Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All else being equal the same car/engine/gearing with a manual and a torque converter automatic the manual is faster. In large part due to that mechanical inefficiency.
Maybe in the 1990s when the parity between autos and manuals you hypothesize about simply did not exist. The reason why manuals were generally faster back then was because of better gearing, more gears with shorter spacing, and better ability to launch.
Fast-forward to 2016. Nowadays with 6 gears being the minimum for an automatic, they have a low first gear to get moving more quickly, the gear ratios and number of gears to match a manual, and quick torque converter lockup to reduce spin losses.
Yeah but a torque converter is a big power robber. Going to make less power at the wheels than a manual or dsg.
I have to agree, we can easily see this with gas mileage between autos and manuals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiffer E38
It's also a torque multiplier, and with a lockup converter, there is no more loss than a clutch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oCQVkUePV0
Anytime you add extra parts or transmit power, you will loose some. This is why simplest is usually the best. The same factor when installing larger tires on a vehicle than the last. You are increasing torque but loosing energy in the process. Both will result in worse fuel mileage.
Yes, but those who drive manuals don't do it for the gas mileage.
I have more control over the car with a manual, especially in bad/snow weather.
I think you have my post confused with a different one because I didn't say those who drive manuals do it for the gas mileage. My post was a specific response to a specific claim that manuals achieve better fuel economy.
The manual SS puts down 20 more hp to the wheels than the automatic. Straight line performance difference is in the gearing. On a track the lighter weight of the manual is going to make more difference than the .2s 1/4 difference in straightline acceleration.
The less hp a car has, the bigger the performance discrepancy and the better off you are choosing manual.
Can you give me the weight differences between the two and any credible heads up track test ?
I have the option in my Infiniti G35x. The kind where you slide the shifter over to manual mode. It shifts fast enough, not instant like the Ferrari I drove in Vegas, but still, plenty quick for what I use it for. I usually use it when accelerating up steep hills. The auto mode likes to hold gears longer than necessary, I can shift around 3500rpm and have plenty of power to accelerate up hill without winding out the engine. It's also really nice for driving through mountainous areas; you can make the car hold ANY gear, no more "hunting for the correct gear" and needlessly heating up the transmission. I had it exclusively held in 4th gear driving through a good portion of I-70 in Colorado through the 11k ft pass. It's nice to have the power to maintain the 70mph speed limit up at that altitude and speed road grade without it constantly shifting back and forth on me.
On 4 cyl. cars especially 2 liter or smaller a automatic uses up too much HP. They don't have power to spare like a V8 or modern V6.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
