Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 2): I'll never, ever drive a car with a manual transmission again. Why should I switch the gears by myself when a computer can do this for me?

Uh..... because we humans are smarter than a silicone chip.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 37): A real stick driver doesn't need a tach

A real stick driver doesn't need the clutch either except to get away from a complete stop. You should be able to go up throught the gears and back down again just releasing or blipping the throttle depending which way through the box you're going. Now THAT's FUN!!! Braking AND blipping the throttle with a single right foot is both fun, and a skill a good driver should be able to do.

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 38): And I really hope that a computer will also do the steering for me in a few years. My car can almost do it, I have a lane-assistent.

Wait a minute here. You need help to keep it between the white lines? OMG, no wonder driving skills are disappearing.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 50): You should be able to go up throught the gears and back down again just releasing or blipping the throttle depending which way through the box you're going.

And you'll destroy the syncros in no time if you keep shifting without the clutch  

However, I do heel-toe shifting, but doing a single clutch, double clutching is pointless in anything but a race car without syncros.

[Edited 2010-10-23 19:11:14]

Quoting idealstandard (Reply 4): consider one on a higher end diesel on a car I am considering for 2011.

What are you considering?

Quoting KevinL1011 (Reply 49): Driving a stick requires the driver to think about driving conditions and anticipate the next move or gear selection. Essentially, the driver has to think ahead and pay attention to what the engine is doing. An automatic is like the 'ol Cannon AE-1 commercial, "All you do is point and shoot". It's a no brainer.

While I get it, sometimes I wish there were more manuals out there.....maybe people would have less distractions with phones, texting, etc.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 50): because we humans are smarter than a silicone chip.

As far as knowing when to shift, we humans aren't always smarter than a silicone chip (actually the program within). I'd say that 90% of drivers don't know the difference between engine torque and horsepower as it relates to engine RPM or the affect load has on an engine. This is critical for knowing when to shift. Electronically controlled transmissions monitor load, throttle application, brake application, engine rpm and vehicle speed just to name a few. The people who program the transmissions software know alot more about this stuff than anyone here and I'd give them the benefit of doubt.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 52): While the classic AT's slow shifting is definitely annoying and may be even dangerous in regular traffic, the speed of the robotized transmission is an overkill

A properly operating automatic transmission will shift in less than 1/10th of a second and is in no way dangerous.

Quoting cpd (Reply 45): Quoting pelican (Reply 10): No doubt about that, but they would be more fun with a manual. And much slower!

As WildcatYXU put it: Who cares?

Quoting ScarletHarlot (Reply 39): nice to have the automatic and to not have to worry about stop-and-go traffic or hills.

Isn't hilly terrain the place where a manual is the most fun to drive?  

pelican

Quoting pelican (Reply 55): Isn't hilly terrain the place where a manual is the most fun to drive?

Yes.but you gotta watch out who's behind though..my sister's new Golf (it was a week old then) was hit when the pick-up in front rolled back onto her car..didn't cause any damage but was a major embarrassment to the driver of that manual pick up hehe.

Quoting pelican (Reply 55): Isn't hilly terrain the place where a manual is the most fun to drive?

Hilly terrain with traffic lights and arseholes who creep up on your bumper can be quite stressful.

Quoting ScarletHarlot (Reply 57): Hilly terrain with traffic lights and arseholes who creep up on your bumper can be quite stressful.

Not if you have a BMW with the 'hill holder' function where the car automatically holds the brakes for 2-3 seconds till the clutch is engaged, saving you from rolling backwards into the car behind you.

Quoting ScarletHarlot (Reply 57): Hilly terrain with traffic lights and arseholes who creep up on your bumper can be quite stressful.

If someone's right on my tail on a steep incline I use a bit of parking brake.

Quoting Flight152 (Reply 58): Quoting ScarletHarlot (Reply 57): Hilly terrain with traffic lights and arseholes who creep up on your bumper can be quite stressful.

Quoting Flight152 (Reply 58): Not if you have a BMW with the 'hill holder' function where the car automatically holds the brakes for 2-3 seconds till the clutch is engaged, saving you from rolling backwards into the car behind you.

Coordinating the hand brake gives the same effect. Though drifting backwards into a car never really bothers me as a likely possibility, the technique is useful if you're trying to dart out of a city's parallel parking space on a hill (as one example).

Quoting Flight152 (Reply 58): Not if you have a BMW with the 'hill holder' function

Subaru has had this feature since the '70's.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 43): manual ftw. automatics are killing the environment with their extra weight/fuel consumption over the equivalent manuals... If everyone drove manuals the world would be a better brighter place...

What utter rubbish, that was the case a decade ago but now most modern automatics give better fuel consumption than manual tranmission cars, they are faster acclerating as well, the manual tranmission wll end up going the way of the dinosaur as manufacturers need to improve fuel consumption on their vehicles.

Manual and only manual. I have not driven an automatic car regularly since 1998 and will never unless I physically cannot.

Quoting falstaff (Thread starter): The truck is a a real driver's vehicle, no power steering, no power brakes, no hydraulic clutch...

No, its a real masochist's vehicle.  

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 2): I have an automatic transmission aka S-Tronic:

I'm sorry

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 2): I'll never, ever drive a car with a manual transmission again. Why should I switch the gears by myself when a computer can do this for me?

Because it is better in every way.

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 6): 333 HP are also fun with S-Tronic, especially in the "S" mode

Not nearly as fun as with a true manual.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 16): I also had a 1972 220D with a four speed. It was slow too, but much more fun to drive.

My dad had 2 220Ds, one 4 speed manual (1969) and one automatic (1971). The automatic had a second fuel tank and could do West Covina, CA to San Francisco, CA and back on a single tank.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 20): Only problem: If the car has a six speed transmission, I would need quite some time to figure out the proper speed for the sixth gear (even on the Autobahn), because the last cars I've driven had all five speeds.

No figuring. 3000 rpms for better economy, redline for performance.

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 28): Of course you can. It's just not nearly as cool sounding or effective.

Or good for the car. A traditional planetary gearbox will get destroyed by a lot of engine braking.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 36): I've never driven any manual transmission before, though I know fairly well how to do it. I wouldn't let it put me off from buying a car with one anyway. But, I'm not one of the misguided purists though. If a computer can do the job better than me, I'll let it. SMGs are one of the best advances in cars in a while.

You have never driven a manual and you talk about "misguided purists?" That makes no sense.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 37): A real stick driver doesn't need a tach

Um, that really depends on how you drive. You definitely need a tach if you are doing any sort of performance driving.

Quoting mirrodie (Reply 53): While I get it, sometimes I wish there were more manuals out there.....maybe people would have less distractions with phones, texting, etc.

I think this is definitely true.

Quoting Flight152 (Reply 58): Quoting ScarletHarlot (Reply 57): Hilly terrain with traffic lights and arseholes who creep up on your bumper can be quite stressful. Not if you have a BMW with the 'hill holder' function where the car automatically holds the brakes for 2-3 seconds till the clutch is engaged, saving you from rolling backwards into the car behind you.

Or if you practice.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 62): What utter rubbish, that was the case a decade ago but now most modern automatics give better fuel consumption than manual tranmission cars, they are faster acclerating as well, the manual tranmission wll end up going the way of the dinosaur as manufacturers need to improve fuel consumption on their vehicles.

Actually, the utter rubbish is the way car manufacturers have simply used computer controls to game the system with government fuel economy tests. Its just as bad as when GM set up a first to fourth lock out on their performance cars, geared to react exactly under the conditions the EPA tests cars at.

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 56): Yes.but you gotta watch out who's behind though..my sister's new Golf (it was a week old then) was hit when the pick-up in front rolled back onto her car..

Sounds more like you have to watch who is in front of you, don't you think?

Quoting ScarletHarlot (Reply 57): Hilly terrain with traffic lights and arseholes who creep up on your bumper can be quite stressful.

That's were the handbrake becomes very useful. Until I went on a holiday in Devon and Cornwall I wasn't the most safe hill starter... But they have insane roads there with 25 + % gradients, which taught me how to start a car on a hill without any backward movement. Now a hill start adds fun to the driving.

pelican

I prefer driving a manual. It's more fun.

I haven't owned a manual car since I sold my first car more than 10 years ago, now. These days, I rarely get the chance to drive a manual, but I'd leap at the opportunity. My current car has a four speed automatic with sequential shift option, so at least I can use the sequential mode. Still nowhere near as fun as driving a manual, though.

Quoting pelican (Reply 10): Especially driving on hilly terrain is so much more fun with a manual. But maybe it's just me.

Then in that respect, Birmingham, Alabama might well be the land of your dreams.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 41): On a truck or van, automatic.

Absolutely, if for no other reason than a floor-mounted shifter wastes a lot of space that could otherwise be used for storage. The exception to this is vehicles like Falstaff's with column-mounted manual shifters, but they're an increasingly rare breed.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 41): In lots of stop and go traffic, automatic.

So true.

Quoting ScarletHarlot (Reply 57): Quoting pelican (Reply 55): Isn't hilly terrain the place where a manual is the most fun to drive? Hilly terrain with traffic lights and arseholes who creep up on your bumper can be quite stressful.

Agreed, and that's very much the case here in Birmingham where lots of traffic lights are located on hills.

I've owned two cars with manual transmissions, a 1977 Toyota Corona and a 1984 Nissan Maxima (last year for RWD and the inline-six engine). Both were fine to drive on the highway but both were a chore to drive around town on hilly terrain and in stop & go traffic. If I lived in a place that was relatively flat I'd probably prefer a manual, but for around here an automatic is the best choice.

The last automatic I "owned" was my mother's 1974 Ford Granada which had an awful 3 speed box.

Since then, every car I have owned, from my Escort XR-3 to my current BMW 320d, has been manual.

However.... not considering auto for the diesel was a mistake. Diesels don't rev so manual is a pain. I wish I had got the auto for this car, especially as the BMW automatic boxes are excellent and give you the manual option if you want it.

I drove an Audi A4 auto rental a few months ago that had an 8 (?) speed box and it was fabulous.

In short... if I buy another BMW diesel it will be auto. But, the diesel currently top of my list, the Golf TDi doesn't come in auto so I may be short shifting for a while yet!

Quoting David L (Reply 25): For those who think manual gearboxes put you "more in control", what do you think of ABS, fuel injection, electronic engine management, self-adjusting timing, power steering, self-cancelling indicators (turn signals), automatic lights/wipers, etc? You know what I mean - the things much older drivers thought were removing the "skill" from driving.

Those are all toys. The fact is an auto won't engine brake on a steep hill nearly as effectively as you can get with a manual.

Quoting ajd1992 (Reply 29): I will never, ever be a convert to an auto unless my clutch foot can't physically push the pedal down. I think automatics for the most part are pointless and for the lazy, but that's coming from a guy who lives in a country where 98%+ of the cars are manual.

Hmm...but they are soooo good in traffic! And I'm a young driver!

Manual is great for sports cars, economy cars and pick up trucks.
For luxury cars, sedans, coupes and station wagons I perfer automatic.

Quoting KevinL1011 (Reply 49): Quoting aerobalance (Reply 22): Learned on a stick, raced with a stick. Love my slushboxes nowadays in the So-Cal area - can't avoid traffic, love that 405. As you get older, accumulate debt and work 15hrs a day trying to get ahead, the automatic trans becomes a motorist best friend.

Fortunately, I have zero debt, I work 6 hours a day max when not on multiple projects, I'm so far ahead I can retire now. An automatic transmission, for me, was a voluntary decision.

Quoting cpd (Reply 45): Not much noise, no wheelspin - just instant bullet like acceleration.

Indeed! There is no acceleration break when the DSG/PDK/S-Tronic is shifting.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 50): Uh..... because we humans are smarter than a silicone chip.

Apparently not, as I wrote above, the DSG/S-Tronic is shifting more economical than every human could do.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 50): Wait a minute here. You need help to keep it between the white lines? OMG, no wonder driving skills are disappearing.

I am driving motorized vehicles for over 18 years now and I think that my driving skills are pretty good. I simply like it as comfortable as possible, I also have a blind spot assistant so that I do not have to turn my head when changing lanes on the Autobahn, I just have to watch the little LED light next to the outside mirrors. Oh yes, another nice thing is the parking assistant.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 52): Hmm, ever thought about hiring a driver?

No, I like to drive by myself but I also like it to have it as comfortable as possible.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 63): Not nearly as fun as with a true manual.

The acceleration time from 0 to 100 kph is better with the S-Tronic. As I wrote above, it is switching the gears more economical than a human could ever do and it is switching the gears without an acceleration break.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 63): Because it is better in every way.

As I wrote in many replies above, I hate it to operate the clutch and to switch the gears by myself. A manual transmission is unnecessary garbage in my opinion. I drive a mix of city traffic and Autobahn every day and the S-Tronic is just perfect for that.

Patrick

Manual for me. I've never even driven an auto. I drove a few times a clutchless manual (Twingo easy), it was quite a strange experience. I guess I could like that for when I'm in the traffic going to or from Paris, but nowadays I don't bother anymore, no parking space anyway so I take the train.

Quoting cpd (Reply 45): In the 962C, you'd brake hard for a corner, and then ask for a downshift and it'd downshift to the right gear for you, at the right engine speed. So it'd do like a 5th to 2nd downshift at the right point.

That's not how it should be done. With a manual and a very hard braking you would do that because you're not quick enough to use all gears, but with a quick dual clutch it's much better to use them, that's what they do in F1 where the braking is the more extreme : by using all gears you get the best engine braking.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 62): now most modern automatics give better fuel consumption than manual tranmission cars, they are faster acclerating as well,

If modern cars with automatics get better gas mileage than the same model with a stick it's because of two things:

1. The automatic has taller gear ratios for increased economy (especially the top gear for better highway mileage)

2. Something else has been done to make the manual version more sporty but less efficient than the automatic.

With a traditional automatic, even though they lock up in more gears than just the top gear, there's still wasted energy due to the torque converter--which of course a manual doesn't have. And automatics are still heavier than manuals (my Mazda 3 with a 5A instead of the 6M weighs 60 pounds more. And that's only a 167hp engine).

Quoting TSS (Reply 66): I've owned two cars with manual transmissions, a 1977 Toyota Corona and a 1984 Nissan Maxima (last year for RWD and the inline-six engine).

My parents had a Corona Mk Something and after it got crunched by a snowplow my mom replaced it with a 1985 Toyota Cressida, which also had RWD and an inline Six. It was my first car and I enjoyed driving it.

Quoting cpd (Reply 45): Indeed - and have you seen what a 997 911 Turbo PDK is capable of? Not much noise, no wheelspin - just instant bullet like acceleration. Insanely scary - and fantastic. Even with 3 passengers!

you also forgot to ad it gets better mpg as well!

Quoting pelican (Reply 3): Because it's more fun?

I once said the same...before I got the 7G DSG.

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 31): VW's DSG or Audi's S-Tronic are switching the gears more economical than every human could do.

  

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 31): You can switch the gears by yourself with DSG or S-Tronic.

  

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 31): I don't find a manual transmissions fun at all, it annoys me that I have a clutch and a stick to operate.

  

Quoting N1120A (Reply 63): Because it is better in every way.

That's what I say about the DSG.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 63): Not nearly as fun as with a true manual.

I have never had as much fun as with DSG.


PH

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 72): Oh yes, another nice thing is the parking assistant.

:D

[Edited 2010-10-24 12:21:23]

Quoting KevinL1011 (Reply 54): Electronically controlled transmissions monitor load, throttle application, brake application, engine rpm and vehicle speed just to name a few.

That's all great, but it lacks the most crucial thing : it doesn't know what the driver wants ! And even less what the driver will do in the future, because it doesn't monitor the road (yet, anyway).

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 62): What utter rubbish, that was the case a decade ago but now most modern automatics give better fuel consumption than manual tranmission cars, they are faster acclerating as well, the manual tranmission wll end up going the way of the dinosaur as manufacturers need to improve fuel consumption on their vehicles.

I looked this up and I found cars where the manuals' numbers were better (BMW). Also, you often can't even get an automatic with the less powerful engines, those that have the better fuel economy (Audi, WV).

I looked at what could be a 333HP S-Tronic car and found an Audi S5. The S-tronic model has indeed slightly better fuel economy than the manual (but of course we're talking about nearly 10l/100 for both which is pretty bad anyway), but it has a 5.3s for the 0=>100 against 5.1 for the manual.

Quoting TSS (Reply 66): Absolutely, if for no other reason than a floor-mounted shifter wastes a lot of space that could otherwise be used for storage. The exception to this is vehicles like Falstaff's with column-mounted manual shifters, but they're an increasingly rare breed.

What is more common is dash mounted shifters. My mother has one on her Citroën Evasion HDi and it falls nicely under the hand, which is fortunate because with this engine you have to shift a lot.

I drive an automatic =)

I drove for the very first time when I was maybe10 on a manual, but the experience was terrible-I felt overwhelmed and didn't enjoy it.
Fast forward 7 years later....decided to learn driving properly. Didn't even consider a manual. An automatic is simply less hassle, especially if you live in a congested city. Driving an auto gives me more time to focus on the road.

OMG, I just remembered the last manual I drove that I owned....


in college.


Say it with me, chick magnet....

Toyota Tercel wagon, manual with a 2nd stick for 4WD. That beast actually got my out of 3 feet of snow in an unplowed parking lot!

http://static.cargurus.com/images/si...ercel-pic-7156898367507254428.jpeg

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 38): And I really hope that a computer will also do the steering for me in a few years. My car can almost do it, I have a lane-assistent.

I don't know if I want to live in your world - it seems boring. Even though I drive almost 25,000 km per year, almost entirely within the city, I wouldn't give up the entertainment and control a manual transmission allows for anything. I am firmly of the opinion that we need LESS driver aids in our cars; things like automatic transmissions, stability control, lane departure warnings and the like are making the general population indolent at driving. Let me put it this way - here in North America, we have a major problem with cellphone use in cars. If a driver had to shift gears for themselves rather than let the box do it for you, I'm fairly sure the problem would go away quickly, as it is physically difficult to talk on a cellphone and shift gears and you'd be shifting the driver's attention back to the task at hand, rather than away from it.

Another advantage that a manual transmission has is the mechanical simplicity compared with any type of automatic transmission. My last car was a 2002 BMW M3 with the 6-speed manual; at about the same time I bought mine, a friend of mine bought an M3 of the same year (and a few thousand fewer kilometres), only his car had the SMG gearbox. The only transmission-related work I needed (apart from two gear oil changes) was to replace the clutch (the original) about a year before I sold it; even though I am an amateur mechanic, I was able to get the job done in a day's work and with a few hundred bucks of parts. At the beginning of this year, on the other hand, my friend's M3 needed several thousand dollars (and a few weeks) worth of work on its transmission; the hydraulic pump went out and in doing so, it fried the clutch and took out the controller unit. Making the matter worse was that the transmission failed in such a way that the driveline completely locked up. For all intents and purposes, his SMG box needed to be completely rebuilt by BMW - even if you know enough to rebuild it yourself, BMW won't sell you the parts to do so. Even the new DCT gearbox from BMW isn't immune to problems; an acquaintance of mine bought one of the first E92 M3s with the DCT, and it seems like his car is in the shop with transmission problems almost as much as it's been on the road.

Quoting MrChips (Reply 81): I don't know if I want to live in your world - it seems boring.

It is not boring, it is comfortable.

Quoting MrChips (Reply 81): Even though I drive almost 25,000 km per year

I drive at least the double amount of kilometers every year.

Quoting MrChips (Reply 81): If a driver had to shift gears for themselves rather than let the box do it for you, I'm fairly sure the problem would go away quickly

No, here in Germany we have 85% manual cars and a lot of people are talking on their mobiles.

Patrick

Quoting N1120A (Reply 63): Actually, the utter rubbish is the way car manufacturers have simply used computer controls to game the system with government fuel economy tests

You make it sound like it's the car manufacturers fault.

Quoting idealstandard (Reply 68): The fact is an auto won't engine brake on a steep hill nearly as effectively as you can get with a manual.

I can engine brake with my Ford C-6 auto trans to the point of locking up the rear wheels.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 70): I seriously doubt this number

Something I learned studying for my ASE certification in Powertrain.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 70): The engine usually slows down first, then the CPU finally computes that change in the throttle's position didn't bring the desired effect and sends the signal to the transmission to shift down

Quoting Aesma (Reply 78): it doesn't know what the driver wants ! And even less what the driver will do in the future, because it doesn't monitor the road (yet, anyway).

Have you ever tried selecting gears manually?

Quoting mirrodie (Reply 80): Say it with me, chick magnet.

Oh Yeah!
Then bust out those air horns in her driveway when you pick her up!

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 82): It is not boring, it is comfortable.

   You and the slushbucket lover below.

Quoting aerobalance (Reply 71): I work 6 hours a day max when not on multiple projects, I'm so far ahead I can retire now. An automatic transmission, for me, was a voluntary decision.

Ah ha! So the next time I invite you to the Fab Ford show, I don't wanna hear any excuses!   

2008 Mustang GT 5 Speed Manual

Quoting Aesma (Reply 78): but it has a 5.3s for the 0=>100 against 5.1 for the manual.

And on the flip side, compare the 911 Turbo PDK against the 911 Turbo 6 speed manual. The PDK Turbo is faster and more economical. Same also on the previous 911 Turbo where the automatic was faster from 0-100km/h than the manual.

If you want to race against fighter planes on airport runways, make sure you get 911 Turbo or Turbo S with PDK transmission. Those are weapons grade material!  

The PDK gearshifts are also smoother too, despite being also faster. In the M3 BMW too, the 7 speed twin-clutch transmission is superior to the 6 speed manual. A PDK, or any other form of that kind of twin-clutch transmission is inherently superior to the other transmissions at the moment. It has the best attributes of a manual and automatic, with none of the drawbacks.

It's interesting to note that Ferrari has also adopted twin-clutch transmissions (even though it already had some very fast shifting single-clutch sequential manual transmissions in 430 Scuderia and 599 GTO).

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 86): ell, the Nissan GTR's tranny needs 200 ms to complete an upshift, the Ferrari Enzo does the same in 150 ms

And the SLS AMG twin-clutch unit takes 100ms to shift gears. If SLS had the standard Benz 7G-Tronic automatic, it'd be just another big heavy Benz grand-tourer.

Bugatti uses a 7 speed one with the thundering Veyron to spectacular effect (it wouldn't be nearly as fast as it is with a manual gearbox).

Lotus also has a compact, light 8 speed twin-clutch on the horizon (patent pending).

Quoting KevinL1011 (Reply 83): I can engine brake with my Ford C-6 auto trans to the point of locking up the rear wheels.

After seeing my parents sink $3000 into their Grand Caravan to replace the transmission when it failed the first time at 130K miles, I would be highly reluctant to stress a transmission like that. That's what your brakes are for.

So far no one's mentioned that while a clutch replacement may become desirable at some point in your ownership of a car, manuals are far cheaper to repair than an automatic or DSG.

Quoting cpd (Reply 85): The PDK gearshifts are also smoother too, despite being also faster. In the M3 BMW too, the 7 speed twin-clutch transmission is superior to the 6 speed manual. A PDK, or any other form of that kind of twin-clutch transmission is inherently superior to the other transmissions at the moment. It has the best attributes of a manual and automatic, with none of the drawbacks.

And you do realize that a DSG/PDK is in fact a manual transmission? It just has twin clutches, a computer to manage the shifting, and a few extra bits. And I recommend to my mother that she get her 2010 TDI Jetta with the 6-speed manual instead of the DSG because of Edmunds' long term TDI Jetta experience where they kept complaining about it lurching at low speeds and not smoothly modulating itself like a real automatic or a regular manual.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 86): so I still doubt that your everyday Hydra Matic can do it in 100 ms.

Do you know if those trannys are planetary gears or linear? It makes a difference. I'm looking for the figures re: shift times and I'm thinking now it's chutch or band application time which was about .1sec. There will be some inherent slip after application but my point is no human can shift quicker than a planetary automatic.

Didn't F-1 outlaw automatics?

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 91): Trannies using new-ish technologies such as DSG

I did find that the DSG (which is a linear) can upshift in 60ms. This is high $ stuff and it should outshift my beloved Hydromatic.   

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 91): how much is this slip.

Anywhere from .5sec to 1.2sec. depending on the trans. So if you consider the time from gear release to next gear lockup it will be more than the time it takes for band or clutch application. So, you are right if we consider a "Shift" as time between release and lockup however the band or clutch application is almost instant. There will be some inherent slip with a manual clutch as well.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 90): Fast Veyron, fast Veyron...let's see...let's see the lap times at the Nordschleife

You'd think that a million dollars could buy you some more weight reduction, but I guess not.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 91): using new-ish technologies such as DSG

That idea actually dates back to pre-WW2 times, from a French engineer.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 90): Or did you mean "fast in a straight line"?

I'm can't quite recall what my original meaning was.

But I do note that the current Nissan GT-R is faster than all of those, at 7m:20sec - using a twin-clutch gearbox.

The 911 GT2 RS is faster again, but it's debatable how "normal" that car is, with near cut slick tyres (from the one I looked at a couple of weekends ago at a Porsche function), and otherwise a very stripped out interior. And then of course, there is another group of 'production derived' cars that lap in the 6m:50sec or even mid-to-high 6m:40sec range using sequential gearboxes.

And the ultimate lap times for 'production' cars were in the 6m:11sec range for the Porsche 956C, possibly the ultimate turn-key production model (29 built). Even a few of those were equipped with the PDK transmission for testing.

It all depends on what you term as 'production'. There are many types and categories of production cars, and we can all be right, depending on how you define them.

I don't have a clue what the relevance of all this Nurburgring lap-times talk is, but you might be able to explain it...

[Edited 2010-10-24 19:40:00]

Quoting KevinL1011 (Reply 83): You make it sound like it's the car manufacturers fault.

Of course it isn't. The tests are made too easy and not set up for real world driving. To complicate things, when they tried to retro-rate cars for "harder" driving conditions, they applied the same standards to all cars and didn't realize the difference in the economy/performance of a Taurus and an M3.

Quoting cpd (Reply 87): Bugatti uses a 7 speed one with the thundering Veyron to spectacular effect (it wouldn't be nearly as fast as it is with a manual gearbox).

Funny, given how fast the McLaren F1 still is, with its "pedestrian" 6 speed manual.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 95): Funny, given how fast the McLaren F1 still is, with its "pedestrian" 6 speed manual.

Tell me how fast a McLaren does 0-400km/h. Then tell me how fast a Veyron does 0-400km/h. Then, tell me how fast each does 0-320km/h (200mph).

In fact, here are some figures:

0-200km/h:
Veyron: 7.2sec
Dauer-Porsche 962LM: 7.3sec (730hp/700Nm,1100kg, 5 speed manual, 3.0L flat-six)
F1: 8.8sec

0-250km/h:
Veyron: 11.4sec
F1: 14.7sec
911 GT1: 17.4sec

0-320km/h:
F1: 28sec
Veyron: 23.8 sec

0-400km/h:
Veyron: 55.6sec
F1: Can not achieve 400km/h.

The acceleration of Veyron is comprehensively faster, even despite the poorer power/weight ratio. The all-wheel-drive traction and the speed of the twin-clutch gearshifts must help, especially considering the engines in each car are among the most responsive of their types.

[Edited 2010-10-24 19:58:19]

Quit arguing about acceleration rates, RWD and a twin turbo pushrod V10 eat such delicacies as the Veyron for breakfast when you press the gas pedal from the light. Hell you are at 200mph before someone in a Veyron knew what was happening.

I like the automatic personally. Who really needs a manual in this world when they arent even more fuel efficient than automatics these days except maybe a small % of people that actually know how to drive? Start with the fact that 99.9% of people in America cant drive to begin with, and we are talking about cornering and accelerating? People dont even know what a passing zone here is much less where the 5th or 6th gear is located on their gearbox.

Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 97): I like the automatic personally. Who really needs a manual in this world when they arent even more fuel efficient than automatics these days except maybe a small % of people that actually know how to drive?

With the way modern ones are, for everyday use in most ordinary cars, there is little point in the manual transmission. So I agree completely in that respect. The automatic might be the lazy option - but that's the brilliance of it. For those times when you feel like getting somewhere in the minimum of fuss and bother.

Quoting LOT767-300ER (Reply 97): RWD and a twin turbo pushrod V10

It's surely not from this person, is it?

http://www.300cforums.com/forums/gen...ool-gets-punked-his-own-board.html

it's almost like that's some troll playing a very bad joke.   It's hard to believe someone could be like that. Especially the all-caps messages and profanity laden messages.  

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 98): You have mentioned the Veyron as a fast car and you mentioned the DSG as it's big advantage. I showed you some examples of waaaaay cheaper cars using manuals being faster than the Veyron doing some real driving (as opposed to accelerating in straight line right to the kingdom come). Apparently the engine's power and the tranny used is just a part of the big picture, as proven here:

I guess what I was trying to suggest is, would Veyron be anywhere near as quick as it is, if it had a regular manual gearbox? Probably not. The 0-160km/h would probably be a lot slower.

[Edited 2010-10-24 21:10:22]

[Edited 2010-10-24 21:34:27]