Why did people spec auto on performance cars?
Discussion
I've always championed a 3 pedal manual over an auto, however yesterday I saw a Cayman S coming up quickly behind me in my 370Z...I panicked because I wanted a lower gear and I made a right hash of it! It was one of the rare occasions where I wished that I was in an auto, so I could just stamp my foot down and get on with it!
So in summary from my experience...if you want to go fast buy an auto, and if speed isn't a priority then go for a manual. I do appreciate the extra involvement that a 3 pedal manual gives you overall though.
So in summary from my experience...if you want to go fast buy an auto, and if speed isn't a priority then go for a manual. I do appreciate the extra involvement that a 3 pedal manual gives you overall though.
Speed is only one thing so the portions of a second are neither here nor there.
When in gear and 'on it' there is no difference really even in a torque convertor old auto, but the clutch allows you complete control of the power through the drive train, so you can stall, burn the clutch out, lock up the rears on a down change, miss shift and crunch gears, all manner of bad things! but it's also useful too and as far as I know no auto even the dual clutch type allow this.
It's perhaps old tech and not favoured my most but it does offer something auto's don't.
Saying this auto's are now generally so good (especially in sports cars) and not at all clumsy that most people prefer their benefits, but then again the range between a good auto and a bad one is still far wider than a good or bad manual box, ie if you buy a manual you are unlikely to dislike it, it's more likely to be as you'd expect, auto's can still be clumsy and odd shifting especially on lower powered models so need some research to check.
When in gear and 'on it' there is no difference really even in a torque convertor old auto, but the clutch allows you complete control of the power through the drive train, so you can stall, burn the clutch out, lock up the rears on a down change, miss shift and crunch gears, all manner of bad things! but it's also useful too and as far as I know no auto even the dual clutch type allow this.
It's perhaps old tech and not favoured my most but it does offer something auto's don't.
Saying this auto's are now generally so good (especially in sports cars) and not at all clumsy that most people prefer their benefits, but then again the range between a good auto and a bad one is still far wider than a good or bad manual box, ie if you buy a manual you are unlikely to dislike it, it's more likely to be as you'd expect, auto's can still be clumsy and odd shifting especially on lower powered models so need some research to check.
cerb4.5lee said:
I've always championed a 3 pedal manual over an auto, however yesterday I saw a Cayman S coming up quickly behind me in my 370Z...I panicked because I wanted a lower gear and I made a right hash of it! It was one of the rare occasions where I wished that I was in an auto, so I could just stamp my foot down and get on with it!
So in summary from my experience...if you want to go fast buy an auto, and if speed isn't a priority then go for a manual. I do appreciate the extra involvement that a 3 pedal manual gives you overall though.
I've always driven manuals and now have my first auto as a daily. Funnily enough, in that situation I have trained my brain to always switch my car to manual mode. The same goes for overtaking. In order of reaction speed between wanting instant acceleration and getting it, it goes ZF8 manual mode, full manual car, and languishing as the slowest is flooring it in 'D'.So in summary from my experience...if you want to go fast buy an auto, and if speed isn't a priority then go for a manual. I do appreciate the extra involvement that a 3 pedal manual gives you overall though.
With my car's ZF8 box, if you just floor it suddenly in 'D', they'll be a pause, the gearbox will shuffle down to an appropriate gear, which is usually far too low, taking you beyond the torque peak, and then it'll go. That drama took several seconds in early ZF boxes (a performance I found hilarious), and now in my 2016 530d it takes about 1 second. The thing is, because you're higher than the torque peak you still don't get optimal acceleration. What I do is pull a paddle once (or )twice to switch to manual mode and drop one (or two) gears, then go; all of which takes a split second, faster than a manual gearchange would be. The car stays in manual mode until it detects a steady throttle with no steering movement for a few seconds.
It's interesting re gears on auto's 6-8 speeds being quick common now?
I have a 4 speed slush auto in a powerful car and it's pretty good and it would be interesting to see in the real world what difference a modern box would have. With high power/torque loads of gears seems OTT? Is it all/mainly for emissions, surely more gears means more 'hunting' in fully auto modes?
I have a 4 speed slush auto in a powerful car and it's pretty good and it would be interesting to see in the real world what difference a modern box would have. With high power/torque loads of gears seems OTT? Is it all/mainly for emissions, surely more gears means more 'hunting' in fully auto modes?
xjay1337 said:
J4CKO said:
Our Fiesta ST is way more fun than the M135i.
I can imagine, but for me on track I will never go back to a FWD.On the road then it's probably more fun sure, but on track, no way.
Have enjoyed it but cant wait to change, just not the car for me.
I am largely ambivalent of drive layout, maybe a bit weird but I loved my 225 TT even though it was a pile of s
t (that example) and found it more engaging than the M135i, probably as it was a manual.May be just me being an old fart at 49 stuck in my ways !
Why, because it's what suits my needs. I have a do-it-all M4 with DCT which is my only car. 95% of the time I'm on A to B journeys inc. commuting in traffic through London and the auto makes sense to me. I don't miss a manual except when on a drive for pure enjoyment or on track which is the other 5% of my driving.
If I had the luxury of a pure toy, it would be manual but then again many of the pure toys are manual; Caterhams, Lotuses, Ariels etc.
If I had the luxury of a pure toy, it would be manual but then again many of the pure toys are manual; Caterhams, Lotuses, Ariels etc.
rockin said:
What's real rubbish isn't manual and it isn't auto - it's driving a multi-gear auto on the paddles. The idea that a human driver can asses gearchange points better than the computer is fanciful. The auto will work through many more shifts and much more quickly than a human. The real use for paddles is an occasional downshift to prepare for an event the transmission can't see coming, such as an overtake. Beyond that it's best to leave the gearbox to do its own thing.
Regarding 0-60 times and lap times for manual cars it's worth remembering the high levels of mechanical abuse that are required to achieve them, whereas an auto just does the standing starts and puts in the laps while quietly minding its own business.
Sorry as to be so arrogant as to think I can choose a gear better than an auto (in auto mode). If you can't make better decisions than an auto you are simply not reading the road ahead. Rolls Royce do actually use GPS to read the bends ahead. Any others simply have no idea where the road ahead goes, whether an overtaking opportunity, or road works is coming up. If you can't outthink even the best of the rest you ought to concentrate on the road more. Regarding 0-60 times and lap times for manual cars it's worth remembering the high levels of mechanical abuse that are required to achieve them, whereas an auto just does the standing starts and puts in the laps while quietly minding its own business.
fatboy b said:
I had no choice. But a ZF8 is a far superior box to any manual.
Its a technical triumph, it is so unobtrusive in its operation because it is so clever, it shifts faster, its more economical etc etc.But, I prefer a nice manual, its not the ZF8 being bad, its just what I am used to and prefer.
Interesting topic this, as I’ve just gone from a ZF8 speed auto back to a manual and couldn’t be happier.
For years I wanted a “flappy paddle box”, I spent the last 4 years with one and decided I was totally bored of driving it.
There’s numerous advantages to them and certain cars still suit an auto but I’d rather a manual personally unless i was driving around London all day.
For years I wanted a “flappy paddle box”, I spent the last 4 years with one and decided I was totally bored of driving it.
There’s numerous advantages to them and certain cars still suit an auto but I’d rather a manual personally unless i was driving around London all day.
J4CKO said:
Its a technical triumph, it is so unobtrusive in its operation because it is so clever, it shifts faster, its more economical etc etc.
I prefer a nice manual, its not the ZF8 being bad, its just what I am used to and prefer.
I absolutely agree that's the bottom line. Modern auto's are astoundingly competent. But if you want to change gears yourself - buy a manual. I prefer a nice manual, its not the ZF8 being bad, its just what I am used to and prefer.
J4CKO said:
Not sure would take my M135i on track as its useless on the road when pressing on, the engine is awesome, as a daily its awesome but it just falls apart when you go quickly, needs modifying to shine and there is a superb car in there but for me, the steering and gearbox mean its not worth developing it.
Have enjoyed it but cant wait to change, just not the car for me.
I am largely ambivalent of drive layout, maybe a bit weird but I loved my 225 TT even though it was a pile of st (that example) and found it more engaging than the M135i, probably as it was a manual.
May be just me being an old fart at 49 stuck in my ways !
I have a readers ride of mine on here.Have enjoyed it but cant wait to change, just not the car for me.
I am largely ambivalent of drive layout, maybe a bit weird but I loved my 225 TT even though it was a pile of s
t (that example) and found it more engaging than the M135i, probably as it was a manual.May be just me being an old fart at 49 stuck in my ways !
Suspension wise its got only some camber top mounts and Bilstein coilovers and a few easily installed bushes.
Pagid Rs29 pads and a CSF oil cooler.
Engine is stock cos warranty.
Gearbox has XHP software. But factory software was pretty good.
I really enjoy it myself. The camber alone has increased steering feel and decent tyres and alignment make it really pointy at the front. In fact this weekend im changing to 245 35 all round!
The main issue with a completely stock car is the rebound damping and odd spring rates, at lower speeds with a single occupant on a bumpy road (typical BMW Problem) which would not be an issue on a smooth race track :-)
Interesting you find the TT225 better. I've driven one and it had less steering feel (IMO) than the BMW! Very dull at the front end. Maybe if the BMW was a manual, eh :-)
Edited by xjay1337 on Thursday 25th June 22:28
Leon R said:
Interesting that the flat shifting option on a manual box has been mentioned as surely that is 'less involving' than having to depress the clutch? Same goes for manuals with auto throttle blip.
Yep, I wouldn’t want either. Like many people, I learnt to rev match and heel and toe aged 17 so it’s just part of my driving - I don’t think I could cope with an auto blip. As for flat shifting, well I simply enjoy using a manual box, so I don’t know why I’d want that.Olivera said:
Leon R said:
Interesting that the flat shifting option on a manual box has been mentioned as surely that is 'less involving' than having to depress the clutch? ...
Afaik the 'flat shifting' refers to keeping the throttle pinned, but you use the clutch as normal.Uncle boshy said:
In my mgf the manual is far superior to the slush box.
As a former MG man and current day pedant, I have to point out the MGF auto was a pulley CVT (Stepspeed), not a slushbox. Also... despite having 120bhp and a slower 0-60 time the Stepspeed was known in MG circles to be faster than the 135bhp manual in cross-country driving as it could stay at peak power whilst the 135 was moving up and down the power band.
So, to say the manual is superior depends upon your criteria. I'd agree the manual was better to drive, but only faster if you could stretch to the 160.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff