 shift. I've never had it happen on the 3 to 4 or 4 to 5 shift. On my two closest tracks I drop into 2nd gear twice at hedge hollow and only once at Ozark. For once or twice per lap, it's not a huge concern, and again easily mitigated by changing driving technique slightly.

 

[Fred 930]

Thanks for the detailed and very interesting comments. I again must state I've not tracked my ITS and indeed the undesirable Over-Rev "feature" might be acceptably reduced once a normal track "rhythm" is established. The problem might even be eliminated when consistently shifting near red-line, as I'd hope the ECU would not insist on increasing engine speed above that max level.

So the unacceptable over-rev behavior I complain about happens in Street situations when shifting up (probably 2nd - 3rd, or 3rd - 4th, as I'm old and a tame street driver). Since the car's velocity remains fairly constant during those up-shifts, a "smooth" shift requires engine RPM to fall - probably in the range of 500 RPM, depending upon the next higher gear ratio. So a higher engine RPM due to over-rev when re-engaging the clutch is unexpected and results in a noticeable drive-line shock. That said, I have less than 2000 miles on the car, and it's only happened on relatively aggressive up-shifts. However, it is quite repeatable and certainly does not result in "smooth shifting" - but rather an apology to any passengers!

Also as you mention, it's possible the ECU may be doing this to better maintain boost / reduce lag. I had not considered that possibility, but if so, it's a feature I'd disable if I had the choice.

Finally, I must consider my car could be "worse" in this regard (than others), and attempt to find a "good" dealer service tech to consult - likely a difficult task.

Anyway, I also have instructed at the Club level (Audi, BMW, & Porsche), and appreciate your perspective. Hope you are able to drive Road America some day - its only 45 minutes away for me.

 

[akoza]

Are you guys driving with rev-match on or off? I drove with it on for almost 2 years, and last month I finally turned it off (and left it off) after doing a road trip in my friend's Jeep that didn't have rev-match. I found that with rev-match on, I usually have to wait a half second before re-engaging the clutch in order to get a smooth shift (probably the rev hang you guys are talking about). However, with rev-match off, I'm able to shift more quickly just like with previous cars that didn't have rev match.

I'm a vocal critic (on other threads) of the ITS nasty "Over-Rev" (some call it rev-hang, but it's worse than that) problem. I used to do a fair amount of track driving, most recently with a low HP but great handling VW Scirocco race car (full cage, lightweight, no interior, fire system, belts, seat, etc.).
Have not tracked my ITS, but even spirited street driving suffers when making high RPM up-shifts. Rather than allowing revs to drop (perhaps) 500 RPM like it should on upshifts, the ECU actually applies throttle to increase revs, perhaps 1000 RPM. So even modestly fast gear up-changes results in a rough clutch / driveline "lurch", since the engine is about 1500 RPM higher than it should be for the next higher gear.

But since neither of the above descriptions from experienced track people have mentioned this, it makes me wonder if perhaps my car may be exhibiting more of this undesirable behavior than that experienced by others? I would expect every track 2-3, and 3-4 up shift would result in a nasty driveline "shock" in my car, unless one waited an unacceptably long time before clutch re-engagement for the revs to actually fall (not rise like mine does). So a question to the track guys - isn't the ITS Over-Rev issue a problem for you versus manual transmission German performance cars??

BTW - I've driven manuals my entire life. Only one other Japanese car (a loaner driven several years ago) exhibited this problem, which others have speculated is related to Honda's emission control system. My 2023 VW GTI 6MT has no such issue.

I've heard so much about this topic recently so I want to clarify a few things. It's a topic that seems to cause a lot of confusion for people, just like turbo lag vs turbo threshold. I believe the general car media outlets are also doing car enthusiasts a disservice from assumptions and incorrect use of certain language (again also true for turbo lag vs threshold).

Rev hang is the specific electronic throttle body action of leaving the throttle open so that unburned fuel in the manifold can burn during the next cycle. You know you have a Rev hang specific tune or problem if it occurs in neutral when you rev the engine. If the rpm stays for a second and then falls, that's rev hang. The throttle was left open and the rpm hung around before the throttle closed. Simple, direct, observable, repeatable.

Overrev as it's being described, is the throttle plate intentionally not closing fully between gears.

Why might you WANT Overrev?
Smoother gear changes from less shift shock
Keeps boost from dropping because the turbo keeps spinning (turbo cars)
Keeps lag down because the turbo keeps spinning (turbo cars)
Keeps engine momentum up (flywheel are heavy now and changing rotational speed of a large mass is time consuming and takes energy)
Sudden throttle closing can cause compressor surge (if the wastegate can't keep up)
Prevents surge against the pcv system

Why might you NOT WANT overrev?
Reduces engine braking when engaging a lower gear
Consumes more fuel
Creates more emissions
Preference for more traditional throttle closing and revs falling to feel the "shift shock"


Let's define turbo lag and turbo threshold for a sec... Lag is how long it takes for the turbo to spin up and build boost AFTER you press the throttle and the difference between throttle application and power delivery is known as lag. Threshold is the limit at which a turbo starts to build noticeable(often peak) boost. On this car we're looking at right before 3k rpm stock.

So why do we care? The throttle plate deal is part of several factors, including lag management. Most of what it's trying to do is keep you from feeling surge and lag. Smoothing out shifts and keeping the flywheel mass from impacting shock is part of the strategy as well, but arguably more minor parts.

Why do people who frequent tracks not care so much? In short, it's controllable by your brain and foot. I know we're all perfect drivers here who have driven manual for years, but no matter how perfect we may be, driving to the car is a FUNDAMENTAL skill of progressing from beginner to intermediate in regard to driver track skill. I absolutely will not pass a DE1 driver to DE2 or DE2 to DE3 if they cannot prove to me that as tires, engine, trans, brakes get hot that they can adapt and keep the car and driving line consistent. Every car is different and will behave differently. Even when I've had an Fl5 on track next to my De5, it felt very different. Same car, similar pace, but the Fl5 would understeer mildly at low speeds and understeer aggressively at high speeds... Mostly because of their factory alignment (and mildly because of the wing). Does that mean I needed to go immediately align the car before it was drivable? No... It means I added brake pressure on turn in and had to brake much harder and later to keep balance and pace. We're taught (and I teach) that we adapt as drivers first and then make changes to the platform when the driver skill or adaptation doesn't align with the vehicle. As the saying goes, "the best way to ruin a great track car is to modify it".

I can tell you I've had it happen on track when shifting "early" at the 5500-6k range. After it happened the second time, I adjusted so that my foot came off the throttle slightly earlier and I smoothed out my clutch release on the 2 to 3 shift. I've never had it happen on the 3 to 4 or 4 to 5 shift. On my two closest tracks I drop into 2nd gear twice at hedge hollow and only once at Ozark. For once or twice per lap, it's not a huge concern, and again easily mitigated by changing driving technique slightly.

 

[Victorofhavoc]

Are you guys driving with rev-match on or off? I drove with it on for almost 2 years, and last month I finally turned it off (and left it off) after doing a road trip in my friend's Jeep that didn't have rev-match. I found that with rev-match on, I usually have to wait a half second before re-engaging the clutch in order to get a smooth shift (probably the rev hang you guys are talking about). However, with rev-match off, I'm able to shift more quickly just like with previous cars that didn't have rev match.

I've done both.

I've driven several iterations of blip-shift. Notably Porsche, Nissan, BMW, and acura. The Porsche and Nissan implementation is the best imo. They blip the throttle when the gear lever moves towards the gate, and not when it's in the gate. This makes them much faster, especially when you have a lighter flywheel. The acura in comparison feels lethargic and like it's being weighed down by the flywheel.

All of the systems I've tried match up shift and down shift. Usually they're matching up shift so you can be smoother. I have a hard time with the up shift match on this car because it's not delaying the throttle or matching my throttle/load request to existing throttle it was giving the car.

On or off, the overrev behavior exists. However, when off it's not throwing the logic in to match the revs to the gear/speed so the revs will start to drop a bit sooner. I am both more and less smooth with it off. It depends on the gear.

Sponsored