I don't really mind either type of gearbox. I would happily buy a manual or an auto.
I do support the general principle though that autos are better suited to more powerful engines in the main. The combination of low or medium power coupled to an auto box can be tedious.
|
Economy figs on Honda Civic 1.8 I-shift are better (slightly) than the equivalent manual.
I believe it does 'full auto', although the up changes are a bit clonky.
|
Right ho, i detest automated manuals.
My thoughts AF if you are test driving an automated manual; do take it into a close manouevering situation, you know the sort of thing, but slowly as if getting close to another car/wall especially on a hill. Also give it a few steep hill starts. Try 'creeping' along in simulated heavy traffic too. Also give it some welly in auto, and watch the head of your nearest and dearest as she does a good impression of a set of headbanging rockers..;)
Would be interested to hear what the sales guys have to say.
Tin hat on.
|
Mrs B had a Merc A class 170 diesel clutchless manual for a while. She hated it. I hated it. I think it probably hated itself. Sold it after 6 months.
Quite right GB, they seem OK until you start to tight manouever.
|
|
You can add me to this category of disliking automated manuals. I've never been a big fan of the VAG DSG box because of exactly this problem. I never have trouble in such situations with a manual or a proper auto or even a CVT but an automated manual? Happens every time I drive one.
|
|
|
|
Also give it some welly inauto and watch the head of your nearest and dearest as she does a good impression of a set of headbanging rockers..;)
That made me smile!
I would of course give any car a good test drive, especially one with a different kind of gearbox.
They must be improving as the technology develops surely?
Andyfr
|
IMO, an autobox is as inept and frustrating on a good B-road as a manual is when sitting on the M25 on a Friday evening. It's horses for courses, and depends on the car you're driving, the road you're on, and the mood you're in.
My biggest personal dislike on a conventional auto is the torque converter, which always gives that slight delay between the revs picking up and the car accelerating. I prefer the 'direct' mechanical link of a manual.
I would definitely consider an auto as my next commuter / runabout though. Preferably attached to a big diesel engine. That Merc seriously impressed me, and was the definition of fuss free shove.
Haven't yet tried flappy paddle or DSG. A friend has an Audi A3 TDI with DSG and rates it, apart from owning it two years and never once managing a smooth exit off his driveway (1 in 4 slope)
Cheers
DP
Edited by DP on 19/08/2008 at 21:26
|
I'm not a convert.
I've driven autos several times in the US, but never come away thinking "I must get one of those." In general I felt that it was no better, no worse, than driving a manual. On my most recent visit, I did feel that the auto did seem to make the car (a PT Cruiser) more lethargic than it should have been. My Berlingo has a 110 bhp petrol engine, and to find that a 140 bhp car which is not that much heavier had, if anything, less urge, was disappointing.
|
The Highlander we hired was a 3.3 V6 with 230 bhp and it was great.
I have often wondered how the semi-autos manage to start off on a hill. When does the clutch "bite"?
Andyfr
|
I would buy a Qashqai CVT if the cabin was not so cramped and tiny.
Ditto for the Prius - the auto box on that is a joy and, again if the cabin was not so cramped and the seats so low, I would purchase one of those for the auto rather than the hybrid technology.
I have been considering the CRV but am concerned about low MPG reports - was concerned prior to fuel and tax rises so less likely to buy now.
Driving autos is so stress free. I drive autos whenever I am in the US and it is more relaxing.
I do wonder with the proposed VED increases whether autos will die out in the UK due to their often higher CO2 rating and lower MPG?
|
I do wonder with the proposed VED increases whether autos will die out in the UK due to their often higher CO2 rating and lower MPG?
I think they may develop more of the CVT/Semi-autos to get over that problem.
Andyfr
|
Interestingly, the Qashqai CVT gives slightly better official MPG than the manual.
Shame that there are people on the Qashqai forum now complaining that their new cars are rusting.
|
|
"I have often wondered how the semi-autos manage to start off on a hill. When does the clutch "bite"?"
It depends on the system. Some require power applied before the clutch is applied (smart system was like this) - this causes the problems associated with tight manouvering. VAG DSG applies the clutch as soon as the footbrake is released so the car will move on tickover, very handy for tight space manouvering.
|
As other posters have pointed out, it is very much a horses for courses issue.
I have a 1.8i astra automatic, which has a 4 speed getrag box, with sports mode.
Does the job I want it to do admirably, in that it is ideal as a commuter. On the 20km to work commute I used to do, it worked out better on economy than the manual version owned by a friend - probably because a lot of the stop/start stuff was on inclines.
On the open road it pulls well enough, and the sports mode gives a bit of overtaking oomph when needed.
In top, which it gets to and tends to stay in on the open road, it gives me 40km/h per 1000 RPM, which means it isn't revving its butt off at motorway speed, as opposed to my mum's 1.0 Charade auto which is screaming at close to 4000!
In the past, a lot of smaller engines were linked up to boxes which were more suited to big yankee engines - I had a chevy 2.8 with a 3 speed torqueflite box, which was a gutless POS, but which would have been perfect (though thirsty) with the 4.2 engine.
Getting back into manuals - mostly hire cars - is simple enough. It is only when you forget it has a clutch and start coasting up to the lights in 4th that things get di-ffi-ffi-ffi-cult... :)
|
What does DSG stand for ?
If its anything like the C3 clutchless auto I drove a couple of years ago, being a conventional autobox driver - I did find it quite "entertaining" somewhat but then I've been driving for 38 years now inc. V8's & V12's + heavy lorries so I could even drive a demanding car like say a Nissan Almera
I wouldn't have been happy for Mrs Dog to drive the C3, especially here in Cornwall with all the hill-starts !
|
What does DSG stand for ?
Direct Shift Gearbox. Some others say as Tiptronic, i-shift etc.
|
Tawse
*I have been considering the CRV but am concerned about low MPG reports - was concerned prior to fuel and tax rises so less likely to buy now.*
Don't be, I've cut and pasted an earlier comment of mine here:
*For reasons not up for discussion here I recently drove down to Devon on the A303 at a steady 50mph.
I drove a 2007 CRV petrol/automatic/aircon/radio/wipers/lights on etc. etc. and got a measured 40mpg. At 80mph+ or around town I'm getting about 28-30. Light right foot and avoiding dead stops/starts is the secret plus a sensible average speed. *
Just common sense really, I've had autos for about 30 yrs., drive with one foot to make manual hire cars easier to handle.
|
Whilst having a break rom decorating I looked up some data on manual and auto cars. The list below gives some examples, which are interesting. Interstingly, the performance in these examples is almost identical, so i ahven't lsited it, but the fuel economy and emissions vary considerably between manual and auto. (auto data in brackets)
BMW 520d SE Saloon
Combined fuel mpg 55.4 (50.4)
CO2 Emission 136 (149)
BMW 525i SE Saloon
Combined fuel mpg 36.7 (37.7)
CO2 Emission 182 (178)
Mercedes-Benz C220 CDi saloon
Combined fuel mpg 47.9 (42.8)
CO2 Emission 156 (173)
Audi A6 2.7TDi S line saloon
Combined fuel mpg 40.9 (39.2)
CO2 Emission 184 (192)
For Focus 1.6 petrol duratec hatch
Combined fuel mpg 42.2 (36.7)
CO2 Emission 159 (179)
It would seem that for these cars at least, you may have to pay quite a lot extra in running costs to drive an auto (and probably pay more for it in the first place).
|
And for an A3 Sportback like mine - 2.0TDi 170
DSG figures in brackets.
CO2 151 (156)
Urban 36.7 (37.2)
Extra urban 62.8 (57.6) - I don't believe either!
Combined 49.6 (47.9)
Noise level when moving
74 (72)
So not much difference between manual and auto.
I achieve the urban regularly, low 50s is possible on a good run at sensible speeds, combined at high 40s, is not far off what I currently get - last 40 litres saw over 400 miles.
Edited by daveyjp on 20/08/2008 at 15:43
|
I know the dsg versions are pretty good re emissions and fuel economy, but they do cost more as an initial (and, presumably, used) purchase. I haven't tried one so perhaps I ought to when I next change car.
My point is that the economy/emissions of an auto can differ significantly from the manual version, depending on car, engine size, fuel type etc.
I still prefer manual, mainly due to the degree of control (as mentioned by others) afforded when doing fine manoeuvres, hill starts, reversing etc.
|
"I drove a 2007 CRV petrol/automatic/aircon/radio/wipers/lights on etc. etc. and got a measured 40mpg. At 80mph+ or around town I'm getting about 28-30. Light right foot and avoiding dead stops/starts is the secret plus a sensible average speed."
I too drive a 2007 auto CRV and would totally agree with this. stop/starts kill the consumption
|
I live in a detached house, it cost me more than a semi detached house but I payed the extra as I prefer to live in a detached house ... the same goes with my auto gearbox - cost doesn't enter into it (for me) because I prefer an autobox - what price comfort ?
... Just my personal opinion.
|
Thanks Dog and Pica.
If this was 12 months ago I probably would be buying a CRV auto. Now, well, I am just so uncertain. 30 MPG does not seem that much when, for example, I compare it with another car I am looking at which is a Toyota Verso 1.8, albeit a manual, which reportedly gets 37 to 38 MPG.
I know I am not comparing like for like there but the Verso is almost a third more in MPG and that, as far as I am aware, the Verso is not that fuel efficient compared to many other motors of similar size on the road these days.
Of course, joy and happiness plus the less stress of an auto should play a big part but... well, costs are so important in this day and age. I admit, I am in a dilemma.
|
|
The 1.8 petrol struggles to pull the heavy-ish Verso along. The 2.2 diesel is good to drive and much more fuel-efficient. Quite refined too, so suitable even for people who don't like diesels.
|
>I admit, I am in a dilemma.<
In my 05 1.8 Almera auto tawse, I often nudge 45 MPG up on the ole computer, which I know is only a guide, Herself - who is the main driver, rarely gets over 40 MPG.
In my mobile car tuning days, we had a slogan which went "Drive as if there is an egg under your right foot" which is good advice for today me thinks !
We don't cover a lot of miles these days, so don't be guided by me, if running cost is a big issue & you cover a fair few miles, then maybe diesel is "The Way To Go"
|
|
|
|
|
|
