Manual or Auto - which do you prefer?

[Eoin]

It totally depends on the car. I don't agree with the idea that you need a manual to properly drive or control a car. Otherwise I don't think you'd see so many performance cars that only come with auto boxes (and some come only in auto these days).

My car before last (which I still regret selling), was an e39 BMW 525i Auto, and it was an absolute joy to drive. Sport mode + kickdown, and you're steaming ahead. It had a tiptronic mode as well, but I didn't use it that much - it was more than good enough in auto mode. I never had a problem with overtaking. In real life, I'd say that pressing the clutch, shifting down and releasing the clutch would really be that much faster than just planting the foot.

I'd say most the people that don't like autos just haven't tried out the right auto and engine combo for a long enough time. I don't think it's fair to say that they're only better if you want a more relaxing drive.

And that's not even talking about DCT gearboxes which seem to be the best of both worlds.

[foggyjames]

I guess it depends on your attitude to motoring. I'm sure this isn't universal, but most auto-box lovers own them for how easy, rather than engaging, they make motoring. A couple are actively interested in "driving", and they have autos for everyday use and manuals for fun. Well...one of them used to, but I think he's getting soft in his old age...!

As for response...I take the point that a manual shift is often slower (certainly if it's going to be smooth), but you should be pre-engaged in the correct gear ready to go anyway. You can force an auto to do that, but it rather defeats the point.

I was quite impressed by the T5s with the 4 speed auto (and I've driven 3-4 of them)...until I drove a manual, which just worked better. The 4 speed autoboxes were particularly badly affected by ratio choices which made them extremely sluggish at slow speeds (say 20mph leaving a roundabout) compared with the manual versions.

Large performance cars (with lots of power...I'm thinking Merc AMGs, etc) tend to have automatics because it's easier to make them strong enough to handle hundreds of lbft of torque without making the gearbox feel like it has been borrowed from a lorry. I don't think many "proper" performance cars (i.e. something you could sensibly take on a track) have conventional autoboxes - they will at least have sequential manual gear selection (tip-tronic, etc). A V12 GT car doesn't really count...that's a cruiser rather than a "performance" car as such, in my book. I'd love a DB7, but I doubt I'd take it anywhere near a track.

Fair enough, automatics are nice in town, but on the open road I find them frustrating, and there's no benefit either way on a motorway. I guess they're fine for cruising, but I like to actively 'drive' my cars, and I don't tend to last more than 10 miles without screaming at the slusher for failing to do what I want it to. Sure, you can drive a car with an automatic box in a performance-minded manner, but I find that the box starts spoiling my enjoyment, sooner or later.

Originally Posted by XC60Fan

When is it an issue? If I take my foot off the gas the car slows down and changes to a lower gear.

I've never driven an automatic which does the last part. Without exception, they have simply selected the highest ratio possible, leaving the brakes to do all the work. It then changes down when you re-apply the throttle, but usually to the wrong ratio (one down-shift instead of two), finally realising its mistake mid-corner and giving you a shove of torque right when you don't want it, provoking wheelspin and oversteer or understeer in RWD and FWD applications respectively. To avoid that, you have to apply less throttle, and you're back to "cruising", rather than driving in a "spirited" manner. Being in the right gear at the right time influences how the throttle responds...which is what gives you more control over how the car will behave. It barely matters if you're just pottering to the shops, but if you're out to have some fun on a twisty road, that kinda thing becomes a big issue. There's a good reason race cars are manuals.

If I could find an automatic which always does what I want it to, I would be over the moon, but I've always found them to be a let-down, sooner or later. To be fair, my housemate's Mercedes S320 CDI has enough torque that it barely matters which gear it picks, and it's wonderfully smooth...but even that has a flaw. The engine doesn't breath well at high RPM (unlike my D5), so anything above 3500rpm is a bit of a waste of time. That doesn't matter at all, as the engine has more than enough low-down grunt to make very reasonable progress in a highly relaxing manner. Unless you engage kickdown. Do that, and there's a delay of several seconds which it selects the lowest gear possible, realises there's no torque to be had at 4500rpm, shifts up a gear, and then finally gives you want you wanted seconds ago and throws you back in your seat. By which time, the gap you were aiming for has closed. It's a programming error, basically...a mismatch between the gearbox software and the torque curve of the engine, but it's bloody annoying on the road...and this from the masters of the autobox.

It's horses for courses...and I'd not criticise anyone for choosing an automatic if that's what they like, and it suits the type of motoring they're doing. For me (being more performance orientated than most, I suppose), probably 90% of the time an auto would be just fine (I've owned one, and driven many)...but several of those applications have been poor (including some high-end brands) and would blunt enjoyment of B-roads...and in some cases (like the S320 CDI, and the 4-speed T5s) elsewhere, too. If you're more of a cruiser, that's unlikely to be an issue.

In other words "it doesn't affect me, given my usage" is fair enough, but "it doesn't make any difference" is certainly not true, IMO.

cheers

James

[Volvo2002]

Originally Posted by foggyjames

I guess it depends on your attitude to motoring. I'm sure this isn't universal, but most auto-box lovers own them for how easy, rather than engaging, they make motoring. A couple are actively interested in "driving", and they have autos for everyday use and manuals for fun. Well...one of them used to, but I think he's getting soft in his old age...!

As for response...I take the point that a manual shift is often slower (certainly if it's going to be smooth), but you should be pre-engaged in the correct gear ready to go anyway. You can force an auto to do that, but it rather defeats the point.

I was quite impressed by the T5s with the 4 speed auto (and I've driven 3-4 of them)...until I drove a manual, which just worked better. The 4 speed autoboxes were particularly badly affected by ratio choices which made them extremely sluggish at slow speeds (say 20mph leaving a roundabout) compared with the manual versions.

Large performance cars (with lots of power...I'm thinking Merc AMGs, etc) tend to have automatics because it's easier to make them strong enough to handle hundreds of lbft of torque without making the gearbox feel like it has been borrowed from a lorry. I don't think many "proper" performance cars (i.e. something you could sensibly take on a track) have conventional autoboxes - they will at least have sequential manual gear selection (tip-tronic, etc). A V12 GT car doesn't really count...that's a cruiser rather than a "performance" car as such, in my book. I'd love a DB7, but I doubt I'd take it anywhere near a track.

Fair enough, automatics are nice in town, but on the open road I find them frustrating, and there's no benefit either way on a motorway. I guess they're fine for cruising, but I like to actively 'drive' my cars, and I don't tend to last more than 10 miles without screaming at the slusher for failing to do what I want it to. Sure, you can drive a car with an automatic box in a performance-minded manner, but I find that the box starts spoiling my enjoyment, sooner or later.


I've never driven an automatic which does the last part. Without exception, they have simply selected the highest ratio possible, leaving the brakes to do all the work. It then changes down when you re-apply the throttle, but usually to the wrong ratio (one down-shift instead of two), finally realising its mistake mid-corner and giving you a shove of torque right when you don't want it, provoking wheelspin and oversteer or understeer in RWD and FWD applications respectively. To avoid that, you have to apply less throttle, and you're back to "cruising", rather than driving in a "spirited" manner. Being in the right gear at the right time influences how the throttle responds...which is what gives you more control over how the car will behave. It barely matters if you're just pottering to the shops, but if you're out to have some fun on a twisty road, that kinda thing becomes a big issue. There's a good reason race cars are manuals.

If I could find an automatic which always does what I want it to, I would be over the moon, but I've always found them to be a let-down, sooner or later. To be fair, my housemate's Mercedes S320 CDI has enough torque that it barely matters which gear it picks, and it's wonderfully smooth...but even that has a flaw. The engine doesn't breath well at high RPM (unlike my D5), so anything above 3500rpm is a bit of a waste of time. That doesn't matter at all, as the engine has more than enough low-down grunt to make very reasonable progress in a highly relaxing manner. Unless you engage kickdown. Do that, and there's a delay of several seconds which it selects the lowest gear possible, realises there's no torque to be had at 4500rpm, shifts up a gear, and then finally gives you want you wanted seconds ago and throws you back in your seat. By which time, the gap you were aiming for has closed. It's a programming error, basically...a mismatch between the gearbox software and the torque curve of the engine, but it's bloody annoying on the road...and this from the masters of the autobox.

It's horses for courses...and I'd not criticise anyone for choosing an automatic if that's what they like, and it suits the type of motoring they're doing. For me (being more performance orientated than most, I suppose), probably 90% of the time an auto would be just fine (I've owned one, and driven many)...but several of those applications have been poor (including some high-end brands) and would blunt enjoyment of B-roads...and in some cases (like the S320 CDI, and the 4-speed T5s) elsewhere, too. If you're more of a cruiser, that's unlikely to be an issue.

In other words "it doesn't affect me, given my usage" is fair enough, but "it doesn't make any difference" is certainly not true, IMO.

cheers

James

James you know your stuff

I remember reading about the sensodrive C2 citroens and how they were murder to live with. Basically owners complained about the gearbox in town when at some points the car bunny hoped down the road

[thad1]

I think it very mush depends on the car, my first Auto was a saab 900 2.5V6, nice car terrible handling but the Auto seemed to suit it. I then bought a 9-5 Aero and that was very good with the Auto, the sport mode helps a lot if you are in a hurry. Now have aC70 T5 GT Auto and think the Auto box works well with the car, only complaint would be sometimes it's nice in a manual to be sat in 3rd gear at 60 waiting to overtake then when you floor it you get to feel the trq properly, in the Auto you do get a bit of a rush when you kick down but you can't always have the right circumstances to allow it!

I previously had several cars that would not work as an Auto, 16V Integrale and Porsche 944 Turbo, not to mention 400hp classic Impreza lol

Can't imagine driving any of them with an Auto!!

[Volvo2002]

Originally Posted by thad1

I think it very mush depends on the car, my first Auto was a saab 900 2.5V6, nice car terrible handling but the Auto seemed to suit it. I then bought a 9-5 Aero and that was very good with the Auto, the sport mode helps a lot if you are in a hurry. Now have aC70 T5 GT Auto and think the Auto box works well with the car, only complaint would be sometimes it's nice in a manual to be sat in 3rd gear at 60 waiting to overtake then when you floor it you get to feel the trq properly, in the Auto you do get a bit of a rush when you kick down but you can't always have the right circumstances to allow it!

I previously had several cars that would not work as an Auto, 16V Integrale and Porsche 944 Turbo, not to mention 400hp classic Impreza lol

Can't imagine driving any of them with an Auto!!

The manual aero really takes advantage of the 250hp and the manual has the 20ib overboost function at full power.

[XC60MY12]

Any thoughts on CVT? A bit off-topic I know but my last car (Qashqai) had it and it was the smoothest thing I've owned. As you may have gathered I'm not a "performance" driver; I look for comfort and stress-free driving, hence Geartronic and ACC in a D3 XC60, a combination I find perfect for me (must be why I bought it). Neither am I an "enthusiast", also as you may have noticed. I don't knock those with different criteria, that's their choice. It's good to learn others' points of view though.

[foggyjames]

I agree, and I'd like to be clear that I wasn't being critical of those who prefer autos.

I think CVTs are a wonderful idea, as you might have guessed from my interest in the 300 series...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8AzqtomwD0
...they still have the same problems as a regular autobox, but the novelty value of holding the engine at peak torque is great!

cheers

James

[Clan]

Originally Posted by foggyjames

I agree, and I'd like to be clear that I wasn't being critical of those who prefer autos.

I think CVTs are a wonderful idea, as you might have guessed from my interest in the 300 series...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8AzqtomwD0
...they still have the same problems as a regular autobox, but the novelty value of holding the engine at peak torque is great!

cheers

James

I found myself in a 343 CVT in the 1980's at some lights next to a vauxhall cavalier 1.8 i the lights changed and off we went . everytime the vauxhall changed gear he dropped about 6 feet back , he didnt go past until 83 mph where the 343 was getting near its 93 mph max speed ,One of those epic experiences you dont forget :-)

[Volvo2002]

Originally Posted by Clan

I found myself in a 343 CVT in the 1980's at some lights next to a vauxhall cavalier 1.8 i the lights changed and off we went . everytime the vauxhall changed gear he dropped about 6 feet back , he didnt go past until 83 mph where the 343 was getting near its 93 mph max speed ,One of those epic experiences you dont forget :-)

Bet his face was a sight being out dragged by one of those

[silestanix]

I'm a Manual man through and through but my C70 is an automatic; have had to revert to automatics as I have problems with my left knee (I'm only 26 too ) .

Saying that though, the C70 (and my previous V70)'s autoboxes are one of the best I've used. The adaptive means exactly that, changing when required according to the situation. On the flip side, I drove a Vauxhall Insignia CDTi 160 for 6 months last year and it's got to be one of the worst auto boxes I'd ever used, I had to use the tiptronic instead 80% of the time as the gearbox just 'slipped' under heavy acceleration...quite poor.