[FAIAAA]

Voted AT . Have experienced the 4 speed AT in Marutis and Toyota Corolla Altis (before they introduced the CVT). It's smooth and reliable. Yes it will show it's limitations at higher speeds (but that is limited by the engine anyways) and reflect in lower FE.

[MotoDrive]

Voted for AT, I do have the Urban Cruiser with same AT transmission which is very smooth! I hate driving with manual gear box, which I feel is a big headache for me even though I can drive it without any issue. The reason I like AT is I can fully focus on road than worrying about pressing clutch and changing gears.

[ike]

I voted for the MT. If at all I wind up buying a Jimny it'd be the manual because that transmission is from the 16th century. If it is an AT offroader/4WD that I'm looking for, the Thar is clearly superior both in terms of the engine and the transmission.

[Jaggu]

It's a tiny city car and Offroad cutie. AT all the way, the box is simple and no headache of clutch burning on Offroad. Even with a MT it ain't gonna be a 0-100 KMPH champion and is actually a pain to use in city. I have had my fair share of Gypsies and Thar's and now after experiencing the AT's, I prefer the latter. Especially when AT can also be selected / restricted to a particular ratio when needed. What the vehicle needs is a Turbo upgrade

[nishsingh]

AT all the way.

The only time I might prefer an MT over an AT is if I am drag-racing.

To clarify, the only time I have drag raced is when I was playing Need For Speed during my MBA days.

Since then I have preferred an AT over MT, even when playing video games!

[swami69]

AT for me.

I don't know how MT and AT behaves in a Jimny as no TD so far. Still, I would not want to drive an MT anymore. I think this AT on the Jimny is proven, sold worldwide and it should be good, even if there are some shortcomings, I am happy to live with it.

Swami

[Geo_Ipe]

Originally Posted by NTO

The 4th gear is also pretty tall bringing in 100 kmph at a shade above 2K rpm, helping with calm highway cruising.

That's extremely unlikely. The 4AT is quite strained at higher speeds is what I've heard.

Originally Posted by akshay4587

Yes it is, very silent cruising at 100km/hr at 2950RPM, this is for AT.

[NTO]

Originally Posted by Geo_Ipe

That's extremely unlikely. The 4AT is quite strained at higher speeds is what I've heard.

This is my experience with the Toyota UC with the same engine and GB combo. If Jimny is bringing in 100 at 2950 rpm then either there is a change in gearing or the lack of mild hybrid is making the difference.

[akshay4587]

After owing AT for a week and 1400kms, Test drove the MT today; One word, AT all the way.

Will pen down a detailed comparison tonight.

AT is also a better cruiser on the highway and not strained at all; MT inspite of an extra gear does 100 at 3050 RPM as compared to 2950 of AT.

Originally Posted by Geo_Ipe

That's extremely unlikely. The 4AT is quite strained at higher speeds is what I've heard.

Not at all; I have taken her upto 110 and the engine is not strained at all at 100, it can sit there all day long with cruise control humming silently at 2950 RPM.

[Sidjohri]

Voted for AT.

1. AT is the way to go in city driving given the increasing traffic related mess
2. Jimny's 4 speed AT is proven and reliable

[adi.mariner]

Voted for Automatic just because of the convenience factor in city driving. I haven't test driven either of them and don't plan to do so in the near future.

[aviator1101]

Anyday AT. Contrary to some rumours, the engine doesn't feel stressed at all at higher speeds with the AT. And with today's modern technology, the AT provides better efficiency than the MT if used judiciously. So along with kaise chalti hai, kitna deti hai is also answered with the AT..

[pheru8b]

Reading all the above made me wonder, and don't kill me for this, but what if the Jimny came with the 1.0 litre turbo petrol from the baleno or fronx?

That engine would have 99bhp and 147nm of torque as against 103 bhp and 134nm respectively in the k15B on the Jimny. And the 1 litre turbo engine would be 25% more fuel efficient at 20kmpl vs around 16kmpl.

However, perhaps the 1 litre turbo may not work for the buyers who will take it offroading? Would love to know your point of view on that.

Else, for all we know, one day we may find the 1 litre turbo in a 2 wheel drive "Jimny City" created to further increase demand for the awesome vehicle!?!?

[aviator1101]

Originally Posted by pheru8b

Else, for all we know, one day we may find the 1 litre turbo in a 2 wheel drive "Jimny City" created to further increase demand for the awesome vehicle!?!?

Why not? It's a pretty neat package and 60-70% people who will buy the Jimny will hardly end up doing any serious off roading. For city and mild off the road activities, even a car with good ground clearance and rear wheel drive would suffice. And Jimny would shine here as well. Plus it has enough space for today's micro families. The pricing would be the deal maker or breaker in this configuration though.

[Blooming Flower]

Originally Posted by pheru8b

That engine would have 99bhp and 147nm of torque as against 103 bhp and 134nm respectively in the k15B on the Jimny. And the 1 litre turbo engine would be 25% more fuel efficient at 20kmpl vs around 16kmpl.

The power and torque curve throughout the RPM range matters instead of the max on-paper figures. This also answers why not new gen. K15C for Jimny.