Buying a used vehicle. Manual transmission vs. automatic.

[mellondust]

I need to buy a used vehicle, probably a car. I will end up getting something with probably 75,000 miles or more as that is what I can currently afford. I am thinking a 97 - 01 Toyota, Honda, or Nissan around the camry class of those three. I have had all imported cars before that were manual transmissions and all have lasted over 225,000 miles. Some I have had to replace the clutch but not much else drivetrain wise. My wife wants something easy to drive but with a used car I am thinking manual is the way to go. It hasn't failed me in the past but I don't know much about the reliability of newer auto transmissions. Anyone with experience out there? My buget will probably be around $6,000-9,000 depending on how good a deal I can get. I could be wrong but my current belief is that domestic cars seem to have more automatic transmission problems after 100,000 miles.

 

[theeedude]

Honda, Nissan -> Manual
Toyota -> Auto

 

[zanieladie]

Probably an automatic. At least that way you won't have to replace the clutch!

Of course, I am no where near being an auto expert. That's just my opinion. I've had both.

 

[theeedude]

I recommend 2000-2001 Nissan Maxima w/ Manual.

 

[kmrivers]

Manual FTW!

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: zanieladie
Probably an automatic. At least that way you won't have to replace the clutch!

Of course, I am no where near being an auto expert. That's just my opinion. I've had both.

Clutch job is cheaper than a rebuild on a slushbox.

 

[daveshel]

Manual transmission saves gas and puts the driver in closer communication with the road. Lazy people pay the oil companies to shift their gears.

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Keep in mind that depending on the situation either one might come out ahead depending on how the driver treated the transmission

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: daveshel
Manual transmission saves gas and puts the driver in closer communication with the road. Lazy people pay the oil companies to shift their gears.

That's plain ignorance. The fuel savings between auto and manual transmissions is almost non-existant these days. Its all about your driving habits...not the transmission you have.

 

[Kalvin00]

Originally posted by: zanieladie
Probably an automatic. At least that way you won't have to replace the clutch!

Of course not--you get to spend more than a grand on a new tranny!

 

[Reckoner]

Manual's not all it's cracked up to be, at least as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Turkish]

The question to ask is: are you going to keep this car for long or no? If yes, manual is ok, but if you are going to sell it in a few years, well, selling it will be harder... and will bring back less $$$.

 

[Kalvin00]

Also, matters where you live. I really don't think I would get a manual if I did lots of city driving, particularly in a city like San Francisco..haha.

More country driving? Go with manual.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: Kalvin00
Also, matters where you live. I really don't think I would get a manual if I did lots of city driving, particularly in a city like San Francisco..haha.

More country driving? Go with manual.

Yeah, manual in San Fran isn't fun. I spun my tires quite a bit on a rainy day once (obviously before I had a Subaru).

There's always the hill-holder clutch

 

[Reckoner]

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: Kalvin00
Also, matters where you live. I really don't think I would get a manual if I did lots of city driving, particularly in a city like San Francisco..haha.

More country driving? Go with manual.

Yeah, manual in San Fran isn't fun. I spun my tires quite a bit on a rainy day once (obviously before I had a Subaru).

There's always the hill-holder clutch

Why did subaru ever stop that anyways? It was a neat idea, and it sure would make manual driving a lot more enjoyable.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: PaulNEPats

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: Kalvin00
Also, matters where you live. I really don't think I would get a manual if I did lots of city driving, particularly in a city like San Francisco..haha.

More country driving? Go with manual.

Yeah, manual in San Fran isn't fun. I spun my tires quite a bit on a rainy day once (obviously before I had a Subaru).

There's always the hill-holder clutch

Why did subaru ever stop that anyways? It was a neat idea, and it sure would make manual driving a lot more enjoyable.

You can still get it on the Forester

 

[xrax]

clutch isn't the only thing that can go wrong with a standard transmission. There is some sort of torque converter (Synchromesh ) so you don't have to double clutch. You can shift without the clutch if you match RPM's. Some people don't maintain their cars per the manufacturer. You are supposed to change out the transmission fluid every 20-30 K miles depending on manufacturer and climate.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: xrax
clutch isn't the only thing that can go wrong with a standard transmission. There is some sort of torque converter (Synchromesh ) so you don't have to double clutch. You can shift without the clutch if you match RPM's. Some people don't maintain their cars per the manufacturer. You are supposed to change out the transmission fluid every 20-30 K miles depending on manufacturer and climate.

Good facts chief.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: daveshel
Manual transmission saves gas and puts the driver in closer communication with the road. Lazy people pay the oil companies to shift their gears.

That's plain ignorance. The fuel savings between auto and manual transmissions is almost non-existant these days. Its all about your driving habits...not the transmission you have.

Now how in the world that that ignorance thing happen? I plainly ignored what? The transmission that sees the road ahead and thus considers not only what to do now but also knows what I'm going to do next? The one that has more control over my driving habits than I can exert on my own?

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: daveshel
Manual transmission saves gas and puts the driver in closer communication with the road. Lazy people pay the oil companies to shift their gears.

That's plain ignorance. The fuel savings between auto and manual transmissions is almost non-existant these days. Its all about your driving habits...not the transmission you have.

Now how in the world that that ignorance thing happen? I plainly ignored what? The transmission that sees the road ahead and thus considers not only what to do now but also knows what I'm going to do next? The one that has more control over my driving habits than I can exert on my own?

Seriously, most cars will get very similar mileage, auto vs. manual. Auto trannys are just much smarter than they used to be.

 

[MazerRackham]

I could care less if an automatic gets the same (or even better) gas mileage than a manual.

I will NEVER own a car with an automatic transmission. At least not until I turn 70 (I am 32 now).

I would consider a true SMG transmission (ala M3, M5, M6), but I wouldn't like it over a regular manual.

 

[PaducahPhil]

Well this is a familiar issue to me:
I have only owned Japanese cars the last 12 or 15 years; I have owned Hondas with manual and automatics, 4 or 5 in all.
Something to consider here is having a reliable mechanic specifically check out the clutch/trans BEFORE you buy.
A clutch rebuild here in the Bay area could run $800 or more, although I've had it done for less with mixed results: I got 185K out of the factory clutch with no issues and started having problems with the replacement clutch after 45K in the same driving conditions, and yeah if you do the math I got 225K out of that car
As to living with a manual versus an automatic on a day to day basis, I really enjoyed the added control over acceleration I had with a manual but don't think I'd want to go back to the hassles of shifting

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: PaducahPhil
Well this is a familiar issue to me:
I have only owned Japanese cars the last 12 or 15 years; I have owned Hondas with manual and automatics, 4 or 5 in all.
Something to consider here is having a reliable mechanic specifically check out the clutch/trans BEFORE you buy.
A clutch rebuild here in the Bay area could run $800 or more, although I've had it done for less with mixed results: I got 185K out of the factory clutch with no issues and started having problems with the replacement clutch after 45K in the same driving conditions, and yeah if you do the math I got 225K out of that car
As to living with a manual versus an automatic on a day to day basis, I really enjoyed the added control over acceleration I had with a manual but don't think I'd want to go back to the hassles of shifting

A clutch rebuild for $800 or more? Why not just replace the whole clutch?

 

[Reckoner]

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: PaulNEPats

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: Kalvin00
Also, matters where you live. I really don't think I would get a manual if I did lots of city driving, particularly in a city like San Francisco..haha.

More country driving? Go with manual.

Yeah, manual in San Fran isn't fun. I spun my tires quite a bit on a rainy day once (obviously before I had a Subaru).

There's always the hill-holder clutch

Why did subaru ever stop that anyways? It was a neat idea, and it sure would make manual driving a lot more enjoyable.

You can still get it on the Forester

Nah they discontinued it.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: daveshel
Manual transmission saves gas and puts the driver in closer communication with the road. Lazy people pay the oil companies to shift their gears.

That's plain ignorance. The fuel savings between auto and manual transmissions is almost non-existant these days. Its all about your driving habits...not the transmission you have.

Now how in the world that that ignorance thing happen? I plainly ignored what? The transmission that sees the road ahead and thus considers not only what to do now but also knows what I'm going to do next? The one that has more control over my driving habits than I can exert on my own?

Seriously, most cars will get very similar mileage, auto vs. manual. Auto trannys are just much smarter than they used to be.

Over the last few years, the difference seems to have shrunk. I'm sure the advances in engineering have supported this to some degree, but I think there has also been a move on the part of the car companies to de-emphasize the difference. After all, it is in their best interest to promote their more expensive product. And we have heard lately that the EPA ratings are flawed and don't really reflect the way we drive. I'm thinking if they did they would reflect a greater difference between manual and automatic: driving manual gives you the control that is the foundation of efficient driving habits.