Hi there,
I'm looking to buy a used car, preferably a reliable brand like a Honda or a Toyota but I can't decide whether I should go automatic or not. I've been driving a manual since passing my driving test a few years ago, but I've been thinking of getting an automatic after test driving a few in the past. I don't drive that much, maybe once a week, it will be mainly my wife who will be driving back and forth to work (about 3-4 miles only) every day.
I have driven an '06 1.4 Jazz, '06 1.6 Kia Ceed and 04 1.6 Civic, all automatics and I think I liked the Ceed and the Civic, but not the Jazz because of it's 1.4 engine.
Recently I drove a '06 1.6 Ford Focus and it felt to me like the Focus needed a *lot* more accelerator when taking off at traffic lights and junctions. This annoyed me slightly and I can't remember properly but I think the Civic and Kia didn't have this problem to the extent the Focus did. Am I mistaken about this? I assume all automatics have this issue to some degree?
The Jazz also felt this way, but it had only a 1.4 engine whereas the Civic and Kia were 1.6. I'm thinking if I should go back to the Jazz and try a manual version? Even though it's 1.4 only it might feel better to drive?
I was also thinking about Toyota automatics but I seem to get the general impression that their MMT is something a lot of people are advising against, what is so bad about this gearbox anyway? I was thinking of getting an '06 Corolla Hatchback.
|
>>Recently I drove a '06 1.6 Ford Focus and it felt to me like the Focus needed a *lot* more accelerator when taking off at traffic lights and junctions. This annoyed me slightly and I can't remember properly but I think the Civic and Kia didn't have this problem to the extent the Focus did. Am I mistaken about this? <<
Some 'boxes so have more sluggish takeup than others, its individual to each setup.
was also thinking about Toyota automatics but I seem to get the general impression that their MMT is something a lot of people are advising against, what is so bad about this gearbox anyway?<<
I spent several weeks driving a Yaris diesel with the MMT box and it is neither as controllable as a manual or a smooth and easy as a proper autobox, so its really a dog of a solution. It say the manual is a far better option over the MMT box, although id much prefer a proper auto over either.
|
You seem to have a good idea of what you do and don't like. The only way to decide on the MMT is to test drive it.
If it's anything like the smart I'd describe it more as a manual you don't need clutch control for, rather than an automatic as for the majority of time to get a smooth ride manual changes were needed.
|
|
|
Thanks for your replies!
stunorthants26, what would you say is a proper automatic then?
I do sort of have an idea of what I want but certain other things are making it hard to decide.
I would like a Jazz, as it's very practical, and maybe I'll be ok with the manual one even at 1.4, BUT looking at What Car's Owner's reviews of the Jazz, there seem to be too many people unhappy with their Jazzes. Some say it's uncomfortable to sit in, some talk about EGR problems, etc so it's hard to know if this is a reliable car or not?
As for the Ceed, yes it comes with a 5 year warranty but does that really mean that the car is reliable? Or will it keep having problems but they'll keep fixing it for free to keep me happy? I can't find any negative reviews of the Cee'd, but there's just not that many people getting them to find out if they are any good or not..
And the Civics seem to have gearbox bearings issues and streering rack failure.
Is there a way I can ask a dealer to check these out before I buy the car? I'm sure if I ask they'll just say it's ok, it's not a problem without even bothering to check because it will cost them money to fix.
And every dealer I've been to only allows me 10 mins in the car for a test drive, no more. That doesn't really help me judge the car properly.
|
kj,
Can I suggest that you might also like to think about a Skoda with the DSG auto? As far as reliability is concerned they are up there with the very best of them. I have an 04 Octavia 1.9 tdi with around 50k on the clock now, I have done over 20k miles in it in less than a year and other than servicing (the last one cost me £62.81 at my local village garage) it has never been in the garage and has always proved reliable and economical (av 52 mpg in the winter and about 53.5 now). I have developed a bone problem in my left foot that is causing me intermittent, severe pain and am seriously thinking about swapping to an auto. I have read around on various websites, including the briskoda owners website, and owners seem to be very pleased with both performance and economy. My brother is in the motor trade and strongly advises against the Toyota MMT version, if they go wrong which is apparently not at all unknown, they can be expensive to repair. We have a manual yaris that is a delight to drive.
MGs
|
|
|
>>what would you say is a proper automatic then?
>>
It isn't very easy to find out what sort of auto gearbox a particular car has.
I suppose they can range from a torque converter gearbox at one end of the scale to an electronic clutch at the other end.
For my two pennorth give me a nice old-fashioned torque converter automatic gearbox every time - yes, they may be less efficient mpg wise, but far more reliable, with a better driving experience.
|
a better driving experience.
Not always. Ever tried an early Mk 1 Micra auto? Not an eager beast...
|
>> a better driving experience. Not always. Ever tried an early Mk 1 Micra auto? Not an eager beast...
Yes but to be fair Lud it's not really a proper car!
Best reg's.....MD
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was very pleasantly surprised with the new Golf 1.6 DSG (new dry plate 7 speed box).
The only real downside as compared to a proper torque converter auto was that at low speeds the Golf felt and sounded like it was going to stall. It didn't actually stall, but it was off-putting.
This may be an artefact of the mating to the weedy 1.6 petrol. With the 1.4 TSI or the old 6 speed DSG on a TDI, it might be fine.
I would consider buying one, but I'd need a rock solid warranty to back it up. Just for peace of mind.
|
|
|
Hey,
I have been where you are and am heading back there now. About 5 years ago when it came to an enforced change of car I decided that I wanted an automatic. I picked up a Golf TDI automatic and two things made me change the car quickly. The first (and main reason) was that the interior stank of smoke once the cleaning products wore off. The second reason was because of overtaking. In a manual, if you are going to overtake or nip through a tight gap you drop a gear or two in preparation. An automatic can't read the road ahead so the first thing it knows about the overtake is when you floor it and then it downshifts to match your demand for power. This meant that it always felt like a bit of a delay between my putting my foot down and the car "going". The former problem is solved by being suspicious of cars that smell of cleaning products. The second is solved by having an automatic with flappy paddles on the wheel (or at the least an override on the stick) so you can preselect the gears before going for the overtake. Personally I would generally go for paddles if they were available. I expect my next car to be an automatic because increasingly I can find little reason not to if it has paddles.
As far as types of auto go, there are a few:
1. Conventional Auto - uses a torque convertor. Very smooth and predictable. Not always the quickest shifters and drink fuel. Mostly found on high-end cars now where the smoothness is desirable and the fuel consumption increase isn't an issue.
2. CVT Auto - uses two pulleys and a belt to constantly vary the ratio. Smooth, less of a fuel consumption hit. Slow off the line but ok once moving, can't handle high power (>200hp generally). Sounds a bit "odd" to the average person because the gearbox holds the engine at high revs for acceleration. Seems odd but is actually the quickest way to accelerate.
3. S-Tronic/DSG/Powershift - two automated manuals in parallel, one for the odd gears, one for the even gears. No economy hit compared to a manual as it is a manual but with automated clutches. Can be jerky when setting off if you try to set off too fast. Biggest issue from my point of view is trying to "squirt" yourself into a gap on a roundabout where it's possible to catch the gearbox out and end up in an awkward situation. Can't slip the clutch like a driver does so can jerk a little in traffic. Now getting popular in VAG cars (and the Focus has one too on the 2.0TDCI)
4. MMT/SMT/EGS - basically a normal manual with an automated clutch and shift. As there isn't a gear in waiting like with a DSG box, there is an appreciable delay between gears and the changes aren't that smooth. Shouldn't have much of a fuel consumption penalty but might not be easy to live with.
I've drive Manuals and all types 1-3 but not an MMT type car. For me if I could pick for an auto car it would always be a conventional auto box for the smoothness. You can work around the catch outs of a DSG, but what's the point of an auto you always have to select the gears on for a roundabout???
|
|
I prefer the control of a manual in general and would only go for an auto in something like a Merc or a Jag. Borrowed my Dad's C280 recently when my car had problems (it's an old 1995 car but immaculate) and found the old 4 speed box brilliant. Quick changing, smooth (even on full bore upshifts) and quick to change down. I did suffer from itchy left foot syndrome though and I didn't feel that involved.
|
Every Auto' that I have driven and there's been a few, offer much more than you think if you take notice of their 'patterns' and drive them properly. i.e. Know the torque band and if it aint going to change up during rapid acceleration back off the throttle and let it change and get on the gas again. Rapid progress possible. Best car I have ever owned was in 1989 and was a nearly new 2.9 Granada Ghia, assembled in Germany and I really do struggle to think it will be beaten. Makes the current Merc' look like a pile of doo doo, which of course it is.
|
|
|
My 4 year Almera 1.8SE is (too me) an ideal auto gearbox to engine match, although a conventional auto is known to drink more juice, I can still do 40 MPG no prob.
I've driven every type of car over the years from a Daf 33 CVT to a Rolls Royce silver whatever it was .. if ya get a bad engine to gearbox mis-match it'll put ya orf automatics FOR LIFE!
|
|
|
|
>Conventional Auto - Not always the quickest shifters and drink fuel.
Let's put this little misapprehension to bed eh?
Torque convertor 'boxes have moved on quite a bit from the old vacuum and cable controlled units of a few years ago. Some vehicles equipped with the latest generation electronically controlled 'boxes are actually quicker than their manual equivalents yet use less fuel. eg. the Mercedes 7G-Tronic.
Kevin...
|
Kevin, I do not disagree with you - the ZF 6-Speed that BMW/Audi/Jaguar/LR/Bentley et all use is a superb box as is the Mercedes you mentioned and have very little impact on fuel consumption. The *average* box is not always in the same league as these units however.
With regard to fuel consumption, the gap is now minimal in most cases with the aforemention boxes within a couple of MPG is likely. If you care to compare other autos that are conventional e.g. a Fiesta 1.4 Auto the difference is nearly 7mpg. On a Focus 1.6 it's about the same gap. Compare that the ZF equipped A4 3.0TDI where the difference is 1.9mpg.
Shift-wise, agreed we have come on miles, but the inherent mechanical workings of a torque convertor auto prevent it being as quick as a simultaneously engaging/disengaging pair of clutches. All however are faster than a human moving a stick of course.
|
|
I've just bought a BMW 335d, which is only available with an automatic gearbox, and I found it to be superb to drive. Upchages were only discrenable by the drop in engine RPM. Kickdown was....impressive, and it has the paddles for manual changes should I be in the mood.
|
Consider this - I have owned 38 vehicles in my time and apart from 9 of them, the rest have been automatics.
I've only ever had gearbox trouble with one, and that was an old Riley Kestral with more rust than sub frame!
So words like clutch replacement are alien to me.
Sure, I may lose a few MPG compared to a stick shift - but that is a price I'm prepared to pay.
An automatic really comes into its own driving across town - especially in hilly Cornwall where I live but ... If I was a'gonna buy an MX5 - it would be a manual!
|
I like both autos and manuals for different reasons. Just as I like both RWD and FWD for their different characteristics. I also like diesels but enjoy the feel of a petrol. I enjoy convertibles but find estates useful. In certain circumstances I would favour a 4x4 but I do take pleasure in a nimble supermini for town work.
I think about nine cars would be about right.......
;-)
Edited by Humph Backbridge on 15/05/2009 at 10:07
|
I've always hated driving automatics, and I have never owned one, or even considered owning one.
However, I don't know whether it's down to getting older, or the heinous traffic I have to deal with every day, but just recently I have started to think that an auto might be an appropriate choice for my next car. Partly I think because the S60 is probably better suited to an auto box than a manual. The manual change and clutch are long winded and quite difficult to execute smoothly, even after 20,000 miles of familiarisation. It's also much more of a "waft" car than a "drivers" car - and that isn't a criticism by the way.
I agree with Humph though - most technologies and approaches have their own strengths, and the only fix is a lottery win and a very big garage!
Edited by DP on 15/05/2009 at 10:33
|
Any configuration of car is better than a train. Went on one of those the other day. Expensive, crowded and inconvenient. Guy who would have to sit next to me smelled of BO. He spent the entire journey drinking strong lager from cans and rolling home made cigarettes. Two youths with tattoos on their heads sitting in front of me were trying to avoid paying and had a heated and foul mouthed exchange with the ticket collector and then proceeded to follow me off the train making loud comments along the lines of "let's do the old geezer over for our train fare".......
Manual or auto, either would have been fine.....
|
|
|
|
|
