• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Automatic or Manual Transmissons. I know how you all hate autos but..

T

Tommy2000GT

Golden Member
if you had to get a new Accord, would you get it in automatic V6 or a manual even if it only comes in 4 cylinders?

I know autos are faster. On the other hand, I heard that a Porsche 996 Tiptronic(auto) accelerates faster than a 996 manual (0-60 in 3.6s vs 3.9s respectively). For those who don't know what a 996 is, it is a '01 911 Turbo. Anyone know of any other cars that are faster in an automatic form than manual with similar engines?

EDIT: I said "I know autos are faster" but I meant "I know manuals are faster", sorry
 
I don't know how anybody can stand screwing around with a manual these days. I used to have a '66 GTO with a 4spd hooked to a hulking 400ci V8. You could actually feel each cylinder fire through the Hurst shifter. The shifter would twist with the torque of the engine. It was nice just to hold on to it and "feel" the engine purrrrr...

How that feeling is replicated in a FWD car is beyond me. I used to take off from a stop in first gear up to 35mph and then just drop it into fourth. Not sure you can do that with an Accord. Shifting is generally a bother. Hard to eat and drink while driving when ya gotta shift so much.
 
I know some similarly modded cars who will have the auto beat out the stick on teh drag strip, due to faster shifting, it can spool up the turbo before launch, etc.
 
<< Hard to eat and drink while driving when ya gotta shift so much. >>

Ornery, you shouldn't drink and drive in the first place. 😉

I vote for automatic transmissions. The relief from the burden of shifting is worth more to me than any added feeling of &quot;control&quot; a stick provides.
 


<< if you had to get a new Accord, would you get it in automatic V6 or a manual even if it only comes in I4? >>




I´d take the automtatic because I´m a lazy bastard, but your decision should also depend on what you want to do with the car...how often are you going to drive, where will you drive (driving in an city with an manual can be a pain in the ass!), do you really have to have the best acceleration possible....
If you would give us a little bit of info we could help you more easily. 🙂
 
About the only person I know that can consistantly outperform an automatic with a stick is dad. Of course he doesn't do it often since it's really tough on everything mechancial. On one test drive he pulled off stuff he would never have done had he owned it. The ride was very harsh and loud but we did go fast. 🙂

There is also the manumatic which gives you a good portion of the control a manual offer while being an automatic. IMHO the best benefit of a muanual is that its more economical because of inital cost and fuel savings (then comes a clutch change).

Windogg
 
I used to hate automatics, no fun at all. But since I live in San Francisco (constant traffic + mucho hills = no fun regardless of the car) my mind is starting to change. 😛

I'd probably get the V6 just because of the engine. An Accord isn't any sports car anyways. Too bad the V6 Accord doesn't have at least sportshift like the Prelude or CL-S.
 
The only two cars I've ever owned have been sticks, but with that said, I'd get the automatic if I was you. Automatics are great for sports cars, but the Accord isn't a sports car. My next car will be an auto because I'm just tired of driving a stick in Bay Area traffic, plus my next car won't be sporty, it will be more luxury.
 
Most automatics aren't like manuals in the sense that there are no gears that physically connect the transmission to the engine and are slower because of it, correct? Are Tiptronics and Manumatics more like manuals with a direct gear connection?
 
I used to say I'd never drive an automatic, then I bought an Eagle Talon AWD TSI. It's very fast, but I desperatly wish it was a manual. If you are going to be doing any cornering, or racing in it, you will want a manual too. The problem I see is mostly when trying to accellerate out of corners and the dang automatic takes 2 seconds to think about what gear it wants to be in, which means I don't get my power until I'm all the way out of the corner. A decent manual driver can kick the pants off an automatic of similar power any day.
 
If you live in a nice secluded, low population area, and enjoy driving for it's own sake, maybe a manual might be good. But I think autos are more well rounded, they might be incrementally slower, but man, it's such a pain in the ass to have to keep working the gears, especially in traffic. Why bother doing something yourself when a machine can do it just as well?
 


<< Are Tiptronics and Manumatics more like manuals with a direct gear connection? >>



As I recall, tranmissions of those type are really wannabe manuals, because they still have torque converters instead of clutches.

 
I have the new prelude, which has the sportshift and it is basically an automatic most of the time except when you move the shifter over to the left. Than it is still an automatic except that you control the shift points and it automatically downshifts to first if you go below 6 mph. Like at a stoplight. I hate the transmission in the prelude for doing any type of agressive driving. It loves to get in forth gear and stay there. BTW the VTEC loves the 5-7000 range you can feel the power in that range 🙂
 
If two cars are about the same performance wise, with one having a stick, one with an auto, the auto will own the stick if the driver w/ the stick makes one mistake. And seeing as how most people do not truly know how to drive a stick to get the most out of the car, you're better off getting the auto.
 
I'm impressed, not one wannabe car nut has stepped into this thread yet proclaiming that automatic sucks and anybody who drives one is a weenie.

Unless you're going to race (in an Accord? 😛) get the automatic.
 
The 4 door V6 Accord's acceleration times were almost as good as a 6 cylinder Camaro/Mustang. Laugh all you want, and yes, V6's don't belong in Camaros/Mustangs, but with a little work they can hang with their V8 counterparts. Although I'd take a V8 anyday over a 6 banger - start fast and work your way up from there.
 


<< not one wannabe car nut has stepped into this thread >>



here I am! your loyal wannabe car nut. 😛



<< On the other hand, I heard that a Porsche 996 Tiptronic(auto) accelerates faster than a 996 manual (0-60 in 3.6s vs 3.9s respectively). >>


That is impossible. If it was possible, BMW and Ferrari wouldn't bother creating their hydraulic actuated shifter.
 
Automatics are faster with turbocharged engines for one reason: The engine is not throttled back between shifts and it allows the turbos to remain spooled up. (For those who don't know, turbos are driven by the exhaust gases, and the faster the engine spins the more turbo boost, and consequently power, you have.) In any normally aspirated engine a torque converter type automatic will be slower than the manual version. Also note that there is generally at least a 5mpg fuel economy increase with a manual because of the inefficiencies of a torque converter. In the case of the Accord, I'd go with the EX V6 even though I HATE slushboxes (automatic trannies) because the increased power of the six will more than make up for any losses in the torque converter. Honda history also tells us that the EX V6 will have more sport-tuned suspension (still no Prelude, but it can keep up with a 3-Series if worked hard) and the option of larger wheels and wider tires. Well, actually I'd get the I-4 Accord and retrofit it with the EX suspension, as all the hardpoint would be the same, but that comes from the same person who is waiting for the slushbox in his 1988 Accord LXi to die so he can put a 5-speed in to replace it. 🙂 Unless you plan to really hustle the car along the road, get the V6 with the slushbox, for the average driver the extra control of a manual is not a great benefit. BTW the Accord is a terrific automobile, mine is over 12 years old, has 191+ thousand miles, runs like a top, still pulls hard to redline, and doesn't eat a drop of oil.

Aaron Meyer

EDIT: DataFly: Automatics use what is called a torque converter to connect to the engine. The engine drives a pump which circulates fluid in the torque converter, which in turn drives and impellor that drives the transmission which has actual gears. However, since the transmission is driven by fluid pressure on an impellor and at idle there is very low fluid pressure, the car can be stopped &quot;in gear&quot; since the fluid can move without the impellor having to. The Tiptronic transmission still uses a torque converter, it is only faster on the turbo version because the engine does not lose RPM between shifts.
 
Genocide- it's a '92 with 50,000 miles... did I mention it's a turbo?? 😀

I still think that a manual will accellerate faster, the auto takes too long to get around to shifting. But I have nothing but my own experiance to back up this opinion so I'll shut up... 🙂
 
Two things:

1.


<< (still no Prelude, but it can keep up with a 3-Series if worked hard) >>

Hmm... I don't think so. The type R is as competitive as the 3 series in touring car racing. I don't think the heavy accord is up to that level yet. Assumming you're referring to the new 3 series. Again, please forgive me, cause I'm a BMW freak. 😛

2.
That's one hell of a laptop you have coming. $5000 or something? Damn.
 
I remember a friend got one of the first Acura Integra Type Rs back in 1997. He wasn't bad with a stick but he wasn't perfect either. One night we took the cars out to a little used road to see who could win in a 1/4 mile sprint. To my surprise and his chagrin my 1995 Grand Cherokee Limited V8 beat him. That was the moment that reinforced my belief that 90% of the drivers out there cannot get anywhere close to the acceleration numbers put out by professional auto magazine writers. I was told he spun the tires off the line and part way through the run the car seemed to have hopped a little like he missed a gear. He has since traded in the Type R because the constant shifting in Boston's traffic was rally annoying him.

Windogg
 
Raging: The driver of a manual transmission would need to make several mistakes before he was threatened by a slushbox version of the same car. The problem with slushboxes is twofold, there is a noticable power loss at the toruqe converter, and the slushbox takes too long to decide which gear to be in when accelerating out of a slow corner. Also, manuals are nice because they allow you to slow the car down using the transmission, thus saving the brakes. Before you say that you can just bump you slushbox down into third to slow the car, beware that this can destroy the clutchpacks in your slushbox (I got that warning from my mechanic when I asked him about it). If you are talking about a stoplight drag, and the guy in the manual misses a shift, yes, the slushbox will win. Down a twisty road with many low-speed corners, that missed shift on the straightaway is left behind along with the slushbox-equipped car. That said, very few people drive that way on the street, and that is why slushboxes are so popular. Personally I will never buy a car with a slushbox (my current car was given to me on my 16th birthday, and beggars can't be choosers) unless I suffer a knee injury, but that is preferance, and where I live it is flat with a lot of freeway driving. (And the occasional timed run down the back road following a meandering creek.) 😉

Aaron Meyer

EDIT: Lupin: That bit about keeping up with a 3-Series was taken from a Road &amp; Track comaprison between an Accord EX I-4 and a BMW 318 (previous generation 3-Series). Looking back I wasn't clear, but I meant that the Accord driver has to work harder than the BMW driver for the same level of performance. BMW's are awesome machines, handle like a dream, and drive the proper (read: rear) wheels as God and Henry (Ford) intended. The ThinkPad is actually about $3600 for me. Mainly because I have been waiting for it since July 10. (Started out as a 750 w/ 20GB HDD and an SXGA+ display, that was discontinued and they moved me to the one I'm currently waiting for without a change in price.) Right now I'm really pissed at IBM for taking so long, any ideas on how to get IBM's attention?
 
Windogg,
I think another reason that the TypeR lost was b/c you were in the car. For a 1.8 liter engine, another person sitting in the car could mean 1-2 secs slower 0-60. This is an educated guess though. 🙂


Zenmervolt
Hehe, told you I'm a BMW freak. Anyway, I was thinking of the 6 cylinder 3 series vs. Accord V6. The 4 cylinder is too weak for a 3000 lbs car like the 3 series.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top