Automatic v manual fuel consumption

corblimey

Not a case of which should I get, but a case of which should I use? I found out at the weekend that the 520 I just got has both automatic and manual gears. I'm happy to use the automatic, but I can imagine that the manual might get better mileage.

Having said that, I suspect the manual to be a sort of 'soft' version, in that it's still only changing the gears on the automatic gearbox, so it wouldn't make a jot of difference (and in fact might be slightly worse if I cocked up the gear changes as I probably do)

alias no.9

The traditional loss of efficiency in autoboxes comes from usually having one or two fewer gear ratios than their manual equivalent along with a torque converter instead of a clutch. Most modern autoboxes have the same number of ratios as their manual equivalent to that's no longer a worry. Some also use double clutch gearboxes instead of torque converters which can deliver better MPG than manual. I'm assuming yours has a torque converter and at least 5 if not 6 gears, I doubt you'll do much better than the box when it comes to fuel consumption so why bark yourself when you've got a dog to do it for you.

R.O.R

I can't imagine the manual shifting would be any better on fuel than just leaving it in D. If you are light with the right foot, the box changes at the most fuel effecient point.

One point on the "manual" - the box automatically downshifts when you brake, so no need to do it yourself coming up to a roundabout etc. If I'm really bored towards the end of my commute, I'll sometimes put it in to manual, but usually end up going back in to D after a few changes.