Automatic vs. Manual: The Ultimate Showdown Thread

[Stevisiov]

I can do this quicker in my manual car than any auto I've driven.

I am not saying I don't believe you, but dropping 2 gears can isn't that much quicker due to the nature of a H-gate, of course dropping one gear can be almost instantaneous in a manual.

 

[Perfect Balance]

I am not saying I don't believe you, but dropping 2 gears can isn't that much quicker due to the nature of a H-gate, of course dropping one gear can be almost instantaneous in a manual.

Maybe not that much quicker, but still quicker and a LOT smoother.

 

[homeforsummer]

I can do this quicker in my manual car than any auto I've driven.

Bear in mind that doing so in a manual car involves pressing the throttle to the floor as part of various other things. In an auto, it's the only thing you do. I can change down for overtaking pretty quickly in my car, but an auto will generally be quicker unless it takes an age to kick down.

 

[Azuremen]

Bear in mind that doing so in a manual car involves pressing the throttle to the floor as part of various other things. In an auto, it's the only thing you do. I can change down for overtaking pretty quickly in my car, but an auto will generally be quicker unless it takes an age to kick down.

I really doubt that. I've driven quite a few cars, and even new, fast automatics still shift slower than me. What slows down my shifting isn't the time it takes for me to pull the stick through the gate, but waiting for the engine speed to match to the road speed. So on a downshift, I just blip the throttle while shifting to pass and viola, in gear.

 

[the Interceptor]

Gentlemen, your current discussion brings me back to my main point I raise against an autobox: it will ever only react to my inputs, while with a manual, I can act prior to the happenings I expect.

 

[homeforsummer]

I really doubt that. I've driven quite a few cars, and even new, fast automatics still shift slower than me. What slows down my shifting isn't the time it takes for me to pull the stick through the gate, but waiting for the engine speed to match to the road speed. So on a downshift, I just blip the throttle while shifting to pass and viola, in gear.

True, I guess. Like I said, I can shift reasonably quickly... maybe it's just a feeling thing, that because you aren't doing as much it feels like it's reacting quicker.

I did mention a couple of posts ago that before I overtake I'm always in the right gear anyway, so for me it's irrelevant.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Aside from the greater power draw of an automatic, it has no disadvantages versus a manual IF DONE RIGHT.

Now, I don't mean the newfangled DSGs and such, I mean a bog-standard torque-converter automatic.

Now then... Manual valvebody and a ratchet shifter, there's full gear control (Or a complete manual mode as seen on the early Probe/MX-6/post-fox Capri and a ratchet shifter) with pretty much no chance of missing a gear EVER.

A properly done auto can only be out-shifted by a manual if you're Ronnie Sox, which the average person is not.

Then for simple drag racing, full automatic operation and quick shifts are the order of the day. More consistent and every bit as quick as a stick.

See where I'm headed?

 

[Bones Brigade]

but drag racing is boring. so...are you going to say that auto is better in all of lifes most mundane aspects?

 

[Perfect Balance]

We weren't talking about just shift speed in general. We were talking about downshifts.

It also has plenty of disadvantages, as long as advantages, we've already discussed them in this thread.

 

[niky]

I'd certainly agree that autos aren't any more dangerous than manuals, but re: the overtaking comment, are you referring to EA11R above learning to drive, or driving in general?

I'm not having a dig at you here Niky, but in my view people who "don't see any need" to overtake are the sort of people who cause huge queues of traffic on main roads when they "don't see any need" to overtake a lorry that's going 40mph in a 60mph zone.

Overtaking is a perfectly safe and occasionally very necessary skill to driving - given correct planning. It winds me up when people complain about overtaking as if it's reckless and unnecessary. Sure, it's possible to overtake recklessly, but then it's possible to park recklessly too.

Incidentally, to veer back on topic, that is one thing that autos with a bit of power are good at - if the box is a good one then kickdown can be very useful for a quick overtake. If I see an overtaking opportunity I always try and be in the right gear to make the maneuver, but in an auto you can just cruise along at low revs behind whatever is going slowly, and when you see a gap just press the pedal to the floor and wham, down two gears for instant punch.

Oh... I'm not that sort of person... I'll actually overtake when the need arises... but if you're in a compact with a 4-speed AT and a 0-62 mph time of... oh... just about legal minimum age... ...if you can't overtake the guy in front of you, it's probably best you don't even try.

When I'm holding up traffic (driving a car that gets to 62 mph at near F1 retirement age... my work truck is THAT slow), I pull as far to the right as possible to give people every opportunity to pass.

---

As for the overtaking argument... it's only one command, right? But for your traditional small-engined cars with torque converter automatics, which are probably what EA11R is talking about... you have to give it a doggone hard kick to downshift... a downshift that occurs one or two seconds after the command. It takes a bit of predictive driving to overtake safely with this lack of connection between the "go" pedal and any sort of go. Especially if the truck in front of you is doing 40 mph and there's oncoming traffic.

Manually shifting the box helps, though... I find that toggling "Overdrive" off for a few seconds works perfectly fine for these occassions.

Again, though... new boxes, different parameters... six-speed autoboxes can often shift down (like homeforsummer says) two gears or more very quickly (without needing to guesstimate the proper gear, like humans do) for maximum acceleration when you need it. There's delay in the response, but the faster shifting more than makes up for it. DSGs are even better... while they're still "reactive" in the sense that they'll only shift after the request, but they're predictive in the sense that the next gear is queued up and ready to be activated even before you ask for it. Sure, some DSGs can get confused in full automatic mode, but in traffic, they're great. Point. Squirt.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

but drag racing is boring. so...are you going to say that auto is better in all of lifes most mundane aspects?

Disagree with the drag racing is boring bit...

And yes, I'll say that in most cases I would prefer an automatic.

We weren't talking about just shift speed in general. We were talking about downshifts.

It also has plenty of disadvantages, as long as advantages, we've already discussed them in this thread.

Do a slushy right and it'll do what you need it to. Do it wrong as most manufacturers do and it'll keep every stereotype there is intact.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Do a slushy right and it'll do what you need it to. Do it wrong as most manufacturers do and it'll keep every stereotype there is intact.

So then you're comparing a high performance automatic with a normal manual box found in everyday cars in an situation where the only thing the transmission is really required to do is upshift.

Yes, that's an awesome comparison. Now I see why an slushbox shifts just as quickly, responsively and smoothly as a manual transmission.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Oh really? So a slushbox not being setup the absolute cheapest/easiest way possible automatically makes it a PERFORMANCE automatic? Mmkay.

All I'm saying is that if manufacturers would put any sort of work into autos then they wouldn't be worse than manuals in most areas.

 

[Wolfe]

But there's no reason to chase high performance torque converter boxes when we have DSGs and such around, and standard manuals will continue to be an option for those who want to be involved with the drive...so what's the point?

 

[the Interceptor]

So can we agree that both types of gearboxes have advantages and disadvantages, and which one you prefer is down to personal taste?

 

[homeforsummer]

Oh... I'm not that sort of person... I'll actually overtake when the need arises... but if you're in a compact with a 4-speed AT and a 0-62 mph time of... oh... just about legal minimum age... ...if you can't overtake the guy in front of you, it's probably best you don't even try.

My car has 60bhp, five manual gears and a 0-60 time of around 14-15 seconds. Third gear is short enough and yet long enough to be useful for overtaking in in the general slow traffic range of between 40 and 60 miles an hour. It makes me laugh when I read magazine reviews of cars with 100bhp+ and the writer says "you'll need a lot of planning for overtaking". If I can overtake safely with 60bhp I don't want to meet the man who can't overtake with over 100bhp...

 

[Duke]

Some of you manual-trans afficianados are badly overstating the case against automatic transmissions, and it's not helping your credibility any.

I've been driving automatic and manual transmission cars of all types for 30 years, and I have never ONCE met one that takes an ACTUAL "1-2 seconds" to kick down. Most that I've driven downshift at least 1 pop, if not 2, as soon as your foot hits the floorboard. And it's not like an automatic transmission will suddenly and arbitrarily shift somewhere delicate and hurl you off the side of the road.

Sometimes they'll downshift a little later than you want. Sometimes they'll upshift a little sooner than you want. But it's not like there is some random-number generator stuck in the bottom of the car that arbitrarily decides when and how to shift. The car actually does react to the driver's input.

 

[the Interceptor]

Here's an example of what the DSG in my dad's Seat does. And this is no one-off, it always does that:

It "refuses" to downshift when you're in a long, quickly driven corner. That sounds good in theory, since you don't want to unsettle the car in that situation. But in praxis, it isn't.

Imagine this: I'm changing from one Autobahn onto another one. A long, sweeping bend connects them. I take the exit and enter the bend, letting the car gradually slow down for the bend. Coming towards the end of the bend, the car is still in 6th gear, since I didn't lose enough speed to downshift. 6th is too high to actually accelerate again though. So the only thing happening when I press the accelerator is that the engine starts to shake.

Now, I have a few options:

• I press the accelerator harder until the DSG shifts down: then however, it'll make a jump, and the car will unsettle
• I give the accelerator a short blip and hope it was enough to make it downshift while not having the above problem: not very elegant either
• I go into manual mode and make the downshift by myself

Obviously, I regularly do the latter. Then however, I ask myself why I have an automatic gearbox when I need to override it manually. That kind of defeats the purpose of the thing for me.

 

[YSSMAN]

Sometimes they'll downshift a little later than you want. Sometimes they'll upshift a little sooner than you want. But it's not like there is some random-number generator stuck in the bottom of the car that arbitrarily decides when and how to shift. The car actually does react to the driver's input.

Very much correct, and again, that comes down to the transmission's programming versus that of the actual unit. I usually think of the GM slushboxes that hold onto gears a little too long or shift up a little too soon under these circumstances, but I know at least in the case of the big Lambda crossovers, they were designed to act that way.

Nevertheless, if it is in a "performance car," there should have been some kind of "performance" tune for the transmission's brain.

 

[niky]

You've never driven a 2-ton 4-speed truck with just 50 bhp? I swear... that thing never wants to downshift... I always rib my uncle about it when I drive his... "full throttle, half-throttle, full throttle, half-throttle.... see the difference?" (and you don't... it's lugging uphill and still refuses to kick down into the next gear...)

Most modern ATs... thankfully... don't do that... but on economy cars, you don't really want to use full throttle to overtake if you don't have to... manuals give you that luxury.

 

[homeforsummer]

Most modern ATs... thankfully... don't do that... but on economy cars, you don't really want to use full throttle to overtake if you don't have to... manuals give you that luxury.

I would have thought on low powered economy cars you'd have to use full throttle regardless of manual or automatic transmission? I know I use full throttle when I'm overtaking. It's a process you want done as quickly as possible and if the car hasn't got much power then naturally you have to use a bigger proportion of what's available - i.e. all of it!

 

[Jim Prower]

Depends on what a "Low-powered economy car" is to you. Over there, Low-powered is REALLY low-powered, less than 100hp, but over here, Low-powered is 110hp or more.

 

[TheCracker]

Depends on what a "Low-powered economy car" is to you. Over there, Low-powered is REALLY low-powered, less than 100hp, but over here, Low-powered is 110hp or more.

I would imagine that over there your 110bhp+ cars are bigger and therefore heavier than our low-powered cars giving a similar power-weight ratio.

 

[Tornado]

PWR does not always indicate acceleration.

 

[kingcars]

I've been driving automatic and manual transmission cars of all types for 30 years, and I have never ONCE met one that takes an ACTUAL "1-2 seconds" to kick down.

Guess you've never driven a stock Ford AOD . Trying to get it out of overdrive would take ages. And sometimes if I got on the gas at just the right speed, she simply wouldn't downshift at all. And yes, the TV cable was properly adjusted.

 

[Stevisiov]

PWR does not always indicate acceleration.

I am pretty sure The Cracker is aware of that.

 

[YSSMAN]

I would imagine that over there your 110bhp+ cars are bigger and therefore heavier than our low-powered cars giving a similar power-weight ratio.

Not necessarily. Cars like the Honda Jazz/Fit get higher output gasoline engines here, as does the Kia Rio, Nissan Versa/Tiida, and even that pesky Chevrolet Aveo. I believe the Nissan Versa 1.6 is the lowest-powered car of the group, with just above 100 BHP (I believe 106), the Honda Fit Sport in the same neighborhood.

I believe the argument is that even in small cars, anything less than 100 BHP is "dangerous" in that it is not powerful enough to reach highway speed. Nothing that a proper CVT or Manual can't fix...

 

[Wolfe]

I believe the argument is that even in small cars, anything less than 100 BHP is "dangerous" in that it is not powerful enough to reach highway speed. Nothing that a proper CVT or Manual can't fix...

I don't know about automatics, but I know that with a manual, you don't need triple digit BHP to reach triple digit MPH.

 

[buickgnx88]

You just need the right gearing.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

You just need the right gearing.

Or in Wolfe's case, lots and lots of room.