2/3 of 86 are auto?

[rice_classic]

Currently, there's no replacement for the enjoyment I garnish from a properly executed heel-toe-double-clutch rev match. The A/T being faster on track is predominately irrelevant because in many road racing classes, there will often be a BOP that addresses any specific car advantage or shortcoming. Even when I'm racing my FRS - I really find the mastery of 3 pedals to be more "fun". After all, if racing wasn't fun - I'd stop spending 10s of 1000s of dollars on it immediately.



The long and short of it is - Owners want the car to be more "fun" in it's intended overall use. When I buy an impractical car it better maximize fun and where sports cars are concerned that involves 3 pedals. It turns out, I am not all people and others find their A/T to be "more fun" and that's fine. Making assumptions about people beyond that point, is sort of absurd.



p.s. I like how a M/T sort of makes my car (more) theft proof.

[Johnny Horsepower]

I can understand why manual vs auto was such a big debate back in the day. For me, with a total of 30 minutes of stick experience, it was a big struggle when I was thinking about buying a sports car. Do I get a manual that I'll barely be able to drive at first, might cause serious damage to, and might end up hating, or get an auto and always be thinking that I'm missing out on a lot?

I don't understand though, why paddle shifters are rarely mentioned in this conversation (not this thread, but in general). They give a completely different driving experience from a conventional automatic, even if the transmission uses the same mechanics (i.e., a torque converter).

For people who were torn between manual and auto, they no longer have to choose. Paddle shifters give them all of the auto functionality and (IMO) the best part of the manual functionality without some of the downsides.

Do paddle shifters give you everything that a stick does? No, and I understand why many of you have to have a stick. I might be in that camp too, given different experiences. But for those who were on the fence, seeing major benefits on each side and unable to choose, the debate is over: get an auto FR-S and you won't be disappointed.

Some people want a third pedal, so they get a manual. Some people don't want to think about gears, so they get a traditional automatic. And some people would prefer something in between. At this point, I don't know if I could ever buy another car that didn't have paddle shifters.

[86MLR]

Is my manual still a cool kid, even though Racerom FFS and rev match???

Oh hang on, it also has launch control......mang mang mang mang wwwhhhaaaaa :b urnrubber:

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Johnny Horsepower

I can understand why manual vs auto was such a big debate back in the day. For me, with a total of 30 minutes of stick experience, it was a big struggle when I was thinking about buying a sports car. Do I get a manual that I'll barely be able to drive at first, might cause serious damage to, and might end up hating, or get an auto and always be thinking that I'm missing out on a lot?

I don't understand though, why paddle shifters are rarely mentioned in this conversation (not this thread, but in general). They give a completely different driving experience from a conventional automatic, even if the transmission uses the same mechanics (i.e., a torque converter).

For people who were torn between manual and auto, they no longer have to choose. Paddle shifters give them all of the auto functionality and (IMO) the best part of the manual functionality without some of the downsides.

Do paddle shifters give you everything that a stick does? No, and I understand why many of you have to have a stick. I might be in that camp too, given different experiences. But for those who were on the fence, seeing major benefits on each side and unable to choose, the debate is over: get an auto FR-S and you won't be disappointed.

Some people want a third pedal, so they get a manual. Some people don't want to think about gears, so they get a traditional automatic. And some people would prefer something in between. At this point, I don't know if I could ever buy another car that didn't have paddle shifters.

Very well said!
I think a lot of the controversy stems from people believing that the auto transmissions in these cars are the crappy slush boxes from the past. They are not. AT tech has come a long, long way in the last decade and the use of TCUs has made many ATs more effective than anything in the past. MT tech on the other hand has hardly changed in the last 60 years.

[RayRay88]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Very well said!
I think a lot of the controversy stems from people believing that the auto transmissions in these cars are the crappy slush boxes from the past. They are not. AT tech has come a long, long way in the last decade and the use of TCUs has made many ATs more effective than anything in the past. MT tech on the other hand has hardly changed in the last 60 years.

Um Corvette and Porsche gave the manual transmission world:
ONE MORE GEAR!
7/8/9 Speed manuals are the future...

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Very well said!
I think a lot of the controversy stems from people believing that the auto transmissions in these cars are the crappy slush boxes from the past. They are not. AT tech has come a long, long way in the last decade and the use of TCUs has made many ATs more effective than anything in the past. MT tech on the other hand has hardly changed in the last 60 years.

I will say that this isn’t the case for me. I know that modern autos are superior to MT. I understand that with the press of a button it will instantly and reliably shift. It’s that press of a button that turns me off. I want to perform all the steps manually. I would like to be the one matching revs. I enjoy the extra layer of complication to perform a shift. I like the challenge of executing all this stuff perfectly. If it’s a simple button press it becomes boring for me even if it would technically save 500ms per lap.

In the past people wanted a manual for these reasons and in this order:
More fun
Faster shifts
Better gas mileage

Today:
More fun

When you are buying a family sedan “more fun” may not be a big concern. When buying a sports car I would expect “more fun” to be the highest priority. But it seems like the highest priority for people today is looks and spec sheets.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by RayRay88

Um Corvette and Porsche gave the manual transmission world:
ONE MORE GEAR!
7/8/9 Speed manuals are the future...

Adding gears is not evolving tech.
Heavy trucks have had 10 to 18 gears for 70 years.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ermax

I will say that this isn’t the case for me. I know that modern autos are superior to MT. I understand that with the press of a button it will instantly and reliably shift. It’s that press of a button that turns me off. I want to perform all the steps manually. I would like to be the one matching revs. I enjoy the extra layer of complication to perform a shift. I like the challenge of executing all this stuff perfectly. If it’s a simple button press it becomes boring for me even if it would technically save 500ms per lap.

In the past people wanted a manual for these reasons and in this order:
More fun
Faster shifts
Better gas mileage

Today:
More fun

When you are buying a family sedan “more fun” may not be a big concern. When buying a sports car I would expect “more fun” to be the highest priority. But it seems like the highest priority for people today is looks and spec sheets.

Agree 100%.
The statement I made is directed to the crowd that feels the AT is somehow inadequate not to those that just want more involvement.

[Qwimby1]

While looking at cars over the past couple years, I encountered a couple salesmen who couldn't drive a stick. They insisted on getting the car off the lot for me, but I had to tutor them from the right seat. Kudos to the S2000, which I think may have been the last car available only in MT.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by ermax

In the past people wanted a manual for these reasons and in this order:
More fun
Faster shifts
Better gas mileage

Today:
More fun
.

You left off what is probably the primary reason for MT vs AT selection in the past.... Cost and Availability. I can tell you that every car purchased by my parents and grandparents were purchased with low cost in mind. They would only pay for an AT if it was the only transmission available on the car, or they were buying used and buying the first car in their price range.

Many vehicles did not have available auto transmissions at one point as well.

More Fun and Faster Shifts would have only been for enthusiasts, it would never enter the "general buying public's" thought process.

Fuel economy is valid.

[Johnny Horsepower]

Originally Posted by 86MLR

Is my manual still a cool kid, even though Racerom FFS and rev match???

Oh hang on, it also has launch control......mang mang mang mang wwwhhhaaaaa :b urnrubber:

More examples of blurring the line between manual and what I (though not many others) would call semi-auto.

Originally Posted by Tcoat

AT tech has come a long, long way in the last decade and the use of TCUs has made many ATs more effective than anything in the past. MT tech on the other hand has hardly changed in the last 60 years.

And I wonder what driving technology will do in the future. Someone mentioned "I, Robot" (Will Smith film) the other day, where he was considered crazy for driving his car "manually," meaning with his hands on the wheel and foot on the pedal (didn't notice if there was a clutch). Although I drive an AT, I do lament the loss of manual control in the future.

Originally Posted by RayRay88

Um Corvette and Porsche gave the manual transmission world:
ONE MORE GEAR!
7/8/9 Speed manuals are the future...

Is there a point at which there are too many gears for a manual transmission, at least without skipping gears?

Originally Posted by ermax

I will say that this isn’t the case for me.

And you're describing exactly what I like about MTs, the extra layer of complication (well, and the old school feel).

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

You left off what is probably the primary reason for MT vs AT selection in the past.... Cost and Availability. I can tell you that every car purchased by my parents and grandparents were purchased with low cost in mind. They would only pay for an AT if it was the only transmission available on the car, or they were buying used and buying the first car in their price range.

Many vehicles did not have available auto transmissions at one point as well.

More Fun and Faster Shifts would have only been for enthusiasts, it would never enter the "general buying public's" thought process.

Fuel economy is valid.

AT was a luxury feature as I understand it. Hence why some of the older generations of people call MT "Standard".

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Johnny Horsepower

More examples of blurring the line between manual and what I (though not many others) would call semi-auto.

Oh god. Let's not ever think you could call a car semi-auto, at least not right now.

This is implying the car can never drive like a true auto, like a gun, a semi-auto gun when the trigger is held, no longer launches bullets beyond the single bullet from that trigger pull. Much like a trigger, the throttle when depressed and when the engine reaches the top of the RPM band will not shift. You could only ever call it semi-auto if the car would never let you drive as auto, but that's not a thing as far as I know, correct me if I am wrong.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Johnny Horsepower

More examples of blurring the line between manual and what I (though not many others) would call semi-auto.



And I wonder what driving technology will do in the future. Someone mentioned "I, Robot" (Will Smith film) the other day, where he was considered crazy for driving his car "manually," meaning with his hands on the wheel and foot on the pedal (didn't notice if there was a clutch). Although I drive an AT, I do lament the loss of manual control in the future.



Is there a point at which there are too many gears for a manual transmission, at least without skipping gears?

Not in my lifetime (which isn't that much longer I am sure) but in the foreseeable future cars will either be self driving or electric with no tranny (or both) anyway. It is closer than people seem to believe.


Although pushed as a performance feature a large number of gears has much more to do with economy and emissions. By having a bunch of gears the manufactures can have bigger engines but still meet their reduction requirements. Some of the fastest cars I drove were 3 or 4 speeds.

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

AT was a luxury feature as I understand it. Hence why some of the older generations of people call MT "Standard".

Yep. I still call it standard all the time. It takes and actual conscious act for me not to write it here just to have a bunch of youngin's go "Huh?"