Considering an Automatic

daftmagus

My present manual 1.2 Nissan Micra is getting on (4yrs, 93K miles) and, it having been far less troublesome than anything I had previously, I was going to get a younger model but am interested in automatics in order to let my gear-change-averse missus have a fair crack of the whip with it.

I've no experience with non-manuals. Are autos less reliable? More prone to wear and tear? Costlier in upkeep?

thanks

DM

Greensprout

Automatics take the fun out of driving!

They aren't any less reliable (depending on which car) but if something goes wrong with the gearbox you'll be hit hard in the pocket!

They also use more fuel..

balsingh

Greensprout wrote: »

Automatics take the fun out of driving!

They aren't any less reliable (depending on which car) but if something goes wrong with the gearbox you'll be hit hard in the pocket!

They also use more fuel..

However, they also take the stress out of drivign ... no clutch control needed, no hill starts. In a big city like London, they do help.

Its worth bearing in mind that small automatics arent always very refined compared to bigger cars which are more suited to being automatics.

IWasWondering...

Personally I can't see what the 'fun' is in constantly changing gears.
Unless you are driving an Aston Martin!
Any gearbox replacement will be expensive.
Driving an automatic is so much easier.
Car manufacturers know there is a market for small autos and there are lots to choose from nowadays.
Yes, they do use more fuel. IMHO I think around 5 MPG.
But look at the following MPG figures (Urban). These are for the auto/semi-auto options.
Mini 43.5, Colt 48.7, 107 51.3, Yaris 52.3, Aygo 51.4, C2 41.5, C3 40.9, Auris 48.7, then some not as good, 207 27.9, Note 31, Mazda 3 27, Corsa 32, Astra 29, Meriva 31, and just cos I like them, Freelander 25, Discovery 28. Remember most people will get more as Urban is the lowest MPG figure, Extra Urban and Combined will be higher.
And yes I do know these figures are not guaranteed, it also depends on your driving style.
Also (excepting the Landrovers) CO2 emissions are low keeping RFL down and insurance groups are low too (for the models I looked at).
If you get a semi-auto model with paddle shift you have the option of manual gear change as well as auto.
HTH.

Greensprout

IWasWondering... wrote: »

Personally I can't see what the 'fun' is in constantly changing gears.

I guess it all depends what car you have and what you use it for..

Yes city driving would be less stressful with an automatic, but I couldn't think of a worse car for driving in rural areas..

Saying that I do own performance car and enjoy driving

mjr600

A few autos have passed through my hands, E Class estate, C Class, Focus CVT, Lexus Rx300, Civics and my current very pleasant drive an Altea with a 2.0 diesel and a DSG six speed auto.

The Focus and the Altea have both been the most suprising and pleasant to drive.

The Focus was a 1.6 petrol Zetec, if you read the reviews you would imagine it was awful. It was not, it was quick, great to drive and only a little less economical than the manual.

The Altea will do 50mpg, is quicker than the manual and allows the driver to change gear themselves in tiptronic mode if they so choose.

All bar the Altea (needed a software upgrade) have been perfectly reliable.

I suggest that you rent an auto for the weekend and see if you like it, there are some great automatics about, I think you'll be suprised at how relaxing it is to have the 'box do the work.

[Deleted User]

We have a seat ibiza auto, 9 months old.. nice car, sadly not as nippy as our old automatic (MG ZR) but it's a lot better with fuel

The first thing in the MG to go was the head gasket - nothing to do with it being automatic though