There's numeorus types of automatic gearbox, the two recent (well last 10 years really) developments the automated manual and twin clutch type box are basically manual gearboxes but with the clutch operated by sensors and servos depending on throttle position etc...i always descibe it as you operating the throttle and a friend trying to control the clutch at the same time, horrible things.

Whilst they might be slightly more efficient in fuel use due to their being little to no 'slip' in the system, they lack creep and creep makes for smooth control.

Creep is one of the nicest things about standard torque converter, and some of the newer CV boxes with torque converter as found in Honda Jazz and latest Toyota Yaris for instance, and there's a similar gentle and fully controllable pick up to be found in Toyota hybrids but which are different again.

With torque converter boxes for most manouevers on the flat just lifting your foot of the brake will see enough creep to allow the car to move where you want it to, on almost all examples when the throttle is pressed gently the pick up can be infinitely and minutely controlled.

With automated manual and twin clutch boxes the clutch engagement can be fairly sudden, almost on/off switch, and accidents IMHO are much more likely with these as they require careful throttle/brake control for confined spaces.

I have no idea if the new Nissan Note has a torque converter box, but for comparison purposes you could test drive a small Korean car or two (almost all come with proper autos) and a Toyota Yaris and Honda Jazz as well, and see how they all compare.

Make sure on any test drive that you take some time to learn the ''feel'' of the gearbox, how it picks up and if it has creep that you like so take the car where you want to, spend 10 mins in a quiet car park feeling the power take up if you so wish, its you who is going to be paying for it and you who is going to be driving it...if the sales bod is one of these who simply hands over to you on an open road then 5 mins of main road driving his chosen route and back to the showroom to seal the deal, be ready to just walk away.

I don't agree with driving automatics with two feet, and with a proper auto box it should almost never be necessary.

Edited by gordonbennet on 13/05/2016 at 11:08

I drive a 2012 Jazz Auto - CVT with TC as described above by GB.

Parking is easy. It creeps at idle so you HAVE to use the footbrake or handbrake to prevent it moving. Great for parking.. And keeps the driver alert..

Even I - senile and in my dotage - can drive it smoothly... and park.

I had an uncle who crashed his 1967 Daimler 250 by accelerating rather than braking (it was an auto). His car went through the rear garage wall and ended up in the garden.. This was in the early 1970s. He was in his 70s.

He gave up driving after that..

Anyone remember the Daf variomatic?.It could be driven just as fast in reverse as it could forwards.Many a garden wall have been demolised by these.

I had a 1971 Daf 55 from about 1977 - 1979 (and a few years later a 'Volvo 66' which was effectively the same thing but with big bumpers).

The 55 had a Renault 1100 engine but was surprisingly quick, the bodywork was quite light and of course if you floored the pedal the engine went to full power while it accelerated seamlessly up to an indicated 80+.

Only drawback was the need to crawl under to tighten the drivebelts fairly often.

Like all the other automatics I've driven I favoured the two-footed technique, these had a centrifugal clutch so creeping in tight spaces wasn't as simple as with a traditional TC.

Never owned one but i drove a nice Daf55 a few times and really enjoyed it, it was a completely different transmssion to anything else at the time but within minutes felt quite at home in it.

Blimey-praise indeed!

In my experience most elderly drivers involved in accidents were driving an auto.

That's proof of what exactly?

- that many older drivers prefer automatics - it could equally said that most Americans involved in accidents were driving autos.