Pros/Cons of a fully auto tranny

[Perfect Balance]

Aw, how cute. You can't even respond to the rest of my post & try to make a witty response.




Please read your first sentence. Apply to self.

Not to interfere, but you've got no clue what shuffle steering is.

I'll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with the car, it's something the person does.


Back on topic, I will always choose a manual over an auto.

A DSG may shift faster, but only after it's been told to shift. The time I spend hitting the paddle on the shifter, I would be shifting in a manual car, and given the slow response of every one I've ever driven, I will have gotten on the gas sooner. The problem isn't the speed it shifts at, it's the timing.

If I'm flooring it to speed up in a dsg, I will have just floored it, and will be waiting for the car to downshift and start accelerating, when in a manual car, I will have already downshifted prior to putting my foot to the floor.

Not to mention rev matching and smoothness, or staying in a gear a bit longer when needed.


I'm not against a DSG, but until someone makes one that can monitor the road ahead and know exactly what you're going to need from it, it doesn't cut it.

 

[Tornado]

Don't DSGs have a hold gear option? Not like automatics have where you select it and it only occasionally listens, but one that actually keeps it in the exact gear you want? I haven't driven a DSG, so I'm genuinely curious.

 

[McLaren]

Not to interfere, but you've got no clue what shuffle steering is.

I'll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with the car, it's something the person does.

I know what it is, but my brain apparently mistook it for an auto shuffling to find a proper gear, so my apologies.

However, a car forcing you shuffle steer isn't necessarily a bad thing. His argument though, is still crap, and yours honestly isn't far from it, though you're referring to a DSG.

The DCTs I've driven/ridden in with, are a different story to the typical semi-auto/DSG-like transmissions.

 

[Perfect Balance]

I know what it is, but my brain apparently mistook it for an auto shuffling to find a proper gear, so my apologies.

I thought it a bit strange that you wouldn't know what shuffle steering was.

However, a car forcing you shuffle steer isn't necessarily a bad thing.

It is if you're trying to drive quickly, shuffle steering is a bad habit a LOT of drivers get into when driving hard. Having to do it because you need to use the shifters is horrible.

His argument though, is still crap, and yours honestly isn't far from it, though you're referring to a DSG.

I don't really see why it's crap. I work at a car dealership, I drive a LOT of different cars. I haven't found one that shifts exactly when I hit the paddles. The downshifts on some are close, but they have a little lag, and they don't rev match. If you are braking at the limit, and downshift, it locks up the tires and, if you are turning as well, unsettles the car.

The DCTs I've driven/ridden in with, are a different story to the typical semi-auto/DSG-like transmissions.

As far as I can tell, a DSG is a type of DCT.

I am fine with them, but at the same time, I don't consider them in the same category as a fully automatic transmission. They are essentially manual gearboxes that shift themselves.


For me to feel that they are on the same level as a manual tranmission, they need to work like the paddle shifters on a gaming console. Instant, quick, shifts that revmatch for you on downshifts. Anything else doesn't have the timing required for on the go adjustment. There's more to a transmission and driving than making a shift as quick as possible.

 

[Keef]

I don't know how to rebuild a DSG. Fact is, sometimes transmissions break, and I think it's neat to be able to fix it yourself in your garage.

Every now and then I decide to double-clutch downshift from 5th to 1st just because I can. When I tried that in my ex's GTI not only did I have to slap the stick 4 times - two of which weren't registered because I hit it too fast - but I then had to wait for it to make the jump and then brace my neck as it kinda sorta rev-matched. In regular use the transmission was honestly spectacular. It could do what I can do with me actually doing it. But in extreme situations like that, which you can do for fun in a stick, it couldn't keep up with me. All I did was ask it to downshift from 5th to 1st at 30mph, right? How difficult can it be?

 

[McLaren]

It is if you're trying to drive quickly, shuffle steering is a bad habit a LOT of drivers get into when driving hard. Having to do it because you need to use the shifters is horrible.

I think this is probably a case-by-case basis & will depend on how the car has its paddle shifters setup. From what I've read, shuffle steering is a common trait used for police officers & stunt men, and that a car with paddles mounted to the steering column can benefit from it.

I don't really see why it's crap. I work at a car dealership, I drive a LOT of different cars. I haven't found one that shifts exactly when I hit the paddles. The downshifts on some are close, but they have a little lag, and they don't rev match. If you are braking at the limit, and downshift, it locks up the tires and, if you are turning as well, unsettles the car.

Against Dual Clutch Transmissions, it's a poor argument as most of them are pretty quick & normally don't act like the transmissions he's describing, but that's to be expected; most as said, are in performance cars.

But, I suppose it should also be noted now that the capability of a DCT depends on who's building it, and the one that is producing the quickest & most used by the manufacturers (besides Porsche & McLaren) is built by Getrag.

As far as I can tell, a DSG is a type of DCT.

It is, you're right, as DSG's seem to be about the closest thing to a current, mainstream DCT that you'll find, and seem to be among the slowest.

I am fine with them, but at the same time, I don't consider them in the same category as a fully automatic transmission. They are essentially manual gearboxes that shift themselves.

Unfortunately, BS seems to think they are by the way he describes them.

For me to feel that they are on the same level as a manual tranmission, they need to work like the paddle shifters on a gaming console. Instant, quick, shifts that revmatch for you on downshifts. Anything else doesn't have the timing required for on the go adjustment. There's more to a transmission and driving than making a shift as quick as possible.

I don't know if they rev-match, but from the PDK I've used in a Cayman, they are pretty quick. That one wasn't video game quick, but I suspect you'd have to have a Ferrari or one of the 911s to really see where these DCTs are going.

 

[Perfect Balance]

I think this is probably a case-by-case basis & will depend on how the car has its paddle shifters setup. From what I've read, shuffle steering is a common trait used for police officers & stunt men, and that a car with paddles mounted to the steering column can benefit from it.

Neither of which are very effective at getting the best out of a car. In fact, neither are 80% of people (including actual "race car drivers" ) who visit the track these days. Shuffle steering is not the best way to drive a car fast, and if you do it, you will never be as fast as the next person who doesn't do it.

Against Dual Clutch Transmissions, it's a poor argument as most of them are pretty quick & normally don't act like the transmissions he's describing, but that's to be expected; most as said, are in performance cars.

Unfortunately, "pretty quick" isn't the same as "when I need to" and they just don't cut it. It's not just a matter of hitting the button a little sooner than when I want it to shift. That's fine for simply accelerating, but it won't work in a situation that you don't know you need to shift until it actually needs to be done.

BTW, it seems you are under the impression that I am trying to support BS in his views. I'm not, that was just the shuffle steer part, everything else is just my own views.

But, I suppose it should also be noted now that the capability of a DCT depends on who's building it, and the one that is producing the quickest & most used by the manufacturers (besides Porsche & McLaren) is built by Getrag.

It is, you're right, as DSG's seem to be about the closest thing to a current, mainstream DCT that you'll find, and seem to be among the slowest.

Unfortunately, BS seems to think they are by the way he describes them.


I don't know if they rev-match, but from the PDK I've used in a Cayman, they are pretty quick. That one wasn't video game quick, but I suspect you'd have to have a Ferrari or one of the 911s to really see where these DCTs are going.

They might have gotten where they need to be with a Ferrari or something, but they aren't there yet for the average consumer. Until then, I'll stick with manual.

 

[McLaren]

Neither of which are very effective at getting the best out of a car. In fact, neither are 80% of people (including actual "race car drivers" ) who visit the track these days. Shuffle steering is not the best way to drive a car fast, and if you do it, you will never be as fast as the next person who doesn't do it.

Noted.

Unfortunately, "pretty quick" isn't the same as "when I need to" and they just don't cut it. It's not just a matter of hitting the button a little sooner than when I want it to shift. That's fine for simply accelerating, but it won't work in a situation that you don't know you need to shift until it actually needs to be done.

"When you need to" will differ by person. When you need it will probably satisfy someone else. Could depend on the situation as well. I'm also wondering if the DCTs you've driven are DSG-esque or if you've had some experience in the quicker cars with them.

As said, the Cayman S was probably not equipped with the fastest DCT, but I know it would still out-accelerate even some of the best drivers once you floored it. The PDK is a very responsive DCT.

BTW, it seems you are under the impression that I am trying to support BS in his views. I'm not, that was just the shuffle steer part, everything else is just my own views.

I was originally until your last post.

They might have gotten where they need to be with a Ferrari or something, but they aren't there yet for the average consumer. Until then, I'll stick with manual.

Of course. The fastest ones are in cars most people can't afford, leaving the ones like the DSG system found in Volkswagens which aren't that much faster than some of the best semi-autos.

 

[Perfect Balance]

I think the end result is that while an "auto" transmission has the ability to be quicker and more effective than a manual, in the current state that they are for the average consumer/person who owns a track car, a manual is a more reliable, and effective option.


I realize that they can shift quicker, leading to quicker acceleration, but as far as maintaining a car on the limit of grip effectively, one would be disappointed with what's on the market for the average buyer.

Of course, most people, even those who drive on a track, will never reach that point, but if we're settling with "good enough" then a regular manual was "good enough". It's really annoying to be not be able to drive quickly because of something wrong with the car instead of the driver simply not having the skill the extract everything it's got to offer.

Kind of like driving on cheap brake pads that overheat when you try to push it, so you've got to drive slow when you know the car is much more capable. It's frustrating. I feel the same way when test driving cars with any sort of automatic transmission. If you don't know what I mean, then chances are you've never driven a car properly hard. In which case you wouldn't really be able to make use of the benefits of a manual transmission anyway. That would pretty much make this entire discussion irrelevant, since the daily grind, with traffic jams and all, is much more comfortable in an auto.

 

[McLaren]

I think the end result is that while an "auto" transmission has the ability to be quicker and more effective than a manual, in the current state that they are for the average consumer/person who owns a track car, a manual is a more reliable, and effective option.


I realize that they can shift quicker, leading to quicker acceleration, but as far as maintaining a car on the limit of grip effectively, you'd be disappointed with what's on the market for the average buyer.

Of course, most people, even though who drive on a track, will never reach that point, but if we're settling with "good enough" then a regular manual was "good enough". It's really annoying to be not be able to drive quickly because of something wrong with the car instead of the driver simply not having the skill the extract everything it's got to offer.

Kind of like driving on cheap brake pads that overheat when you try to push it, so you've got to drive slow when you know the car is much more capable. It's frustrating.

Too often on this forum, I find we refer to the professionals or the very best drivers instead of the average consumer. So, I will agree to that,👍

 

[GT_Prologue5]

I'm going to agree with what's said above, not many people out there are race car drivers, and so be it that most of them are just regular commuters. You wouldn't need more than a Automatic or DCT.

 

[Wolfe]

Until they invent a "semi-automatic" or automated transmission that gives me complete control over the delivery of power from my engine to my drivetrain, allowing me to instantly and selectively disconnect the engine's flywheel from the transmission, and gives me the same level of satisfaction and joy I get from rowing my car's gear-lever from one gear to another..."flappy-paddle" automatics and DSGs can just sod off.

If other people find a manual transmission inconvenient, difficult, or complicated in daily driving, that's fine. I can acknowledge the sentiment, even though I can't really understand it (barring physical impairment/missing limbs). I've driven my BMW while sick, dangerously tired, and achy and sore; I've driven it through hours of stop-and-go traffic and launched it from San-Francisco-like hills. Using a clutch and shifter has literally never been something I've dreaded (and not in that common, half-assed sense of the word "literally").

Personally, I find it more strenuous and annoying to hold the brake to keep an automatic-transmission car from creeping forward while waiting at a red light in "D" (driving my fiancée's car, I've gotten into the habit of slotting the tranny into "N" at lights) than any situation I've encountered in my experiences with manual transmissions. But maybe that's just me.

Driving a manual is no more complicated (to me) than the steering or braking you have to do in any car. The transmission itself is simple and robust, and offers flexibility and choice no other current transmission can match. For bonuses, it makes your car fairly theft-proof (at least in america) and easy to deal with in the event of a dead battery (I can push and bump-start my car by myself).

I guess car thieves and jumper-cable manufacturers would love to see the day manual-transmission cars disappear completely. But if that day ever comes, it'll be the day I become one of those weird guys who commutes on a motorcycle year-round, even in snow.

tl;dr -- I'll sum up my feelings into two, very simple statements:

Automated transmissions, even the most driver-involved DSGs, are BORING. A manual transmission makes even the slowest of cars at normal-traffic pace a blast to drive.

Needing to "ask" a computer to shift for you, whether it's through throttle input, a forward-backward stick, or flappy paddles, is FRUSTRATING. I don't care if the tranny can shift from one gear to the next in 0.0000000001 seconds; if it's automated, it will second-guess you when you don't want it to.

 

[AlexGTV]

For bonuses, it makes your car fairly theft-proof (at least in america)

How does a manual make your car theft-proof?

 

[niky]

Don't DSGs have a hold gear option? Not like automatics have where you select it and it only occasionally listens, but one that actually keeps it in the exact gear you want? I haven't driven a DSG, so I'm genuinely curious.

Depends on the box. If you have a DSG/DCT with paddles, you can sometimes force it to hold gears.

 

[Wolfe]

How does a manual make your car theft-proof?

Automatics are so prevalent in this country that the majority of drivers here never learn how to use a manual transmission.
Majority of drivers can't drive a manual = Majority of would-be car thieves can't drive a manual.

The ratio is probably closer to 50/50 with the car thieves, because if they want to be good at what they do (and pick up nice sportscars) they ought to know how to use a clutch...though on the other hand, car thieves aren't necessarily the smartest bunch.

This clip is from Canada, not the u.s., but the point remains:


Finding your car halfway down the street from where you parked it with a ruined clutch (it's happened) is better than having to find a new car.

 

[Kylehnat]

The ratio is probably closer to 50/50 with the car thieves, because if they want to be good at what they do (and pick up nice sportscars) they ought to know how to use a clutch...though on the other hand, car thieves aren't necessarily the smartest bunch.

Good car thieves can probably drive stick. 99% of thieves are no more than common thugs who probably don't know what that third pedal does.

 

[homeforsummer]

The downshifts on some are close, but they have a little lag, and they don't rev match.

Really? I've driven one car with DSG (Audi TT-S) and one with an automated manual transmission (smart fortwo), and both of those rev-matched. Yes, even the smart. In fact, I've not yet heard of an automated manual or DSG that doesn't rev-match on downshifts.

I agree with the lag after pulling a paddle though. From what I've seen the DCT in the Ferrari 458 looks pretty instantaneous, from having seen youtube vids of people driving the car. And yes, that one rev-matches too.

As far as proportions of cars with manual transmission go, it's miles higher in Europe. I think a good 65% or so are still manual here, followed by autos, then DCTs and then everything else. I recall hearing that around 80% of new cars sold in the States are autos, in comparison.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Really? I've driven one car with DSG (Audi TT-S) and one with an automated manual transmission (smart fortwo), and both of those rev-matched. Yes, even the smart. In fact, I've not yet heard of an automated manual or DSG that doesn't rev-match on downshifts.

I agree with the lag after pulling a paddle though. From what I've seen the DCT in the Ferrari 458 looks pretty instantaneous, from having seen youtube vids of people driving the car. And yes, that one rev-matches too.

As far as proportions of cars with manual transmission go, it's miles higher in Europe. I think a good 65% or so are still manual here, followed by autos, then DCTs and then everything else. I recall hearing that around 80% of new cars sold in the States are autos, in comparison.

From what I've seen, they don't seem to rev match, the engine is just forced to whatever rpms it needs to be at for the current speed and gear, and it's not smooth as a result. I haven't driven one that actually revs up before engaging the lower gear (while braking, not accelerating), making a seamless shift.

I'm sure some of the higher end cars do it, but not the regular ones in my experience.

 

[Keef]

All of VW's DSG transmissions rev-match. Pretty much all manuals-with-an-auto-mode rev-match. Slushbox rev-matching has been slow to trickle down from high-end applications, but more and more sport-oriented applications have the capability.

The only problem is that they're all easily confused, even the DSG. Going from 5th to 1st to 5th again as quickly as possible works out pretty fluidly in my 20 year old RX7, but isn't the prettiest operation in the GTI I drove.

 

[homeforsummer]

Yeah, as Keef says above, the VW ones certainly do. It would really surprise me if others didn't, since giving an electronic blip of the throttle doesn't seem that difficult in the greater scheme of things if you've designed a transmission which manages two clutches.

And again, even the smart I drove rev-matched. The transmission was pretty slow in it but the blip was noticeable before the clutch re-engaged.

 

[Danoff]

I'd like to be though. Everybody has their own interests and desires, and driving just happens to be one of few things I crave to excel at. I get all happy like a little kid when I'm bombing into a corner and manage a perfect hell-and-toe downshift, and it makes me want to go that much faster.

That's great, I'm glad you get entertainment out of pullingoff a heel-toe downshift, but it has nothing to do with driving any more than manually pumping the water through your engine block or telling your spark plugs when to fire by blinking your eyes.

Operating a transmission is not driving - it's operating a transmission.

By slogging every day in anything other than a manual car I would basically be giving up on the dream of being an excellent driver and that would be disgraceful.

The best drivers in the world don't race with a clutch. I suppose you think they're giving up on the chance to better their skills at "driving".

As much as you don't like them I love them, maybe more so, and that's fine. But dysfunctional? Hardly. As a matter of fact, a traditional manual transmission is a textbook example of "functional". It's a simple mechanical system with no electronic interference. A machine operated by a person. It can be operated well, it can be operated poorly, it can produce glorious results if you know what you're doing, or it can explode into bits before you get off the dealer lot.

Hmmm, user error results in catastrophic loss? That's a dysfunction interface. Imagine if, for a moment, your computer exploded into bits if you clicked on a particular button in the operating system.

Needing one foot to operate two pedals is a dysfunctional interface. Having to take your hand off the wheel to flip a lever is a suboptimal interface.

For me, I'd go with the Manual ... All I know is I enjoy a good challenge, and I'd go for it.

Try operating a car where there's no engine but you stick your feet through a hole in the floor to move the car forward. That's an excellent challenge. Since you like challenges, I assume you'd take that car over the comparatively easy manual transmission any day.

I like a good challenge too - but only when it means something. Taking on a challenge for the sake of the challenge itself makes it sound like you've got too much time on your hands.

Changing from one gear to the next one above or below isn't the point of a manual gearbox.

For a pure driving enthusiast experience, you don't need to skip gears. I've never heard a formula 1 driver say "I really wish I could skip gears in this thing". When I'm tearing up a windy road, I don't skip gears for speed. So what you're talking about is a perceived benefit for daily driving.

So for daily driving, you're saying that you can jump down 3 gears faster than a DSG could. Even if that were true, even if you could do it a fraction of a second faster with a stick, I'd suggest that you shouldn't be performing maneuvers that have such little margin for error during daily driving.

I think for daily driving, an auto or DSG wins bigtime. Driving defensively means not having to have every last ounce out of your engine during maneuvers. Having both hands on the wheel at all times is a plus, and of course it's much more convenient to operate an auto or semi-auto transmission. My daily driver, for instance, is still fully functional if I break my wrist or my left ankle.

For "spirited driving" or even autocross or racing, skipping gears saves no time, as you could be downshifting during braking - and all shifts will be perfect and faster-than-humanly possible. So you're going to have a better experience, freed to concentrate on apexing, late braking, and hard acceleration and have faster times around the track. Here again, the DSG wins.

But there is an advantage I see for a manual. If you're poor and can't afford a car with a decent engine or a DSG, and you're worried about the car breaking down and having to repair it yourself or simply worried about getting the car home because it has 250,000 miles and things aren't working as well as they used to - the manual is cheaper, mechanically simpler, and more robust in these scenarios.

I see the manual hanging around in low-end cars none of us are interested in for reasons none of us are interested in for a while longer. Eventually, though, I don't see the clutch surviving.

I'm not against a DSG, but until someone makes one that can monitor the road ahead and know exactly what you're going to need from it, it doesn't cut it.

You tell it when to shift, and it does it faster than you can. It doesn't need to monitor the road, you do.

I don't know how to rebuild a DSG. Fact is, sometimes transmissions break, and I think it's neat to be able to fix it yourself in your garage.

See above. I assume that your car has no computer chips in it that require special machines to read or reprogram, and has no mechanical components that you can't replace yourself. The fact is, sometimes things break. If you want to have a high performance vehicle, you're going to have to cope with the fact that some of the engineering is a bit more complex than what you can fix in your own garage. If you want something simple an reliable, fine, but don't pretend you're an enthusiast with that outlook on cars.

Every now and then I decide to double-clutch downshift from 5th to 1st just because I can.

I hope you're rev-matching.

This is bad for your manual transmission and one of my biggest problems with people who drive stick. People suck at driving manual transmissions. I've ridden with a lot of people who drive stick, and they're not good at it. Rare is the time when I've thought to myself "hey, this guy knows what he's doing". More typical it's "this guy is killing his transmission". My buddy owns a stick "because it's cheaper", and had to rebuild his transmission at 120,000 miles. It's not cheaper if you suck at it.

Do your car a favor, stop bothering 1st gear. You don't need to do it, and you're being harder on your car than you should be.

Until they invent a "semi-automatic" or automated transmission that gives me complete control over the delivery of power from my engine to my drivetrain, allowing me to instantly and selectively disconnect the engine's flywheel from the transmission,

You need this because.... ? there are a few answers that come to mind and none of them should be this high on the priority list.

and gives me the same level of satisfaction and joy I get from rowing my car's gear-lever from one gear to another..."flappy-paddle" automatics and DSGs can just sod off.

Your level of satisfaction and joy at moving a lever back and forth will only ever be met by moving a lever back and forth. It sounds like you really enjoy two things, driving, and operating a manual transmission. I prefer driving. If I wanted to operate a manual transmission, I'd have one in my house that I could play with when I got bored. You don't have to be driving to move a lever back and forth. You can do that anywhere.

 

[homeforsummer]

All valid points, but objectivity doesn't come into it when for some people simply find it fun to use a manual transmission. And no, the same satisfaction couldn't be had from having one in your living room to play with. It's the fun and satisfaction from skilfully operating a mechanical device. It's no different really to why people are interested in old steam trains or crafting things out of wood. They're all archaic in the modern age but it doesn't mean they aren't tactile ways of doing tasks that have long since been superseded using modern methods.

You absolutely can't objectify it.

 

[Famine]

For a pure driving enthusiast experience, you don't need to skip gears. I've never heard a formula 1 driver say "I really wish I could skip gears in this thing". When I'm tearing up a windy road, I don't skip gears for speed. So what you're talking about is a perceived benefit for daily driving.

So for daily driving, you're saying that you can jump down 3 gears faster than a DSG could. Even if that were true, even if you could do it a fraction of a second faster with a stick, I'd suggest that you shouldn't be performing maneuvers that have such little margin for error during daily driving.

Hmmnmmmnnmm, it's not really that either - though the ability to drop two gears at once is quite useful in a VTEC


Automatic gearboxes are always in the right gear for the engine speed and throttle. That's their benefit. Flappies add to that the ability to be in the right gear for the current road conditions (with the caveat that you can manually shift autos too, but I've never seen someone do it). Manuals add to that the ability to be in the right gear for the next set of road conditions. Of course every additional level of user control also adds the downside that the user controls is badly ("If we give them adjustable suspension, they will adjust it wrong" - Colin Chapman), so what you say about people driving stick badly is very much the case.

Overall though, it's not about how fast you can do this thing now (where a computer will always beat a person), but about preparedness - which is a key in effective (and safe) road driving.


If I'm trundling along a random country road at 55mph I'd be in 5th. If I approach a corner that I cannot assess in its entirety, I'd put the car from 5th down to 3rd in one movement (well, of my hands anyway) because 3rd gives me greater decelerative control and greater fine control of speed, and then take the corner in 3rd at an appropriate speed. In a flappy, I'd put the car from 5th down to 3rd in two separate movements and the above still applies. In a full auto I'd take the corner in, probably, 4th and if I back out of the throttle I might find the transmission changing itself down a gear in the middle of a bend - which is a massive no-no. In that situation the auto is worst, the manual is best and the flappy is nearly as good as the manual.

On a spirited drive, I'd do exactly the same thing, except I'd be starting off at 60mph (which would be the limit for that road) and probably in 4th. Flappy > Manual > Auto. If we did the same thing on a track, I'd not be in 5th at 55mph - I'd already be in 3rd - and I wouldn't be not-on-the-gas or not-on-the-brakes at any point anyway. Flappy > Manual > Auto.


In terms of gearchange speed, auto will always win. In terms of sports driving, a flappy will always win (that's why F1 has them and not automatics) - because of the combination of gearchange speed and gear control for car balance. In terms of safe driving though, a full manual is the only place to be - a flappy is a good substitute.

 

[Keef]

Needing one foot to operate two pedals is a dysfunctional interface

But you're a badass if you can, just for the sake of being awesome.

 

[Danoff]

Manuals add to that the ability to be in the right gear for the next set of road conditions.

I don't understand why you can't do this with a flappy paddle gearbox.

Overall though, it's not about how fast you can do this thing now (where a computer will always beat a person), but about preparedness - which is a key in effective (and safe) road driving.

I don't see a difference in preparedness, I see a potential difference in speed.

In a flappy, I'd put the car from 5th down to 3rd in two separate movements and the above still applies.

This seems to be about speed.

If you can prepare for the gearchange in advance, you can do it with flappy paddles or a stick. If you you're cutting it down to a paper thin margin for daily driving, you're doing something else wrong.

If you happen to be in a scenario where you need to downshift 3 gears, do it in a fraction of a second (so two movements is too long), and then get on the accelerator in order to avoid an accident, I'll concede that it can be done faster in a manual. Seems like an extremely unlikely scenario, but it is possible. That being said, I'll take flappy over the manual in terms of safety because I recognize that I'm not flawless at operating a manual. The scenario I described above seems less likely than flubbing a gearchange.

 

[Keef]

I'm not flawless at staying employed but that doesn't mean I'm going to sign up for welfare. I'm interested in becoming more self-sufficient financially as I'm interested in being more self-sufficient driving my car. Once I've learned the lesson the hard way, then I can retire fat and happy.

 

[Danoff]

I'm not flawless at staying employed but that doesn't mean I'm going to sign up for welfare. I'm interested in becoming more self-sufficient financially as I'm interested in being more self-sufficient driving my car. Once I've learned the lesson the hard way, then I can retire fat and happy.

...you missed the point. You have to be flawless (impossible) to out-perform the DSG overall, even limiting the discussion to aspects where it actually is humanly possible to out-perform the flappy paddle.

 

[Eric.]

Until they invent a "semi-automatic" or automated transmission that gives me complete control

Uh..

 

[mustangGT90210]

All the points so far made for AND against manual trans here are all valid, save for the one I'm going to pick apart here:

Autos can only react, there is no proactive adjustment it can do. It'll destroy you in a 1 shift scenario, but if you have to drop 2 gears to enter a turn, it's gonna take more thought and waiting to run a DSG through those 2 clicks of the paddle instead of the 1 motion of the down shift. (In an everyman's DSG, because I feel that's more relevant to this discussion)

The one other thing here is just personal satisfaction. I much prefer manual, because it gives me more control over the gear I'm in. We'll take my mom's Escape 6 speed auto for example here (and I'd imagine other more economy related autos are like this), whenever I let off the gas, the trans upshifts to the highest gear it can while gliding(or goes to neutral, unsure) and then when I get back on the gas you hit the pedal and wait while it shifts back down(or out of neutral) then goes. In her Escape 5 speed this was never an issue. I could go to the same turn in 2nd gear, let off, brake, get back on and not have any trouble, because I could hold it where it needed to be. I just get frustrated with the new one.

 

[Famine]

I don't understand why you can't do this with a flappy paddle gearbox.

You can - it just requires two separate movements. That's why the flappy is almost as good.

This seems to be about speed.

No, it's about control.

Proper car control is about smoothness and progressiveness. Smoosh the brake pedal and, ABS excepted, you'll not brake very effectively. Ease it on and ease it off and you're in control.

Gearchanges are phenomenally dangerous. What any gearchange does is suddenly remove drive from your car and suddenly reapply it - in fact the amount of time spent without drive is irrelevant (with one exception), so the speed of the change itself isn't important, rather that drive is suddenly diminished and repplied. Just watch the occupants of a car driven by someone who can't drive stick properly lurch about with each change - which, on the face of it, seems an argument against the manual 'box, but it's an exaggerated example of the forces at play. Gearchanges - even seemingly perfect rev-matched DCT changes - unbalance cars significantly and you should seek to minimise them at all times (especially while cornering). This is the issue with flappies - you can't block shift and block shifts have important safety aspects.


But if you want to drive fast, drive flappy. I don't use the clutch in GT5, for example.

Of course in theory, CVTs are even better. But for some reason, they really didn't take off and tend to only be applied for fuel economy purposes these days. That one probably is down to vanity.

If you happen to be in a scenario where you need to downshift 3 gears, do it in a fraction of a second (so two movements is too long), and then get on the accelerator in order to avoid an accident, I'll concede that it can be done faster in a manual. Seems like an extremely unlikely scenario, but it is possible. That being said, I'll take flappy over the manual in terms of safety because I recognize that I'm not flawless at operating a manual. The scenario I described above seems less likely than flubbing a gearchange.

It seems to be a cultural difference. I wouldn't say that everyone over here is perfection with a clutch, but the massive difference in relative proliferation means that people here are more familiar with manuals and have a pretty high success rate with manual gearchanges. I wish the stuff I've written above was taught as standard rather than Roadcraft, but generally we seem pretty good with them.