Automatic versus manual for a mix of driving?

Yeah, I agree with the US on this one. Auto is the way to go.

Previously they were less efficient, less robust and of course, as they still are, more expensive.

But the move in motor sport to move automated gear boxes, not fully but in many cases tiptronic and the likes, have moved the technology on massively.

I was going to opt for Auto recently but held off because of the extra cost and the fact that it would be harder to resell. In addition, we are fast moving towards electric and hybrid and they are going to mostly be autos so I think the move will happen over time regardless.

worded wrote: »

Ive always driven a manual but recently drove an automatic and it was very pleasant in traffic.

My dad was anti Automatic as he said the gears fail more often years ago and they use way more fuel ...

If I was to get a 1.6 to 2.0 Automatic car that was circa 2010 what are the main disadvantages to manual? Is there that much of a fuel difference ?

thanks

maybe in a Cortina Mk3...

Modern auto's are much better, and in many cases now use less juice, not more, than their manual equivalents.

Even if they weren't, for city driving, auto is the er, 'automatic' choice tbh. One by One we've changed all our cars as we've changed them, to automatic.

Your dad is right that a long time ago there was a discrepancy, but it's not true any more.
There may be some diffs in fuel but it's negligible I think considering that if you slow down a little it will have a bigger impact of your economy.

coylemj wrote: »

Garda patrol cars in Dublin have been automatic since at least the 1970s and they get a fair amount of usage.

Really?

coylemj wrote: »

Garda patrol cars in Dublin have been automatic since at least the 1970s and they get a fair amount of usage.

They used Avengers and Renault 18s a lot during the 1970s. None of those were auto and I can never remember seeing any autos in use by AGS until a few years ago (Q7s, X5s etc.)

I'd prefer a manual for the mechanical simplicity and the added driver interaction and involvement. With the right engine and gearbox it's really no hassle having to change the gears yourself because the box is so slick and precise coupled with a nicely weighted clutch, but so much more enjoyable on your favourite country road than an automatic. Also better for towing and you've more control over the car in harsh weather thanks to the engine braking.

However, they only really work well in a petrol. They're generally awful in diesels, you need to be on the boil the whole time and compared to a petrol they're very unforgiving of being in the wrong gear. They're often painful around town because you have to change to second gear much earlier than in a petrol. Coupled with a gearbox that is usually heavier and less slick than their petrol equivalents, they're a bit of a pain to drive really. Autos disguise the narrow power bands most diesels have beautifully and make them much more relaxing to drive. I wouldn't buy a diesel unless it was an automatic quite frankly.

Garda cars have chips and a special box that makes them way faster than all the other cars on the road.










*Curry chips & a snack box maybe

zilog_jones wrote: »

Would you prefer having a manual choke too? And a manual ignition retard lever, like on a Model T? Where do you draw the line?

I prefer to start my car with the crank handle - you get much more feel than with these fancy electric starter motors.

zilog_jones wrote: »

Would you prefer having a manual choke too? And a manual ignition retard lever, like on a Model T? Where do you draw the line?

Typical auto snobbery comment there.

I have driven some of the best automatics out there (VW's DSG, as well as BMW's DCT and 8 speed ZF spring to mind), so I'm well aware of how good automatics can be, yet despite this, I still prefer a good manual gearbox in the same way I much prefer hydraulic power steering to electric power steering - both involve the driver much more in the process of driving and give the driver much more control.

A slick gearbox coupled a nicely weighted clutch, revvy engine with a good and linear powerband makes driving more enjoyable. Plus some automatics are decidedly iffy reliability wise as the miles pile on. I know it's not true any more but even until quite recently automatics sapped power and fuel economy, too.

Cripes!!! You seem to be quite offended by random people on the internet having opinions that differ to yours...........you should see someone about that.

zilog_jones wrote: »

So you have some emotional attachment to playing around with some weird mechanical stick and a pedal? I've driven many amazing roads in automatics and did not think once that I regretted not having a manual at the time.



I'd rather be able to focus more on the road ahead of me and actually steering and stuff rather than having to keep track of gearbox ratios.

Would you prefer having a manual choke too? And a manual ignition retard lever, like on a Model T? Where do you draw the line?


Automatics usually have some way of holding lower gears for the purpose of engine braking, be it "L" or "B" or whatever.

So, let's take this one at a time.........

Yes I do have an emotional attachment.

It may be a weird stick to you but to me, a mechanic, I know exactly how it works and appreciate it even more for that.

I've driven around Europe, Australia, America in manual cars and on manual bikes. Never even thought about an automatic in that time.... imagine that! Different people have different likes and dislikes! Well I never!!!......

If driving a manual distracts you then it's probably better you do drive an auto......also, I've never counted a gear ratio while driving. Can you explain how that works?

Many bikes I've owned in recent years have had manual chokes.....great fun altogether.
And I draw the line at Auto gearboxes FYI.

The run of the mill automatic car driver knows P, R, N, D.........and in a situation where engine braking would be necessary, like stopping in a hurry, will just plant both feet on the brake pedal and pray.


In summary, you do you and I'll do me, with a soul.

Wibbs wrote: »

Jaysus yes, a thousand times yes. Now I believe some of the latest leccy power steering systems are much better, but I've yet to drive one anyway.

Whatever about automatics, I'm immovable on electric steering! I have yet to drive a car that has steering as good as the hydraulic power steering in my E46, although the E92 M3 and the E39 would run it very very close. The Mondeo Mk4 also has very good steering (a bit too light but otherwise very communicative), but that's also hydraulic so no surprise why it's so good. Surprisingly, the Mk1 Volvo S40 did well on this front, much more communicative than you might expect. Again, that has hydraulic power steering. On the other hand, 90s Corollas had dreadful steering and in fact the electric power steering modern Toyotas have is better, so that's proof that I'm not totally biased towards hydraulic .

khaldrogo wrote: »

It may be a weird stick to you but to me, a mechanic, I know exactly how it works and appreciate it even more for that.

I know how it works too, but I don't have any desire to get directly involved in it when a computer can probably do a better job and controlling it. (I don't mean automatic clutch type auto boxes, they seem generally terrible).

But let's get back to the OP here - they're talking about a daily driver, e.g. "in traffic". What advantage is there to driving a manual in these situations? For a daily driver, one requirement for me would be comfort - driving an automatic in traffic, motorways, etc. equals more comfort IMO.

I wouldn't mind having a manual classic or whatever for weekends (if I could afford it), but for commutes or 200km+ journeys? Nah.

If driving a manual distracts you then it's probably better you do drive an auto......

I can change gears in a manual without really thinking, but I still have to actually do it and that must require some level of brain activity - and taking one hand off the wheel.

also, I've never counted a gear ratio while driving. Can you explain how that works?

You need to keep track of what gear you're in and change accordingly for the conditions and engine speed. You generally don't need to care when driving an auto.

The run of the mill automatic car driver knows P, R, N, D.........and in a situation where engine braking would be necessary, like stopping in a hurry, will just plant both feet on the brake pedal and pray.

Engine braking isn't really that useful for stopping in a hurry, unless your brakes are shîte. The main need for it is on long descents where there's risk of cooking your brakes.

In summary, you do you and I'll do me, with a soul.

I just don't get how changing gears manually equates to "soul". I like cars, but I'd never give one a name or use gendered pronouns either, so I guess I just don't think that way about machines.

One more thing (not relevant to OP though): I've never raced a car in real life, but in simulations - heel-toe braking while trying to downshift and rev-match correctly is a pain in the arse! There's a reason why modern sports cars do some (or all) or that automatically.

I recently switched to automatic after driving manuals for over 20 years. It's the way to go.
Only thing I dislike is having to keep your foot on the brake when stopped at traffic lights (been told that it's better to do that than shift into neutral or park constantly which leads to more wear and tear).

have drove autos the last 10/12 years maybe more,maximas,civics,lancer and never had any issues at all apart from the norm,and never ever had gearbox problems touch wood..the cars i have do very high miles...