Can you manually shift automatic version w/out the paddle shifters?

[maxeveland]

I notice in the interior images the automatic frs has the look of the manual and the frs is described as having paddle shifters but do you have the option of moving the stick shift up and down?

And does anyone know if the BRZ will have the same looking automatic?

[Argent6978]

One would assume you could move the stick shift up and down, else it would be very very difficult to get it out of Park.

Looking at the interior images on Scion's page, the shift lever does seem to indicate that when in Drive, it can be pulled a little to the left and used to shift up and down as well.

[tripjammer]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

Yes, but Toyota still insists on using the wrong layout. It should be pull aft to shift up and push forward to shift down. This way the motion of your hand works with the g-force of the car accelerating and braking.

I only use the paddles in the IS350 because that annoys me to no end.

The same way GM fucked up their paddles on the Corvette. You pull right to shift up, pull left to shift down. You don't push either paddle forward to shift up and pull to shift down. That's retarded. Thankfully they got it right on the CTS-V.

Man the corvette is like this? WOW that is crappy crazy yo! Hopefully they fix it in the next corvette in 2014..

[Dragonitti]

Saw the title and thought...."Why on earth would you want to do that?"

[madfast]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

You don't push either paddle forward to shift up and pull to shift down. That's retarded.

both porsche and BMW did this until very recently. in fact i think the cayman s still uses that old tiptronic style of "paddles".

[FRSpdDmn]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

Yes, but Toyota still insists on using the wrong layout. It should be pull aft to shift up and push forward to shift down. This way the motion of your hand works with the g-force of the car accelerating and braking.

This always annoys me to no end. Every time I drive a rental or loaner car that has it backwards (ie, anyone but Mazda and BMW), I have to think about EVERY shift to make sure I go the right (wrong) way.
PULL BACK FOR UP.
PUSH FORWARD FOR DOWN.
Every racecar with a sequential gearbox is like this. If there are paddles, right paddle for UP, left paddle for Down. The only thing worse than getting it opposite is Chrysler's shifter that's side-to-side.

[TylerLieberman]

Bmw got it right. I remember driving an e43 m3 smg and it was the right layout. Very crisp and positive feedback too. A lot of automatic cars with paddles have this short lag after chnaging gears.

[madfast]

pull back for upshift, companies that get it right: BMW, mazda, suzuki, fiat, and mitsu's SST.

worst offender of push forward upshift: VAG. cars like the R8 and veyron and all PDK porsches could have used whatever style they wanted, and yet they still kept the push forward upshift. what a shame. AND some VAG cars make you push the shifter to the right in order to access the push/pull console shift action. for a left hand drive car, this is away from the driver, wtf?

[SUB-FT86]

I like push down for downshift and up for upshift. Why? It makes sense to me. The opposite way is confusing.

[madfast]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I like push down for downshift and up for upshift. Why? It makes sense to me. The opposite way is confusing.

but do you like it only because you're used to it?

the way they usually do it, in racing, is pull back for upshift. many theories on why but i think we can all agree that in racing that's the way they do it. so why does almost everybody do it pull back for downshift? IMO it has to do with the PRNDL/PRND321 convention. in that convention pull back is downshift, so its all about familiarity. car manufacturers probably value familiarity and convention over doing it the "racecar-way". and that's why "sporty" car companies like BMW and mazda choose to do it the "right" way. they have enough balls to defy convention and do whats best for the driving experience.

the same can be said with the paddles. it went from pushing buttons (very familiar to have buttons on the steering wheel, so why not to change gears right?), to toggle "paddles" (half way between buttons and actual paddles), to the ones we have today (no doubt F1 and ferrari's use in it's cars have made these the standard when it comes to steering wheel mounted gear selection).

[zoomzoomers]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

I've driven an IS-F with the same trans tune as this car is purported to have (except that's an 8 speed) around Monticello. The torque converter essentially acts like a clutch. Once you're rolled away from a stop, the converter is locked, except when you downshift. The converter unlocks so the engine can rev-match. That car shifted pretty much instantly. I still wish it had a stick, but with a torque converter automatic, that really is the best experience I could ask for. I actually prefer it to SMG II because the torque converter reacts normally at low speeds, so you don't hammer a clutch trying to drive sedately or parallel parking.

I used to have a M3 with SMG II and I've driven my buddy's IS-F around a short improvised track/course. Like you said the tranny in the IS-F is really nice. I'd say 99% as good as the SMG was on the M3. Shifts seemed just as fast and felt way~ smoother on the road. One thing that it "felt" a tiny bit behind the SMG was on downshifts, especially if they were multiple gears, but I'm completely splitting hairs.

If I had to choose between the two, I'd choose the one in the IS-F because it's easier to live with on a DD. If had to pick the best "auto" tranny I've ever had the pleasure of driving is the one in the E63 AMG. It's basically a torque converter less tranny so something close to a SMG, but much better in execution. Best of both worlds!

[FRSpdDmn]

I've driven an IS-F, too. The Auto works well for what it is. They're not the only one, though. Every current BMW locks up the torque converter after launching in 1st gear and also rev-matches it's downshifts.

If you truly want the best of both worlds, the double-clutch gearboxes is where it's at. Instantaneous shifts with none of the clunkiness of the old SMG's and none of the power loss of a torque converter. I'm talking about Audi/VW's DSG, BMW's DCT, and Porsche's PDK, among others. I still love the connection through the manual gearbox and won't give that up for a pleasure car. If I were looking to gain those hundredths of a second in racing, it's hard to argue with the automated manuals. And they never miss a shift.

[madfast]

Originally Posted by FRSpdDmn

I've driven an IS-F, too. The Auto works well for what it is. They're not the only one, though. Every current BMW locks up the torque converter after launching in 1st gear and also rev-matches it's downshifts.

what makes the IS-F's 8 speed special is the solenoids. that's how they achieve such quick shifts. at the time, it was touted as the fastest shifting production tranny. early TC lock should be on every AT. it makes the driving feel better and gets better mpg. its win-win. so yeah TC lock up and rev matching isnt new, but the IS-F solenoids are. once we see more of this tech, they will achieve parity with DCTs very quickly.

If you truly want the best of both worlds, the double-clutch gearboxes is where it's at. Instantaneous shifts with none of the clunkiness of the old SMG's and none of the power loss of a torque converter. I'm talking about Audi/VW's DSG, BMW's DCT, and Porsche's PDK, among others. I still love the connection through the manual gearbox and won't give that up for a pleasure car. If I were looking to gain those hundredths of a second in racing, it's hard to argue with the automated manuals. And they never miss a shift.

i disagree. the IS-F shows that you can have super quick shifts in a TC AT. as quick as DCT or AMT? no, but lets be honest here, you're splitting hairs if you want to talk about milliseconds. the cost and complexity of the DSG is it's downfall. firstly, low speed operation will never be as smooth as an AT. secondly, you're at the mercy of its computers way more than an AT. with the computer controlling the clutch, you never have full control. you're at the mercy of however it was programmed. with an AT you will at least have a viscous connection through the TC at all times. and lastly, the tranny is non-serviceable. out of warranty and the DCT dies? guess what? you're SOL...

the absolute best of both worlds is the Mazda SkyActiv AT. it uses a very small TC that locks up super early. you can think of it as a clutch slipping device, because basically that's all they're using it for. right now its on an economy car, but the principle of operation can be expanded to a sporty AT very easily. for example, combine the small TC, early lockup philosophy with the solenoids of the IS-F, and you'll get one awesome conventional AT.

[Godzpeed]

Originally Posted by madfast

both porsche and BMW did this until very recently. in fact i think the cayman s still uses that old tiptronic style of "paddles".

BMW has always used pull down to shift up and push up to shift down like a sequential gear box on the gear lever

M cars had proper paddle shift (right to shift up and left to shift down). regular Steptronic had pull to shift up and push to shift down until recently.

and thats not the Tiptronic style paddles, Tiptronic uses buttons on the steering wheel. Those are the regular PDK shifter. you need to order the optional sport steering for proper paddle shift. the regular PDK wheel is still standard on every Porsche including the newest 991