I never used it even once in my own car, but I use the buttons/paddles on the steering wheel in cars which have them (mine doesn't, it's a bit too old). That's nice if you're into a bit more sporty feeling, but it only makes sense in high-powered cars like AMG IMO.
Automatic or Manual gear?
- Thread starter pascal
- Start date
I never used it even once in my own car, but I use the buttons/paddles on the steering wheel in cars which have them (mine doesn't, it's a bit too old). That's nice if you're into a bit more sporty feeling, but it only makes sense in high-powered cars like AMG IMO.
i have it but dont use it. i use the S(port) drive . its cool if you have to drive on ways where there are lots of hills or mountains.
When I was about 16-17 my brother had a manual and I had an auto since I didn't know how to drive a manual and he was always on my ass with stuff like that too.
Probably why I learned, but I got even with him and learned on his truck....
BTW-Is tiptronic another name for one of them automatics that tries to pretend it's a manual so the driver doesn't feel quite so effeminate?
Yeah, thinking in buy it to my wife and daughter.BTW-Is tiptronic another name for one of them automatics that tries to pretend it's a manual so the driver doesn't feel quite so effeminate?
In all the manuals I've ever driven you should be able to do that quite easily without touching the gas -- Hell, all you'd need is the clutch if you're used to the car. I'd say manuals are far better in precision driving, actually. The counter-intuitive nature of automatics at low speeds is quite annoying, if you ask me.
Manuals all the way!
OK techie question here. Why are automatics less efficient than manuals?
I mean I realise it takes power from the engine to change the gears but it seems to me that a modern engine management system should have a much better idea of when to change gear than a typical human driver (male as well as female). Why doesn't that outweigh the other things?
The formal fuel consumption figures show that manual is better of course, but they're also (I presume) driven by professional drivers who specialise in that sort of thing. [And no sensible male driver would admit that he's not one of the best drivers on the planet of course, so clearly we're all better than the computers, right?]
But averaged over the whole driving population with their average inability to drive in the right gear under any circumstances (does 50mph in 3rd gear really make sense?) is it at all clear if and why automatic is more fuel efficient than manual?
I mean I realise it takes power from the engine to change the gears but it seems to me that a modern engine management system should have a much better idea of when to change gear than a typical human driver (male as well as female). Why doesn't that outweigh the other things?
The formal fuel consumption figures show that manual is better of course, but they're also (I presume) driven by professional drivers who specialise in that sort of thing. [And no sensible male driver would admit that he's not one of the best drivers on the planet of course, so clearly we're all better than the computers, right?
]But averaged over the whole driving population with their average inability to drive in the right gear under any circumstances (does 50mph in 3rd gear really make sense?) is it at all clear if and why automatic is more fuel efficient than manual?
I'd prefer a nice electric car without transmission, if I could afford it. The only automatic I've ever driven was a 1991 Mercedes E220 which had its flaws ("laggy" acceleration). But I'm convinced a modern automatic could do better than that, and I don't really like manual shifting on my daily commute.
The only automatic I've ever driven was a 1991 Mercedes E220 which had its flaws ("laggy" acceleration). But I'm convinced a modern automatic could do better than that, and I don't really like manual shifting on my daily commute.Because you as a human can plan your gear choice ahead of time. The system doesn't have the information required to do an optimal gear choice. It's not the case that a given speed always run optimally on a certain gear. If you're coming to a long downward slope you can put the gear in neutral and let it just roll. The computer doesn't know if the slope will end in a few meters. Or if you're coming at a sharp uphill slope, a sensible driver would accelerate ahead of time to easier climb the hill. This may lead to the automatic to undesirably shifting up the gear, only to have to shift down again later and loose power for a while as it's changing gear. Or if you're driving steady but low speed, say 50km/h. The most economic way to drive is to choose the 5th gear since most cars can keep that speed on that gear with nearly no gas. An automatic will likely choose 3rd or 4th gear since those speeds are typical for driving in the city with lots of stops and accelerations.
Naturally, if you're habitally choosing the wrong gear, or if you have an aggressive driving style, a manual gear won't help you though.
Well, they may get interested if there's a large enough saving of doing so. Not that I think there will be a huge rush to change cars, just that more people may opt for manual the next time they upgrade if that saves them money in the long run. SUVs aren't doing as well as they used to for the same reasons. Many bought them just because of the convenience of having a car that could load a lot of stuff should they need to. With the rising gas prices fewer will go with the convenience.
Well, I'd say automatics are more intuitive, especially for precision driving. In my experience just using the clutch often leads to engine halt. Could also be because my dad never bought the cars with the strongest engines, but rather the ones with best mileage (and I've never owned a car myself yet).
If it's a BIG luxury sedan I'd prefer automatic but most of the time I drive small cars and people would look down on you if a manual was too much for you...and I don't think anything other then Ferraris and lamborghinis can accelerate fast enough that F1 paddles would be worth it. Obviously you have the convenience but it's not as fun to me.
Torque converter mainly. At lower speeds, the engine output shaft and transmission input shaft don't spin at the same speeds, so you lose efficiency. Once you get up to a certain speed, the torque converter locks up, and efficiency is pretty decent, especially on newer cars. Today's autos are nothing like those of a couple decades ago, and you'll find that on many of them the MPG difference is maybe 1-2 MPG. They're much better about being in the right gear, and many of them learn your driving habits over time.
The auto in my previous truck was really pretty good about being in the right gear. I could make the 30 mile drive to work without it leaving overdrive. This is on a county road with a whole bunch of 35 mph curves and hills.
That same road sure is a lot more fun with my manual 9-2x. Though I went 2 years in my truck without getting pulled over, and only 6 months in my 9-2x.
What do you mean, fuel consumption? Not really that way anymore with the latest generation.
Because you still need power for changing the gears (there's lots of hydraulic and electric actuators in the gearbox). It does already outweight with new systems in many situations, so we're almost there. And the sequential gearboxes (like in the Formula 1 or the BMW M5) have had better fuel efficiency than manuals for ages already.
It depends on how steep the hill is as well. If it is flat then it is easy to crawl with a manual, but you will burn up the clutch if you do it too much.
There is no doubt in my mind autos are better in traffic jams, but otherwise I would take a manual.
And on the mileage thing I am not actually sure whether an aggressive driving style would do better or worse on an auto, it probably depends a lot on the transmission since some change gears too much.
That's true, but if you're used to the car it's quite easy to be very precise (making engine halts sort of none existent). Manuals definitely require a person to be used to the car, more so than an automatic no doubt.
I just don't like the fact that at low speeds an automatic will go forward if the break isn't kept on -- that may be a personal issue for me, but it makes me uncomfortable to know the car will go forward unless I do something about it... I like the fact that in a manual the car generally doesn't move unless I make it move. That's what I meant by counter-intuitive -- cars should not move unless told!
Even with latest models of cars, manufacturer sites will often have fuel consumption ratings for manual and auto separate because auto is usually about 2mpg less.
Just for the ones who dont know what is a manual transmission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manual_transmission
My car has this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manual_transmissionMy car has this one:
It's because Automatics don't have true mechanical gears in the same sense that manuals do. Automatics have a series of hydraulically engaged clutches, and these clutches are never fully engaged nor disengaged. There is always some slippage present in them.
So, you don't make a mechanical gear change, placing a gear against another gear, instead you get a hydraulic clutch engange for each seperate gear. That loss of a mechanical link means a loss in efficiency.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
