[manim]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I didn't, I didn't! I mean the automatic select lever!

Sorry, I did not read your earlier post!

I think BMW has a lever instead of paddle-shifts (without clutch of course). But which is better will be decided soon in the future when all cars start having a standard!

[amit]

I would love to buy a DSG equipped car. If the Civic had DSG, I would be saving up for it right now!

[equinox22]

I drive both an auto and a manual car. After a point it is not difficult to switch between driving the two. But all said and done, except in bumper to bumper traffic, I always prefer the manual.

[pedrolourenco]

Has anyone tried the Auto-Clutch? I just saw an A-Star fitted with it today. The gear knob has a touch sensor. So when you touch the stick to shift, the clutch automatically engages. There's also a switch to disable the whole system and use it like a manual. It costs 35K and can be fitted to any car. Most of the effort in driving a manual is in depressing the clutch. So here we have an option to reduce the effort by more than 50% with no effect on fuel efficiency like an AT.

[Theyota]

* In US 'automatic transmission' is the default, where as in india it is 'manual transmission', car-gurus, whats the major reason for this difference?

In US an automatic transmission is default if you consider the average aaam admi. But if you sample people who are very passionate about automobiles, you will notice that they almost always drive a stick shift. There is even a section of people who consider not being able to drive a stick shift as girly even though a major part of the driving public cannot really drive a stick.

As has been noted by various posts in this thread, the one and only (huge) advantage of automatic transmission is ease of driving.

Stick shift has many advantages,

- better FE (if you are good at driving, you can beat the company specified FE by a huge margin)
- low initial cost
- low maint
- longer life
- you control your car (eg: you donwshift to slowdown instead of breaking).....and so on


Ofcourse we also have the modern semi-luxury and luxury cars with a hybrid transmission that can be operated as an automatic or like a stick.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Sorry, but I think a lot of that has been de-bunked!

FE --- many people who prefer manual like it because they can driver in a, err... more exciting style. That is very expensive on fuels.

Low initial cost --- yes. Any auto option ever been cheaper than manual? I guess the technology is just more expensive

Low maint --- How? You have to top up the fluid; manuals have fluids too.

Longer life --- How many auto boxes have you succeeded in wearing out? I drove a 13-yr-old for a year or two; there was a very minor fluid leak which required topping up the level every couple of months. That car died on the motorway; a seized big end, nothing to do with the gearbox.

Control --- There's a lever: flip it to 2, or to 1 --- hey! Engine breaking! And that's the old-fashioned way; many modern autos will pretty-much simulate manuals if you want them to --- as you say, tends to be higher-end.

[Theyota]

Thad,

FE - We are talking about average driving. Facts show that for almost all the cars, manual versions have better FE. You can verify this at Edmunds.com for all the cars sold in USA(except for a couple of models all manuals have better FE). We have to compare oranges to oranges here. If you want to talk about exciting driving style, then you have to compare manual exciting driving with automatic exciting driving......

Low maint--- In USA fluids cost is the last thing that matters. In fact fluids top up cost is included in the 20 bucks you pay when you go for a basic oil change. I am talking of cost of have a transmission fixed in event of a break down.

Longer life --- Well I have tanked an automatic after only 60000 miles on a GM car, but it does not answer your question because it might just be single case example. If you google you will see 1000s of articles indicating why a manual might end up having a longer life compared to an automatic. But it is true that modern automatic transmissions are good enough to live long enough before an average driver dumps his car...

There is no such thing as "simulation of manuals". What I was talking about is semi-automatic transmissions or clutchless shifting (tiptronic )

[Sankar]

Are we confusing true automatics with mechanised manual transmissions? Well my understanding is that an auto has to have a torque converter and no clutch. Most of the new breed of high end autos have no torque converter but a mechanised manual, like a DSG and they don't have torque converters. These are cars which can be driven like a manual (but minus the driver actuated clutch) or an auto. So when we talk about autos i think we should be clear on what kind of an auto it is. If it's mechanised manual (rally cars/f1 cars, cars with dsg boxes and similar) then it's in a different league altogether when it comes to performance, control and efficiency. These cannot be just grouped into autos that have torque converters (most autos here; santro,i10, maruti, civic) even if they provide a paddle behind the wheel.

[Raj1008]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

Which is why paddle shift automatics are gaining more attention. Unlike a fully auto transmission, you need not rely on the computer to decide what gear you need. You can always shift to a higher gear on slippery surfaces (just like a manual) and accelerate gradually.

Moreover, letting you clutch out slowy increases wear and can reduce clutch life in the long run. The DSG makes sure that your engine speed is always matched with your transmission speed, increasing clutch life.

Shan2nu

Yes thats true but then I thought we were talking about just auto or just manuals. I drive an old Camry :( Sudden stopping isnt its thing.

[ImmortalZ]

Originally Posted by Theyota

Thad,

FE - We are talking about average driving. Facts show that for almost all the cars, manual versions have better FE. You can verify this at Edmunds.com for all the cars sold in USA(except for a couple of models all manuals have better FE). We have to compare oranges to oranges here. If you want to talk about exciting driving style, then you have to compare manual exciting driving with automatic exciting driving......

People here on the forum have coaxed 16 or 17KMPL out of a Civic A/T. I can't even dream of such averages on my own A/T. It all depends on the driver.

Originally Posted by Theyota

Low maint--- In USA fluids cost is the last thing that matters. In fact fluids top up cost is included in the 20 bucks you pay when you go for a basic oil change. I am talking of cost of have a transmission fixed in event of a break down.

Unfortunately, we aren't in the US of A, are we? I've never heard of a newer generation auto dying before some other major transaxle part. And by auto, let us not count DSGs, which are notoriously unreliable (VW's versions, anyway). Of course, such hearsay do not matter because A/Ts are sold in such low numbers here that you don't hear about such problems unless the affected person is on T-BHP. We've had some threads about Laura DSGs, though. I believe GTO can provide some insight based on the collected ownership feedback based on which the test drives section on the main page is written.

Originally Posted by Theyota

Longer life --- Well I have tanked an automatic after only 60000 miles on a GM car, but it does not answer your question because it might just be single case example. If you google you will see 1000s of articles indicating why a manual might end up having a longer life compared to an automatic. But it is true that modern automatic transmissions are good enough to live long enough before an average driver dumps his car...

It is my understanding that it is far easier to destroy a manual by abuse than an auto - mainly because there is only so much you can do to an auto (like driving on a track with no additional transmission oil cooler).

I've felt sometimes that I could do with a shifter so I can kick that thing into third in an instant. However, sometimes, when driving a manual in bumper to bumper peak hour traffic, I've felt like putting a gun to the clutch pedal and ending it all. It is all balanced out, in my case.

[pedrolourenco]

Originally Posted by Sankar

Are we confusing true automatics with mechanised manual transmissions? Well my understanding is that an auto has to have a torque converter and no clutch. Most of the new breed of high end autos have no torque converter but a mechanised manual, like a DSG and they don't have torque converters. These are cars which can be driven like a manual (but minus the driver actuated clutch) or an auto. So when we talk about autos i think we should be clear on what kind of an auto it is. If it's mechanised manual (rally cars/f1 cars, cars with dsg boxes and similar) then it's in a different league altogether when it comes to performance, control and efficiency. These cannot be just grouped into autos that have torque converters (most autos here; santro,i10, maruti, civic) even if they provide a paddle behind the wheel.

Mechanised manual transmissions like DSG are more advanced than the older autos. FE is the same as a manual. The i10, Santro, Wagon R etc have the older type. BTW what's your opinion on the auto-clutch in my previous post.

[Theyota]

Immortalz,
16 or 17 kmpl is nothing to boast about on a 2008/09 civic. I do not know what you drive.

I quoted US of A, because the thread started with autos in US of A.

I am not pitching of reliability of auto against manual. I am saying that if auto transmission breaks down, it will cost "way" more $$ to fix.

Yes it is easier to destroy a manual if one is a shi$$y driver. But we are talking of an average driver.

I agree in bumper to bumper traffic, you can't beat the utility of an auto.

I also believe that if you want to fully experience your car, then you have to have a stick. There is a reason why most sport cars are manual....

[raveen_2023]

There is even a section of people who consider not being able to drive a stick shift as girly even though a major part of the driving public cannot really drive a stick.

That's exactly how i feel. I drive a 5 speed Mustang V6 and i consider it manly (in US)

[ImmortalZ]

Originally Posted by Theyota

Immortalz,
16 or 17 kmpl is nothing to boast about on a 2008/09 civic. I do not know what you drive.

What you do not know is where we drive. We don't have the wide open freeways where we can cruise at 120KPH for hours on end with no braking or acceleration.

You won't find anyone with more than 10KMPL in-city and 13-14 on the highways in a Civic M/T here in India, if they are driving normally. The city mileage will drop even more in places like Bangalore and the highway mileage will drop in Kerala because of the winding, twisting two lane highways. Driver hard, this drops even more.

[sgiitk]

Originally Posted by amit

I would love to buy a DSG equipped car. If the Civic had DSG, I would be saving up for it right now!

Civic does not have DSG, but like most modern transmissions has a electronic clutch lock, which locks out the Torque Converter above a particular speed. hence the highway economy is unaffected. Was still surprised to see that the highway economy of the AT ar (US) spec was 1 mpg more than the manual. May be the slightly different ratios had something to do with this.

Lower end trannies like the MS and the Hyundai do not have a torque converter lockout.