Manual vs Auto MPGs
 

Is there a reason why the hwy/city mpg of the auto fr-s is higher than the manual? I thought historically it was the other way around. And it's not just by a bit, its by 3+ mpg!

Gearing.

If there is no performance or fuel efficient reason to get manual, whats the point anymore?

I bet I could get the same MPG figures with MT as with the AT if I wanted.
It's all about how you drive.

The point is the same as it always has been.
If you don't see what MT offers over AT, you never will.

Fun

Not to sound negative but I'd like to see that happen when you're under 3k RPM at 65+mph with the Auto but just at or above 3k RPM at 65+mph with the Manual ;).

I'm a manual man here but the gear ratios put the engine at lower RPMs at the same speeds compared to manual. Which causes the engine to use less gas at the same cruising speeds.

To have fun. I'd still get 6-speed manual even when I have a choice of getting 8-speed auto with better 0-60 time and mpg.:happyanim:

The superiority of the FR-S/BRZ auto over the manual in testing is most likely an artifact of the testing protocol. In real-world driving there is unlikely to be any difference. A preliminary look at mileage already posted on Fuelly seems to show that there is minimal, if any difference. At some point automatic transmissions may trump manuals, but it requires the kind of sophisticated engine/transmission calibration that has only been achieved with CVT and dual clutch transmissions, not a six-speed, as in the FR-Z.

Maybe, but I'm sure the stats on their website has some merit.

MPG[4] (EPA CITY) (MT/AT) 22 / 25
MPG[4] (EPA HIGHWAY) (MT/AT) 30 / 34
MPG[4] (EPA COMBINED) (MT/AT) 25 / 28

It really struck me as odd since manual trannies have always been known to be more efficient. I'm pretty sure the current generation remembers that.

Wouldn't have Toyota sensed that and then attempt to reconcile that with real world simulation? I would believe that if it was an mpg difference or two...but those site stats are really concerning...

Gearing in ATs has over the past 3 years or so made them MORE efficient on mileage than MT. You'll almost never see a more effcient MT in anything beyond 2011 than AT.

I've been playing with the whole rev range and still averaging 32mpg with my manual... Wouldn't go back to paddle shifters for the world!

Toyota doesn't setup the testing protocol, the EPA does. They (Toyota) setup the auto to get the best MPG by adjusting the gearing, but they setup the M/T to work the best for driving/racing (otherwise they would get chewed up by the magazines/users/etc.).

Oh, and the auto can downshift anytime it wants without annoying the driver, so it can cruise as a much lower RPM with fewer negative effects from that perspective too.

-Charlie

I'd agree with the 32 MPG and MT. I can do about 31 - 32 MPG with MT on cruise on the interstate.

Handling throttle duties myself and being 'careful' 35 - 36 MPG @ about 70 mph.