Has anyone ever grown to like an auto?

[xjay1337]

RobM77 said:

Hmm.. I'm not sure about that. I've raced for 18 years in everything from classics to FWD hatches to full on downforce single seaters, and I don't think I've ever met anybody who claims you can't adjust the balance of a road car on the throttle. The laws of physics don't suddenly change for luxury cars. This is just a simple misunderstanding of car dynamics - nothing more.

I'm not saying you can't adjust the car on the throttle.

I'm saying that on the road in normal driving only knob heads do so.

I don't throttle adjust the car doing 200 miles a day in the M5......or when driving to see my friend.

I might do on track, or on a nice mountain road. Where you can feel the "rwd balance " and all of that crap.

So much cock waving about this. So I'm going to bow out.

Edited by xjay1337 on Sunday 28th July 14:40

[RobM77]

xjay1337 said:

Who can take anything you say seriously when you say BMW's do not have bad gearboxes?
They are awful as far as gear boxes go.

Crumbs, I wouldn't say that. I've owned quite a few BMWs over the years:

E36 325i
E36 328i
E46 330ci
Z4 Coupé 3.0si
E92 320d SE
E92 320d ED

I've also driven lots more - the whole 1 series range, E30s, M3s etc. All have had perfectly fine gearboxes; certainly better than other cars I've driven from Ford, Vauxhall, Peugeot, Citroen, Toyota, etc. Snickety snick across the gate - no complaints at all. The only issue I've had was in my 2007 E90, which could be tricky to get into reverse sometimes, but that's genuinely the only issue I've had.

They're not the best boxes I've tried, that honour for road cars belongs to the S2000, the T5 box in my V8 MG and perhaps the Caterham 6 speed manual.

Which BMWs have you owned or tried that you thought had "awful" gearboxes?!

[RobM77]

xjay1337 said:

RobM77 said:

Hmm.. I'm not sure about that. I've raced for 18 years in everything from classics to FWD hatches to full on downforce single seaters, and I don't think I've ever met anybody who claims you can't adjust the balance of a road car on the throttle. The laws of physics don't suddenly change for luxury cars. This is just a simple misunderstanding of car dynamics - nothing more.

I'm not saying you can't adjust the car on the throttle.

I'm saying that on the road in normal driving only knob heads do so.

I don't throttle adjust the car doing 200 miles a day in the M5......or when driving to see my friend.

I might do on track, or on a nice mountain road. Where you can feel the "rwd balance " and all of that crap.

So much cock waving about this. So I'm going to bow out.

Edited by xjay1337 on Sunday 28th July 14:40

We must be talking about different things. Adjusting the balance of the car on the throttle is inevitable if you go anywhere near the throttle in a corner; the only choice you have is whether to do it consciously and well, or carelessly. You can't just decide to not have an impact on the balance of a car in a corner; that's physically impossible - you do this every time you drive. There’s also no way any sane person can think it makes you a ‘knob’ to do it.

I'm equally confused as to why it's "cock waving" to talk about driving techniques. Nobody on this thread has claimed to be a good driver, or made any judgement at all about their driving. We’re just chatting about driving.

Are you perhaps referring to powersliding the car?! That would make someone a knob on the public road in many people’s eyes, for sure.

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 28th July 14:54

[HM-2]

xjay1337 said:

Why would I troll about that??

"Just because you feel it doesn't mean it's actually there"

Followed by...

"I've got both a FWD and RWD car and I can't feel it so it must not be there".



You can't be blind to the obvious contradiction in your own statements, can you?

[bmwmike]

xjay1337 said:

bmwmike said:

Honestly think you are trolling. What you've written actually contradicts itself. A feeling is not a sensation? What are you on. If you can't tell which wheels are driven when youre driving a car normally bully for you.

Why would I troll about that??

There is no difference driving normally in a RWD to a FWD car.
That I can tell as a fact because I own both and regularly switch between the two.

When you are driving in a sporty manner then yes, there is a difference in how the car feels which is quite easy to tell.
but normally, in normal cars? no.

This is my point - as a petrol head you have to be able to tell.................... to imply that since in normal driving you can't tell what wheels are driven, which you can't, means you are not a true enthusiast!

Again you seem to change your mind half way through your own post.

And I'm saying that I CAN tell the difference as soon as I move the car. Wheels track differently for starters.

What a wacky conversation for a car forum.

[RichardJS]

Poppiecock said:

Ignoring that most who say in everyday driving it’s not apparent have experience of older cars and or track driving where you can feel it?

Where can I feel it? Through my finger tips as the steering gets lighter and heavier; and softer and more crisp. And through my backside as the car's orientation reacts to the steering, throttle and brakes. The new BMWs aren't great for feel but it's still there.

For example, a couple of weeks ago I was accelerating up a slip road around a curve and I felt the steering go slightly light and vague and felt the car deviate outward from what I was expecting. It had just started raining after quite a long dry spell and the surface must have been very greasy - quite possibly with some spilt diesel. I wasn't going fast at all - normal everyday driving. As soon as I felt the low grip and understeer I released the throttle slightly to get more weight on to the front wheels, without unweighting the rears too much, to balance the car. I felt the steering become firmer again and the nose tuck back in. At no point did the stability control cut in and anyone watching from outside or inside the car wouldn't have noticed. What would have happened if I'd not felt the low grip? Not a lot - the stability control would have cut in if necessary. So a bit pointless then - but it gave me the satisfaction of being properly in control of the car.

Another example, pulling out on to a dual carriageway on my way home from church this morning - normal everyday driving. A little dab on the accelerator after I'd started turning changed the balance of the car to cause the rear of the car to come around more quickly. Stability control was fully on and was not activated and I did not exceed the 30mph limit - I was not being a "knob" as someone else so delicately put it. Again, no one inside or outside the car would have noticed. And again, completely pointless - but for me it made a dull drive slightly less dull.

Does this make people think that I'm a bit weird? Quite possibly, but I really don't care!

[WJNB]

RobM77 said:

Thanks guys. Given the twisty A, B and C roads I commute down, I'm thinking that sticking with a manual might be the more sensible choice. I only very rarely drive in towns and/or traffic. The extra power of a 30d engine would be nice towing, but I'm not sure it's worth switching to an auto for.

Don't understand that. Needing to move up & down gears why faff about with an Edwardian era invention when flipping gearbox paddles is quicker & saves an awful lot of leg ache. A 3 litre engine diesel or not linked to a multi close geared auto box makes for fast smooth easy progress. We are in the 21C after all.

[E-bmw]

WJNB said:

flipping gearbox paddles is quicker & saves an awful lot of leg ache.

I must have REALLY strong legs as I have never had aching legs from manual gear changes in 35+ years.

In fact I have spent today at a track day & must have done well over 100 manual gear changes in around 7 hours so I must have truly Herculean leg muscles.

[DanL]

E-bmw said:

WJNB said:

flipping gearbox paddles is quicker & saves an awful lot of leg ache.

I must have REALLY strong legs as I have never had aching legs from manual gear changes in 35+ years.

In fact I have spent today at a track day & must have done well over 100 manual gear changes in around 7 hours so I must have truly Herculean leg muscles.

Or possibly you just don’t drive in stop start traffic....

[naturalaspiration]

WJNB said:

RobM77 said:

Thanks guys. Given the twisty A, B and C roads I commute down, I'm thinking that sticking with a manual might be the more sensible choice. I only very rarely drive in towns and/or traffic. The extra power of a 30d engine would be nice towing, but I'm not sure it's worth switching to an auto for.

Don't understand that. Needing to move up & down gears why faff about with an Edwardian era invention when flipping gearbox paddles is quicker & saves an awful lot of leg ache. A 3 litre engine diesel or not linked to a multi close geared auto box makes for fast smooth easy progress. We are in the 21C after all.

Well, some people simply enjoy driving a car with a manual gearbox more than an automatic one. OP already made his position clear if you scroll back a bit :
"...I'm not interested in performance for a road car, just the process and enjoyment of driving..." And more importantly he is not trying to force his views onto anyone.

No need to get upset.

[RichardJS]

WJNB said:

RobM77 said:

Thanks guys. Given the twisty A, B and C roads I commute down, I'm thinking that sticking with a manual might be the more sensible choice. I only very rarely drive in towns and/or traffic. The extra power of a 30d engine would be nice towing, but I'm not sure it's worth switching to an auto for.

Don't understand that. Needing to move up & down gears why faff about with an Edwardian era invention when flipping gearbox paddles is quicker & saves an awful lot of leg ache. A 3 litre engine diesel or not linked to a multi close geared auto box makes for fast smooth easy progress. We are in the 21C after all.

I've made the same decision as Rob. If I stick with BMW, my next car it'll be a 320d MANUAL - which I think I'll enjoy much more than my 330d auto. The performance of the 330d is nice to have for a few seconds a month but having had a 320d when mine was in for the EGR cooler I decided the 320d has sufficient performance and the option of going back to manual swings it for me - plus saves some money.

[cerb4.5lee]

RichardJS said:

WJNB said:

RobM77 said:

Thanks guys. Given the twisty A, B and C roads I commute down, I'm thinking that sticking with a manual might be the more sensible choice. I only very rarely drive in towns and/or traffic. The extra power of a 30d engine would be nice towing, but I'm not sure it's worth switching to an auto for.

Don't understand that. Needing to move up & down gears why faff about with an Edwardian era invention when flipping gearbox paddles is quicker & saves an awful lot of leg ache. A 3 litre engine diesel or not linked to a multi close geared auto box makes for fast smooth easy progress. We are in the 21C after all.

I've made the same decision as Rob. If I stick with BMW, my next car it'll be a 320d MANUAL - which I think I'll enjoy much more than my 330d auto. The performance of the 330d is nice to have for a few seconds a month but having had a 320d when mine was in for the EGR cooler I decided the 320d has sufficient performance and the option of going back to manual swings it for me - plus saves some money.

This is a difficult one and I've had a E90 330d auto and a E61 520d manual. I specifically got the 520d as a manual because I prefer a manual, but I thought that it was a poor match to that engine.

I don't really enjoy using an auto from an enjoyment perspective but I do think that an auto mated to a 3 litre diesel is a slight less compromise than a manual mated to a 2 litre diesel for me.

The auto just suits the torque delivery far more than a manual and it also helps hide the harshness of the engine a little bit more too. A diesel only offers a very small powerband so the manual just doesn't really suit a diesel imo.

[E-bmw]

cerb4.5lee said:

The auto just suits the torque delivery far more than a manual and it also helps hide the harshness of the engine a little bit more too. A diesel only offers a very small powerband so the manual just doesn't really suit a diesel imo.

And is that the reason for the "rise" of the automatic, being piggy-backed onto the rise of the TD engine.

I have oft-said that I thought that an 8er auto would be the ideal 'box to suit a diseasel if the software could be up to the task.

[handbraketurn]

Ive done 17k miles this last year, mostly around the M25 and surrounding m/ways. And stuck in traffic around London, dipping a clutch in and out does my back no favours, and I get no enjoyment from that whatsoever, so I went for a ZF 8spd auto.

I absolutely love it now, the vast majority of the time I have it in flappy paddle mode, but it'll slush the gears together nicely in auto and you can take over at any time.

It is a bit annoying in car-parks and tight spaces, but like many things in life, you adapt and get used to it.

It's not as fast changing as a DCT but it's fast enough and I could not see myself owning a manual on the road again at the moment. Unless I was in the position of being able to have a toy.

Perhaps if I drove one I might suddenly feel differently but for now, a ZF or DCT will do me fine. I'm currently looking at M2 DCT as I write this.

[RichardJS]

cerb4.5lee said:

This is a difficult one and I've had a E90 330d auto and a E61 520d manual. I specifically got the 520d as a manual because I prefer a manual, but I thought that it was a poor match to that engine.

I don't really enjoy using an auto from an enjoyment perspective but I do think that an auto mated to a 3 litre diesel is a slight less compromise than a manual mated to a 2 litre diesel for me.

The auto just suits the torque delivery far more than a manual and it also helps hide the harshness of the engine a little bit more too. A diesel only offers a very small powerband so the manual just doesn't really suit a diesel imo.

I understand what you’re saying but before the 330d I had a 123d manual and enjoyed driving that much more (despite it being inferior in just about every measurable way!)

[Pica-Pica]

cerb4.5lee said:

A diesel only offers a very small powerband.

A very sweeping statement.
A 335d has greater ps/t from 25% revs to max revs, than a VWGTi.

[RobM77]

Of course, it's perfectly possible to like both

I think in an ideal world for my current type of driving I'd have an auto 5 series like a 530d and an Elise and then alternate between them. I used to have an Elise as a daily driver years ago, when my commute was similar to my current one (C, B and A roads, twisty and hilly, with no traffic) but much shorter, and every single mile made me smile, the Elise was that good. At 76 miles a day now though and a longer much harder working day I think I'd get tired 5 days a week in an Elise, plus of course I couldn't carry my windsurfing stuff around or tow my racing car.

Like most people though, I'm limited and can't really afford more than my current two cars. My manual 3 series on Birds suspension is a compromise for everything I do.

[bodhi]

cerb4.5lee said:

RichardJS said:

WJNB said:

RobM77 said:

Thanks guys. Given the twisty A, B and C roads I commute down, I'm thinking that sticking with a manual might be the more sensible choice. I only very rarely drive in towns and/or traffic. The extra power of a 30d engine would be nice towing, but I'm not sure it's worth switching to an auto for.

Don't understand that. Needing to move up & down gears why faff about with an Edwardian era invention when flipping gearbox paddles is quicker & saves an awful lot of leg ache. A 3 litre engine diesel or not linked to a multi close geared auto box makes for fast smooth easy progress. We are in the 21C after all.

I've made the same decision as Rob. If I stick with BMW, my next car it'll be a 320d MANUAL - which I think I'll enjoy much more than my 330d auto. The performance of the 330d is nice to have for a few seconds a month but having had a 320d when mine was in for the EGR cooler I decided the 320d has sufficient performance and the option of going back to manual swings it for me - plus saves some money.

This is a difficult one and I've had a E90 330d auto and a E61 520d manual. I specifically got the 520d as a manual because I prefer a manual, but I thought that it was a poor match to that engine.

I don't really enjoy using an auto from an enjoyment perspective but I do think that an auto mated to a 3 litre diesel is a slight less compromise than a manual mated to a 2 litre diesel for me.

The auto just suits the torque delivery far more than a manual and it also helps hide the harshness of the engine a little bit more too. A diesel only offers a very small powerband so the manual just doesn't really suit a diesel imo.

Just to add another perspective, I've had a 330d Manual (E46) and the engine suited the box perfectly. If the x30d had a narrow powerband like the x20d I would entirely agree, but because the 330d didn't run out of puff until 4500 rpm, I wasn't changing gear any more than I was in the 328i before it or 125i that replaced it. It was only if the revs dropped below 2000 rpm that you had to drop a cog, otherwise it just pulled. Plus, the old ZF6 box was fairly dimwitted and liked a drink, so manual showed a clear benefit - with the ZF8 not so much.

I'm thinking more and more I shall have to keep the 125i when I get my 4 GC. For instance I spent yesterday driving my mum's new Mini Cooper with the ZF8 box - a lovely thing to potter round in, and picks up pretty quickly in Sport mode. But the most fun was had getting back in the elderly 1 Series - that combo of N/A Straight 6 and manual box is just too much fun. Just need to convince the wife it's a better bet for her to drive than an Abarth 500....

[cerb4.5lee]

Pica-Pica said:

cerb4.5lee said:

A diesel only offers a very small powerband.

A very sweeping statement.
A 335d has greater ps/t from 25% revs to max revs, than a VWGTi.

To me my manual 520d only really had a 2k rev operating window where it felt meaningful, then it dropped off boost and then you changed into the next gear. My 640d felt like it offered a bit of a bigger window but I guess that was down to the auto gearbox.

A diesel engine generally only revs to 5k max revs, whereas I've had a few petrol engines that rev to 7500rpm and above, so for me personally I find the operating window(rev range) of a diesel engine to be really small that's all.

[cerb4.5lee]

bodhi said:

Just to add another perspective, I've had a 330d Manual (E46) and the engine suited the box perfectly. If the x30d had a narrow powerband like the x20d I would entirely agree, but because the 330d didn't run out of puff until 4500 rpm, I wasn't changing gear any more than I was in the 328i before it or 125i that replaced it.

I have read this before and I'd actually like to try a manual with the 30d engine to see what it is like. I think the kerbweight didn't help in my manual 520d(1700kg), and it just felt gutless almost all of the time with the manual gearbox.

Whereas the 30d engine has so much more torque and I'd imagine it to be a bit of fun riding the torque and using the manual gearbox as you mention.