Auto-Transmission vs Manual Transmission on VEHICLES

Thats called a sequential gearbox and they always have 2 gears selected ready for use(1 down+ 1up) the problem with this type of gearbox is that you cannot select any gear like a manual.
I agree that modern sequential boxes are awesome, but sadly they cost a lot of money when they go wrong. Not forgetting the fact 95% of auto/sequential are still worse than manual gears.

In the next 5-10 years i suspect nealry all cars will be using sequential/auto as the technology improves and becomes much more reliable for road use.

 

Depends on the car & where I'm driving it. Right now I'm driving a Civic SI that has a "rally" shifter. It's pretty fun.

 

^^ That looks very strange.

I currently drive a manual but over the past few years I'm really starting to hate it. Not that I hate driving a manual, its just the traffic in my area is getting worse and worse. I live 10 miles from my job and it takes me almost an hour to get to work everyday. I can pretty much drive the entire way in second gear.

 

Manual is more economical, when petrol costs about 1,5 €/litre, transmission does matter. (Ahneet paskat! Kiskurit! And so on...)

 

I currently drive a Mazda 6 with AT. I've had fun using the "Manual" mode and it becomes habit switching gears. I figure my next car will be manual just so I can get a good comparison and see how much I like it. In the area I currently live we have lots of back country roads with light traffic and high speed limits which makes a very fun combination for driving. Where I live in the future may not though.

 

Manual simply rocks

 

That's true with diesel engines (Toyota Avensis D-4D 2.2 A/T and M/T)
Combined: 7,0 - 5,5
City: 8,6 - 7.0
Outside city: 5,0 - 4,7

If you mostly drive in city, then there is difference indeed, but if you like outside big cities and mainly drive longer distance, that 0,3L isn't huge difference. Diesel is "only" a bit over 1€/Litre Dad has been thinking about getting automatic one.

Petrol Avensis 2,0 Valvematic 6 M/T vs Valvematic Multidrive S

Combined (l/100 km): 6,9 - 7,0
City (l/100 km): 9,1 - 9,2
Otsude city (l/100km): 5,6 - 5,7

0,1L aka no difference... (source).

Subaru I heard has good automatic which doesnt increade fuel consumption much, perhaps it's the AWD which already makes it consume more fuel and you cant see much difference between A/T and M/T.

 

/facepalm

 

both? thats why i have manual and auto cars. manual for twisties/trackdays, auto for town/cruising.

 

Subaru Legacy with CVT consumes less fuel than AT and MT variants and it has manual mode too. Their CVT transmission is pretty good, AT version uses more fuel than MT and CVT variants.

 

Manual is more fun, to me. I've driven both honda S2000 and nissan 350z with sport gear boxes, though they are harder to shift properly than a normal car they are quite fun, I found I dont notice much after getting useto driving them.

Though currently I own an automatic toyota, it has a 4-speed(A340E POS without mods).
Where I currently live theres lots of nice backroads, quite fun to drive on. Though I usually try to shift before 4,000RPM's(I like my car) on the engine and trying to do this on an automatic is very annoying, shift times are slow and sluggish, mostly auto's are designed for comfort...

Though if you dont care much about backroads, ect and you are not much into driving than an auto is probably better, more comfortable.

Really depends on the preference of the driver.

offtopic: Do trackdays only exist in europe? I cannot seem to find any information here in america.

 

My dad recently bought 1.5R Impreza with auto transmission. That's the most boring car I've seen so far. Slow as fu** but has big fuel consumption (around 12-13L/100Km, city conditions of use) - mainly because of AWD and auto transmission.

Always manual for me, much more fun and control over the car.

 

hu? For what? Sorry man i didnt born in UK as u did so my english skill is not as good as u. I did translated it with my low level english and maybe made a mistake and u become RUDE agaisnt it? Unacceptable and not polite. U r a good fella i think i understood u wrong hu?

 

My father is getting a DSG transmission with his Octavia L&K, can't wait to give it a spin !

 

Or just because of it has too small engine for "heavy" awd car. I bet that 2.0L engine would consume less. Trying to accelerate fast with small engine increases fuel consumption very much.

"lisence for transmission"

You forgot to say which kind of transmission... "Lisence for automatic/manual transmission"

 

All my cars had a manual transmission , now my last one has got a 6-speed auto-transmission with 3 settings :full auto , sport auto , steptronic(shift gear manualy but no clutch)

Well try to follow me with the manual gear , you just can change gears that fast by hand. So for my no more manual , from now on i'm a lazzy old fart in some peoples eyes when I say I drive auto gearbox , that changes quick when I leave them by the trafic light. :flip2: :cop:

 

That playes a part too. I think the car weights almost 1400kg, which is quite heavy for 1.5 engine with 107HP (so the specs say).

 

Hey.

lazy ≠ slow

Capito?

 

I love Mechanical Manual Transmissions but I stuck with a Hydraulic Manual Transmission atm..,