|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
TRANSMISSION, AUT? STD?
DO YOU PREFER AUTOMATIC OR STANDARD TRANSMISSIONS? WHY
if you live in a high traffic area I would prefer auto. but Standard is what i'm looking at for my next vehicle.
Love std. I think it forces you to be more involved with driving. I hate auto, I hate cruise. Both seem to distance you from the second to second experience of driving.
Also, you get better response on acceleration. Although, it seems that some of the newer autos are addressing that. Anyone have any firsthand info?
Also, you get better response on acceleration. Although, it seems that some of the newer autos are addressing that. Anyone have any firsthand info?
People think that autos lessen your acceleration only because they don't know how to use one. If you really know your aoutomatic tranny, you can make it shift precisely when you want to by a slight release of the accelerator. As for better control in downshifting, you can do that just as well in an auto too. Should anyone doubt me about the benifits of knowing your tranny, the factory specs for my truck give it a 10.1second 0-60 time. I've made no modifications, and just by knowing how to use an automatic transmission, my 0-60 time in it is 7.68seconds. (it also helps that I know precisely at what RPM's my engine produces the most power.)
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| People think that autos lessen your acceleration only because they don't know how to use one. If you really know your aoutomatic tranny, you can make it shift precisely when you want to by a slight release of the accelerator. As for better control in downshifting, you can do that just as well in an auto too. Should anyone doubt me about the benifits of knowing your tranny, the factory specs for my truck give it a 10.1second 0-60 time. I've made no modifications, and just by knowing how to use an automatic transmission, my 0-60 time in it is 7.68seconds. (it also helps that I know precisely at what RPM's my engine produces the most power.) |
I think we've danced around this before, haven't we? My issue here is initial accleration. Most autos I've driven have a lag associated with the first application of power. As I've said, they might be getting better, but I've never driven an auto that didn't lag before acceleration kicks in.
I like STD, because I must control my car, not my car must control itself. I decide when change gear and which gear should be in at the moment. When I`m going to overtake other car I`m reducing gear. Automat doesn`t know what I`m going to do, so I haven`t 100% of control. Automatic trans is for old ladies 
| jackill wrote: |
| ....Automatic trans is for old ladies |
Hey, I know some "old ladies" who would kick some butt at that statement.
It's a choice, with good and bad both ways. Heck, I remember one Thanksgiving when I was stuck in traffic that averaged 6 miles and hour for 2 hours that even I wished I had auto. My trick knee was starting to hurt purty bad.
But I really am curious about some of the newer autos out there. Looks like they are improving a bit.
Automatic is what I'd be looking for in a daily commute, however I prefer manual because you have more control and power.
Simple. Manual.
Not going to list the many advantages to manual, but I can't see any real advantage in automatic shifts if you're an experienced driver. The ones usually mentioned - starting on an upward slope, "smooth shifts" etc. are easily done just as well by an experienced driver with a manual. In spite of me mostly spending my time on motorcycle rather than in a car, I've driven cars enough to be very experienced with manual car shifts. So, I see no point to automatic.
Also, on a bike, there's pretty much no choice (if I wanted a choice), with Boss Hoss and Ridley being almost the only options if you want automatic (and I can't think any motorcyclist would - but the designs of Ridley and BH can pretty much only appeal to someone who'd want automatic anyway - BH especially eradicating everything fun about bikes IMO)
And finally, I know of noone driving automatic in Europe, other than handicapped people, mentally retarded people - who aren't retarded enough to be denied a license altogether - and mobility-impaired elderly people. So jackill has a point. Old ladies.
Not going to list the many advantages to manual, but I can't see any real advantage in automatic shifts if you're an experienced driver. The ones usually mentioned - starting on an upward slope, "smooth shifts" etc. are easily done just as well by an experienced driver with a manual. In spite of me mostly spending my time on motorcycle rather than in a car, I've driven cars enough to be very experienced with manual car shifts. So, I see no point to automatic.
Also, on a bike, there's pretty much no choice (if I wanted a choice), with Boss Hoss and Ridley being almost the only options if you want automatic (and I can't think any motorcyclist would - but the designs of Ridley and BH can pretty much only appeal to someone who'd want automatic anyway
- BH especially eradicating everything fun about bikes IMO)
And finally, I know of noone driving automatic in Europe, other than handicapped people, mentally retarded people - who aren't retarded enough to be denied a license altogether - and mobility-impaired elderly people. So jackill has a point. Old ladies.
| Kaneda wrote: |
| I know of noone driving automatic in Europe |
Yep, because we are using both hands while driving, Americans are holding cup of coke or hamburger with one and wheel with second hand
/In USA when U are geting Ur driving licence, U R taking an exam in car with automatic transimssion (am I right?, i`m not sure...)/| jackill wrote: | ||
Yep, because we are using both hands while driving, Americans are holding cup of coke or hamburger with one and wheel with second hand /In USA when U are geting Ur driving licence, U R taking an exam in car with automatic transimssion (am I right?, i`m not sure...)/ |
Last I heard, it's the drivers choice as to what you take your test in. I remember when I took my motrocycle test, there was a dude who brought his hog with extended front forks. Haha. He couldn't turn the thing tight enough for the slalom section and failed...Fool
BTW - Just doing the math here, but if you are using both hands with a std, wouldn't you have an extra hand if you had an auto?
I heard somewhere that auto is really expensive in some areas. Is this true in Europe. It's about a $1000 difference in the states.
| HoboPelican wrote: |
| Last I heard, it's the drivers choice as to what you take your test in. |
Really? So what is percentage of drivers taking manual for their exam? can anybody tell me? i heard from my uncle that in USA You are taking exam in a car with auto.
Automatic for commuting and manual for on the open road.
In Jakarta traffic a manual is a pain, I know, I drive one. But for fun and performance driving manual is generally much better.
The line between the two is getting closer for sure though.
I remember seeing on TV about a ferrari or something that had an electronically controlled manual gearbox. Sort of the best of both worlds.
Automatic clutch kits were available years ago also. So you just grab the gearlever and a servo operates the clutch for you. I am not sure how succesful that was. Does anyone know if they are still available?
In Jakarta traffic a manual is a pain, I know, I drive one. But for fun and performance driving manual is generally much better.
The line between the two is getting closer for sure though.
I remember seeing on TV about a ferrari or something that had an electronically controlled manual gearbox. Sort of the best of both worlds.
Automatic clutch kits were available years ago also. So you just grab the gearlever and a servo operates the clutch for you. I am not sure how succesful that was. Does anyone know if they are still available?
| HoboPelican wrote: |
|
Last I heard, it's the drivers choice as to what you take your test in. I remember when I took my motrocycle test, there was a dude who brought his hog with extended front forks. Haha. He couldn't turn the thing tight enough for the slalom section and failed...Fool
I heard somewhere that auto is really expensive in some areas. Is this true in Europe. It's about a $1000 difference in the states. |
Yes, you can choose any car you have to take the test in. I took the test in a chevvy suburban, and greatly impressed the tester that I was able to get into the parking spot.
As for an auto being more expensive, that is true, but with newer cars it's actualy a little rare to find a standard in the US.
And, yes, there is a slight lag before the acceleration kicks in in an auto, but a standard also has lags every time you shift (unless you are very good with it.) Yes, an auto lags then too, but not nearly as much.
Once more I will remind ya'll that yes you can downshift in an auto: the shifter is right there, just move it. (Unless you have one of thos crappy autos that dosen't let you select any gear you want).
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| Yes, you can choose any car you have to take the test in. I took the test in a chevvy suburban, and greatly impressed the tester that I was able to get into the parking spot.
As for an auto being more expensive, that is true, but with newer cars it's actualy a little rare to find a standard in the US. And, yes, there is a slight lag before the acceleration kicks in in an auto, but a standard also has lags every time you shift (unless you are very good with it.) Yes, an auto lags then too, but not nearly as much. Once more I will remind ya'll that yes you can downshift in an auto: the shifter is right there, just move it. (Unless you have one of thos crappy autos that dosen't let you select any gear you want). |
Good job with the suburban!
Boy, you're right about getting harder to find stds. I had to get my Cherokee from the next state. Of course, I wanted manual windows too. Made it a little tough.
I'll take your word about downshifting an auto. All the ones I have tried(and they have been older models) lagged before grabbing and I was limited to 3 gears. Didn't like it much.
I know I'll have to get an auto someday, but until then I like the feel of involvement that the std gives. (and the 1000 buck difference is nice, too)
I think anybody who likes to drive will tell the same thing. Automatic transmission is perfect for daily driving, where you have to stop quite frequently, but manual shifting feels much better where you can get a response from your engine as you like. But if you ask me, tiptronic (ie. manual or automatic w/o clutch) is the best option where you can get both mixed.
Just a few facts;
Citroen Xantia II 1.8 16V (112 BHP)
Gearbox: 5+1/AUT
0-100 kph: 10,8/13,1
V-max: 194/186
Fuel for 100km: 8,7/8,9
Conclusion -> no comments old ladies
Citroen Xantia II 1.8 16V (112 BHP)
Gearbox: 5+1/AUT
0-100 kph: 10,8/13,1
V-max: 194/186
Fuel for 100km: 8,7/8,9
Conclusion -> no comments old ladies
Fairly obscure sports car w/manual transmission: rebuilt transmission for $800
Moderately common wagon w/auto transmission: rebuilt transmission for $3,000
Both were about 10yrs old and nearing 200,000 miles at the time of their rebuilds.
That's all I need to know.
Moderately common wagon w/auto transmission: rebuilt transmission for $3,000
Both were about 10yrs old and nearing 200,000 miles at the time of their rebuilds.
That's all I need to know.
I Think that there is something better about std and that it is the real way to drive!
automatic can be nice when you drive in a city, when the trafic is flowing really slow, or if there´s a lot of trafic lights.
But when it comes to more "inspired" driving I prefer manual shifting, since it gives a lot better controll of how the engine handles.
But when it comes to more "inspired" driving I prefer manual shifting, since it gives a lot better controll of how the engine handles.
| tuncay wrote: |
| I think anybody who likes to drive will tell the same thing. Automatic transmission is perfect for daily driving, where you have to stop quite frequently, but manual shifting feels much better where you can get a response from your engine as you like. But if you ask me, tiptronic (ie. manual or automatic w/o clutch) is the best option where you can get both mixed. |
The problem with the tiptronic style shifting is that it DOES NOT always shift when you tell it to. For example, I drove a 2002 Volvo S80 Twin Turbo today, and while I have the response in first that I wanted, I had no control on when it shifted to second and third and so on. I would tell it to shift then about 2 or 3 seconds later it would begin it's shifting. Don't get me wrong, it's a great idea, I just think that if you are going to get an automatic, don't get the tiptronic, because if you want a manual, get a true manual, it will be much more responsive, and you will have far more control. I'm looking at one with tiptronic in it, only because it was the only transmission offered...
Standard is harder, and more fun.
I prefer standard (although we brits call it a manual transmission). I prefer the control I have over the car with a manual, I can change down to imporve my braking etc. and I can really feel the car respond.
I must say though all of the automatics which I have driven are poor transmission systems, the Toyota Yaris I drove (the worst) jurked around every time it changed gear, up or down, and suffered from serious acceleration issues because of the dogdy transmission- which is apparently normal for the Yaris auto-gearbox. Odd because Toyotas are usually really well made cars.
I must say though all of the automatics which I have driven are poor transmission systems, the Toyota Yaris I drove (the worst) jurked around every time it changed gear, up or down, and suffered from serious acceleration issues because of the dogdy transmission- which is apparently normal for the Yaris auto-gearbox. Odd because Toyotas are usually really well made cars.
 |