Considering an AT

[Mule]

Originally Posted by IDFWU 420

This was my first manual car. I told myself no way I'm going to get this car in an auto, it's just not right.. Took my friend to the dealership so he can drive my car home and learned to drive manual in that car 1-2 days later.



2 years later and NO RAGRETS!!!!!!! I FUCKING LOVE DRIVING THIS CAR AND JUST BANGING GEARS !!!!

Lol I love it - good for you man that took balls purchasing a manual when you didn't know how to drive it.

That's how you grow though - put yourself in an uncomfortable situation; now you've learned a whole new craft, awesome!

That's what it's all about - driving is an art, not a race, and you've learned a whole new dimension to this wonderful art we all love. Fuck yeah.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Mule

[IMG] (Photos from Zeroto60times.com

Yes, I'm familiar with that one but you mentioned specifically Car and Driver as your source so that was what I was interested in seeing.

Zeroto60times is a good source, but they average together other sources to get their speeds and don't really indicate where they came from. The ones I referenced came directly from the C&D articles on the two cars.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Yes, I'm familiar with that one but you mentioned specifically Car and Driver as your source so that was what I was interested in seeing.



Zeroto60times is a good source, but they average together other sources to get their speeds and don't really indicate where they came from. The ones I referenced came directly from the C&D articles on the two cars.

It's in this article - http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ed-test-review

1.7 seconds faster aka A LOT faster


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Mule

It's in this article - http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ed-test-review

1.7 seconds faster aka A LOT faster


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting since in this one

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ic-test-review

They list it at 7.7.

[fierostetz]

Be real though, one's slow, the other is slower. Does it *really* matter? If someone says "the manual helps avoid the torque dip", that's real, useful feedback. A 0-60 time on a car that gets thoroughly dusted by minivans is irrelevant. If it allows someone to enjoy a car that would otherwise be unavailable to them, then it's entirely positive.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Mule

Lol I love it - good for you man that took balls purchasing a manual when you didn't know how to drive it.

That's how you grow though - put yourself in an uncomfortable situation; now you've learned a whole new craft, awesome!

That's what it's all about - driving is an art, not a race, and you've learned a whole new dimension to this wonderful art we all love. Fuck yeah.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My great grandmother, grandmother and mother all drove manuals almost exclusively. So did anybody else's if they are over 30. It didn't "take balls" for them to do it. Doesn't take anything to learn to drive a manual. It isn't magic or some special skill and sure as hell isn't a "craft".


Driving is an art but do all artists use the same type of brush?

[Mule]

Originally Posted by fierostetz

Be real though, one's slow, the other is slower. Does it *really* matter? If someone says "the manual helps avoid the torque dip", that's real, useful feedback. A 0-60 time on a car that gets thoroughly dusted by minivans is irrelevant. If it allows someone to enjoy a car that would otherwise be unavailable to them, then it's entirely positive.

Of course. Assuming the driver is fluent using a manual though, a 1.7 second advantage (good point re: avoiding the torque dip) is a HUGE difference.

It could be the difference between winning or losing the drag race with that Honda Odessey lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mule]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Interesting since in this one



http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ic-test-review



They list it at 7.7.

Meh, to your earlier point, I'm sure they tested a ton of twins under different conditions and there's many variables at play.

My only real takeaway is that MT obviously has superior launch control and the ability to avoid torque dip with more control. I could totally see the AT being quicker (and slower!) around any given track because of the same variables that caused C&D to get different 0-60 times.

Still think a MT is more 'spiritually aligned' with this car given it's a cheap, no frills car and the AT adds cost, weight and complexity but to each their own!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by fierostetz

Be real though, one's slow, the other is slower. Does it *really* matter? If someone says "the manual helps avoid the torque dip", that's real, useful feedback. A 0-60 time on a car that gets thoroughly dusted by minivans is irrelevant. If it allows someone to enjoy a car that would otherwise be unavailable to them, then it's entirely positive.

Oh I hate that myth!
Please point out in the attached which minivans will "thoroughly dust" a twin. I see a very tiny group of top level (and very expensive) mini vans that may have a couple of inches on them in 0 to 60 but even they lose in the 1/4 mile.
http://www.zeroto60times.com/body-style/van/


If you are getting "thoroughly dusted by minivans" you just can't drive worth shit.

[fierostetz]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Oh I hate that myth!
Please point out in the attached which minivans will "thoroughly dust" a twin. I see a very tiny group of top level (and very expensive) mini vans that may have a couple of inches on them in 0 to 60 but even they lose in the 1/4 mile.
http://www.zeroto60times.com/body-style/van/


If you are getting "thoroughly dusted by minivans" you just can't drive worth shit.

Oh come on, I'm not going to scour the web to prove something to you, there's no burden of proof on me and I don't care enough to do so. Assuming average drivers in both, a minivan is going to win pretty consistently. An average driver isn't going to be throwing down magazine-or-better 0-60 sprints in a manual trans than a dead consistent v6 minivan. You can go compile a giant internet nerd list if you want to, but theres a vast delta between controlled-condition 0-60 times and real world ones. Pulling website specs and magazine racing isn't real world. Stop looking for fights. We're not talking about track surfaces prepped with VHT and professional drivers. We're in a world of 300hp camrys. Even more telling in a day-to-day scenario is going to be 0-30 times, which is really what you're going to hit in the distance across an intersection.

Heck, I've seen an automatic geo metro take the trophy at a bracket racing drag day. Dead consistent alllllll day with his 22 second quarter mile times. Every time he won everyone just looked at each other with disbelief... at the end of the day everyone was trying to get him to go out for a beer because it was ridiculous that this dude showed up in his DD metro and took home the pot.

In fact, thats a perk in favor of the automatic 86, it'll do the exact same 0-60 time over and over regardless of driver skill.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Mule

Of course. Assuming the driver is fluent using a manual though, a 1.7 second advantage (good point re: avoiding the torque dip) is a HUGE difference.

It could be the difference between winning or losing the drag race with that Honda Odessey lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

2014 Honda Odyssey LX 0-60 mph 7.7 | Quarter mile 15.8




2013 Scion FR-S (Manual) 0-60 mph 6.2 | Quarter mile 14.5
2013 Scion FR-S (Auto) 0-60 mph 7.9 | Quarter mile 15.9


Yep that $50K special edition Odessey can really teach even the AT a lesson with it's .2 second 0 to 60 and .1 second 1/4 mile. Why I bet it would have it's front bumper a good 1/2 ahead of the FRS bumper.


Bench racing by the numbers is so fun!

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by fierostetz

Oh come on, I'm not going to scour the web to prove something to you, there's no burden of proof on me and I don't care enough to do so. Assuming average drivers in both, a minivan is going to win pretty consistently. An average driver isn't going to be throwing down magazine-or-better 0-60 sprints in a manual trans than a dead consistent v6 minivan. You can go compile a giant internet nerd list if you want to, but theres a vast delta between controlled-condition 0-60 times and real world ones. Pulling website specs and magazine racing isn't real world. Stop looking for fights.

Heck, I've seen an automatic geo metro take the trophy at a bracket racing drag day. Dead consistent alllllll day with his 22 second quarter mile times.

Oh but we are playing with the set of numbers from one site here. Can't use them for one thing and throw them out when not convenient.
An average driver in a minivan isn't going to hit those numbers either. That is the whole point. If we want to say that the minivan numbers are consistent then we need to say the Twins ones are as well.
The numbers from the same site debunk this whole "minivans are faster" thing.
I am not "looking for fights" but will not sit and smile and nod in agreement to false statements either.


And that 300hp Camry 2017 Toyota Camry XSE V6 0-60 mph 6.1 | Quarter mile 14.5
Barely creeps ahead of the MT.

[fierostetz]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Oh but we are playing with the set of numbers from one site here. Can't use them for one thing and throw them out when not convenient.
An average driver in a minivan isn't going to hit those numbers either. That is the whole point. If we want to say that the minivan numbers are consistent then we need to say the Twins ones are as well.
The numbers from the same site debunk this whole "minivans are faster" thing.
I am not "looking for fights" but will not sit and smile and nod in agreement to false statements either.


And that 300hp Camry 2017 Toyota Camry XSE V6 0-60 mph 6.1 | Quarter mile 14.5
Barely creeps ahead of the MT.

Thats an MT, on a vht prepped surface with a professional driver.
Jeezus, stop looking for a fight.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by fierostetz

Thats an MT, on a vht prepped surface with a professional driver.
Jeezus, stop looking for a fight.

And the minivans aren't?
How is it possible to say "those numbers don't count be these ones from the same source do"?
I repeat. Not "looking for a fight" but I disagree with your statements and will say so.
All data shows that most minivans are NOT faster and those that are have such a small advantage it almost is meaningless in real world driving.
Your Statement was "thoroughly dusted by minivans" and that is nothing but internet commenter myth.