Stick/Manual vs. Automatic

[lochl...@my-deja.com]

I'm sorry if this topic has been flogged into the ground in this ng but
I was wondering if someone could enlighten me on the relative merits of
manual versus automatic transmission. We have a manual and it caused
some problems when we went to visit my in-laws at Christmas. My wife
had a bad foot so I drive all the way there. While we were there, I
dislocated a finger so she had to drive back. She now complains that
manual transmission provides nothing but hassles. I have tended to
argue that manual is more fuel efficient and cheaper to maintain, also
one less thing to go wrong. Plus, they tend to be cheaper. However,
to be honest, I probably have a personal preference for manual because
it seems more macho. I was wondering if anyone could give me some
ideas about the relative merits of the two transmission modes or a
source for such information.

Many thanks in advance,
Peter.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

[mikeh...@mailcity.com]

Some things to consider. When you buy a new car if you want
a manual your selection of vehicles in limited but you can
save $500 to a $1,000 on a manual v. an automatic. However,
You will lose $1,000 to $1,500 when you trade the vehicle.
Automatics require some HP to operate so that the manual may
offer some marginal performance value particularly in a
small
engine vehicle. Fuel mileage in todays automatics is equal
to
manuals in most cases because of gearing and lock up
converters.
If you consider dragging an automatic is as fast or faster
than
the average driver can shift, and you NEVER miss a shift.
Most
automatic can be shifted manually if you so desire. Pretty
much
it comes down to do you like to shift or not.

[Lars]

Some cars comes with an optional Auto, which had lower HP than the manual
shift model.
A stick shift is a lot less complicated, and will rarely break down on you
if treated nicely. The clutch will probably wear out, but this doesn't
happen suddenly.

In city driving a manual is a pain, and an Automatic is a dream.

If you go for the Auto, at least get a bigger engine. A friend of mine in
Europe has a 1.3 liter Toyota Corolla Auto, and it is THE slowest car ever.
Pretty bad. With a 300 HP engine, it doesn't matter much.

Good luck, and keep your finger safe.

Lars

mikeh...@mailcity.com wrote in message <393BCE50...@mailcity.com>...

[Clemens Hisch]

One other thing to consider is that the brakes on an automatic will wear
out about a third faster than on a manual. The thing is that you always
have to use the brakes when coming to a standstill while you can use the
engine break on a manual when coming to a traffic light, for instance.
I like the automatic transmission in city traffic as you have got
excellent accelleration from stanstill and plenty of comfort.
I come from Austria and most cars here are fitted with a manual
transmission.

[Fox]

Hmmm well your right about the manual being slightly more efficient in
mechanical terms, but its main advantage is having more gears generally
(5 speed). With 5 gears you can keep the engine in its prefered RPM
range a lot better as vehicle speed changes. On the other hand you
lose a hand most of the time in city driving to operate it. There is
also an extra pedel to operate. If you speak of racing a car the stick
is a lot harder to operate in that you have to slip the clutch manually
which can never be as accurate as the machine (torque converter).
Automatic transmissions having this converter always apply the right
amount of torque to the driveshaft. This makes auto cars easier to
race and drive in general. The fluid coupling between the engine and
the tranmission (torque converter) allows the engine to slip at low RPM
(or when there is a lot of resistance) keeping the engine closer to its
prefered RPM range, it also multiplies torque using the classic
inductor, stator, turbine configuration. This slippage does lower
efficency, but the converter isn't always slipping. The difference is
usually around 5-7% (auto vs. stick) with the stick being the better.
Modern torque converters have a ability to lockup in which the
connection between the engine and tranmission is coupled by mechanical
parts with no slip rather than fluid. This usually happens when the
car is at hwy speeds. Makes the difference between the 2 even
smaller. A auto weighs anwhere from slightly more to a lot more
depending on what transmission you have. In all honesty it comes right
down to your personal preference these days. My preference is for the
auto since its easier to drive (long trips or city driving) and much
better for 1/4 mile racing. A stick is usually best for cars with
smaller engines. The extra gears allow the car to stay in its optimum
power range making up for the peaky engine power band. The auto car
needs a wider power band to compensate for only having 3 gears. Modern
auto tranmission can have up to 4 forward gears as well as a lockup
converter (wow) but they are pretty expensive compared to my old
fashioned TH-400 automatic with 3 gears and a standard torque converter.

In article <8hf6fs$741$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

[critte...@webtv.net]

I have used both not only for daily drivers, but also in performance
vehicles. My pesonal choice will always be the automatic. With the new
technology, the problems with no performance from a automatic have for
the most part been resolved.
I have two cars--a 93 Olds with a 4-sp auto, and a 80 Toyota with a 5sp
manual. I perfer the Olds, in large part because of the auto.

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world" Mahatma Ghandi

http://community.webtv.net/critterslair/CRITTERSLAIR20

[mikeh...@mailcity.com]

There are several FIVE speed automatics out there, as well
as SIX speeds close to production.

[Michael Lewis]

I think I heard form somewhere that the U.S. is like the only place that
still uses Automatics. And other places have Manual as standard.
<critte...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:28211-39...@storefull-148.iap.bryant.webtv.net...

[Raija Ylönen]

Manual is much more fun to drive. You are actually driving the machine, not
stearing it forward.
I have driven both, automatic in America and manual shift in Europe and I
prefer manual.
It is much more fun, especially on snow and ice.
Raija

<critte...@webtv.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:28211-39...@storefull-148.iap.bryant.webtv.net...

[Fox]

Info?

In article <393D2D29...@mailcity.com>,

mikeh...@mailcity.com wrote:
> There are several FIVE speed automatics out there, as well
> as SIX speeds close to production.
>

[mikeh...@mailcity.com]

The Lincoln LS has a five speed automatic. Actually any
4 speed with a lockup converted is equivalent to a 5 speed,
as well. Ford has a six speed in testing.

[forgues]

I prefer manual but I changed to automatic because it is
recommended for towing.

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

[Fox]

Sorry but a lockup converter is not the same as a extra gear by any
stretch of the imagination.

In article <393FB4FC...@mailcity.com>,

[may...@ptdprolog.net]

> Fox wrote:
>
> Sorry but a lockup converter is not the same as a extra gear by any
> stretch of the imagination.
>
> In article <393FB4FC...@mailcity.com>,
> mikeh...@mailcity.com wrote:
> > The Lincoln LS has a five speed automatic. Actually any
> > 4 speed with a lockup converted is equivalent to a 5 speed,
> > as well. Ford has a six speed in testing.
> >

No the next time your converter locks/unlocks check the
tach.
Don't you think engine RPM's and drive line RPM's have a
ratio
other than one to one?

[signman]

forgues wrote...

>I prefer manual but I changed to automatic because it is
>recommended for towing.

I also prefer stick to automatic. Had to get automatic now because of hip
and back problems and as much as I hate to admit it, my hip and back are
much better since I stopped driving stick shift.
signman

[mikeh...@mailcity.com]

You got that right, this gettin old is a bitch.