I'm using a 500GB 840 EVO as my main drive in my system. I've moved stuff like/var to a separate hard drive (because of log files and constant tiny read/writes that aren't speed-sensitive), and I do all compiles on a RAM disk, I've upgraded to 16GB to avoid swapping.
Based on reviews etc., I fully expect the 840 EVO to outlast every other component in my PC.
I have had extremely good results using an Aeropress and good-quality beans that I grind myself. When done right, it makes coffee that has no bitterness at all, even if allowed to cool to room temperature.
Coffee that tastes as good as it smells is something everyone should try at least once in their lives.
The cruise control on the current S-class will automatically slow down to the same speed as the car in front of it, including stopping completely if necessary. It will also auto-correct the steering to keep the car within the lines. It's currently limited to just a few degrees of correction, and you have to touch the steering wheel, you can't just let go and let it steer itself for more than a few seconds. It's probably the closest thing to a commercially available self-driving car at the moment.
As long as they avoid fresh cheeses and stick to the aged ones, even lactose intolerant people can eat delicious cheese. Besides, the aged stuff tastes better, especially over bacon fat on whole-grain sourdough rye bread with a dab of dijon or hot mustard. Seriously good eatin'.
We're talking a few degrees of negative camber, not massive "stanced" or "slammed" or "demon camber" or whicher idiotic thing mouthbreathers do to their cars these days.
A little bit of negative rear camber significantly aids cornering stability. Too much hurts straight line stability, but a bit of additional toe-in can mitigate this. Too little will hurt corner stability. For a street-driven car where tire wear is also a concern, a couple of degrees is ideal.
Cupping has nothing to do with camber or toe, it happens because of bad damping and is a completely unrelated issue.
Regarding the rear tire wear, perhaps you should try a different make and model of tire, or you could try driving less aggressively or less over-loaded. 15000 miles is perfectly normal for a tire with sporting pretensions.
Also set up wrong by the manufacturer. The 2007 honda civic has a highway MPG rating of 40mpg. I regularly get 44-46 while speeding after I fixed their design flaw in the rear end. they set the car with significant negative rear camber and with about 2 degrees of toe, I reset it to zero and zero and not only did fuel mileage numbers skyrocket by 10-15% but rear tire wear dropped to zero or undetectable. From what I can tell they STILL sell civics with this flaw, and the Honda Fit as well suffers from it.
That's not a flaw, it's a deliberate design to improve stability and handling, especially during mid-corner corrections and emergency maneuvers. The slight toe-in also helps straight line stability.
My car (Peugeot 406) is setup like that as well, it has enough negative rear camber that it is immediately noticeable when looking at the car. If you try to "correct" this by dialing out the camber, the car will be less stable over mid-corner bumps, and the small amount of passive rear steering built in the rear suspension will be negated, further worsening the handling.
What you have done is make your car go from being relatively neutral in corners, to having positive camber when the suspension is loaded up. If you've ever read "Unsafe at any speed" or seen an old VW Beetle corner hard, you will know that having positive camber is one of the most dangerous situations you can be in. So you've actually made your car significantly less safe, all for the sake of a few MPG. Congratulations, I hope you're proud.
A lot of the "new generation" of cars will have small turbocharged engines with direct injection and variable valve timing. Most will develop over 200Nm torque from below 2000rpm, not peaky at all. In fact, a lot of these cars with these engines are already on the road and have proven themselves both reliable and fuel efficient, as long as the owners actually drive them properly.
My car is decidedly old-tech in comparison, with a 2.2L naturally-aspirated 4-cylinder, rated at 8.8L/100km (27.7mpg). I average 9.0L/100km (26.1mpg) in mostly city and motorway driving, with ~160,000km on the odometer. I drive normally, stick to the speed limit or 5-10 over depending on the situation, and try to look ahead and anticipate traffic. It really isn't that hard to get very close to the ideal fuel consumption figures, you just have to relearn how to drive instead of going full-throttle/full-brake all the time.
Most motorcycles are perfectly fine on E5/E10, certainly those with EFI (expanding plastic fuel tanks notwithstanding), and a lot of carbed bikes are fine as well. Even if there is a slight compatibility issue, hoses are generally very accessible and user-replaceable on most bikes, and even rejetting carbs is relatively easy and a one-time job.
To be fair, most motorcycle enthusiasts are also raging idiots, and a large proportion of those are simpleminded luddites who steadfastly stick to severely outdated technology, delusionally claiming it's somehow "better" than any even remotely modern. Carburetors have no place on any vehicle made since the 1980s.
My 1996 Bandit 600 had a rack of 4 carbs, which was a pain in the ass whenever they needed synchronizing. I never had any trouble running it on E5/E10, though. However, I certainly don't miss fiddling with the petcock, balancing the choke on cold starts and all the other little idiosyncrasies of carbed vehicles. Now I ride a 2008 Yamaha XT660 with EFI, and life is so much easier and worry-free.
P.S.=> You spoke of how I conduct myself? Heh - I use facts that you dorks can't overcome, & your results? See above - reduced to LIBELING me like worms you all are (and you KNOW it, worm)... apk
I think this pretty much speaks for itself.
Weird and inconsistent use of punctuation (comma followed by ampersand, really?), excessive use of ellipsis, random ALL-CAPS and bold text, defending arguments with spurious insults, obsessively cataloguing perceived slights and list of enemies, and so on and so forth.
These are all hallmarks of a crazed conspiracy theorist or a person with severe mental instability, or both, which is often the case.
I don't know how you got the idea that I'm a mmell sock puppet. Look at our user IDs, my account is significnatly older than mmell's. Besides that, I don't care much for his aggressive tone, but at least he manages to communicate in writing without coming off as a rambling paranoid delusional conspiracy nut case.
Seek help. You seem to desperately need it. Seek help now.
APK, you're insane. Your crazy incoherent ramblings and random use of bold and capital letters are not helping your cause.
You sound like a cross between the Unabomber and a 9/11 Truther. Even if your software does what it claims to do, I would not trust it, simply on the basis of how you conduct yourself in discussions online.
Wolfenstein 2009 is a much much better singleplayer game than RTCW, especially with the Retrostein mod, which reduces the consolitis and ups the challenge a bit.
Syndicate the FPS was a decent enough game, but it didn't have much of anything to do with the old Bullfrog Syndicate games, so the neckbeards got all huffy and started whining. Had it had a generic cyberpunk setting, they would have gobbled it up and loved it.
For going 120kph in an 80kph zone while overtaking on a double white line (same as double yellow in the US), I got a fine for ~$920 and a suspended license. Then I had to retake both the practical and written tests, which cost me another ~$550 and a significant chunk of my spare time. If I commit a similar offense within three years of retaking my license, I will be banned from driving for at least 3 years, after which I will have to retake the tests again.
Had I been going 128kph or more, I would have lost my license outright and been banned from driving for at least 3 years, plus the accumulated points due to said offenses would be carried over to my new license. Every major offense is 1 point and we only get 3, so it is very likely that I would have been banned from driving for 6 years or more.
At the Edinburgh airport, I noticed the security cameras had a spinning ring of white LEDs around the lens. It was basically impossible not to look directly at them.
There is a better substitute, measure body fat percentage instead of height in relation to weight. It's easy enough to measure using a set of plastic calipers, or a DXA scan if you want super-precise results.
It is a much better predictor of health than BMI, because it actually measures body composition. BMI fails in many cases because it assumes everyone has a perfectly average body composition, when in fact the metric we're really interested in, body fat percentage, is readily measurable using a simple $2 tool that is readily available from every single health- or fitness-related store in existence. It takes a couple of minutes to do the measurement compared to plugging a couple of numbers into an overly-simplistic formula, but the results are better and more usable.
I'm 28, if that matters. Using the calculation you linked, I got 28.04%. This may actually be correct, it's been a while since I had my body fat % measured accurately. But keep in mind that this calculation does not take fitness level, muscle mass or any other factor other than geometry, age and sex into account. At best, it is a tool for estimating the average body fat percentage of a group of people.
Allow me rephrase my complaint. BMI is a reasonable statistical tool used for estimating incidences of overweight in groups of people based on pure geometry, but it should not be used as a metric for estimating health in individuals, at least not without a number of other, more accurate measurements. It can give a ballpark figure, but that's all.
Whenever health or overweight is discussed, BMI is brought up as the ultimate metric of health, as if you can't be healthy outside of the 18-25 BMI envelope. Everyone with a BMI of 30 or above is classified as "obese", for which I'll quote the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article:
Obesity is a medical condition in which excess body fat has accumulated to the extent that it may have a negative effect on health, leading to reduced life expectancy and/or increased health problems. People are considered obese when their body mass index (BMI), a measurement obtained by dividing a person's weight by the square of the person's height, exceeds 30 kg/m^2.
Now, if you knew me, you would know that I'm well aware that I am overweight (and working to change that), but I sure as hell am not obese, not even close. But someone looking at my papers would probably think so, based on simple geometry.
Health is much too complicated to be defined in such a simple way.
I agree, BMI is a horrible metric. It would be much more meaningful to use body fat percentage to evaluate if someone is overweight.
And even then, it doesn't always hold up for individuals. My BMI is ~31.5, my body fat is right around 30%, but I'm in extremely good health, good cholesterol numbers, no diseases, good blood pressure, stable blood sugar levels, no diabetes, all of those things. But I lift weights and I'm not into the cut and striated bodybuilder thing. Sure, I'd love to lose some fat, but not at the cost of my current good health.
The key difference is that with a car, you generally slip the clutch for less than a second, where on a bike, you sometimes slip it for much longer than that, depending on the situation. You also don't slip the clutch on a car through corners so you can avoid downshifting. At least, I've never heard of anyone competent doing it;-)
Plus, clutching by hand is a lot more precise and offers much more finesse than a foot clutch.
You can't just ride a bike like you drive a car. Some bikes in particular really require you to have good clutch control to ride them well, such as big singles or other vibey engines. The large moving mass of that big piston will not be smooth when trying to run at low RPM, you need to finesse the smoothness into the drivetrain with your left hand. Mastering the clutch is key to riding a bike well, I'm sure you use it a lot more than you consciously give yourself credit for.
There are various reasons for slipping the clutch, one of them is that sport bikes in particular tend to be really high-strung, with basically no power below 3000 RPM if it's a 600cc inline-4. So you slip the clutch when setting off, to counter the low power at low RPM. This also goes for pretty much any small displacement (250cc) engine, no matter the configuration.
On the other hand, you have engines such as singles and V-twins and inline twins. They tend to have more torque at low revs, but lower redlines. So first gear is usually relatively tall to offset this, and you slip the clutch a bit when setting off, to counter the taller gearing. It depends a lot on the bike of course, my Yamaha XT has a pretty short first gear, despite having a single-cylinder engine.
Slipping the clutch for low-speed turns can smooth out the power delivery and let you run at slightly higher RPM that you normally would in a given gear, allowing you to complete your turn in second gear instead of first, giving you a smoother corner exit.
In general, the clutch on a bike is mainly used for low-speed control. Once you get going, in theory you don't even need the clutch anymore, since you can change gear by preloading the selector and briefly cutting the gas, a benefit of a true sequential gearbox.
Another further benefit for more modern bikes is that slipping the clutch slightly can help offset the "snatchy" nature of most EFI systems when coming off and on the throttle. People tend to not notice it in their cars, because the weight of the car smooths it out (and conventional automatic gearboxes pretty much eliminate it completely), but even heavy bikes weigh less than 250kg. When you have that little weight and a snatchy throttle, it can upset the bike if for instance you need to back off the throttle in a turn. Slipping the clutch smooths it out, giving a more stable ride. The latest EFI systems are much better, thankfully.
For parking lot maneuvers and such, good clutch control is essential. You cannot coast with the clutch in like you can in a car, dynamically a bike is completely different and relies on forward movement to stay upright. Slipping the clutch allows you to have forward motion at much lower speeds than you normally would be able to. And since most bikes have wet clutches, you can slip them almost indefinitely without causing undue wear.
True sequential gearboxes cannot skip gears, because they're usually implemented as a specially-designed cam applied to a normal type of manual gearbox.
But dual-clutch gearboxes can indeed skip gears, for instance when downshifting during kick-down. However, I don't think you can skip gears when shifting manually using the paddles, apart from software tricks like automatically shifting to the best available gear if you hold the downshift paddle for more than a second.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm using a 500GB 840 EVO as my main drive in my system. I've moved stuff like /var to a separate hard drive (because of log files and constant tiny read/writes that aren't speed-sensitive), and I do all compiles on a RAM disk, I've upgraded to 16GB to avoid swapping.
Based on reviews etc., I fully expect the 840 EVO to outlast every other component in my PC.
There is nothing inherently wrong with pods, it all comes down to the quality and freshness of coffee in the pods.
I have had extremely good results using an Aeropress and good-quality beans that I grind myself. When done right, it makes coffee that has no bitterness at all, even if allowed to cool to room temperature.
Coffee that tastes as good as it smells is something everyone should try at least once in their lives.
The cruise control on the current S-class will automatically slow down to the same speed as the car in front of it, including stopping completely if necessary. It will also auto-correct the steering to keep the car within the lines. It's currently limited to just a few degrees of correction, and you have to touch the steering wheel, you can't just let go and let it steer itself for more than a few seconds. It's probably the closest thing to a commercially available self-driving car at the moment.
As long as they avoid fresh cheeses and stick to the aged ones, even lactose intolerant people can eat delicious cheese. Besides, the aged stuff tastes better, especially over bacon fat on whole-grain sourdough rye bread with a dab of dijon or hot mustard. Seriously good eatin'.
We're talking a few degrees of negative camber, not massive "stanced" or "slammed" or "demon camber" or whicher idiotic thing mouthbreathers do to their cars these days.
A little bit of negative rear camber significantly aids cornering stability. Too much hurts straight line stability, but a bit of additional toe-in can mitigate this. Too little will hurt corner stability. For a street-driven car where tire wear is also a concern, a couple of degrees is ideal.
A lawsuit does not magically make whatever it alleges true. It just means a lawyer managed to convince a judge to rule in his/his clients' favor.
Oddly enough, the Civic and Fit/Jazz are very popular vehicles here, yet no one has raised a stink about anything suspension-related. Funny that.
Cupping has nothing to do with camber or toe, it happens because of bad damping and is a completely unrelated issue.
Regarding the rear tire wear, perhaps you should try a different make and model of tire, or you could try driving less aggressively or less over-loaded. 15000 miles is perfectly normal for a tire with sporting pretensions.
Also set up wrong by the manufacturer. The 2007 honda civic has a highway MPG rating of 40mpg. I regularly get 44-46 while speeding after I fixed their design flaw in the rear end. they set the car with significant negative rear camber and with about 2 degrees of toe, I reset it to zero and zero and not only did fuel mileage numbers skyrocket by 10-15% but rear tire wear dropped to zero or undetectable. From what I can tell they STILL sell civics with this flaw, and the Honda Fit as well suffers from it.
That's not a flaw, it's a deliberate design to improve stability and handling, especially during mid-corner corrections and emergency maneuvers. The slight toe-in also helps straight line stability.
My car (Peugeot 406) is setup like that as well, it has enough negative rear camber that it is immediately noticeable when looking at the car. If you try to "correct" this by dialing out the camber, the car will be less stable over mid-corner bumps, and the small amount of passive rear steering built in the rear suspension will be negated, further worsening the handling.
What you have done is make your car go from being relatively neutral in corners, to having positive camber when the suspension is loaded up. If you've ever read "Unsafe at any speed" or seen an old VW Beetle corner hard, you will know that having positive camber is one of the most dangerous situations you can be in. So you've actually made your car significantly less safe, all for the sake of a few MPG. Congratulations, I hope you're proud.
A lot of the "new generation" of cars will have small turbocharged engines with direct injection and variable valve timing. Most will develop over 200Nm torque from below 2000rpm, not peaky at all. In fact, a lot of these cars with these engines are already on the road and have proven themselves both reliable and fuel efficient, as long as the owners actually drive them properly.
My car is decidedly old-tech in comparison, with a 2.2L naturally-aspirated 4-cylinder, rated at 8.8L/100km (27.7mpg). I average 9.0L/100km (26.1mpg) in mostly city and motorway driving, with ~160,000km on the odometer. I drive normally, stick to the speed limit or 5-10 over depending on the situation, and try to look ahead and anticipate traffic. It really isn't that hard to get very close to the ideal fuel consumption figures, you just have to relearn how to drive instead of going full-throttle/full-brake all the time.
Most motorcycles are perfectly fine on E5/E10, certainly those with EFI (expanding plastic fuel tanks notwithstanding), and a lot of carbed bikes are fine as well. Even if there is a slight compatibility issue, hoses are generally very accessible and user-replaceable on most bikes, and even rejetting carbs is relatively easy and a one-time job.
To be fair, most motorcycle enthusiasts are also raging idiots, and a large proportion of those are simpleminded luddites who steadfastly stick to severely outdated technology, delusionally claiming it's somehow "better" than any even remotely modern. Carburetors have no place on any vehicle made since the 1980s.
My 1996 Bandit 600 had a rack of 4 carbs, which was a pain in the ass whenever they needed synchronizing. I never had any trouble running it on E5/E10, though. However, I certainly don't miss fiddling with the petcock, balancing the choke on cold starts and all the other little idiosyncrasies of carbed vehicles. Now I ride a 2008 Yamaha XT660 with EFI, and life is so much easier and worry-free.
P.S.=> You spoke of how I conduct myself? Heh - I use facts that you dorks can't overcome, & your results? See above - reduced to LIBELING me like worms you all are (and you KNOW it, worm)... apk
I think this pretty much speaks for itself.
Weird and inconsistent use of punctuation (comma followed by ampersand, really?), excessive use of ellipsis, random ALL-CAPS and bold text, defending arguments with spurious insults, obsessively cataloguing perceived slights and list of enemies, and so on and so forth.
These are all hallmarks of a crazed conspiracy theorist or a person with severe mental instability, or both, which is often the case.
I don't know how you got the idea that I'm a mmell sock puppet. Look at our user IDs, my account is significnatly older than mmell's. Besides that, I don't care much for his aggressive tone, but at least he manages to communicate in writing without coming off as a rambling paranoid delusional conspiracy nut case.
Seek help. You seem to desperately need it. Seek help now.
APK, you're insane. Your crazy incoherent ramblings and random use of bold and capital letters are not helping your cause.
You sound like a cross between the Unabomber and a 9/11 Truther. Even if your software does what it claims to do, I would not trust it, simply on the basis of how you conduct yourself in discussions online.
Wolfenstein 2009 is a much much better singleplayer game than RTCW, especially with the Retrostein mod, which reduces the consolitis and ups the challenge a bit.
Syndicate the FPS was a decent enough game, but it didn't have much of anything to do with the old Bullfrog Syndicate games, so the neckbeards got all huffy and started whining. Had it had a generic cyberpunk setting, they would have gobbled it up and loved it.
Both before and after, but they must have installed at least twice as many when I got back from the tour.
For going 120kph in an 80kph zone while overtaking on a double white line (same as double yellow in the US), I got a fine for ~$920 and a suspended license. Then I had to retake both the practical and written tests, which cost me another ~$550 and a significant chunk of my spare time. If I commit a similar offense within three years of retaking my license, I will be banned from driving for at least 3 years, after which I will have to retake the tests again.
Had I been going 128kph or more, I would have lost my license outright and been banned from driving for at least 3 years, plus the accumulated points due to said offenses would be carried over to my new license. Every major offense is 1 point and we only get 3, so it is very likely that I would have been banned from driving for 6 years or more.
Don't drive or ride like dumbasses, kids.
At the Edinburgh airport, I noticed the security cameras had a spinning ring of white LEDs around the lens. It was basically impossible not to look directly at them.
There is a better substitute, measure body fat percentage instead of height in relation to weight. It's easy enough to measure using a set of plastic calipers, or a DXA scan if you want super-precise results.
It is a much better predictor of health than BMI, because it actually measures body composition. BMI fails in many cases because it assumes everyone has a perfectly average body composition, when in fact the metric we're really interested in, body fat percentage, is readily measurable using a simple $2 tool that is readily available from every single health- or fitness-related store in existence. It takes a couple of minutes to do the measurement compared to plugging a couple of numbers into an overly-simplistic formula, but the results are better and more usable.
I'm 28, if that matters. Using the calculation you linked, I got 28.04%. This may actually be correct, it's been a while since I had my body fat % measured accurately. But keep in mind that this calculation does not take fitness level, muscle mass or any other factor other than geometry, age and sex into account. At best, it is a tool for estimating the average body fat percentage of a group of people.
Allow me rephrase my complaint. BMI is a reasonable statistical tool used for estimating incidences of overweight in groups of people based on pure geometry, but it should not be used as a metric for estimating health in individuals, at least not without a number of other, more accurate measurements. It can give a ballpark figure, but that's all.
Whenever health or overweight is discussed, BMI is brought up as the ultimate metric of health, as if you can't be healthy outside of the 18-25 BMI envelope. Everyone with a BMI of 30 or above is classified as "obese", for which I'll quote the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article:
Obesity is a medical condition in which excess body fat has accumulated to the extent that it may have a negative effect on health, leading to reduced life expectancy and/or increased health problems. People are considered obese when their body mass index (BMI), a measurement obtained by dividing a person's weight by the square of the person's height, exceeds 30 kg/m^2.
Now, if you knew me, you would know that I'm well aware that I am overweight (and working to change that), but I sure as hell am not obese, not even close. But someone looking at my papers would probably think so, based on simple geometry.
Health is much too complicated to be defined in such a simple way.
I agree, BMI is a horrible metric. It would be much more meaningful to use body fat percentage to evaluate if someone is overweight.
And even then, it doesn't always hold up for individuals. My BMI is ~31.5, my body fat is right around 30%, but I'm in extremely good health, good cholesterol numbers, no diseases, good blood pressure, stable blood sugar levels, no diabetes, all of those things. But I lift weights and I'm not into the cut and striated bodybuilder thing. Sure, I'd love to lose some fat, but not at the cost of my current good health.
The key difference is that with a car, you generally slip the clutch for less than a second, where on a bike, you sometimes slip it for much longer than that, depending on the situation. You also don't slip the clutch on a car through corners so you can avoid downshifting. At least, I've never heard of anyone competent doing it ;-)
Plus, clutching by hand is a lot more precise and offers much more finesse than a foot clutch.
You can't just ride a bike like you drive a car. Some bikes in particular really require you to have good clutch control to ride them well, such as big singles or other vibey engines. The large moving mass of that big piston will not be smooth when trying to run at low RPM, you need to finesse the smoothness into the drivetrain with your left hand. Mastering the clutch is key to riding a bike well, I'm sure you use it a lot more than you consciously give yourself credit for.
There are various reasons for slipping the clutch, one of them is that sport bikes in particular tend to be really high-strung, with basically no power below 3000 RPM if it's a 600cc inline-4. So you slip the clutch when setting off, to counter the low power at low RPM. This also goes for pretty much any small displacement (250cc) engine, no matter the configuration.
On the other hand, you have engines such as singles and V-twins and inline twins. They tend to have more torque at low revs, but lower redlines. So first gear is usually relatively tall to offset this, and you slip the clutch a bit when setting off, to counter the taller gearing. It depends a lot on the bike of course, my Yamaha XT has a pretty short first gear, despite having a single-cylinder engine.
Slipping the clutch for low-speed turns can smooth out the power delivery and let you run at slightly higher RPM that you normally would in a given gear, allowing you to complete your turn in second gear instead of first, giving you a smoother corner exit.
In general, the clutch on a bike is mainly used for low-speed control. Once you get going, in theory you don't even need the clutch anymore, since you can change gear by preloading the selector and briefly cutting the gas, a benefit of a true sequential gearbox.
Another further benefit for more modern bikes is that slipping the clutch slightly can help offset the "snatchy" nature of most EFI systems when coming off and on the throttle. People tend to not notice it in their cars, because the weight of the car smooths it out (and conventional automatic gearboxes pretty much eliminate it completely), but even heavy bikes weigh less than 250kg. When you have that little weight and a snatchy throttle, it can upset the bike if for instance you need to back off the throttle in a turn. Slipping the clutch smooths it out, giving a more stable ride. The latest EFI systems are much better, thankfully.
For parking lot maneuvers and such, good clutch control is essential. You cannot coast with the clutch in like you can in a car, dynamically a bike is completely different and relies on forward movement to stay upright. Slipping the clutch allows you to have forward motion at much lower speeds than you normally would be able to. And since most bikes have wet clutches, you can slip them almost indefinitely without causing undue wear.
True sequential gearboxes cannot skip gears, because they're usually implemented as a specially-designed cam applied to a normal type of manual gearbox.
But dual-clutch gearboxes can indeed skip gears, for instance when downshifting during kick-down. However, I don't think you can skip gears when shifting manually using the paddles, apart from software tricks like automatically shifting to the best available gear if you hold the downshift paddle for more than a second.