Why choose to drive manual? :)

Ebe_Scrooge

I've driven both, give me a manual any day.

More fun / engaging to drive.
More control of very low-speed manoeuvring ( parking etc. ).
More control over the amount of engine braking in tricky conditions.
A whole lot more control in snow and ice.
You can't bump-start an auto if you find yourself stranded with a flat battery.

That said, an auto is very easy to drive around town, but for fast open-road driving I'll take a manual please. The more gears to play with the better

( How I long to drive one of these ! )

Stnaptol

CharlieRabbit01 wrote: »

Admittedly I've never driven an auto, but I always choose a manual, I enjoy driving and I like changing gear when I want to do, I feel that I have more control to choose a lower or higher gear that I want.

I can do that in my automatic, either by using the gear stick or using the paddleshift, just no clutch to worry about!

Stnaptol

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

I've driven both, give me a manual any day.

More fun / engaging to drive.
More control of very low-speed manoeuvring ( parking etc. ).
More control over the amount of engine braking in tricky conditions.
A whole lot more control in snow and ice.
You can't bump-start an auto if you find yourself stranded with a flat battery.

That said, an auto is very easy to drive around town, but for fast open-road driving I'll take a manual please. The more gears to play with the better

I have a six speed tiptronic (auto) car and it's damn fun! Dead easy to park and very easy to control at low speed.

fivetide

iolanthe07 wrote: »

There are a lot of comments on here about how expensive autos are to fix, but actually a torque converter autobox is very simple and reliable. In 23 years of driving torque converter autos I have never had any problems with them at all. On one occasion when I accidentally shifted into reverse (instead of 2nd) when going down a steep hill I expected the gear box to self destruct. But nothing happened at all. Auto boxes do seem to be idiot proof.

I've had a number of autos and the only ones I've ever had issues with are the Ford ones with popped convertors.

The Mercedes stuff, especially the older ones, are bombproof.

I think the issue is with newer designs like clutch free manuals and the number of systems that pre-select the next gear etc. Like anything, the more complex it gets the more things there are to go wrong. The more likely it is to go wrong and the more expensive it is to fix.

Stnaptol

fivetide wrote: »

The Mercedes stuff, especially the older ones, are bombproof.

Just a shame their manual boxes weren't up to scratch! Both OH and my father had issues with Mercedes manual boxes.

fivetide

As has been said though, very few people buy a manual MB. they know their market and customers so while they would do one it was never going to be a good experience.

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

Surprised at the suggestion that manuals are easier at low speed than autos, frankly it is just plain wrong.

At low speed there are two features that come into play, the deliberate creep that allows you to fiddle around at low speed, and if you really want to cope with really awkward situations you can left foot brake against the accelerator. Add in stuff like the hold feature on the footbrake and low speed stuff is trivial in an auto.

Low speed stuff in a manual, say a hill start out of a tight parking space, potentially needs one hand on the handbrake, two on the steering wheel, and swift footwork between clutch and brake and accelerator. How many people stall an auto - the ultimate low speed manoeuvre of starting and stopping?

No problem on engine braking either, I've got 7 gears to choose from, all engaging smoothly and no neutral runaway on a steep downhill that gets steeper, flick of a paddle to choose more or less. Add together a speed limiter system to use the brakes and gears to maintain the speed (the C class had electronically controlled downshifts to manage speed in the 1990s), engine braking is a myth too, use it all the time.

I'd agree that playing with a manual gives a satisfaction of doing the driving, and I can enjoy driving a manual, and if I bought a fun car like an MX5 I'd have a manual, but don't justify using a manual by pretending that autos can't do the job, because they do the job better than a majority of drivers.

Joe_Horner

Driven both many times over the years - one of my first cars was a shed of a BMW 2500 auto back in the days when a student could afford to run such things. I usually have manuals simply because there are more of them out there when it comes to buying.

It does amuse me, though, when people make comments about control, performance and so on. Even the old 3-speed boxes had a hold-down function which, if you used it properly, gave just as much control, and better performance, than most people could get out of an equivalent manual.

Want to overtake? Watch for an opportunity, drop it down on the lever (as you would with a manual) and go. As you go, knock it back into "D" again and it'll go all the way to the redline then, if needed, change far quicker than you can when it runs out of revs. Similar with fast cornering - change as you would, through the corner, then nudge it back into drive.

The only thing you couldn't do with those autos was hold it in too high a gear and labour the engine, but I struggle to think of a time you'd really want to do that!

Fuel consumption on paper used to be worse, but that was mostly due to converter slip and they got rid of that by the 80's with locking converters. In any case, I managed a run from Loughborough to Devon averaging over 40mpg out of that old BMW tank, which was pretty respectable for a 2.5l petrol of the era

The problem seems to be that people assume that auto means you just stick it in go and go. You can do that, or you can take charge and actually drive the thing (even with the old boxes) just as hard as any manual!

DUTR

IanMSpencer wrote: »

Surprised at the suggestion that manuals are easier at low speed than autos, frankly it is just plain wrong.

I'd agree that playing with a manual gives a satisfaction of doing the driving, and I can enjoy driving a manual, and if I bought a fun car like an MX5 I'd have a manual, but don't justify using a manual by pretending that autos can't do the job, because they do the job better than a majority of drivers.

Indeed and it's back in line with the topic raised by the OP.
It does seem the replies have turned the thread into an auto vs manual debate. In reality there is no debate or justification to have, the few moments of changing gear is hardly involving one self with the driving experience. In fact thinking about my own car, not only are the gears automatic, so are the headlights, wipers, braking, handbrake, distance to the car in front, radio volume, cabin temperature , screen demist and those are the things that quickly spring to mind

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

DUTR wrote: »

Indeed and it's back in line with the topic raised by the OP.
It does seem the replies have turned the thread into an auto vs manual debate. In reality there is no debate or justification to have, the few moments of changing gear is hardly involving one self with the driving experience. In fact thinking about my own car, not only are the gears automatic, so are the headlights, wipers, braking, handbrake, distance to the car in front, radio volume, cabin temperature , screen demist and those are the things that quickly spring to mind

95% of the time I am not driving for the driving experience, I am going somewhere as safely and in as relaxed a manner as I can.

In fact, I think some of the frustration on the road is people have spent a small fortune on a car and want to play with it. Unfortunately, these days it isn't going to happen, so having a gear stick to fiddle with doesn't really do anything for the driving experience, and with anything but narrow country lanes being limited to 50mph or less, you are going to struggle to find roads where control makes a difference, so you are left with admiring the smoothness of your own gear changes, exploring the torque curve and so on.

If you want the mechanical experience, then the gearbox is such a small part. In the days of manual choke and dodgy carburettors, the engaging experience was about having the ability to start a car first time by knowing how warm the engine was likely to be; avoiding the deadspot on the accelerator when going for a pass, and generally learning how to work around the various deficiencies of a 1970s car.

So delete ABS, auto, fuel injection, automatic chokes, automatic timing advance, and you can then have this fabled control.