I drive a manual transmission. There are only two situations where it is a detriment: (1) stop-and-go traffic; (2) on hills where you have stop on an incline (you'll start rolling backwards, so you'll need to learn to use the handbrake).
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
depends on the gearing of autos. many new ones are 5 geared, some even have regular clutches but double, like the vw? changes gear faster than you could. and even normal slush boxes lock once they reach freeway speed so theres no slippage problem there. its just some people want to feel like boy racers, no prob with that unless they believe theres no advantage than there really is. not much advantage at all these days for normal every day driving. let alone when u are trying to dial your phone..and u know u do it.
How can you compare MPG, feel, speed with 2 different cars, engines and transmissions?
Drive an auto and manual Focus back to back (or Stratus, don't know if those came in manual) and you'll have your question answered.
You couldn't be more wrong.
A car with a weak engine needs all the help it can get, and a manual tranny is definitely better suited in those situations than an auto.
Lighter, less drivetrain loss, usually more gears.
So only enthusiasts drive manuals? :roll:
Did you just learn to drive stick last week and are now a self-proclaimed enthusiast? :roll::roll:
When I was looking for a used BMW to buy I was looking for a manual. I think its a crime to put an automatic in such a nice driving machine. 6 speed manual with a V8 FTW!!!
Auto is better off road, so I don't miss having a manual much. I can still control the highest gear my transmission goes to, except 4th. The OD button locks out 4th and 5th, 2 locks out 3rd, and 1 locks out 2nd. Low range + 1st = good for going downhill on a treacherous mountain trail.
OrganizedChaos
Diamond Member
- Apr 21, 2002
- 4,524
- 0
- 0
secretanchitman
Diamond Member
- Apr 11, 2001
- 9,353
- 23
- 91
at least when ive sat in one, it feels like you are going faster...and you definitely have more control.
Colt45
Lifer
- Apr 18, 2001
- 19,720
- 1
- 0
VW DSG isn't like a traditional automatic.
It's kind of like two manual transmissions, one for odd and one for even gears, with two wet clutches, all in one unit. no planet gears, no torque converter. so it's a fancy ass manual transmission. So you can't really lump it in with a PowerGlide or a Turbo Hydramatic.
soydios
Platinum Member
- Mar 12, 2006
- 2,708
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: jagec
Well, it's a simpler, lighter, more efficient, more reliable system with less drivetrain loss and a lot more driver control over what the car's doing.
That said, you have to be a decent driver to take advantage of everything a manual transmission has to offer, and it can be a bit more of a pain in stop-and-go traffic.
So, for a point A to point B commuter, an automatic is fine for most people. But driving enthusiasts, fuel misers, control freaks, and cheap bastards all prefer manual.
QFT
An excellent summary.
It's not better. They are different - very different at that.
The fun factor is much greater in bumper-to-bumper or slow moving traffic when you have an automatic. When you cruise along, they are just the same - you don't change gears anyway.
Manual shifting gives you better "performance" - you can accelerate faster, use engine braking to slow down and so on - IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
The fun factor is much greater in bumper-to-bumper or slow moving traffic when you have an automatic. When you cruise along, they are just the same - you don't change gears anyway.
Manual shifting gives you better "performance" - you can accelerate faster, use engine braking to slow down and so on - IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
The automatic transmissions made in the 1970-early 1980s had something like three gears. Bad for fuel efficiency, bad for torque to the wheels.
Current automatics have (mostly) 5 gears, which makes them better than manuals (if worked right, like in manual shift mode).
Are automatics better than manuals? Well, formula 1 cars use only automatics (7-gears I think)
yhelothar
Lifer
- Dec 11, 2002
- 18,409
- 39
- 91
Traditional automatics are mostly slow because they shift to neutral everytime you let your foot off the throttle. So when you want to accelerate again, you have to wait for the transmission to shift back into gear.
Tiptronic gearboxes let you choose the gear like in a manual, and doesn't shift to neutral when you let off the throttle. But the system is slow and dodgy. It won't shift when you tell it to shift, and it often shifts for you if you rev too high.
The biggest problem of automatics is probably the gear ratios. They are usually really low, which is why your auto shifts at 1700rpm while your manual shifts at 3000. It accounts for the greatest performance difference between the auto and the manual.
Tiptronic gearboxes let you choose the gear like in a manual, and doesn't shift to neutral when you let off the throttle. But the system is slow and dodgy. It won't shift when you tell it to shift, and it often shifts for you if you rev too high.
The biggest problem of automatics is probably the gear ratios. They are usually really low, which is why your auto shifts at 1700rpm while your manual shifts at 3000. It accounts for the greatest performance difference between the auto and the manual.
LOL no I've been driving sticks since I learned to drive, and in a daily driver it's a pain in the ass. Do you really need to rev your Kia into the 5's at a stop light to beat other cars? Absolutely not. Is it fun? Not really as any BMW or Mercedes even with an auto will easily catch up to you once you hit 60. Not to mention automatics are much easier to drive in traffic. I do not see any point these days in driving a non sports car with a manual tranny. My Cobra is just for weekend fun. I have a manumatic (just auto as I don't use the feature anymore) Kia for regular work days, as it is much more conveinent and gets me there when I don't car about an instant of acceleration lost.
And, I still don't buy into Perknose's arguement of being able to take an old VW or something to the max on the real roads because it has a small engine. I had a 1988 Volvo stick for years (5-6?) before I got my Kia and I could easily speed in it if I got it going, and it was a pain to have to shift when I wasn't in a car that could really get up to pace.
So my opinion is still, it isn't worth buying a manual (because they are mostly for run now a days, especially with the new advanced SMG's, triptronics, steptronics etc that are coming out) unless you have the fun power to back it up.
Sorry, I am not going to spend my time shifting in an accord and trying to get "the best out of a small engine with my super awesome macho skillz" when I could just press the gas peddle and be gone, and then have some real fun in a car that can do something on the weekends.
Summary:
Manuals aren't worth the trouble unless you have the car to make it enjoyable and balance off the hastle.
5 speed auto > 5 speed manual?
:laugh:
Riiight.
Go look up torque converter.
Then look up drivetrain loss.
Then look up tranny weights.
You're still missing the point. It has nothing to do with fun or showing off skills.
Some cars are just downright unbearable with an auto, while acceptable with a manual.
I know because I have (had) 2 identical cars, one of them auto, the other manual with a puny 1.6L engine.
With the AC on and only myself in the car, each time merging onto the highway was an adventure in the auto, and not a good one.
With the manual, I could do the same task with a passenger or two, no sweat.
You summary is opinion, which I disagree with. I enjoy driving the manual variant of the same car, any car, 10 times out of 10.
PricklyPete
Lifer
- Sep 17, 2002
- 14,582
- 162
- 106
Originally posted by: jagec
Well, it's a simpler, lighter, more efficient, more reliable system with less drivetrain loss and a lot more driver control over what the car's doing.
That said, you have to be a decent driver to take advantage of everything a manual transmission has to offer, and it can be a bit more of a pain in stop-and-go traffic.
So, for a point A to point B commuter, an automatic is fine for most people. But driving enthusiasts, fuel misers, control freaks, and cheap bastards all prefer manual.
Pretty much right on... also... it is just more fun.
dr150
Diamond Member
- Sep 18, 2003
- 6,570
- 24
- 81
I drive a manual instead of an automatic, but definitely prefer automatic out of convenience in daily stop and go traffic and stop lights on hills. If one doesn't have to put up with such daily inconveniences, then manual, but most work for a living and commute in dense populations, so....
The only reason I have a manual is b/c my wife is German and as all good Europeans, she refuses to drive "sloppy" auto.
The only reason I have a manual is b/c my wife is German and as all good Europeans, she refuses to drive "sloppy" auto.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter