Team-BHP - So, why don't you buy an Automatic?

Quote:

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno (Post 2718581)

Leaving aside segments which is too hazy a subject, I believe you were looking for something (AT convenience) and ended up buying something else (new car, but MT). The need for AT convenience cannot be made good with a newer MT car or a cheaper MT car. It is sort of like someone looking to buy an SUV and then saying that he instead bought an SX4 and saved money in the bargain.

Well, I agree and disagree with what you say - True, we wanted an AT, but we also had the cost in mind. We wanted something that's easy to drive, low on maintenance and wouldn't mind getting thrown around a bit, yet get repaired almost anywhere at a cost that wouldn't hurt our pockets.

Buying a MT also meant that the wifey *must* learn to drive a manual, which, by the looks of the current scenario in our country, is not such a bad idea after-all. If we were in the US and were surrounded by ATs, may be it made sense to look for other ATs... but not in India... not "yet". Basically, I didn't want her to limit herself to "knowing how to drive a car, but it has to be an AT" - she must be able to drive anything that has 4 wheels, irrespective of whether it has a clutch pedal or not. :D

Give me an AT on a small car that gives an equivalent / better mileage than an MT would - I'll get one even if the initial cost is 50K more than the MT.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anu21v (Post 2719250)

b) Power Curve is not good enough in Autos as compared to Manual Gearbox, hence not as much fun chasing someone down on a busy highway. (missing Ego Booster)
c) Fuel Efficiency aka Mileage suffers in Auto Gerabox easily by 10% to 20%. In a cost sensitive country, such as ours, where people decide to buy Petrols or Diesel simply because of Per Km running cost this is the worst possible thing.(Bad economics)

On the Question why Mercedes and BMWs are being sold with Mostly Autos is simple.

I am sorry to say this but the scenario described at (b) appears to be road-rage-ish. Please refrain from it. Not good for health of self, occupants, car and other road users. At (c) you mentioned about fuel efficiency. Trust me if your normal driving style is as described at (b) then you would get better mileage in AT.

And no not just Mercs and Beemers, almost all premium cars' high-end versions are coming in AT and AT alone. You cannot have an MT variant of some high-end cars these days. The gradual shift towards AT has started. It is only a matter of time before it percolates down to lower brands/segments. I see more AT cars on roads even in small town like Vizag these days than I used to a few years ago. I was a die-hard MT fan myself and never once thought I would be hooked to it so badly. The convenience it offers in in-city drives is unparallelled. Just count the number of times you change gears in one day on a 30-40 KM drive through a city and you would know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by niv26 (Post 2719441)

Why AT doesn't come in 'diesel' variants? I see it only in 'Verna' and more expensive cars.
Is it so difficult to make one?

It is perceived that the list price of the car will become unreasonably high. Imagine buying a Swift VDI-AT at 9 Lacs ... I think the manufacturers have priced diesel cars unjustifiably high even in MT.

I am planning to purchase an AT car myself and find the choice very limited. Even on models it is offered, there are no choices in trim and features.

Quote:

Originally Posted by niv26 (Post 2719441)

Why AT doesn't come in 'diesel' variants? I see it only in 'Verna' and more expensive cars.

A Diesel with its narrow torque band is the natural candidate for the AT. I do not think ATs cannot handle the torque, so it is purely marketing driven. Even Petrol ATs are becoming somewhat common for the past year or so.

It's all a matter of perception I guess. Imagine what vehicles on our roads were like a couple of decades (give or take a few years):) ago... They were basic - no A/C, no power steering, no power windows, no safety equipment like seat belts, ABS with EBD, airbags. Then came stuff like power steering & power windows and later all the other advancements. What if a vehicle came stripped of all these features? Would most of us think of it- even though it may save us quite a bit of money? I guess not. So maybe if the customers had an array of options on the AT front across segments, we just might find a decent number willing to pay more for the comfort and convenience it offers. Like air-conditioning or power steering for instance.

Earlier the AT was derived from the 2nd top version, and added Rs.75k to 1L to the price. Now the AT is available in two or more variants. Shows that the demand is improving. I expect Diesel ATs to show up soon. It is more a matter of time, and who breaks the ice. One problem I can see is that while the manual is in some cases assembled in India the AT has to be imported in a CBU condition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgiitk (Post 2720219)

One problem I can see is that while the manual is in some cases assembled in India the AT has to be imported in a CBU condition.

Exactly my point too. No one is willing to invest in that territory. No one wants to ride the wave. Every one wants to take it up after the tide of AT demand has turned high.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilful (Post 2720195)

It's all a matter of perception I guess. Imagine what vehicles on our roads were like a couple of decades (give or take a few years):) ago...

But it's not an Indian thing alone. In USA, and maybe some other countries, AT is the norm, but otherwise, it is easy to find the "real drivers don't like auto gearboxes" ideas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgsagar (Post 2719442)

PGSAGAR, my point was mere a support of "EGO-Booster" argument, that people can decide when to shift gear and accelerate faster which is not an option in ATs. Had it been not Ego booster thing no manufacturer would be advertising the "POWERFUL Engines", "TOP speeds" and "0-100 time".

Quote:

Originally Posted by anu21v

my point was mere a support of "EGO-Booster" argument, that people can decide when to shift gear and accelerate faster which is not an option in ATs. Had it been not Ego booster thing no manufacturer would be advertising the "POWERFUL Engines", "TOP speeds" and "0-100 time".

Some AT's give you the option of choosing when to shift. Honda City is one such car.

OT: When did you last see top speeds and 0-100 times being advertised for cars?

Quote:

Originally Posted by vsathyap

Give me an AT on a small car that gives an equivalent / better mileage than an MT would - I'll get one even if the initial cost is 50K more than the MT.

Basically you want a DSG-kinda AT-box in a small car for just 50K more (which incidentally is the cost of the current AT box in small cars) and with great FE to boot. Good luck !!!

I think you are mixing up ease-of-driving provided by AT with a host of unrelated stuff like maintenance, cost of repair etc. And if you anyway want your wife to learn MT driving, not sure what is the point of looking for an AT car in the 1st place. BTW, maintenance-wise the AT would be cheaper atleast from the transmission POV - no clutch to get fried like in MT, no frequent gear oil changes like in MT (eg. the AT fluid in A-Star_AT is to be changed only at 1.65lakh kms or 11 years).

Quote:

Originally Posted by supremeBaleno (Post 2721433)

BTW, maintenance-wise the AT would be cheaper atleast from the transmission POV - no clutch to get fried like in MT, no frequent gear oil changes like in MT (eg. the AT fluid in A-Star_AT is to be changed only at 1.65lakh kms or 11 years).

My understanding is that since even AT has mechanical gears, it may require frequent oil changes like the manual transmission. It is the so called AT fluid, which is what drives the torque converter which doesn't need frequent replacement. But, experts please comment on it.