Flappy paddle shift - have we reached 'critical mass' yet?
Discussion
There was an interesting thread recently on Ferrari 612 values, and it was noted that manual Ferraris fetch a huge amount more than paddle shift ones (it was called 'F1' by Ferrari in years past, but I'm not sure if it was a roboticised manual like BMW's M3 and M6 system, or a torque converter auto). It seems that in general most buyers of new Ferraris want paddle shift, but buyers of secondhand ones want manual. I asked if anyone knew why this was the case, and nobody responded, leaving me to guess that perhaps buyers of brand new cars want the latest thing and are perhaps extremely wealthy people or CEOs etc who aren't necessarily car enthusiasts, whereas once the cars half in value for secondhand purchases, they attract more savvy buyers who are the more traditional car enthusiast preferring a manual.
kambites said:
I suspect the majority of buyers of second hand Ferraris want an auto too, it's just a slightly smaller majority than that of new buyers.
Note the hugely inflated price for manuals - but I guess you're saying that perhaps even though it's still a minority who want manual gearboxes on the secondhand market, they're all scrabbling over so few cars that the prices go through the roof? That would make sense.kambites said:
Pretty much yeah. If 90% of cars are automatics and 30% of second-hand buyers want a manual, it's going to push manual prices through the roof.
Not really. On cars sold with both transmissions yes, the manuals often sell more easily than the autos in the used market. BUT if you'd ideally like to buy a manual and get fed up with (a) lack of supply, and (b) silly asking prices, it's amazing how soon you realise that buying an auto makes a great deal of sense. Hence no wide price difference emerges.
For me if I was in that position, the choice would be between spending more on the manual or buying a completely different car where manuals don't carry such a premium. As the number of manuals declines across the market as a whole, the value extra value to me of a manual in a particular model will rise. The auto would never be a consideration. I'm sure there are a significant number of people who would consider both, though, yes.
kambites said:
For me if I was in that position, the choice would be between spending more on the manual or buying a completely different car where manuals don't carry such a premium. As the number of manuals declines across the market as a whole, the value extra value to me of a manual in a particular model will rise. The auto would never be a consideration. I'm sure there are a significant number of people who would consider both, though, yes.
why would BMW continue to invest money developing a manual M when 90% of the cars bought are auto
Ari said:
A perfect example would be, I was driving into Cornwall once in summer traffic, which was at a crawl. We were on a two lane uphill section which was stopping and starting. In my torque converter auto, no problem. Leave in drive and ease up the hill on the throttle.
But further up there was a horrific smell of arid burning clutch and as we slowly moved past the other lane we saw an Aston Martin (DB9 I think) which must have had an automated manual. Trouble is that many Aston drivers buy the car for the looks and badge and have no idea about the oily bits. The driver would have seen 'PRND' and assumed he had a normal auto like his old Jag or whatever. As a result he was sitting for half an hour literally slipping the clutch to hold the car on the hill and to creep forward.
That's why you hear of exaggerated clutch wear on automated manuals, people see an automatic gearbox interface and think that is what they have and drive them as such.
Quite a lot of presuming and guessing going on there. Where are all the stories on exaggerated clutch wear? But further up there was a horrific smell of arid burning clutch and as we slowly moved past the other lane we saw an Aston Martin (DB9 I think) which must have had an automated manual. Trouble is that many Aston drivers buy the car for the looks and badge and have no idea about the oily bits. The driver would have seen 'PRND' and assumed he had a normal auto like his old Jag or whatever. As a result he was sitting for half an hour literally slipping the clutch to hold the car on the hill and to creep forward.
That's why you hear of exaggerated clutch wear on automated manuals, people see an automatic gearbox interface and think that is what they have and drive them as such.
I am not all that fussed if the combination works well, I have had horrible manuals (Saab 9-3) and driven a lot of really good autos, I drove a 360 with the F1 gearbox and I wouldn't want one, the one in an early R8 was better but still not at the point where it is completely unobtrusive.
What struck me with the DSG was when they first came out someone pulled from a junction in one (Scirocco) and blasted down the road, the gearchanges were so quick there was virtually no gap, I reckon its worth half a second 0-60 for normal drivers, perhaps a bit less on a road test with pro drivers but for joe public it is like having another 30 or so horsepower in terms of what it does for full bore acceleration, i.e. removing the gaps.
What struck me with the DSG was when they first came out someone pulled from a junction in one (Scirocco) and blasted down the road, the gearchanges were so quick there was virtually no gap, I reckon its worth half a second 0-60 for normal drivers, perhaps a bit less on a road test with pro drivers but for joe public it is like having another 30 or so horsepower in terms of what it does for full bore acceleration, i.e. removing the gaps.
Ari said:
There are, as has been stated, two basic types of auto, traditional torque converter auto and automated manual (the latter also available as a twin clutch where the car pre-engages the next gear then very rapidly swaps cogs by simultaneously disengaging the clutch transmitting the current gear and engaging the clutch of the next gear for an instant seamless change).
To understand the clutch wear issue you have to understand how the gearboxes work.
Torque converters, in essence, work like two fans facing each other, one connected to the engine, the other to the wheels. Spin the engine fan with the engine and the wind spins the one connected to the wheels and drives the car. Obviously its a lot more complex than that, they're in fluid for a start and there is a clutch lock up on most modern ones once moving to reduce losses, but the point is there is nothing to wear when you sit stationary on a hill holding the car on the engine. You can have 'flappy paddles' that instruct the car what gear to be in, but the operation of the gearbox remains the same.
Automated manuals are exactly that. They're like the three pedals and 'H' pattern stick in a normal manual except that 'robots' and computers are pushing the clutch in and out and moving the lever about. Again, the reality is a little different, especially in dual clutch automated manuals, but in essence that's the basics.
The problem of exaggerated clutch wear in automated manuals is not people driving the car hard, it is people not understanding what they have and how it works.
A perfect example would be, I was driving into Cornwall once in summer traffic, which was at a crawl. We were on a two lane uphill section which was stopping and starting. In my torque converter auto, no problem. Leave in drive and ease up the hill on the throttle.
But further up there was a horrific smell of arid burning clutch and as we slowly moved past the other lane we saw an Aston Martin (DB9 I think) which must have had an automated manual. Trouble is that many Aston drivers buy the car for the looks and badge and have no idea about the oily bits. The driver would have seen 'PRND' and assumed he had a normal auto like his old Jag or whatever. As a result he was sitting for half an hour literally slipping the clutch to hold the car on the hill and to creep forward.
That's why you hear of exaggerated clutch wear on automated manuals, people see an automatic gearbox interface and think that is what they have and drive them as such.
good explanation. Not to mention the torque multiplication effect which allows an auto to sit on a steep hill with little/no effort.To understand the clutch wear issue you have to understand how the gearboxes work.
Torque converters, in essence, work like two fans facing each other, one connected to the engine, the other to the wheels. Spin the engine fan with the engine and the wind spins the one connected to the wheels and drives the car. Obviously its a lot more complex than that, they're in fluid for a start and there is a clutch lock up on most modern ones once moving to reduce losses, but the point is there is nothing to wear when you sit stationary on a hill holding the car on the engine. You can have 'flappy paddles' that instruct the car what gear to be in, but the operation of the gearbox remains the same.
Automated manuals are exactly that. They're like the three pedals and 'H' pattern stick in a normal manual except that 'robots' and computers are pushing the clutch in and out and moving the lever about. Again, the reality is a little different, especially in dual clutch automated manuals, but in essence that's the basics.
The problem of exaggerated clutch wear in automated manuals is not people driving the car hard, it is people not understanding what they have and how it works.
A perfect example would be, I was driving into Cornwall once in summer traffic, which was at a crawl. We were on a two lane uphill section which was stopping and starting. In my torque converter auto, no problem. Leave in drive and ease up the hill on the throttle.
But further up there was a horrific smell of arid burning clutch and as we slowly moved past the other lane we saw an Aston Martin (DB9 I think) which must have had an automated manual. Trouble is that many Aston drivers buy the car for the looks and badge and have no idea about the oily bits. The driver would have seen 'PRND' and assumed he had a normal auto like his old Jag or whatever. As a result he was sitting for half an hour literally slipping the clutch to hold the car on the hill and to creep forward.
That's why you hear of exaggerated clutch wear on automated manuals, people see an automatic gearbox interface and think that is what they have and drive them as such.
JakeT said:
Ari said:
There are, as has been stated, two basic types of auto, traditional torque converter auto and automated manual (the latter also available as a twin clutch where the car pre-engages the next gear then very rapidly swaps cogs by simultaneously disengaging the clutch transmitting the current gear and engaging the clutch of the next gear for an instant seamless change).
To understand the clutch wear issue you have to understand how the gearboxes work.
Torque converters, in essence, work like two fans facing each other, one connected to the engine, the other to the wheels. Spin the engine fan with the engine and the wind spins the one connected to the wheels and drives the car. Obviously its a lot more complex than that, they're in fluid for a start and there is a clutch lock up on most modern ones once moving to reduce losses, but the point is there is nothing to wear when you sit stationary on a hill holding the car on the engine. You can have 'flappy paddles' that instruct the car what gear to be in, but the operation of the gearbox remains the same.
Automated manuals are exactly that. They're like the three pedals and 'H' pattern stick in a normal manual except that 'robots' and computers are pushing the clutch in and out and moving the lever about. Again, the reality is a little different, especially in dual clutch automated manuals, but in essence that's the basics.
The problem of exaggerated clutch wear in automated manuals is not people driving the car hard, it is people not understanding what they have and how it works.
A perfect example would be, I was driving into Cornwall once in summer traffic, which was at a crawl. We were on a two lane uphill section which was stopping and starting. In my torque converter auto, no problem. Leave in drive and ease up the hill on the throttle.
But further up there was a horrific smell of arid burning clutch and as we slowly moved past the other lane we saw an Aston Martin (DB9 I think) which must have had an automated manual. Trouble is that many Aston drivers buy the car for the looks and badge and have no idea about the oily bits. The driver would have seen 'PRND' and assumed he had a normal auto like his old Jag or whatever. As a result he was sitting for half an hour literally slipping the clutch to hold the car on the hill and to creep forward.
That's why you hear of exaggerated clutch wear on automated manuals, people see an automatic gearbox interface and think that is what they have and drive them as such.
good explanation. Not to mention the torque multiplication effect which allows an auto to sit on a steep hill with little/no effort.To understand the clutch wear issue you have to understand how the gearboxes work.
Torque converters, in essence, work like two fans facing each other, one connected to the engine, the other to the wheels. Spin the engine fan with the engine and the wind spins the one connected to the wheels and drives the car. Obviously its a lot more complex than that, they're in fluid for a start and there is a clutch lock up on most modern ones once moving to reduce losses, but the point is there is nothing to wear when you sit stationary on a hill holding the car on the engine. You can have 'flappy paddles' that instruct the car what gear to be in, but the operation of the gearbox remains the same.
Automated manuals are exactly that. They're like the three pedals and 'H' pattern stick in a normal manual except that 'robots' and computers are pushing the clutch in and out and moving the lever about. Again, the reality is a little different, especially in dual clutch automated manuals, but in essence that's the basics.
The problem of exaggerated clutch wear in automated manuals is not people driving the car hard, it is people not understanding what they have and how it works.
A perfect example would be, I was driving into Cornwall once in summer traffic, which was at a crawl. We were on a two lane uphill section which was stopping and starting. In my torque converter auto, no problem. Leave in drive and ease up the hill on the throttle.
But further up there was a horrific smell of arid burning clutch and as we slowly moved past the other lane we saw an Aston Martin (DB9 I think) which must have had an automated manual. Trouble is that many Aston drivers buy the car for the looks and badge and have no idea about the oily bits. The driver would have seen 'PRND' and assumed he had a normal auto like his old Jag or whatever. As a result he was sitting for half an hour literally slipping the clutch to hold the car on the hill and to creep forward.
That's why you hear of exaggerated clutch wear on automated manuals, people see an automatic gearbox interface and think that is what they have and drive them as such.
Having owned three BMW SMG cars, I cannot see how anyone with an ounce of mechanical sympathy could not tell what is going on with the clutch on one of these cars. My last two cars have been proper manuals. The only danger to the clutch is me.
From a resale point of view, I think we've got to the stage where a three pedal stick shift option selction will cost you at trade in time, even if a lot of that will be down to the dealer's enthusiasm for slicing cash off of your px.
Many performance machines, like M3s, may become more sought after in years to come, however that will be to a niche audience ..... never forget that "people like us" do not make up the majority of the buying public, even for performance cars.
As these cars age, the technology will become more "known" and less of a scary proposition second hand ..... I did all the necessary work on my M3 SMG at home myself, including a clutch change, and even the electronic tech will filter down to independant service agents.
In my nostrodamus opinion, the manual shift will live on, as it is cheap, reliable, and proven. It will always be something that enthusiasts will look for, and available for very niche models only ..... the modern performance / super / hyper cars outputs won't be able to cope with some ham fisted sack of meat in the seat controlling and clumsily thumping power to the wheels willy nilly.
Single clutch automated solutions have had their day, and twin clutch boxes won't be far behind. The torque converter auto is king at the moment, and has progressed massively since the old slush shift three speed crap we once knew. The new BMW 8 speed kit is pretty astonishing.
Many performance machines, like M3s, may become more sought after in years to come, however that will be to a niche audience ..... never forget that "people like us" do not make up the majority of the buying public, even for performance cars.
As these cars age, the technology will become more "known" and less of a scary proposition second hand ..... I did all the necessary work on my M3 SMG at home myself, including a clutch change, and even the electronic tech will filter down to independant service agents.
In my nostrodamus opinion, the manual shift will live on, as it is cheap, reliable, and proven. It will always be something that enthusiasts will look for, and available for very niche models only ..... the modern performance / super / hyper cars outputs won't be able to cope with some ham fisted sack of meat in the seat controlling and clumsily thumping power to the wheels willy nilly.
Single clutch automated solutions have had their day, and twin clutch boxes won't be far behind. The torque converter auto is king at the moment, and has progressed massively since the old slush shift three speed crap we once knew. The new BMW 8 speed kit is pretty astonishing.
Zod said:
JakeT said:
Ari said:
There are, as has been stated, two basic types of auto, traditional torque converter auto and automated manual (the latter also available as a twin clutch where the car pre-engages the next gear then very rapidly swaps cogs by simultaneously disengaging the clutch transmitting the current gear and engaging the clutch of the next gear for an instant seamless change).
To understand the clutch wear issue you have to understand how the gearboxes work.
Torque converters, in essence, work like two fans facing each other, one connected to the engine, the other to the wheels. Spin the engine fan with the engine and the wind spins the one connected to the wheels and drives the car. Obviously its a lot more complex than that, they're in fluid for a start and there is a clutch lock up on most modern ones once moving to reduce losses, but the point is there is nothing to wear when you sit stationary on a hill holding the car on the engine. You can have 'flappy paddles' that instruct the car what gear to be in, but the operation of the gearbox remains the same.
Automated manuals are exactly that. They're like the three pedals and 'H' pattern stick in a normal manual except that 'robots' and computers are pushing the clutch in and out and moving the lever about. Again, the reality is a little different, especially in dual clutch automated manuals, but in essence that's the basics.
The problem of exaggerated clutch wear in automated manuals is not people driving the car hard, it is people not understanding what they have and how it works.
A perfect example would be, I was driving into Cornwall once in summer traffic, which was at a crawl. We were on a two lane uphill section which was stopping and starting. In my torque converter auto, no problem. Leave in drive and ease up the hill on the throttle.
But further up there was a horrific smell of arid burning clutch and as we slowly moved past the other lane we saw an Aston Martin (DB9 I think) which must have had an automated manual. Trouble is that many Aston drivers buy the car for the looks and badge and have no idea about the oily bits. The driver would have seen 'PRND' and assumed he had a normal auto like his old Jag or whatever. As a result he was sitting for half an hour literally slipping the clutch to hold the car on the hill and to creep forward.
That's why you hear of exaggerated clutch wear on automated manuals, people see an automatic gearbox interface and think that is what they have and drive them as such.
good explanation. Not to mention the torque multiplication effect which allows an auto to sit on a steep hill with little/no effort.To understand the clutch wear issue you have to understand how the gearboxes work.
Torque converters, in essence, work like two fans facing each other, one connected to the engine, the other to the wheels. Spin the engine fan with the engine and the wind spins the one connected to the wheels and drives the car. Obviously its a lot more complex than that, they're in fluid for a start and there is a clutch lock up on most modern ones once moving to reduce losses, but the point is there is nothing to wear when you sit stationary on a hill holding the car on the engine. You can have 'flappy paddles' that instruct the car what gear to be in, but the operation of the gearbox remains the same.
Automated manuals are exactly that. They're like the three pedals and 'H' pattern stick in a normal manual except that 'robots' and computers are pushing the clutch in and out and moving the lever about. Again, the reality is a little different, especially in dual clutch automated manuals, but in essence that's the basics.
The problem of exaggerated clutch wear in automated manuals is not people driving the car hard, it is people not understanding what they have and how it works.
A perfect example would be, I was driving into Cornwall once in summer traffic, which was at a crawl. We were on a two lane uphill section which was stopping and starting. In my torque converter auto, no problem. Leave in drive and ease up the hill on the throttle.
But further up there was a horrific smell of arid burning clutch and as we slowly moved past the other lane we saw an Aston Martin (DB9 I think) which must have had an automated manual. Trouble is that many Aston drivers buy the car for the looks and badge and have no idea about the oily bits. The driver would have seen 'PRND' and assumed he had a normal auto like his old Jag or whatever. As a result he was sitting for half an hour literally slipping the clutch to hold the car on the hill and to creep forward.
That's why you hear of exaggerated clutch wear on automated manuals, people see an automatic gearbox interface and think that is what they have and drive them as such.
Having owned three BMW SMG cars, I cannot see how anyone with an ounce of mechanical sympathy could not tell what is going on with the clutch on one of these cars. My last two cars have been proper manuals. The only danger to the clutch is me.
A lot of new buyers of cars like Astons aren't buying them for their mechanics and drive, it is just the latest greatest fancy.
I had a (very very wealthy) customer a few years ago who had a Vantage after a series of XKRs, he said the auto box was rubbish on it (and indeed burned through a clutch in no time). He had no idea that it was a completely different type of gearbox. He started it, put it in 'Drive' and drove it - so it must be the same surely? The Aston dealer put him in a torque converter auto next, thinking about it I think it was a DB9 - 'much better auto box' he told me.
He genuinely had no idea that he'd gone from a torque converter (XKR) to a robotised manual (Vantage) and back to a torque converter (DB9).
In his mind he'd had three autos, the middle one of which was rubbish!
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that auto/SMG/dual clutch tech has moved on loads. The reason why the manual E46 M3 is more desirable than the SMG is because the manual still stands up to today's manuals, whereas the SMG is a bit of a dog compared to a modern dual clutch / auto transmission.
Hence why, in my view, older manual performance cars are more desirable than their "auto" brothers. Now that the tech is pretty mature and very useable day to day, this may change when today's cars are being reappraised by the second hand market though.
Hence why, in my view, older manual performance cars are more desirable than their "auto" brothers. Now that the tech is pretty mature and very useable day to day, this may change when today's cars are being reappraised by the second hand market though.
For all the bluff and bluster about manuals it doesn't seem to be borne out in new car sales. I remember Porsche stating a while back that circa 80% of all their new 911 sales had PDK optioned, and that was back when you actually had the choice available to you.
That tells me that outside of the PH echo chamber the people actually buying these cars - by and large - want flappy paddles.
That tells me that outside of the PH echo chamber the people actually buying these cars - by and large - want flappy paddles.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff