Find Reviews by Make:
72 Comments on “Question of the Day: Can a “Driver’s Car” Have an Automatic Gearbox?...”
Read all comments
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
- theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
- A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
- Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
- Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
Automatic transmissions have improved a lot in the past decades. In many cases for an average driver they can do a comprable or better job shifting than a manual. Look at the Honda Civic.
Now for the 5% of us who are enthusiasts or hyper milers you can’t beat the hands on control that a manual offers. I could easily get 2-3mpg over EPA sticker Highway with the 5sp in my Mazda B2300 pickup.
Paddle Shifters and Auto-Sticks have somewhat blurred the line between manuals and automatics.
Can a “driver” want a slushbox for certain purposes?
Sure.
Can a true driver be absolutely dependent on a slushbox?
Not in my book.
If a driver’s car is a car that only a true driver can enjoy, can a car with a slushbox be considered a driver’s car?
In lieu of spoiler space, I’ll just omit the answer for now. I know the suspense is killing you.
Automatic as in torque converter, planetary gearset and a zillion valves and solenoids? (Classic automatics, shiftable or not)
Or automatic as in no clutch pedal? (SMGs, DSGs, CVTs and conventional ATs)
Or automatic as in “shifts without your input” (anything that doesn’t give you the option to pick your own gear)
I think a “driver” should be able to do some things that anyone with a car shouldn’t be able to do. Operating a manual is the least of these. It’s something you can lord over the common people.
That being said, there are apparently some auto cars that drive very well.
“Drivers car” with automatic.
That is something that only marketeers would come up with.
Most likely to sell cars to people who had never learned to shift.
In real life, the slushbox drivers, never know the feel of dropping a gear prior to hitting a corner at high speed. Or letting the rpm hit top of power band.
But alas, most of driving experience is being stuck in stop and go traffic, which makes the slushbox very desirable.
Almost any stepped ratio transmission is a compromise to the ideal. A manual version does allow a predictive action to be able to outperform an automatic. However both are compromises to the ideal.
When accelerating what you really want is the engine to stay at peak torque and peak revs while accelerating which a stepped transmission cannot do.
A CVT can almost do it but reliability will take its toll via wear issues. Plus it is effected by temperature. You never know if the transmission is shedding torque or not. Sure you can get the motor to hold 6000rpm but is it pushing full torque or has the rpm limiter taken control at a much lower torque output ? How do you know ?
The Prius is a constant power system but only from 51mph to 100mph (104Hp). The generator current feedback transducer guarantees you’re getting the full 82lbs-ft from the engine.
The VOLT represents the holy grail. If the electric motor reaches full output at 20mph you are guaranteed that power all the way up to top speed. Its 1.4L engine is completely decoupled from the wheels (not just partially like the Prius) so it need be concerned with power only.
Any need for engine bottom end torque here expired with the 20th century.
Of course whether generating ( 80KW ?) power with a 4 cyl engine is the best way to go I have my doubts. That is an awful lot of piece parts just to make that power. FIAT can do it with a parallel twin for example.
At GM the engineers are all good yes men, so probably all they know is what they’ve been told.
T2
Thinking that perhaps F1 pilots were “real drivers” A bit of NET research comes up with this.
If a car’s engine is constantly decelerating and accelerating, it is not operating at maximum efficiency. To do that it should rev constantly at the optimum point of power and torque.
This point was well understood by car engineers outside of Williams long before 1993. One solution was to do away with a conventional gearbox and instead use a system of pulleys to adapt the engine’s power in line with what the driver required.
The system – continuously (or “continually”) variable transmission – existed in various different forms. DAF had produced a road car in 1958 called the 600 (or “A-Type”) which featured a “Variomatic” gearbox – which was essentially a CVT.
The problem for using such technology in racing cars was the difficulty of finding a strong enough belt to transit the power from an F1 engine.
In 1993 Williams cracked it and David Coulthard tested the car on a wet July day at Pembrey in Wales. It was later driven by touring car racer Alain Menu (his Renault 19 race car was prepared by Williams at the time).
At first it was feared that a ban on electronically controlled gearboxes would do away with the CVT before it could race. But in the end the FIA came up with something much more direct to get rid of it.
They stipulated that, from 1994, F1 cars had to have between four and seven fixed gears – and for good measure added a sub-clause specifically banning CVT.
Williams’ CVT car sounded revolutionarily different to contemporary (and modern) F1 cars because of the different way it used the engine. Instead of the revs rising and falling with each corner they remaining constant through each bend – a wholly unusual sound for spectators.
There was also speculation that it had instantly proved several seconds per lap quicker than the conventional Williams – which was already streets ahead of its rivals.
Source is
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/05/03/banned-continuously-variable-transmission-cvt/
This really doesn’t answer the QOD “Can a “Driver’s Car” Have an Automatic Gearbox?”
But maybe answers the question “Does the fastest car have an automatic gearbox.”
Current F1 transmissions are essentially autos with the clutch used only for launch (this requirement dictated by regulation not by performance criteria).
Can a “Driver’s Car” Have an Automatic Gearbox?
No.
yes, DSG
No.
An auto car can be fun, but it’s no driver’s car.
A driver’s car has a clutch. No substitutes accepted.
If God had wanted man to use a clutch, he would have given him three feet.
Honestly. There are some lousy automatics around — the kind that upshifts, piggishly, in the middle of a tricky curve — but for today’s driving, dollar for dollar, most self-shifters are better. Who can bob and weave through urban traffic while stirring the soup? What I need is point and squirt.
“Funny how all men who wet-daydream about dick-extension cars are also convinced that these same cars have to have short stubby gearlevers for them to play with…” – James Hawes, “A White Merc With Fins”
I think a driver’s car should also have running boards. Oh, and also a starter crank. Only pantywaist wuss metrosexuals are so unskilled that they need an electric motor to turn the engine over for them. A manly man has learned how to hold the crank (never with thumb and fingers on opposite sides, since that can lead to a broken thumb or even arm in the event of a backfire) and where to position it in the engine’s cycle so that the engine starts on the up-pull.
I know all this and have performed the highly skilled act of starting cars with cranks, so that obviously makes me a more skilled driver than are people who only know how to use a manual transmission.
And as far as that goes, I can also shift a Model T Ford’s planetary transmission, which requires three pedals, so I think a true driver’s car should have a Model T transmission.
Negative
While traditional auto box equipped cars can be fast and can also more economical than manual, my definition of a ‘drivers car’ is a feeling of involvement by the driver. The auto box takes some of that feeling of involvement away as the car is now in charge of the revs and gears. But the tranny is also not the be all and end all. Is a manual Miata more of a drivers car than an AMG Merc? Yes, I think so. So would an AMG Merc with a manual tranmission be a drivers car? Probably not – there are many other factors which determine driver involvement.
A good driver’s car certainly can have an automatic. Indeed there are a lot of cases where an automatic makes a lot of sense – Chris Vetters’ 302 RX7 autocrosser wouldn’t have worked so well with a manual, and neither would Caleb Zimmerman’s turbocharged 305 Trans Am that made 360 hp and something like 500 lbs*ft of torque. You can build an automatic to upshift seriously fast (that Trans Am would bark the tires going into fourth on the freeway) and if you can afford the weight and power loss penalty even an ordinary slushmatic makes sense. I know I was impressed with the Poncho and probably couldn’t have beaten it rowing my own and that was just an old 700R4. I could certainly see how the brand new six-speed automatic in the CTS-V can be the equal of the manual in that car. It has over 500 hp an lbs*ft so losing a couple percent in fluid losses doesn’t hurt much. It weighs almost 4000 lbs, so the 100-lb weight penalty doesn’t matter that much. The supercharged small-block with its heavy internals is gonna have tons of inertial losses anyway so what’s a little bit of slush going to hurt?
Well, a performance car in the future isn’t likely to be massively torquey, or heavy, or high-inertia. Losing 5% of your power won’t make that much of a difference when you go from 450 hp at the wheels to 430. However, that same percentage loss takes you from 120 to 114. The weight penalty of even small automatics is still 50-75 lbs (a little less for a Hondamatic which is basically a fully automated manual); that REALLY matters in a 1600-2000 lb car which is what we’ll be looking at with $8/gal gas. Finally, an LSx doesn’t feel lazy at all despite its high inertia – there’s a lot to overcome it and you won’t be shifting those big gears fast anyway. The inertial penalty will hurt more with a 90-cubic-inch engine – and a lot more if you’ve got a 50-cubic-inch two-stroke-direct-injection engine driving the car. If I were a manufacturer looking at transmissions of the future I’d be seriously considering building a small sequential gearbox. Now, that’s the one that holds all the cards… seven to ten ratios, shifted as fast as your hand will move.
It can. But it shouldn’t.
Absolutely Not!
I have a Mazda3 and Mazda5, both with 5-speed sticks. Taught my wife to drive a manual she will never go back.
Real drivers shun automatics.
Automatic transmissions are fantastic machines, I just don’t want one in my vehicle.
For most sedan appliance, cell jawing, cup sipping, GPSing drivers, they seem to be necessary.
I don’t mind automatics, but there’s something about getting a shift just right that is much more satisfying than blipping a paddle. So I won’t look down on anyone with an auto.
BTW, anyone ever drive a big truck? :p
Look at how most “yes”-leaning replies also come with a lot of blah blah blah blah blah.. and most “no” replies are pretty short.
No.
Sorry to all the shmucks that have to join stop and go rush hour.. that’s not really driving
(might make exception for DSG)
Ok, please help. I’ve been having trouble deciding. My 91 Nissan Pickup, rusted out w/ unknown mileage, is dying. I was thinking of a Honda Fit, but can’t decide between manual or auto. I’m normally a manual person, but I live in sprawl and have to go through 10 red lights to get anywhere. BUT.. I love long road trips through the mountains. I do not think that the paddle shifters are worth anything. I think I really want a manual.. but would it get old after going through 100 red lights per week? (I mean.. stopping at 100 red lights, then waiting for green). But that 09 Fit is supposed to have a great manual trans.. where is the review, TTAC?
Ok.. blah blah blah. sorry!
A real “driver’s car” should have a manual or manual substitute that is at least offered, but as the shift-point programming of automatic transmissions become more intelligent, the debate between automatic and manual may not matter anymore.
Remember the automatic transmission in most cars today are much more refined and quicker to downshift than they were 20 years ago.
No.
Can an automatic be used in a driver’s car ?….yes. Jim Hall used automatics in most of his Chaparral racing cars, and Peter Greg is said to have preffered using automatics in his road cars.
Should they be used in a driver’s car ?….probably not. Until recently manual transmission cars always had better performance and gas mileage numbers than cars equiped with automatics. It’s hard to fathom GM putting 2-speed Powerglide auto trannys in cars back in the 60’s, but it happened.
This is silly. Why fetishize one specific technology when the whole *experience* is what matters?
Think about some similar questions. Not just from F1 racing or from past autos, as other commenters have already written; parallel cases from other activity groups and technologies. Can a real “photographer’s camera” have autofocus or autoexposure? Can a real “programmer’s computer” have a graphical user interface? Can a real “artist’s paint” be acrylic and clean up with water? Can a real “cyclist’s bike” have indexed shifters? Can a real “writer’s pen” be a rollerball?
The answer, of course, is always yes. Anyone who fetishizes some single aspect of the technology, rather than the activity itself, is a weak and anxious soul, in quest of a badge of authenticity, looking for the right possessions where they should be seeking the best experience.
I have a paddle shift Miata — For ady to day driving I leave it in auto. Lots of traffic.
Buy there is more involvement punching the gas as you down shift to kepp the revs up and not feel the car pull.
You are much more involved with true stick
If by driver’s car you mean a car designed to complete a track in the fastest possible time, I’d probably say that it should be automatic only. I would never buy a car with an automatic though, and I’m someone who doesn’t drive very fast. No stoplight drag races or track day.
By the way, the EPA ratings on auto vs manual are misleading; in fact, they aren’t really comparable. First, you have to consider gearing. Most manuals now are being geared more for performance instead of fuel economy. Second, with an automatic, the manufacturer can game the EPA testing cycle. Third, the test for a manual can’t predict how you drive. There are a lot more things you can do to increase fuel economy with a manual.
If your not using two hands and two feet, you are not driving – you are just sitting behind a steering wheel.
No.
Take a great car and add an automatic and you lose a whole facet of the car from a driver’s standpoint. Take most run-of-the-mill cars and add a proper manual transmission and the car becomes a whole different, much more enjoyable, animal.
Case in point, when I bring in my TSX with a stick and get the same car with an automatic as a loaner, even using the tap shift, it’s a snore.
Yes.
See the IS-F’s shifter, 8 speed automatic, the down and upshifting is way faster than you can when rowing your own boat.
foobar: that’s hilarious. If the experience is what matters, then I argue that an automatic detracts from the driving experience. For some people the idea is to go fast, and in that case not having to worry about gearshifts or lunching the engine/tranny is a good thing. Others enjoy the feeling of absolute control and all the mechanical linkages moving in harmony. Or not, if you’re having a bad day. Actually, that does sound a bit fetishistic.
Me? I want an S2000. *snick snick snick* … oooooooh, I think made a mess in my shorts.
it depends on torque output. There are tons of enthusiast (driver’s) cars out there with torque converters and planetary gearsets. They also all have great heaping globs of torque. Grand National, Bentleys, Merc AMG’s… etc etc.
Part of the problem with this thread is that I doubt many of the most vocal manual-gearbox enthusiasts have ever had a chance to drive a real state-of-the-art automatic, as shown by their frequent use of the term “slushbox,” which is sort of like calling a twin-cam, four-valve, variable-valve-timing engine “just a four-banger.”
I say this not condescendingly, because I wouldn’t have had the chance either if I weren’t a car writer eagerly lent any exotic I wish.
But how many people have actually driven a current-generation Cambiocorsa or a 911 DSG? Everybody has read about them in the buff books, but few have ever experienced them, and I suspect the best that the B&B can come up with in terms of actual experience is a variety of phony paddle-shift automatics that are little different than moving a Buick’s column shifter from D to 3, they’re just doing it with paddles or tap-shifters.
But never mind, pure manuals are on the way out, inevitably. Current demand is on the order of less than three percent of all buyers, I believe, and when it gets a little lower, manufacturers will simply say, “You want one, you make your own. We aren’t paying the enormous expense of certifying a car just to sell 10,000 of them to enthusiasts who frankly aren’t that important in the grand scheme of things anyway.”
It may be true that with a SMG, DSG, or similar type of transmission the lap time may be faster, but the car won’t be as fun. I agree with carguy622, that when you add a manual to many cars they become fun to drive, and when you add an auto to a drivers car it takes away from it.
Drivers cars have a clutch you operate with your left foot. F1 transmissions and DSG’s are not real manuals in my book.
How do you define a ‘driver’s car’ ? Is it horsepower, torque, top speed, handling, number of doors or seats, presence or lack of specific features or functions or is it how it is driven? In the second case, are we talking about racing, and if so, drag, oval, road course, rally, street, or endurance? Is it just a car that is enjoyable and fun and therefore driven as more than just mere transportation?
The question is pretty complicated, so for some people their fun ‘driver’s car’ might only come in a manual, others may enjoy the driving experience more with an automatic. The beauty is that with so many choices in the market there is a perfect ‘driver’s car’ for every individual driver.
Also, spend enough time behind the wheel of a car with an automatic tranny and eventually you learn to sense what it is about to do, what sounds and vibrations mean what is coming next, etc, and you can massage, nuance, and control it just as well through throttle input as most can do with a manual.
A “driver’s” car will have a stick and a clutch pedal. Period. You simply can’t get the same experience otherwise. That said, most people sit in traffic. For commuting, automatics serve a useful purpose.
There should be no absolutes….it should be more of a guideline than a rule…..I am guessing that most of the posters who nearly broke the ENTER keys on their keyboards after typing their Aye’s (either elaborate, or monosyllabic) would not kick an automatic ‘Vette or automatic Aston-Martin out of their garages for eating crackers….
Stephan: Does a GTI DSG count? It’s great for bombing around canyon roads and I’m sure I’d be much faster with the DSG than a manual around a road course. However, during normal everyday driving, I left it in auto. The car doesn’t need me to do anything other than be a passenger. That’s … depressing.
And slushboxes (hehe) may be the way of life here, but aren’t manuals predominant in Europe? I get the feeling that’s why car companies still build and sell the things anywhere.
NullModo: Stefan’s point is that this is basically the manual’s last stand. If today’s automatics are as “fun” as the manuals, we won’t get that choice in the market anymore. It’s flappy-paddle for you whether you like it or not.
And even if you “know” an automatic, you’re still stuck responding to what it wants to do. If it upshifts early at the same rpm and throttle position, but you don’t want it to? Tough.
Can a real “photographer’s camera” have autofocus or autoexposure? Can a real “programmer’s computer” have a graphical user interface? Can a real “artist’s paint” be acrylic and clean up with water? Can a real “cyclist’s bike” have indexed shifters? Can a real “writer’s pen” be a rollerball?
No.
Anyone can drive an automatic and drive it fairly smoothly. Not so with a manual. A manual pushes you to learn and continuously improve in order to achieve smoothness. Therefore, in terms of overall driving skills, a manual-equipped car can teach me a lot more than an automatic.
And of course, there is the fun factor and being able to jump-start a manual car…
B.C., the GTI DSG is maybe the best gearbox I’ve ever driven.
p00ch, you don’t mean jump-start–that’s what you do with battery cables–you mean bump-start, or whatever you want to call it, which is what you do by rolling the car and letting the clutch out.
Common error, but it’s a good point. Don’t know what I’d do without the ability to bump-start a dead-battery car.
The first reply by RedStapler talks like there’s something special about the Honda Civic automatic, there isn’t. It’s just the usual run o the mill automatic. Chaparral you mention the Hondamatic transmission and call it Fully Automatic. To me that would imply that it could shift manually or automatically on it’s own but, they don’t. I had a 79 Honda Civic CVCC with that Hondamatic and you had to manually shift it or it would take off in high gear or low gear and stay in low gear.
I drive an automatic. And I have fun.
Isn’t that the point?
I will have a car with an automatic on the day that the last running car on the planet with a clutch dies.
Until then, I will stick with my clutch.
but I don’t give a rat’s ass what anyone else drives or what they call it.
Your mind has limited bandwidth. Each of your 5 senses has some limited bandwidth at which to work also.
Someone mentioned with time you can learn the sound, feel, vibrations and tendencies of an automatic and control what gear it is in almost as well an a manual. That is true. However, some small part of your sense bandwidth is used up monitoring what gear the auto is in, and what it might be about to do with your possible inputs to the throttle etc. In other words, though automatic in function, it is requiring a bit of your attention a manual will not. That leaves less information bandwidth to work with in becoming one with the rest of the car. The feel of the steering, the acceleration or braking. That is why in any car that is the same other than auto or full manual you shift it the manual will connect you with the experience of driving more. You have more sensory bandwidth to devote in the manual.
In the manual you put it in gear, and know without any effort what gear it is in. As it nears shiftpoints up or down only when triggered by those points do you bother with the shift. Then for a few seconds it need be of no concern to you again. With the auto you always need to keep in the back of your mind what it is and might be about to do.
Now a perfect auto would be so seamless in its execution you would never know, nor need to devote any effort to wondering what it is or might be about to do. Good modern auto’s are getting closer to that. And yes when behind a larger displacement torquy engine with a wide flat band of torque it is easier to approach that ideal.
So a car enjoyed for its driver involvement will likely always be a bit more involving with manual transmission, but good modern auto’s are good enough they don’t totally ruin the involvement at least in large displacement slower revving engines. My long winded answer is YES, a driver’s car can have an automatic gearbox.
Is the Audi S8 not a driver’s car? What about the new M5?
It is obvious to me that these would qualify as driver’s cars.
In my opinion, manual transmissions are only essential for a “driver’s” car when torque output is relativley low.
Isn’t being a “driver” about getting the car around the track in the quickest way.
my 2 cents.
Can a man out-calculate a calculator?
Can a man outplay a computer in chess?
Can a man out-shift an computer controlled CVT?
Yes, for the elite few. With computer technologies evolving constantly, even that elite few will fade.
When was the last time that Kasparov beat deep blue? Do I have to mention that the optimum algorithm has been discovery for checker already?
I agree with Mr. Wilkinson, but would like to add that true driver’s cars have tiller steering.
I agree with Mr. Wilkinson, but would like to add that true driver’s cars have tiller steering.
My Ranger has a manual, and I think this is the last manual I’ll ever own. It’s mostly just a chore
Bowtieboy, all Honda automatics are effectively fully automated manuals with torque converters, even the latest 5-speed grenades hooked up to the V6 engines.
Can I point out again that cars are likely to become much lighter and less powerful, and the performance engines that thrive in the future are likely to have really narrow powerbands (because that’s what two-strokes have), so it’ll be a lot harder to hide the inertial and fluid losses of just about any automatic?
The motorcycle-style sequential will be the last transmission we all use before a sufficiently large surplus of renewable electricity shows up that we’re all compelled to go electric. The arguments over how automated we want our sequentials to be will make the current arguments seem simple and clear cut… paddles or lever? automated clutch or manual? full auto shifting or not? auto-blip, auto-lift, both, neither? forced downshift to first below 15 mph or not? My guess is that the enthusiasts’ choice will be a manual clutch, paddles, autolift, autoblip – but we’ll see both “push one button and go” and “do it all yourself”
My Ranger has a manual, and I think this is the last manual I’ll ever own. It’s mostly just a chore
Of course it is. You’re driving a Ranger. My Miata has an automatic. It’s called muscle memory. When I actually think about shifting, I enjoy the one-ness I have with the car, which (unlike the Ranger) is a joy to drive by design. The rest of the time my right hand and left leg know the dance so well that I don’t even notice that I’m making an effort that wouldn’t be necessary with a slushbox. A very small percentage of drivers enjoy the process of driving as much as I do. I am a “driver”, and I own a “driver’s car”.
Oh, and starting a car is not the same as driving it. Those who think that we’re lauding manuals because they’re “old school” and who think they’re making a point by lauding even older school technologies are missing the mark. The point is there is a sweet spot in specs for street cars when it comes to maximizing the desire to, say, take on the Tail of the Dragon. Hand cranks and four or more pedals doesn’t get you there. A car that does everything for you doesn’t get you there, either. If that explanation doesn’t suffice, then none will. Besides, those of us who do get it enjoy our exclusivity.
One more thing – a DSG qualifies as a manual transmission in my book so long as it virtually never vetoes your decisions. I have no experience with them, but I am willing to concede that a well-engineered DSG might well be part of the new “sweet spot” for ultimate driving pleasure.
I know that from an American point of view an automatic may seem like a contradiction in “driver’s car”. I guess the reasoning is that automatics are driven by everybody and their grandmothers, so you don’t exactly score any bragging points by proclaiming you are driving an automatic. It is a kind of “deliverance” thing to be able to shift a manual trans, and to tell the rest of the world they are sissies for going for the slushbox. In Europe the situation is traditionally reversed. With high taxes on cars, high fuel prices, etc., the norm is manual transmissions. That also used to be the norm for the prestigious German brands. Today that has changed, and the norm is that you find a slushbox in probably 90%a of 5-series BMWs, and in 100% of MB E-classes(At least in Scandinavia)! That way we could say that in Europe the manual transmission is for those who cannot afford a proper car that can handle the automatic transmission! Those with their bank accounts in order buy BMW 5-series, MB E-classes or even Volvo V-classes, where the vast majority are equipped with automatics! So – can a driver’s car have an automatic? Absolutely!
Even an Elantra is more fun to drive with a stick, as getting the most out of 138 ponies is the point.
As long as I have a “suburban” commute, I’ll stick with the stick.
Besides, most run-of-the-mill autoboxes these days try to put you in top gear ASAP, and if you drive in PA, it’s bloody annoying to have to tell the tranny: “I’m approaching a steep hill, and you’re in overdrive already, ya dumb bastich!”.
The idea of a DSG is appealing, but woe betide the soul who has one blow chunks out of the warranty period.
Absolutely!!! Anyone who has used HPTuners which is a GM performance tuning software knows that there all kinds of parameters that can be modified to make the transmission shift exactly when you want it to just by having ur foot in the right place. Now imagine the kind of bulletproof parts that are in the ZR1 Corvette trans… Multiple top of the line clutch packs, and god only knows what else.
I know the principals of driving manual, but I can’t. I prefer a built automatic tuned to the power band, and my personal driving preferences.
But if it were my 620 HP corvette, I want both my hands on the steering wheel, and both of my feet ready for the power sliding.
“…but as the shift-point programming of automatic transmissions become more intelligent, the debate between automatic and manual may not matter anymore.”
whatsanobeen / August 31st, 2008 at 7:17 pm
i think it kinda depends on what the driver’s objectives are. racers, autocrossers – in fact, sports drivers of any sort seem to value optimal performance over process. and, as a result, they may all be driving some sort of automatic, soon.
but not me. to me, driving a sports car is a lot like engaging in sex. although i certainly do enjoy arriving at my final destination, i also realize that much of the fun is in the gettin’ there and so, i don’t mind takin’ a little time to enjoy the ride.
While I agree that you have to look at the whole good computers think faster than we still can’t can drop from 5 to netral, goose the gas to get the revs up and go into 4th. I like my paddle shifters but it ain’t the same feel.
While I agree that you have to look at the whole good computers think faster than we still can’t can drop from 5 to neutral, goose the gas to get the revs up and go into 4th. I like my paddle shifters but it ain’t the same feel.
I think the topic at hand is focused on the new corvette and whether or not it can be considered an actual “driver’s car” with an automatic transmission.
If I heard correctly did he say there were two modes on the automatic transmission????
I thought i heard “sport” and “attack” mode.
Attack mode most likely meaning “traction control off” and shift pressures raised.
The thing everyone is forgetting is that this car has a highly engineered, twin intercooled, 2.3L supercharger on top of a 6.2L motor with 9.9:1 compression.
Anyone ever seen what happens to the 03 Cobra guys who slap a 2.3L blower on. Half of them crash. Same with the Lightnings.
There is a totally different power band than there is with the Nissan GT-R’s twin turbo v6 which is the primary competitor at the moment.
But one thing that dude mentioned is that he was driving the car around previously around Germany. The PCM/ECM learns his driving patterns, and records and calculates ideal throttle response vs. speed vs. shift points parameters, and corresponds with other PCM systems to improve the ability of the car to adapt to the driver, at least with an automatic transmission.
Suppose a car of the future could steer itself. Suppose that the car had no human-steerable wheel at all and that the driver merely entered the destination into the GPS system at the start of the trip and then the car steered itself the whole way. Would that be a “driver’s car”? I don’t think so.
Suppose that car was fitted with a left, right, and forward button on the dash and the driver could then tell the car which road to take when approaching any intersection. The car would still do all the steering and make all the decisions, but this would be a “manually steerable” car. If you pressed the left button but the upcoming intersection didn’t allow left turns, the car would just ignore you. If you didn’t press any buttons, the car would chose whatever way was appropriate at the next intersection for you. Would that then be a “driver’s car”? I still don’t think so.
I’ve read all the responses so far, and only a very small handful of people have grasped what I think is an extremely important distinction – a driver’s car isn’t necessarily a fast car.
Many modern automatics let you pick your gear, just like an SMG or DSG. Of course, if the technology works, it shouldn’t matter whether it’s using a torque converter or a hydraulic clutch. In truth, if the system is well-designed, I don’t see any difference between an automatic with a ‘manual’ mode, and the hydraulic sequential transmission in a modern Formula 1 car. The machine can shift much faster than any driver, and with the technologies we have available you can still have all the advantages of telling the car when to shift. Plainly, if you want to go fast, you should let the car do the physical shifting.
However, I don’t necessarily want a fast car, I want a fun car. A fun car can most certainly be fast, but it’s not a priority. Rather, I want to feel involved in the driving and connected to the car. I don’t get that by telling an automatic or even a hydraulic manual when to shift – That’s not really involvement. In a car like that, the only difference between a perfect shift and a badly botched shift is a few hundred RPM. The car is coddling me, and while the results might be spectacular, the technology is stealing part of my involvement, part of my fun.
Driving a proper manual, though, is the ultimate involvement. A truly perfect shift is rewarding in an of itself, because you actually did it, instead of asking the car to take care of it. When you see a turn ahead and realize you’re going to want second gear, you don’t just flick a lever. You press the clutch in, blip the throttle to bring the revs up to just the right place, slide the shifter down to second, and slip the clutch back out. It’s hard, which makes it so very rewarding when you do it right.
So, can a driver’s car have an automatic? No. But a fast car sure can. Stop confusing the two.
Some say that automatics shift so quickly and effectively that they accelerate faster than stick shift cars and so are “driver’s cars.” But if fast acceleration is what makes a driver’s car than moderate-acceleration cars like the Miata, Mini, or Civic Si, for example, are non-driver’s cars. That’s absurd.
To answer carguy‘s question about AMG Mercedes and stick-shifts… There was a brief period of time after I got my (used) C43 AMG but before I donated my 1986 300E stick shift. Hmmm… AMG suspension, 225/45/17 and 245/40/17 tires, faster steering, and 300 HP verses 205/60/50 tires and an engine and suspension that had 250,000 miles. I was on my 2nd set of shocks, but had a totally original (177 HP) engine! And did I mention donating the car to charity (because it wasn’t worth my time trying to sell it)? Anyway, I think the stick was mostly more fun to drive. A much firmer suspension, 2x the engine, 200k fewer miles, and a 5-speed automatic couldn’t overcome the entertainment of a relatively mediocre Borg-Warner with 250k on the synchros.
For marketing purposes, I used to mention that my 300E had “telepathically controlled shift algorithm.”
Question of The Day II – Does anyone really use the term “Gearbox” anymore?
Like a car’s looks, it’s very subjective and I don’t think there is a yes/no answer to this question. Whatever car makes someone smile (driving-wise), that’s his/her driver’s car.
Lee, I have a very boxy, ribbed aluminum container under the rear seats of my 911, called a Porsche Type 915 transmission. It is filled with shiny gears and slick shafts, each of which I placed there with my own grimy hands before closing up the “box,” so you can be sure I refer to it as a gearbox.
Torque converter = power loss.
Torque converter = power loss.
Then again, RWD = power loss. I’m with you, but sometimes the power loss is worth the trade-off.
To the directly above…
torque converter = power loss, but 400, 500, or 600+ HP = who cares.
RWD = power loss, but FWD = unusable power. How much power is lost through a RWD setup anyway? I suspect that on a modern car there is very little difference.
Easy answer.
No.
To the question at hand.
Drivers drive. Enthusiasts point.
No
Nope.
Automatics kill your fun and dual clutch trannies (trust me, I know) are no equivalent to the experience and simple joy you get with three pedals.