Considering an AT

[Urmyson]

Auto frs/brz seem to have less failures from what I've seen over all. I know a few people in our club who have had their manual trans replaced under warranty, but none of the auto guys. To be fair there are probably 8-1 manuals vs auto's though.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by leevanf

Kinda agree here.. and for city driving where i am in a 15kph crawl 95% of the time, I cant enjoy the manual the way it should be. Its a simple enjoy manual 5% of the time or enjoy AT 95% of the time. And AT it was!

Those saying MT is the only way it should be are probably those fortunate to have easy access to trafficless freeways and mountain roads. We dont have that much in our country. Backroads have potholes and freeways/expressways are limited to 100kph. The rest is all traffic road. The only real place i can enjoy the manual is a mountain road that i can visit only maybe 5x yearly.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I live in Toronto. One of the worst cities for traffic in North America. I MUCH prefer driving a manual to an automatic.

Not sure why we need to make sweeping generalizations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jakinit]

Originally Posted by Mule

I'll weigh in here since there doesn't seem to be a ton of MT love in this thread...

Aside from the awkwardly high engagement point of the clutch (which you get used to after driving it and not other MT cars after a while), this MT is one of the best in the business. And I've driven a TON of Porsches.

The auto, while a good transmission, is nowhere near the top of the heap when it comes to its peers. VW's DSG, Porsche's PDK, and even the now ubiquitous ZF 8-speed are all superior ATs.

If you don't have any physical impediments and you're fluent with a manual transmission, you owe it to yourself to get the transmission that has best perfected its job, and the MT in these cars represents a higher evolution.

Finally, I don't give a hoot what road you're on - nothing, NOTHING tops well executed downshift. I get to have 20-30 or so mini-orgasms every commute with my MT

Hope that helps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why not lower the clutch? Takes about 15 minutes, mine is flush with the brake. While you're at it remove the clutch assist spring

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by Silver Supra

With an AT you can manually shift with the paddles

Oxymoron.

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by Alltezza

@leevanf
Get a manual, you'll regret getting an AT. Here's a recent example....

https://www.reddit.com/r/ft86/commen..._my_automatic/

I've seen people ask how hard or how much it would be to swap the transmissions which would cost a lot more than if you would have just got a MT to begin with.

And a lot of people just regret it, AT gets a lot of hate because it takes away a lot of what this car is known for. Based on your first post you want a MT anyways don't sell yourself short.

Selective bias at work here?
Yeah, some people do regret buying an auto but many people do not.
Just look at the auto purchasers here.

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by Mule

Truth.

No, it is opinion.

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

The scriptures according to the fundamentalist:
1/ There is only one true transmission.
2/ If you don't use the one and only true transmission you shall be cast out and labeled a heretic..
3/ Trying to defend the pagan transmission is an act of sin.

.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Urmyson

Auto frs/brz seem to have less failures from what I've seen over all. I know a few people in our club who have had their manual trans replaced under warranty, but none of the auto guys. To be fair there are probably 8-1 manuals vs auto's though.

You are right! In Atlanta there is a 50/50 amount of manual and auto 86/BRZ drivers yet I see a lot of manual guys having issues with replacements or other issues but I've never seen issues with the auto.

[Submarinesonce]

Originally Posted by LudwigMiles

I don't get the argument about AT not being able to get all the power.
If the AT allows you to control the shift points, via paddles, then the AT can probably offer 95% of the performance of a MT.

The ironic part is that a huge proportion of MT drivers never even let the revs go above 3k. They shift at 3k like a Civic, and then they don't even bother do downshift before a curve to enter the curve at 4000 rpms. If that's how you drive a stick, you might as well get an AT.

The guy with an AT, but who knows how to use the paddles to keep the revs between 4k to 6k will get much more performance than the Civic style MT driver.

So, as usual, it's all about the driver. Not the equipment.

the way this thing is geared, I spend more time above 3k than below it. normal driving has me shifting between 4-5k

[Mule]

Originally Posted by LudwigMiles

I don't get the argument about AT not being able to get all the power.
If the AT allows you to control the shift points, via paddles, then the AT can probably offer 95% of the performance of a MT.

The ironic part is that a huge proportion of MT drivers never even let the revs go above 3k. They shift at 3k like a Civic, and then they don't even bother do downshift before a curve to enter the curve at 4000 rpms. If that's how you drive a stick, you might as well get an AT.

The guy with an AT, but who knows how to use the paddles to keep the revs between 4k to 6k will get much more performance than the Civic style MT driver.

So, as usual, it's all about the driver. Not the equipment.

Except Car and Driver test drove both and the auto was over a second slower from 0-60.

That's a meaningful difference in capabilities of the equipment. And it quite thoroughly debunks the whole 'you get 95% of the MT performance with an AT'.

By my rough calculations, that's 20% difference in 0-60 times, so really you only get 80% of the performance 🤗


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Mule

I live in Toronto. One of the worst cities for traffic in North America. I MUCH prefer driving a manual to an automatic.

Not sure why we need to make sweeping generalizations.

Agreed.

I've driven manuals and automatics all my life interchangeably. Frankly, in day-to-day driving I don't really notice I'm driving a manual. It becomes an "automatic" process after a few hundred thousand miles of driving (well, probably just a couple of thousand miles).

Example, I drove my '85 MR2 about 150,000 miles in DC traffic commuting 35 to 40 miles a day over the beltway. Some of the worst traffic in the country at the time. Never occurred to me I needed an AT. I sometimes swapped off with my '83 Z28 AT, and frankly it never even occurred to me there was a difference between them. My left leg was smart enough to know when it did or didn't need to do anything.

I bought the 86/AT just because I had never had a paddle-shift car before. I drove both, and didn't see any real advantage to either transmission for daily driving once I figured out how to use the paddle shifters. I haven't looked back, been happy with it.

I would have been just as happy with the MT.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by Jakinit

Why not lower the clutch? Takes about 15 minutes, mine is flush with the brake. While you're at it remove the clutch assist spring

Oh yeah? Never considered it and now that I'm used to it I'm almost apprehensive to change it - is it much better with the engagement point lowered and spring removed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Mule

Except Car and Driver test drove both and the auto was over a second slower from 0-60.

That's a meaningful difference in capabilities of the equipment. And it quite thoroughly debunks the whole 'you get 95% of the MT performance with an AT'.

By my rough calculations, that's 20% difference in 0-60 times, so really you only get 80% of the performance 🤗

I think most of this difference has to do more with a lack of launch control on the AT cars then the AT itself. The AT will do 60 in second gear, the MT will not. Launch control would even the score I suspect (theory only of course)

Then again, I'm not drag racing so 0-60 has no bearing on my car purchases. Never has. if it did, I wouldn't have purchased an 86 at all.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I think most of this difference has to do more with a lack of launch control on the AT cars then the AT itself. The AT will do 60 in second gear, the MT will not. Launch control would even the score I suspect (theory only of course)



Then again, I'm not drag racing so 0-60 has no bearing on my car purchases. Never has. if it did, I wouldn't have purchased an 86 at all.

And if my aunt had a ****, she'd be my uncle! Alas, she does not, so she's still my aunt and not my uncle.

In other words, the auto still doesn't deliver close to 95% of the performance...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk