Automatic vs. Manual: The Ultimate Showdown Thread

[TheBook]

Going back to the original topic of this thread, I'd have to say I prefer manual. My entire driving live (a whole 14 months, but still), I drove an automatic-except for one time when my friend let me drive his 5-speed VW Jetta. That small time with the stick made me feel so much... More involved, I guess is the phrase I'm looking for here... that it was plain amazing. Most cars I get from here on out will probably be manuals. Not to say that I dislike autos-I don't mind them at all- but a manual, to me, is so much better than the automatic.

 

[Keef]

In theory, a CVT would yield the best economy because it effectively has an infinite number of gears to find those sweet spots.

But in practice, very few operators drive the car in a manner that actually would yield better mileage. Kind of like hybrids.

 

[Tornado]

In theory, a CVT would yield the best economy because it effectively has an infinite number of gears to find those sweet spots.

Which is what Nissan has been saying since day one, but no one believes them because no one can replicate Nissan's claims.

 

[Wolfe]

I find CVTs technologically intriguing, but I wouldn't want one on an internal combustion engine. On something silent like an electric motor? Sure. I just don't want my engine to moan endlessly every time I leave a stop light.

 

[Duke]

We drove a MINI with the CVT (they didn't offer a regular automatic in 2004) and it was underwhelming, but it was nearly indistinguishable from a regular small-car automatic. We'd never have known if they didn't tell us.

 

[Joey D]

We drove a MINI with the CVT (they didn't offer a regular automatic in 2004) and it was underwhelming, but it was nearly indistinguishable from a regular small-car automatic. We'd never have known if they didn't tell us.

Really? I could tell right away when I drove the CVT MINI, I have no idea what BMW did with it but I thought it was rather poor. Especially compared to the auto they have in the Coopers now.

 

[Duke]

It was poor - but so are most small-form-factor, low-torque automatics. For a German-engineered (I assume) CVT, it drove a lot like the cheap 4-speed autobox in a '95 Civic.

 

[homeforsummer]

Which is what Nissan has been saying since day one, but no one believes them because no one can replicate Nissan's claims.

Incidentally, we'll soon have that "joy" with the new Renault Megane too as Nissan will be providing them for the first time. Unfortunately the article in the magazine (this one) was more in-depth with a little technology box-out about it which isn't on the web version.

 

[nick09]

When I drive a auto I feel like just missing the clutch and the stick. I'm glad my parents own only manual. A auto just feels like it is missing all the fun with no gears for me to shift to.

 

[mustangGT90210]

For me, I've driven 4 cars in my life.
2006 Escape 2.3L 4cyl 5spd
2004 Mustang 3.9L 6cyl auto
1994 Prelude 2.2L 4cyl(VTEC) 5spd
1993 Camaro Z28 5.7L V8 auto

Autos only start becoming fun for me when the engine gets stronger. In the Mustang, it's just boring. In that Camaro, it kicked ass(not to mention the neckbreaking shifts). I prefer manuals because it lets me feel like I'm extracting more power from the car, and in a way, I am due to less drivetrain loss, they just feel faster in a slower car.

IMO Manual FTW everywhere, Automatic in big V8 cars if you can't get Manual

 

[Pupik]

Some of the front-wheel-drive Audi A4s had CVTs, and about half the customers did not like them. They would complain at the first service that there was a hesitation on initial acceleration from a rest, and a little droning. To be honest, some of the CVTs were faulty, and I would replace about one every six weeks.

By contrast, the CVTs in the Lexus RX 400h received little in the way of complaints, although I think the driving habits of the two types of owners (never mind one was a hybrid) were different. A few customers liked the extra pull and grunt of the 400h over the RX 330 motor, a few likening it to a "supercharger" (mostly guys), but once the RX 350 came out, there was no acceleration difference, which was a small motivating factor for a few buyers.

The engine does not drone at high speeds just because there is a CVT, the engine drones usually because of NVH. Only if you keep it hammered continuously at 90-100 mph, would you hear complaints of CVT-related engine drone, but even then...all engines should make some noise at that speed, in my opinion: You should be audibly reminded that you're traveling at potentially dangerous speeds.

Back to manual transmissions, for a moment. Let's face it, it is not something you pick up immediately. It takes many tries to get the motions of the clutch, acceleration, and smooth shifting down right. Usually, it's measured by time, not miles. And that can be frustrating for some people, to the point where they are psychologically worried that they are dangerous behind the wheel.

Some people think you should learn auto first, stick afterwards, and others feel vice versa; I learned auto first, just because you learn the basics of driving, which is more about paying attention and following the rules and laws, rather than operating the controls.

 

[buickgnx88]

Oh for sure, I think people should at least practice on an auto first to get the hang of driving and to get experience in traffic, and then learn a stick. That's essentially what I did, I learned basic driving and traffic skills in my parent's Tahoe, while at the same time learned the basics of a manual in my dad's Saturn around our neighborhood.

The way I learned how to drive a stick was this:
-First in a driveway or empty parking lot, learn to just start moving in 1st using only the clutch.
-Once you get that down, then start using the gas to get moving a bit faster.
-Eventually start going around and upshifting into the higher gears.
It takes a while but it really helped me learn how to "feel" the gripping point of the clutch and not stall the vehicle.

 

[eiriksmil]

I learnt my way around the clutch in a parking lot, then was pretty much thrown out in traffic a week later. Not much traffic, not good shifting, but it worked out. I learnt stick first because that's what most cars around here are, simple as that

 

[kingcars]

I had watched my father run through the gears in his Chevelle for so long that by the time he pulled into a parking lot and told me to drive, it didn't take me long to figure it out. I've always grown up around muscle cars with manuals. My uncle pulled his 69 Caprice out of a field with no engine or tranny. It was originally an automatic/427ci car. The FIRST thing him and my dad did was get the car ready for a manual. With the 427 big block and a 4 speed in that HUGE land yacht, it's something to behold. I can't stand muscle cars with automatics; it ruins the aura and attitude of those cars (although I do understand situations in which an auto is necessary).

 

[///M-Spec]

ZOMG! Monster post alert!

I've been meaning to finish this post for a couple of days now, but my busy schedule and sheer size of it and the tedious, feels-suspiciously-like-work nature of putting it together has made it slow going.

The second part contains actual OT content. The first part is just a bunch bickering over who said what, so to reduce MEGO, some of you may want to just skip down to the last section.


Re: Subjectivity

Not really, I'm saying fun is subjective. I apologise if it's worded weird. You can have fun in a manual you can have just as much fun in an auto. Fun is what you make of it. There are many people saying if you want a fun car it has to be a manual, I'm disagreeing with that.

If you don't have fun with an auto then that is you personal preference, but to say no one can have fun is an out and out lie.

And I said this.... when exactly? You're putting words in my mouth.

If fun is subjective, then no one can be right or wrong. Therefore; "ATs are fun" and "ATs are no fun" are equally valid statements. So harping over people who say "ATs are no fun" is really a pointless activity, isn't it?

The problem with your position is you want to be right and you also want the AT=no fun people to be wrong at the same time. Sorry to break this to you, subjectivity isn't going to give you that.


Re: Reading My Posts

Likewise.

I'm going to prove you either aren't reading or aren't comprehending my posts.

Oct 22 2008, 11:15 AM

There are things in life that are "user preferences". Vanilla or chocolate. Blondes or Brunettes. There's not any right or wrong there and there's no need to justify what amounts to a personal choice. If you had fun in a Protoge auto, I'm not going to argue with you. What's fun is your business.

Oct 22 2008, 12:22 PM

Many people are insinuating you can not have fun or as much fun with an auto, my point is you can have fun in anything. Like I said my buddy with the 80's Crown Vic has fun with it all the time.

Which proves it's subjective. There is no right or wrong with fun.

Oct 22 2008, 4:48 PM

And did you even read my post? Because if you did, you may have noticed that I already stated fun is a subjective thing, and that's not the point of my argument.

Once again for clarity: I didn't say all ATs were bad or not any fun. I said you are wrong to assume all ATs offer as much control over your car as any manual.

Oct 22 2008, 6:02 PM

Not really, I'm saying fun is subjective. I apologise if it's worded weird. You can have fun in a manual you can have just as much fun in an auto. Fun is what you make of it. There are many people saying if you want a fun car it has to be a manual, I'm disagreeing with that.

If you don't have fun with an auto then that is you personal preference, but to say no one can have fun is an out and out lie.

Likewise. Do you have any evidence that supports a manual car being more fun*, granting you more control, or making the drive more enjoy* other then your own preferences? Of course not. Everything being discussed here is subjective in almost every way, my points not excluded.

* emphasis is mine

So you either a) are not reading my posts, b) do not understand them, c) am forgetting what I wrote as you reply or d) deliberately misrepresenting what I'm saying.


Re: Addressing the issue vs. Begging the question

I've addressed everything you've asked of me previously.

No, you haven't. You've reiterated your position, but you haven't supported it. Saying "I disagree with you" or "I firmly believe I'm correct" is not addressing an argument. It's a form of Begging the Question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

You also flat refused to "get into it" with me on Oct 22 2008, 12:22 PM.

I'm not really going to get into with you because you obviously have your mind made up about autos, I'm not going to change your mind.

In that post, you had no direct reply to my very specific reasoning on why you have more control in an MT vs. non-performance ATs.

Re: Passive-aggressive head games = teh lame

Many "holier then thou" statements being thrown around by many members are as well.

I said many members, I didn't say names because as I've learned that could be construed as a direct attack and thus an AUP violation. If you don't fit in one of those "many people" then the point was not directed at you. I'm just trying to play by the forum rules.

Do me a favor. If you've got something to say to me, say it. If it doesn't apply to me, then don't waste my time with it. If you're mad at someone else, don't take it out on me, m'kay?

Re: Personal?

Personal much?

Pointing out issues with someone's posting behavior and statements --like inconsistencies in their position, contradictory messages and yes, hypocrisy is not the same thing as an ad hominem attack.

You have made up your mind about manual gearboxes, which is fine, I'm not here to change you opinion on them because ultimately I won't and you won't change mine. I don't disagree I've made my mind up about transmission, I think an modern automatic is equal to a modern manual, that's my stance. I don't see how it's biased or playing favourites of one or the other when I say they are equal.

No. I don't "make up my mind". I make decisions based on weighing the facts. If the facts change, I could change my mind. If I discover (or if someone convinces me) that my reasoning is faulty, I could change my mind. But my opinions are constantly under evaluation based on the best information possible, using the best reasoning I can muster.

Making up your mind means you have stopped using your brain. Which is why I found that statement offensive and annoying. However, I acknowledge that you probably didn't mean that in a malicious way, so I'm 'over it' and am not going to hold a grudge.


Re: Hey look kids! Actual, on topic, content!

All? No. Most? Yes. As I've said you can shift D 1 2 3 if you so desire or at least D 1 3. Is it recommended? No. However I know many people who drive their autos like this on a daily bases, although I am unaware of what problems they have had.

Not most. Many, perhaps, but not most.

All? No. Most? Yes. Once again leave an auto on 1 2 or 3 and most of the time it will stay there while putting un-needed strain on the engine and transmission.

Most of the time is not the same as all of the time.

Look carefully at the language I used in my post on Oct 22 2008:

With any auto?? A bog standard, non-performance auto with your only inputs being a throttle, "D" in the center console (with a possible "L" for low gear) and a little kick-down solenoid that tells the car to downshift?

I think that is false statement.

My co-workers love Hondas. One of them has 2004 Civic EX with a 4-speed AT. I snapped a couple of pictures yesterday. She thought I was nuts. She may be right.



So here we have the quintessential non-performance economy car. No way to select 1st. D3 is obviously the transmission's "sport mode" and presumably, this locks out 4th. So 2 less gears available to the drive than if she had gotten a 5-speed manual.

I also glanced at a current 8th gen car on the street, with the newer 5-speed AT. Here's a pic from Honda.



How does one select between 4th and 3rd gear in this car? Doesn't look like you can.

You can still slap stick with probably 98% of autos, thus choosing gears, and most modern autos have some sort of manumatic system. They still can be interpreted as four a piece.

98% is a stretch. Basic, non-performance autos account for most of them out there. If you take into account all the old cars still on the road today, it number is probably closer to 50-50. A lot of older 4-speed ATs have D and DS or D3, which is suppose to lock out 4th.

But you are still at the mercy of the tranny, which may or may not kick down under full throttle. Older ATs are very slow to shift. Sometimes they shift inconsistently. It is easy to 'mis-shift' an AT if the shift gate is (like the Civic above) a straight gate.

Likewise. Do you have any evidence that supports a manual car being more fun, granting you more control, or making the drive more enjoy other then your own preferences? Of course not. Everything being discussed here is subjective in almost every way, my points not excluded.

Partially dealt with earlier.

FACT: Some ATs (particularly older ones) can override driver gear choices when kicking down under full throttle or lifting completely off the throttle. This is especially true of ATs with "DS" or "D3" or "D4" positions, which simply locks out the top gear and will continue to shift between 1st to 3rd (or 4th) as it sees necessary.

FACT: Some ATs (particularly older ones) do not allow access to all gears.

FACT: Many ATs (particularly older ones) shift much slower than an average MT driver.

FACT: ATs with a straight shift pattern make it difficult and confusing to the driver to select the gear he/she wants.

Once again; whenever it is possible an AT makes gear choices for the driver or makes gear selection difficult, distracting or time consuming is a reduction in control.

And by your own admission later in the thread, this is true at least some of the time.

Now, if you were to go back and read my original post in the GT-R thread, I differentiate between ATs that behave this way and ATs that don't. And I described all these behaviors in detail.

Once again for clarity: I didn't say all ATs were bad or not any fun. I said you are wrong to assume all ATs offer as much control over your car as any manual.

Why? It's subjective. What in control is to you is different for me is different for the next guy. Once again the subjectivity is this thread's cruel mistress.

Control precision can be objectively measured and evaluated through empirical observation and the scientific process (which by the way, without any of which those things, we wouldn't have any cars to begin with)

Imagine that you sell ice cream cones. You sell small, medium and large cones. You also have two ice cream machines that squirt ice cream on the cones.

One machine has a button that when you press will try to sense the size of the cone and then squirt anywhere from 1 ounces to 5 ounces of ice cream, depending on what it thinks you are holding up to the nozzle.

The second machine has a dial numbered 1 through 5 that allows you to set how many ounces you want, then a switch that you hit so you get exactly the amount of ice cream you want.

I think it's reasonable to say that the second machine gives you more control over the ice cream. The first machine may even work fine most of the time, but you still have more control with the second machine.

Yes I can agree that you have more control over the transmission with a manual since that is the point of them. However on the same token I will same many modern autos act in a similar way, but since not 100% of them do it I won't say they all offer the same control over the transmission.

I think we can finally agree on something. I guess I have to credit PerfectBalance and Azureman for getting us to this point. Well done, guys.


M

 

[Joey D]

Honestly this is still relevant why? This thread was dead. Why not just close this thread?

You tell me if I have something to say to you just say it, fine. I don't agree with you and I think you enjoy making a huge deal out of something that isn't overly meaningful. I'm over the whole discussion, I've said my piece on why I like autos. Can we drop it now?

I felt there were many biased members in this thread, I kept it vague to avoid AUP violations.

To end the discussion though I'll just admit you're right, I'm wrong, I know nothing about cars nor am I true petrol head. [/tongue in cheek]

 

[///M-Spec]

Honestly this is still relevant why? This thread was dead. Why not just close this thread?

Because we don't all have short attention spans?

Because some of us have lives outside GTP and don't find it convenient to post responses right away?

Because maybe someone else wants to give their opinions?

Because when mods debate whether or not to close a thread, we don't immediately ask, "I wonder what Joey D thinks about this thread? I'd better find out if he's done with it yet".

You tell me if I have something to say to you just say it, fine. I don't agree with you and I think you enjoy making a huge deal out of something that isn't overly meaningful. I'm over the whole discussion, I've said my piece on why I like autos. Can we drop it now?

If this isn't overly meaningful, then why did you even respond? Why do you want it closed? Pretty strong response over something without much meaning.

I think you are overly emotional about this thread and the only reason you want it closed is to avoid having to read posts which pick apart the things you have said.

That, of course, is my 100% subjective opinion.

I felt there were many biased members in this thread, I kept it vague to avoid AUP violations.

For someone who has said numerous times in this thread how the issue is purely subjective, I'm amazed that you would complain so bitterly about bias.

"Subjective" is just another way to say "bias".

Bias is a term used to describe a tendency or preference towards a particular perspective, ideology or result, especially when the tendency interferes with the ability to be impartial, unprejudiced, or objective.[1]

Subjectivity refers to a subject's perspective, particularly feelings, beliefs, and desires. It is often used casually to refer to unjustified personal opinions, in contrast to knowledge and justified belief. In philosophy, the term is often contrasted with objectivity.[1]

To end the discussion though I'll just admit you're right, I'm wrong, I know nothing about cars nor am I true petrol head. [/tongue in cheek]

Glad you see things my way. You are now truly enlightened [/tongue in cheek]


M

 

[niky]

RE: transmission response... strangely, even with "paddles" and "manumatics", very few give you absolute control over gear selection. Having paddled ATs in vain around slaloms and handling tracks, this behaviour has become a bane to me, as very few Manual-ized ATs respond exactly as you want them to.

RE: CVTs... technically, they are less efficient. It's in the nature of how they transmit power... which also caps torque capacity for most CVTs.

But put them on smaller motors, and the lighter weight and lower inertial losses start to counterbalance or even outweigh the increased frictional losses. And the fact that CVTs allow you to accelerate in the proper area of the powerband makes for better performance than a standard automatic.

All complaints regarding CVTs... poor response, droning, etcetera...aren't problems of CVTs themselves, but perception. A CVT may feel slow, but it's faster than a traditional automatic by quite a bit... because you're automatically at peak torque (or peak power, depending on programming) and have linear acceleration from a dead stop.

Problem is, newer engines with electronic throttle, ignition and fueling now have wider powerbands. Mated to newer 5-speed automatics, the fuel economy and performance penalty are rendered moot. And better yet, with the computer controlling both the throttle and the transmission, you have less of the second-guessing such throttles do with manual transmissions.

But as CVTs started with scooters, there is a market for cheaper CVTs for city-cars... it may be the only place left for the CVT to go, as the market (amongst compacts and larger vehicles) shifts towards 5- and 6-speed torque converter and dual clutch automatics.

 

[///M-Spec]

I thought the CVT in the wife's Nissan Murano was a pretty good tranny. :shrug:

'Droning' was not an issue because our CVT was attached to a VQ, which is a good sounding motor in all applications. Under full throttle, you could in fact, get it pretty close to redline and the tranny would hold it there until you let off --that was pretty exciting.

It was easy to throw around for an SUV and the motor was perfectly predictable. The lower your foot went down, the more torque you got.

As for fuel mileage, we got about ~19 city, ~23, almost 24 highway, which is about 1 mpg less than the EPA figures.


M

 

[Azuremen]

Sarcasm loaded attempt at getting the last word...

Dude... srsly?

SRSLY?!

You need to learn to separate opinions and fact. And a logical pattern of reasoning and deduction. I feel a separate thread on "logic" might be in order....

And niky brings up a valid point with the modern day engines and setups...

I do know that my 4 speed manual Tercel was about 10 times more exciting than the automatic model. And quite a bit faster and more efficient on the gas as well...

 

[buickgnx88]

Haha the auto Tercel...one of those cars where you'd floor it, you'd hear a loud droning, and wonder why you're barely moving.

 

[///M-Spec]

Back in the day, my best friend had an old Corolla with a 3-speed AT. Instead of 'the gas' or 'the throttle', we called it 'the volume pedal'.


M

 

[buickgnx88]

The best thing is when you get the crappy ricers that have automatics and a fart can, so all you hear is a loud droning as they drive by.

 

[Tornado]

I feel a separate thread on "logic" might be in order....

I think that was tried once. It lead to flaming, I believe.

Under full throttle, you could in fact, get it pretty close to redline and the tranny would hold it there until you let off --that was pretty exciting.

Something that I am curious about CVTs: do they theoretically have an infinite top speed? If it always keep the engine at peak power, couldn't you (in theory) wind it up until the air kept it from going faster?

Back in the day, my best friend had an old Corolla with a 3-speed AT. Instead of 'the gas' or 'the throttle', we called it 'the volume pedal'.

Before my best friend got his Celica, he had an early 90s Ford Festiva with a 3 speed and a rotted out muffler.

 

[///M-Spec]

Something that I am curious about CVTs: do they theoretically have an infinite top speed? If it always keep the engine at peak power, couldn't you (in theory) wind it up until the air kept it from going faster?

No, because you are still limited by actual wheel hp vs. drag + rolling resistance and other factors. CVT simply gives you 'steplessly variable' gear ratios across a wider range than a traditional transmission. It cannot multiply torque infinitely.


M

 

[Jim Prower]

Back in the day, my best friend had an old Corolla with a 3-speed AT. Instead of 'the gas' or 'the throttle', we called it 'the volume pedal'.


M

hm. seems to work fine with mine.

 

[Perfect Balance]

The best thing is when you get the crappy ricers that have automatics and a fart can, so all you hear is a loud droning as they drive by.

That made me think of something.

Aftermarket exhaust with anything other than a conventional manual = fail.

 

[homeforsummer]

Aftermarket exhaust with anything other than a conventional manual = fail.

Even this?



Technically not a conventional manual...

 

[kingcars]

That made me think of something.

Aftermarket exhaust with anything other than a conventional manual = fail.

Not necessarily. My car sounded just fine when it was an automatic; so do many others.

 

[buickgnx88]

That's true, V8 cars and most V6 cars do sound decent (if not good) with an aftermarket exhaust and an auto. It's just the 3/4 cylinders that get annoying with an auto.

Case in point: