automatic cars

timetogetfit

What is the disadvantage with automatic cars?

MetzgerMeister

If you need to downshift/upshift quickly you can't.
If you need a specific gear at a certain time you can't engage it at your will. You have to wait for it to engage.
In a lot of cars automatic models are less powerful
Automatics use quite a bit more petrol than the manual version.
You can't push-start an auto.
They take the fun out of driving and replace it with "so relaxed you're almost asleep"
IMO auto gearknobs look stupid

dynamick

they cost more than manual transmission
many Irish people have never driven one and won't buy one
some people like making manual gear changes
some automatics have higher fuel consumption than manual equivalents
hard to tow
can't push start

Alanstrainor

That's a very vague question. A lot of people would see no disadvantages to driving an auto. But it depends on what auto we're talking about as they are not all created equal.

bladespin

They're slower too

The Big Red Button

timetogetfit wrote: »

What is the disadvantage with automatic cars?

Less control over acceleration; less control in general really. From what I hear, they can be more difficult and expensive to maintain/repair.

Also, they're just less fun to drive in my opinion ... and I would hate to be seen as someone who drives an auto! That's just me though

metzengerstein

i drive one and love it ,very powerfull ,it can be towed of course ,someone there said it cant ,and they can be pushed also you can have the gear in neutral so can be pushed and then you can start it .and to downshift quickly all you do is put your pedal to the floor it will then drop to about 2nd gear and boom your gone like the wind .and also some have a 1st and 2nd gear on the box

and what about american muscle cars they are nearly all autos ,very powerfull and great fun to drive

Berty

Do your driving test in one and you can only drive an automatic unless you resit the test in a manual gearbox vehicle.

rebel.ranter

Most autos have a tiptronic type setting on the gearbox that you can manually select the gear you need (as long as the car thinks it's OK to select that gear).

Zubeneschamali

timetogetfit wrote: »

What is the disadvantage with automatic cars?

1) They cost more.

2) They generally use a bit more fuel.

3) People think they are slower, possibly because of the insane way 0-100 times are measured in manuals.

4) If they go wrong, they may cost a lot to fix compared to a manual.

5) Some of them are just bad: slow to change, hunt between gears, change mid-corner etc.

biko

Not made for spirited driving when you can choose what gears to use in corners etc. But then again many sports cars come in auto versions... prob for the US market.
I'd say the advantages are by far outweighing the disadvantages for most drivers/vehicles.

Voodoomelon

bladespin wrote: »

They're slower too

No doubt you can match your manual cars quoted 0-60 time, driven by a professional driver in optimum conditions.

Andrew33

bladespin wrote: »

They're slower too

Eh no! the DSG auto in my car is quicker to 100kph than the manual version according to manufacturers figures.
And in real life an automatic will beat a manual away from the lights every time (all else being equal, type of car, engine size etc.)

The average Joe/josephine knows less than nothing about modern auto boxes and base their opinions on something they heard 10-15 years ago from a relative who used to drive one.
I had a bloke in my car try to tell me that autos were rubbish and practically undriveable on snow/ice, this was despite the fact that we WERE driving on thick ice (during the Jan weather) without a problem and the duffis didn't even have a car!

Max Power1

Voodoomelon wrote: »

No doubt you can match your manual cars quoted 0-60 time, driven by a professional driver in optimum conditions.

.. no doubt forcing gear changes without using the clutch also

colm_mcm

A DSG isn't an automatic in the conventional sense of the word though.
Same way a Toyota Multimode or Alfa Selespeed isn't.

BlackWizard

The average person can accelerate alot faster in the auto than manual transmission.

When naturally driving you also find you are pulling away alot faster than most manual cars. So much so you find yourself easing your foot off the pedal to mimic gear changes on the car on front of you

My car can manually go up and down the gears, but I dont see the point really. I'm new to the steptronic stuff, so maybe I'll figure it out one day. I just cant get used to it.

edit: I was just thinking that some people will definitely miss the attachment that clutching brings. Its like the engine is attached to your body and you the wheels. You are the go between for the power of the car and the power of the engine is completely at your will. You control 100% of all the torque going into the wheels.

Absurdum

auto ftw!

bladespin

Voodoomelon wrote: »

No doubt you can match your manual cars quoted 0-60 time, driven by a professional driver in optimum conditions.

I can nbut generally don't try to, I value my clutch.

galwaytt

einheisserschre wrote: »

1. If you need to downshift/upshift quickly you can't.
2. If you need a specific gear at a certain time you can't engage it at your will. You have to wait for it to engage.
3. In a lot of cars automatic models are less powerful
4. Automatics use quite a bit more petrol than the manual version.
5. You can't push-start an auto.
6. They take the fun out of driving and replace it with "so relaxed you're almost asleep"
7. IMO auto gearknobs look stupid

god, where to start.........

1. Wrong.
2. Wrong.
3. Wrong
4. You can't win 'em all, but my auto does 23-26mpg, and my manual (exact same car), does about 25-28mpg. Potatoes/Potato's. Smallo potatoes, even.......
5. True - but why does your car have to be pushed ? - my car has a starter. And a key.
6. Wow. Somebody better not tell the F1/WRC guys then.
7. ...can't think of a response to that, tbh....

colm_mcm

some automatics on cheap cars are annoying, but to be fair, a good auto is a fantastic thing.

ianobrien

galwaytt wrote: »

god, where to start.........

1. Wrong.
2. Wrong.
3. Wrong
4. True - but why does your car have to be pushed ? - my car has a starter. And a key.
5. Wow. Somebody better not tell the F1/WRC guys then.
7. ...can't think of a response to that, tbh....

You're wrong on one thing. None of the WRC cars have auto boxes. They have sequencial shifts on dog engagement gearboxes. I'm not too sure about F1 gearboxes, but I imagine they are the same. The beauty of a dog engagement gearbox (shortened usually to "dog 'box") is that when moving, you don't have to use the clutch to change gear. The disadvantages of dog boxes is that they are noisy, have a short life especially if the clutch is not used and generally are not suitable for tootling down to the shop

Audi did try auto gearboxes in rally cars in the group B days to compensate for the peaky power delivery of the engines. They fairly quickly dumped the idea. IIRC Mikkola drove one in Rally Finland in 1985, or was it Stig

Swampy

I dream of the day I can buy a nice Automatic car. No more clutch to 1st, clutch 2nd, clutch break, clutch clutch ...arrgghh. Driving around the city with an auto would be heaven.

dirtydiesel

I have an automatic ford transit lwb, high roof, its got a 2.5 turbo diesel engine with a 4 speed autobox, its much faster than any transit ive driven before and its a pleasure to drive.

Tea 1000

chatterpillar wrote: »

Less control over acceleration; less control in general really. From what I hear, they can be more difficult and expensive to maintain/repair.

Also, they're just less fun to drive in my opinion ... and I would hate to be seen as someone who drives an auto! That's just me though

The majority of people who say that though don't drive a fun car anyway, and wouldn't know how to drive in a style that's in any way fun!

Guy:Incognito

The main problem with auto's is the hearsay and general uninformed opinions and "facts" , most of which are apparent in this very thread, that are spouted when they are mentioned.

I had an auto before I moved o a van. Given a choice I'd never bother with a manual again.

E39MSport

530d

Manual 45 mpg
Auto 32 mpg

same routes, same driver, same conditions, same style

bladespin

Americans drive autos, nuff said, I don't want one

_Kaiser_

+1 for auto (2L TDI Passat here)

As Andrew33 said, the DSG box (I have one too ) is a fantastic piece of kit and outperforms most equivalent manual cars in acceleration and take-off every time.

They're also a lot more relaxing to drive, and in my opinion a far better option if you do a lot of driving.

I can put it in manual mode if I want, but why bother given the above 2 points?

As for fuel consumption.. I find mine to be very frugal on diesel, even better than the older 1.9 TDI Auto Passat I had previously, which itself was no slouch either.

Can't ever see myself going back to a manual to be honest. The ONLY real disadvantage I can see in this country is that because of some outdated opinions, the choice is badly lacking when it comes to auto cars (and particularly vans).

Oh to those saying the DSG doesn't really count... I don't have a clutch pedal and I don't spend my time rooting through gear changes .. it's an auto!!

umpsfar

the only disadvantage to Automatics is parts, fewer breakers would have parts, thats all.
anyone here dissing automatics are probably the same ppl that cut u off when they had a fight with their momy etc.
drive civics and spends 1000's on extras.
i love my auto, especially when i go out to get chinese food and it'll spill if i put it down. so i just hold it in my left hand,
i beat everyone off the lights, its fantastic for rush hour traffic, and ur probably less likely to kill someone, oh and i get to hold hands with my girlfrind all the time, sooooo romantic.
i just take the bike out when i wanna blown of some steam ,

Guy:Incognito

LIGHTNING wrote: »

+1 A dsg box is actually a manual gearbox and it isnt an automatic so it cant really be included as a defense for autos.

From a drivers point of view it's an auto.

coolmoose

umpsfar wrote: »

i love my auto, especially when i go out to get chinese food and it'll spill if i put it down. so i just hold it in my left hand,
...oh and i get to hold hands with my girlfrind all the time, sooooo romantic.

post of the week! haha!

Eoin

LIGHTNING wrote: »

All very true but its a manual gearbox not a auto.

Yes, but some of the people here consider anything without a clutch pedal an auto.

einheisserschre wrote:

If you need to downshift/upshift quickly you can't.

I've had my auto for 2 years now, and have yet to experience a problem with this. If I plant my foot, it will drop down as expected. I don't know if I would be any quicker if I had to change gears manually.

umpsfar

coolmoose wrote: »

post of the week! haha!

Guy:Incognito

eoin wrote: »

Yes, but some of the the vast majority of people here consider anything without a clutch pedal an auto.

.

FYP

At the end of the day as far as the average joe goes, a car with a brake and accelerator and no clutch = auto. What goes on behind the bulkhead or under the floor is irrelevant.

I Was VB

I've gone back to driving a Manual after 4 years and about 100K miles in a Automatic.

I much prefer driving a automatic faster away from the lights (kickdown) more relaxing. If i ever get another car it will be a automatic.

And yea im a taxi driver, for the average joe soap doing maybe 250 miles a week there really isnt a need for it. But when your doing 1000+ a week there really isnt anything better.

The only thing i can think of thats a downside to autos are

Increased fuel consumption.
Rads have the autobox fluid at the bottom of some rads too cool the fluid, can be difficult to find a replacement.

pcardin

einheisserschre wrote: »

If you need to downshift/upshift quickly you can't.
If you need a specific gear at a certain time you can't engage it at your will. You have to wait for it to engage.
In a lot of cars automatic models are less powerful
http://www.argos.ie/static/Browse/ID73/14417704/c_1/1|category_root|Toys+and+games|14417629/c_2/2|cat_14417629|Action+figures+and+playsets|14417695/c_3/3|cat_14417695|Ben+10|14417704.htm
You can't push-start an auto.
They take the fun out of driving and replace it with "so relaxed you're almost asleep"
IMO auto gearknobs look stupid

Myth! You obviously never had one. I usualy hear this saying by the people who prefer a manual windows closing instead of electric as electrics " tend to brake down"

btkm8unsl0w5r4

A good auto needs a powerful engine. I have two auto one diesel one petrol. The auto is relaxing around town. I find it more fuel efficient as your in a better gear more of the time, unless your a hyper-miler the auto will do a better job. Good auto have sports settings that hold the gear and shift faster. Really good ones have paddle shifters on the wheel. For faster driving the auto allows you to spend more time thinking about speed and cornering than what bloody gear your in. You beat everyone off the lights.

The problem with most autos in ireland is that its a optional extra that most of the paddy spec 316, avensis, mondeo brigade dont bother with and go around telling everyone that its cause they like "total control" of the car

Rovi

Thalia Shy Cage wrote: »

The problem with most autos in ireland is that its a optional extra that most of the paddy spec 316, avensis, mondeo brigade dont bother with and go around telling everyone that its cause they like "total control" of the car

Motorists are just getting softer and softer; it all started when they allowed the driver into the same enclosed space as the passengers, did away with the starting handle, and moved 'total control' of the ignition advance/retard and fuel mixture off the steering column.

Alanstrainor

I have to say, i'm currently driving an '03 1.4 auto polo and it's horrible. If something like that is peoples only experience of an auto box i can understand your pain. Awful 4 speed yoke. I cover very few miles these days, and would take a manual any day over an auto equivalent purely for the fun factor.

And as for wearing down pads/disks quicker, i'd rather use the brakes to slow the car rather than the engine any day.

Guy:Incognito

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I have to say, i'm currently driving an '03 1.4 auto polo and it's horrible. If something like that is peoples only experience of an auto box i can understand your pain. Awful 4 speed yoke. I cover very few miles these days, and would take a manual any day over an auto equivalent purely for the fun factor.

.

What "fun factor" is there in a 1.4 manual polo

bladespin

Main disadvantage is the assumption that you can't drive properly so you're driving an auto - tis true though lol

Alanstrainor

Stekelly wrote: »

What "fun factor" is there in a 1.4 manual polo

Apologies, what i meant to say was, if i was buying something now, i would look for a fun manual over an auto. 1.4 Polos and "fun" are two things that should never be used in the same sentence!

Voodoomelon

Sitec wrote: »

They seem to be harder on pads and discs as the engine is'nt doing a lot of the braking.

I thought that too, but I've had my auto for 2 years, the pads were done a year before I got it and I only changed then recently. Thats about 30k miles in 3 years with one set of pads. Not bad! I coast up to lights though etc, i'm light on brakes and the auto allows me to do that easier. Foot off the gas and sail up to the red lights.

bmw535d

E39MSport wrote: »

530d

Manual 45 mpg
Auto 32 mpg

same routes, same driver, same conditions, same style

+1 very true!

Guy:Incognito

bmw535d wrote: »

+1 very true!

getting 6 mpg above official figures for the manual? not bad....


I got the same MPG from 2 cars I had (same make and model, not just 2 random cars I had :-) ). The manual was a 2l and the auto a 2.5.

BlackWizard

I drive a 530d and it's true, it does get reduced MPG. But I think its worth every bit of it!

bmw535d

Stekelly wrote: »

getting 6 mpg above official figures for the manual? not bad....


I got the same MPG from 2 cars I had (same make and model, not just 2 random cars I had :-) ). The manual was a 2l and the auto a 2.5.

ill soon have pics of my idrive to prove,if i push it i can get 48.8mpg from my 2004 530d not bad for a 3 litre:)

catbear

Anyone mention cruise control on an auto for the motorway?

Absurdum

catbear wrote: »

Anyone mention cruise control on an auto for the motorway?

no, why?

RobAMerc

I have to say I simply cannot understand given how **** Irish people are at driving that alot more of them are not convinced to go the auto option.

My wife really struggled as alot of drivers do with operating a manual when she was learning. We got a small auto box and it was a complete revelation. She learned to "drive" the car as opposed to operating the car, ie she was able to spend more time considering her and others road position and traffic conditions rather than what gear she was in or needed to be in.

From reading some of the posts here it seems the blocker to people buying autos here and ergo some people actually learning to drive rather than hitting the streets without a fookin clue as many here do is pure ignorance and scaremongering about a technology that clearly people do not understand.

" you cannot change gear when you want?" - "you have less control" - total toss !- learn about the subject before you propagate the untruths people pls.

sorry for the rant but - the sh1t spouted on this forum really irks me.

BlackWizard

catbear wrote: »

Anyone mention cruise control on an auto for the motorway?

It works just fine on my car. It will even change gears if needs be. You just sit back and relax.