86 AT vs 86 MT - Page 2 - Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community

carbonBLUE · 12-18-2012, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrDarkKnight

damn! where you even trying? lo!l My brothers 2.4 lancer GTS does high 15s and I have beat it!

That's the auto for ya

Captain Insano · 12-18-2012, 09:53 PM

Interesting model you have built OP. Thanks for the info!!

I love the way the AT drives. It just feels more like race car (hard to believe as that is) to me due to how the AT shifts. Very fast for a torque converter AT with all the niceties of AT for when I don't want to shift and just drive lazy. Pretty awesome and I never thought I would say that about any AT.

I've driven both AT and MT and I cannot tell much difference in acceleration between the two once in motion.

PrDarkKnight · 12-18-2012, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carbonBLUE

That's the auto for ya

I know! lol but mine is also an auto

wlfpck · 12-18-2012, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GotM

Attachment 22928

Attachment 23003
I did some basic modeling on the acceleration differences between the MT and AT for the twins.

-The MT has a slight advantage over the AT through all gears. The difference in 1st gears is ~1ft/s^2 delta. This is a fairly small difference.

-It looks like shifting at redline is going to give max acceleration. Except the 4th to 5th. But, the crossover is so small I would still use redline.

-I like how the AT goes through 60mph in 2nd, unlike the manual.

-You can see the slight weight advantage (really, really small) by comparing 5th MT and 4th AT.

-No, these cars do not top out this fast. No energy losses are accounted for in this model. I think some where in the 140s would be top speed, based on the 200hp.

Added:
The time to MPH chart. It looks like the MT has a slight edge on the AT after 60mph. But, I think this is too close to claim one is really faster than the other.

Nice info. I have added the link to this thread in my AT resource/build up thread.

MmmHamSandwich · 12-18-2012, 11:28 PM

This is basically what I've been saying for a while now.

By far, the largest disparity in acceleration times is due to the AT's inability to perform a good launch. When comparing 0-60 times there is a pronounced difference. (A difference that actually closes somewhat by the time the two reach the quarter mile) However, when comparing 5-60 times (as C&D has done) the measured difference was only a tenth of a second. (8.1 vs 8.2)

With a competent driver and from a dig, the AT will be at a severe disadvantage. Elsewhere you're looking at a pretty close race.

naikaidriver · 01-30-2013, 01:41 PM

Thank you for taking the time to work this out mathematically. Its nice to hear someone else speak physics from time to time.

I went for the AT after test driving both the MT and AT and I also noticed that the difference in acceleration between the two from a rolling launch was almost impossible to differentiate. That's pretty impressive from an AT.

Since I have outgrown the need to punish my cars by dropping the clutch at 2500rpms from stop lights and I lost all interest in drag racing the first time I took a car out on a track day, the AT just made more sense to me. Do I miss it? Sometimes but its fleeting especially when I am really running the car hard through the corners and I can downshift without having to use both feet to not upset the chassis while trail-braking!

Anyone who has ever tried downshifting while entering a decreasing-radius turn at 100mph knows exactly what I am talking about.

Scott

kuhlka · 04-02-2014, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naikaidriver

Thank you for taking the time to work this out mathematically. Its nice to hear someone else speak physics from time to time.

I went for the AT after test driving both the MT and AT and I also noticed that the difference in acceleration between the two from a rolling launch was almost impossible to differentiate. That's pretty impressive from an AT.

Since I have outgrown the need to punish my cars by dropping the clutch at 2500rpms from stop lights and I lost all interest in drag racing the first time I took a car out on a track day, the AT just made more sense to me. Do I miss it? Sometimes but its fleeting especially when I am really running the car hard through the corners and I can downshift without having to use both feet to not upset the chassis while trail-braking!

Anyone who has ever tried downshifting while entering a decreasing-radius turn at 100mph knows exactly what I am talking about.

Scott

You're forgetting Autocross times. The AT is slower there, too. It's anywhere you'd need to get a fast start. SSP seems to have solved the problem, but the upgrades cost $799 (torque converter) + $699 (valve body upgrade). That apparently lets you do left foot brake launches and burnouts without blowing things up. DeOppressorLiber has their kit on his car.

EAGLE5 · 04-02-2014, 03:13 AM

And if you get an automatic, you have to turn your penis in at the dealer.

regal · 04-02-2014, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ingen

Technical basis for the model?

I'm just curious

Fantasy league physics? It obviously isn't accounting for something all the empirical runs show the manual a lot quicker.

BRZZZZZZZZZZ · 04-02-2014, 10:27 AM

Thanks for the comparison.

I'll always be a 6MT guy myself though...

synchromesh · 04-04-2014, 01:06 PM

So perhaps MT or was it Car and Driver?'s article might make you think twice as there might be someone you cant trust. Am starting to get bullied a few times on the road these day's. Its funny seeing people react as I fantasize about the having a vintage 3 or 4 speed to prove a point. This tranny really shifts into first at speed well!

Wayno · 06-09-2015, 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GotM

Attachment 22928

Attachment 23003
I did some basic modeling on the acceleration differences between the MT and AT for the twins.

-The MT has a slight advantage over the AT through all gears. The difference in 1st gears is ~1ft/s^2 delta. This is a fairly small difference.

-It looks like shifting at redline is going to give max acceleration. Except the 4th to 5th. But, the crossover is so small I would still use redline.

-I like how the AT goes through 60mph in 2nd, unlike the manual.

-You can see the slight weight advantage (really, really small) by comparing 5th MT and 4th AT.

-No, these cars do not top out this fast. No energy losses are accounted for in this model. I think some where in the 140s would be top speed, based on the 200hp.

Added:
The time to MPH chart. It looks like the MT has a slight edge on the AT after 60mph. But, I think this is too close to claim one is really faster than the other.

Can you repeat the time to MPH chart with shift time? Aero is constant. AT and MT make roughly the same dyno amounts so drive-train loss isn't very big either.

Shift time in AT is 0.3s. Shift time in MT is driver dependent and with a regular driver is around 0.7 to 1.1s. Based on data logging at racetrack.

humdizzle · 06-09-2015, 02:35 PM

idk about 1 second shift times. even wikipedia says that 'average' is around 0.5sec. Someone that knows how to drive could probably get 0.3 or 0.4.

makesdrivingfunagain · 07-31-2015, 01:33 AM

I have an AT. I really like it! My friend has the manual and I really like it. Seriously, I think (opinion) you can't go wrong with either one. They are so much fun to drive. Sometimes I have drivers remorse for not having a manual. Sometimes, but most of the time during the weekly commute I am in stop in to traffic. The ratio for traffic to non traffic is at least a 3 to 1 ratio. I love the manual and auto. The manual is like 50lbs lighter. 50 lbs is Almost 2 percent in weight loss.

12-18-2012, 09:53 PM	#16
Captain Insano Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Drives: 2014 Jeep Wrangler RubiconX Location: Midwest, USA Posts: 1,282 Thanks: 110 Thanked 292 Times in 224 Posts Mentioned: 7 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	Interesting model you have built OP. Thanks for the info!! I love the way the AT drives. It just feels more like race car (hard to believe as that is) to me due to how the AT shifts. Very fast for a torque converter AT with all the niceties of AT for when I don't want to shift and just drive lazy. Pretty awesome and I never thought I would say that about any AT. I've driven both AT and MT and I cannot tell much difference in acceleration between the two once in motion. Last edited by Captain Insano; 01-30-2013 at 06:10 PM.

12-18-2012, 11:28 PM	#19
MmmHamSandwich You know you want it. Join Date: Mar 2012 Drives: '13 FR-S Location: RVA Posts: 705 Thanks: 160 Thanked 327 Times in 154 Posts Mentioned: 9 Post(s) Tagged: 2 Thread(s)	This is basically what I've been saying for a while now. By far, the largest disparity in acceleration times is due to the AT's inability to perform a good launch. When comparing 0-60 times there is a pronounced difference. (A difference that actually closes somewhat by the time the two reach the quarter mile) However, when comparing 5-60 times (as C&D has done) the measured difference was only a tenth of a second. (8.1 vs 8.2) With a competent driver and from a dig, the AT will be at a severe disadvantage. Elsewhere you're looking at a pretty close race. __________________ The Following User _________ Stay_Puft(09-13-2014) Says Thank You to MmmHamSandwich For This Useful Post:

01-30-2013, 01:41 PM	#20
naikaidriver Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Drives: 2013 Scion FR-S AT Asphalt Location: Lynnwood, WA Posts: 770 Thanks: 145 Thanked 673 Times in 289 Posts Mentioned: 13 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	Thank you for taking the time to work this out mathematically. Its nice to hear someone else speak physics from time to time. I went for the AT after test driving both the MT and AT and I also noticed that the difference in acceleration between the two from a rolling launch was almost impossible to differentiate. That's pretty impressive from an AT. Since I have outgrown the need to punish my cars by dropping the clutch at 2500rpms from stop lights and I lost all interest in drag racing the first time I took a car out on a track day, the AT just made more sense to me. Do I miss it? Sometimes but its fleeting especially when I am really running the car hard through the corners and I can downshift without having to use both feet to not upset the chassis while trail-braking! Anyone who has ever tried downshifting while entering a decreasing-radius turn at 100mph knows exactly what I am talking about. Scott

04-02-2014, 10:27 AM	#24
BRZZZZZZZZZZ Car Nut Join Date: Dec 2013 Drives: BMW 335d, Toyota Echo RS, FRS Location: Calgary Posts: 1,557 Thanks: 368 Thanked 603 Times in 346 Posts Mentioned: 12 Post(s) Tagged: 2 Thread(s)	Thanks for the comparison. I'll always be a 6MT guy myself though...

04-04-2014, 01:06 PM	#25
synchromesh Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Drives: Ultramarine Blue Location: Canada Posts: 258 Thanks: 23 Thanked 58 Times in 47 Posts Mentioned: 1 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	So perhaps MT or was it Car and Driver?'s article might make you think twice as there might be someone you cant trust. Am starting to get bullied a few times on the road these day's. Its funny seeing people react as I fantasize about the having a vintage 3 or 4 speed to prove a point. This tranny really shifts into first at speed well!

06-09-2015, 02:35 PM	#27
humdizzle Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Drives: 2018 GT3 / 2015 M3 Location: Missouri Posts: 290 Thanks: 102 Thanked 316 Times in 119 Posts Mentioned: 5 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	idk about 1 second shift times. even wikipedia says that 'average' is around 0.5sec. Someone that knows how to drive could probably get 0.3 or 0.4.

07-31-2015, 01:33 AM	#28
makesdrivingfunagain Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Drives: 2013 FR-S Location: US Posts: 211 Thanks: 128 Thanked 70 Times in 49 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	I have an AT. I really like it! My friend has the manual and I really like it. Seriously, I think (opinion) you can't go wrong with either one. They are so much fun to drive. Sometimes I have drivers remorse for not having a manual. Sometimes, but most of the time during the weekly commute I am in stop in to traffic. The ratio for traffic to non traffic is at least a 3 to 1 ratio. I love the manual and auto. The manual is like 50lbs lighter. 50 lbs is Almost 2 percent in weight loss.

User Name		Remember Me?
Password