Automatics less econmical than manuals?

fivetide

Iceweasel wrote: »

The situation is now the complete reverse of what it was only ten years ago.

Auto-box technology has really moved on.

The latest automatic cars are not only more economical, but faster than the equivalent car with a manual gear-box.

Partly due to them having more gears - perhaps as many as 8 where the manual has 6.

Not sure it's even ten years, it has been coming for a long time. Toyota always rated the MKIV Supra as faster (albeit in a straightline) than a manual simply because the car was able to make faster changes than a manual.

Mitsubishi's INVECS (i think) system was also a delight. There was a tip tronic box that changed instantly. It amazed me that years later you were still seeing reviews with cars taking seconds to change gear after being told to do so.

marlot

attila_ wrote: »

Is there a car on autotrader which does higher mpg as auto than it does as manual? I can't find one.

Yes, the official figures for my 2007 Toyota Landcruiser LC4 are better for the auto than the manual.

Its an old fashioned torque converter auto too, made by Aisin (who I think are owned by Toyota, but make autoboxes for a number of manufacturers).

Virtually every 'baby' landcruiser in the UK is auto as a result.

Just looked them up:
Manual (6 speed): 30.7 combined.
Auto (5 speed): 31.4 combined

Top speed:
Manual: 109
Auto: 109

0-62mph
Manual: 11.5 seconds
Auto 11.2 seconds

tykesi

I always think I like the idea of an auto until the next time I drive one and get bored stiff within a couple of hours. I know it's not for everyone but I find a manual much more engaging to drive.

That might change if a lot of my driving was done in stop/start traffic though where an auto would be a godsend.

Stoke

The most economical car ever made was an automatic. Well, Tiptronic...

Iceweasel

tykesi wrote: »

I always think I like the idea of an auto until the next time I drive one and get bored stiff within a couple of hours. I know it's not for everyone but I find a manual much more engaging to drive.

That might change if a lot of my driving was done in stop/start traffic though where an auto would be a godsend.

I used to think that too - until I discovered that I had much more control over an auto-box than I thought - it requires gentle pressure on or off of the accelerator (I almost never use 'kickdown') and I have the steptronic (or whatever the car maker has decided to call it this week)

Then of course we have the 'flappy-paddle' concept to explore. (What a horrible term for such a useful system)

IIRC the last time that Ferrari offered a manual box there was less than 5% of customers wanted one. They can't all find the car boring, or can they?

Many Porsche and BMW customers are the same - but I'm referring to buyers of new cars not used ones.

Even Mr J Clarkson has stopped complaining that all the exotic machines he gets to play with are almost exclusively autos, with no manual option.

The forums are full of folks complaining they cant find a good used BMW 335d with a manual box for example - they need to ask themselves why.

Autos are becoming more and more popular and it will continue - perhaps those who seek used manuals need to picket the dealers with banners reading:

"Buy a brand new manual model so that I can buy it 2nd hand in a few years time." :rotfl:

tykesi

Oh I realise that I still have a decent level of control over what gear etc it's just I find it dull being so 'push & go' hence my 'after a couple of hours comment'.

I'm a biker and recently rode an auto/tiptronic bike and again, once the initial novelty wore off I was completely underwhelmed. The technology is fantastic I agree but I just don't feel right not having as much input as I do with a manual. My brother is the complete opposite, drives because he has to not because he wants to and keeps saying he will be moving to an Auto (still hasn't though for some reason - maybe he likes it more than he lets on?).

spacey2012

Luxury always comes at a price.
Put it in D and thats it until the other end.

No stick shifting and constant clutch pressing.
Luxury.

hgotsparkle

spacey2012 wrote: »

Luxury always comes at a price.
Put it in D and thats it until the other end.

No stick shifting and constant clutch pressing.
Luxury.

Exactly my reasons for driving an auto, yet all my friends stick their noses up at it, hey I'm the one getting going quicker, and with a lot less fuss. I hate driving at the best of times, so an auto takes the aggro out of it.


I'm not a gear-head or that into cars, I only drive because I have to but when doing around 50/60mph in my 07 auto micra, I will be at about 2000-2500rpm, yet in my OHs car which is an 04 manual, he will be at 3000rpm.

iolanthe07

attila_ wrote: »

Is there a car on autotrader which does higher mpg as auto than it does as manual? I can't find one.

Yes - the Mitsubishi Mirage auto (CVT) has better fuel consumption than the manual.

scaredofdebt

The manufacturer's official figures state that manual cars are more efficient than automatics. I've never seen figures that state otherwise, is this still the case?

I can believe that in theory an automatic could possibly be more efficient if the technology is good enough, which it should be nowadays.