shimz350z

Mr. 18 yr old kid?...<---this will already answer your ignorant question which also answered itself (with an assumption).


I hope it's safe to "assume" that you are referring your comments on a performance(sports) car.

1. "You are not really driving the car unless it's a manual!!!"
-I think it depends on the motive of ones "driving." some examples:

a. Track use
b. Lazy or practical (There is a slight difference.)
c. Destination (Number one reason the car was invented which obviously progressed to an expensive performance hobby)

You have to consider not everyone's intention is to race. It seems to me that the argument is..."if it is a sports car then it should be manual." It's a collaboration of a package from mechanics, aesthetics, moral, history, practicality, etc.

What if someone likes the exterior aesthetics of the 350z and he doesn't know how to drive manual?
-So he's an idiot for purchasing an auto?
-What...he has to learn to drive a manual in order to be a real man?
-So he can learn to be a half a second quicker?
-So he can dodge other ricers roaming the dangerous streets of the lincoln state, sunshine state, golden state, etc?

Maybe it's smarter for him not to drive a manual because those who are driving manuals seem to hit 1/4 times around low to high 14's.

If think about it some of us(those without mods) sacrificed a slight performance loss for the aesthetics of the car...our other choices were evoIII, STI, Cobra, etc which are faster or quicker <---however you want to define it.

Manual is great and I miss downshifting, heel toe, etc. But to say that purchasing an automatic performance car is foolish and stupid is the most ignorant comment/idea to voice because it is the most practical way of basic driving.

I bought a 350z because of the exterior aesthetics and performance was the best bang for the buck.

Prior to the 350z I had a manual mx3. If I still had the mx3 I would prefer to convert it to an auto and my 350z to a manual, but the fact is I have only one car. If I had a decision at the time to convert my mx3 into an auto I would jumped on it so quickly because it was slow as $hit.

slow + manual = double pain in the @ss

fast + auto = slight pain (1/4 mile) & pain (track)

fast + manual= no pain (good driver) very painful (because of human error)

...to expand looks like most of the z's are pushing a good 14-14.8 in the 1/4 when we are supposed to be capable of pushing high 13's (which some have)


If there were no speed limits in the United States then the practicality of a manual car would probably gain a better hold on the average consumer. But hey, some people really like talking on the cell, eating, and drinking while they drive.

The only advantage i see in manual is the ability to control your shifts and focus more on the car.<---which is most practical in track/racing.

I chose auto because it was a compromise between power and practicality for a daily driver. If it's a daily driver I think it's much more PRACTICAL...if it's not, then I would have a manual. I wanted something with performance and comfort all in one.

autos-"I" sacrificed control(gears) and power when it comes to racing.

manuals-"You"sacrificed comfort and practicality when it comes to simple driving.<---and some may argue that it is simple to shift and I agree BUT which is easier?....there's a fine line between something that is comfortable and something you have adapted to(second nature).




p.s. I can't wait for another manual.

AceJ587

First off,...Your views are pretty much on par with mine, EXCEPT:

I dont know where the hell you found those 1/4 times lol

Performance wise, the margin between the auto and manual in terms of "Sacrifice" is just that,...MARGINAL (I wanted the auto but test drove the manual for the hell of it, and found the difference to be negligable).

nbdyfcnsqnc

>> I'm getting sick of these ignorant "manual" enthusiasts posts.

There is clearly ignorance on both sides of the fence. The side isn't what matters. Some individuals know what they're talking about. Some don't.

roydiculous

Auto? I was there for several years. I love my 6MT but I have ADHD when I drive. If I had an auto.. I would play with my buttons and radio, but now that I have a 6MT, I just slap teh car into neutral and jiggle the stick. I also bounce the stick up and down (when you press it go to reverse). One of these days I am going to break teh spring. But I love the 6MT. ESPECIALLY downshifting to 3rd gear and passing soeone on the highway. (going from 55 to 80mph before I can blink.. hehe)

ckny

iTrader: (7)

If an auto works for your particular situation then that's fine. As far as I'm concerned it's not the performance edge a manual gives you because that's marginal with todays advanced auto's. The difference is the overall experience. You can never make the argument that you get the same driving experience with a manual vs. an auto and a sports car like the z, in my opinion, amplifies this difference.

Also, please don't use the excuse that some people enjoy talking on their cell, eating, drinking, etc. No one should be doing anything but driving when you're out on the road.

Paul55100

I think most owners cringe at the thought of people actually getting an automatic sports car, because sports cars are thought of as "street-legal race cars." Short of the F1 transmission(which isn't an automatic, but some categorize it as such), nobody uses auto transmissions in their race cars. I guess that's the reason behind it. I tend to agree, as the manual will make you feel more connected with the car, and of course the performance numbers will be in the favor of the manual. But if you're getting a car just for commuting(in heavy traffic), or leisurely cruises, then why not get an auto. It's your money, do what you want.

AceJ587

I feel just as "Connected" to my Auto as I did with my last three Manuals.

Zero-2-Sixty

I've owned both on a 350z and the difference is nothing worth arguing about tis how you intend on using the car and thats about th end of that. No one's going to tell me for one that I have to get a stick just because it's a sports car. It's my car.......but to each their own.

p.s. To defend automatics further, exhibit a the mercedes benz sl55amg or sl600. Unless those aren't considered sports cars.

shimz350z

I clearly forgot to add the "neutral wiggle!" that is the best. And I forgot to add the "FUN" factor of shifting...but it all dissapears in the traffic jam.

p.s.
i remember my mx3 1st gear almost topped out at like 15 mph!...it was horrible~

shimz350z

I agree with you 100%...but I'm not gonna lie...I confess to eating my big mac during red light sessions. Taking sips of my sprite where the cup holder is....(don't have to look...isn't very hard for your peripheral vision to grab the sprite as your eyes are on the road. -when I had a manual I rarely did it because I had to keep pressing the clutch (slow car) to reach the average speed.

NOTE: when you take a hard left turns the soda spills over to the dash

Yes, I know, very dumb but I was hoping that was all calculated within the "nissan engineering's mind." sigh.

Aggro_Al

I was one of those that used to think that "real sports cars" had to be manuals. But, I've grown out of that. My take on what makes a real sports car is not the individual bits and pieces that went into the car but how the car as a whole makes the driving experience for the individual driver more pleasurable. I will agree that to be considered a sports car it needs to be performance oriented but the value or soul of a sports car should be determermined on how much pleasure it brings the driver. Is a Ferrari 360, Porsche 911, Aston Martin DB9 or even our Zs not a sports cars because they have auto transmissions? Would adding a manual to Toyota Camry or even a Lincoln Town Car make it a sports car? Would I take a Ferrari Stradale (auto) over a Nissan 350Z Track (manual). That would be a big yes, because a Ferrari would be more fun to drive. Would I trade my 5AT Z for a manual Celica GTS? Hell no, because my Z is more fun to drive. The type of transmission doesn't make or not make a sports car. It all about performance for the benefit of the driver, (the fun factor) all else be damned.

As for racing, almost all professional road and track racers use automatic transmissions. NASCAR being one of the big exceptions. The Ferrari F1 is more of an automatic than the Nissan 5AT. The fact that it has the ability to shift "automatically" on it own without any input from the driver makes it an automatic transmission. Even in manual mode the F1 will upshift automatically at the rev limiter if the driver doesn't do it first. If you don't believe me, call a Ferrari dealer and ask. In manual mode the Nissan 5AT will not shift unless you shift it. Don't get fooled by all the ancronyms and fancy names, the bottom line is, a transmission that can automically shift without any input from the driver is an automatic transmission. (If it looks, quacks and feels like a duck, it must be a duck.) Automatic transmissions automatically shift. Manual transmissions require you to manually shift. Another misconception a lot of people have is that all autos have to use a torque converter. The F1, SMGII and the DSG are prime examples of autos that don't use torque converters.

AceJ587

I couldnt have said it better^^^


This Quote RULES! sig material for an AUTO owner

chaofun

I'm sorry, but I believe real enthusiasts have good reason to prefer manual transmissions. It sounds like you're just trying to defend or justify getting an automatic by complaining about people who have good reasons to dislike automatics.

Real enthusiasts want manual transmission cars for many reasons:

more horsepower to the wheels

it's cheaper to manufacture (spending money on an automatic transmission that could have been spent on the car is like a sin to an enthusiast)

controlling the gears manually

chaofun

"Its seems people who drive auto are just lazy and don't have any skills driving a car."

While I don't agree with Lada350Z because that statement is simply not true, driving a manual transmission does require some driving skill that many automatic driviers do not have. Like all women.(J/K)

DIO

Let me see anyone here who owns a manual sit in 5 hours of 2 mph traffic. Lets see how quickly you tire of your MT. Thats exactly the reason why I went auto. Yes, I love driving MT but lets face it, I live in a high traffic area of the country so I chose the best option for me. Plain & simple. And, if I wanna play around, I have the auto/manual stick mode to satisfy my playfull side.

Amnbex

The first part of your statement is not true, newer autos(not the one in the Z though) don't use a fluid to transfer power through the tranny therefore there is the same amount of power loss.

It may be cheaper to manufacture, but it doesn't do as good of a job compared to the newer generation of autos.

And guess what, I can control my gears manually too.

Zcool

Oh my God! A civil war within the Z community. 6 MT vs. AT. I have a 6MT but would never criticize someone for getting a AT. I have a bad left knee and it is slightly painful when I shift but if it ever got to the point where it was unbearable I would switch to an AT. People drive AT's for all sorts of reasons. Laziness being one but a medical condition could be another.

Primaltone

The argument is that you bought a performance car, and since your giving up some performance for convenience, you must've bought the car merely for looks.

I've driven automatic transmissions with the "sport mode" and I've always been disappointed. It seems that I hit the button, wait a few seconds, and it shifts. In a MT, it's immediate. I prefer a MT because of the ability to keep the engine in the power band at all times, whether entering or exiting or corner, or downshifting and blasting by some unsuspecting cager (sorry, this car makes me forget that I'm in one too).

I've driven in San Francisco during rush hour, and it was the longest 4hours/10miles of my life. If I had to drive a clutch in that every day, I'd have a left leg that looked like Arnold Schwarzenegger's - if I didn't go insane first. So, I still prefer a MT, but I can certainly understand why some don't.

lowrider

iTrader: (3)

My Gosh - Personal Preference - That's all it is. For me that happens to be a 6MT. I have never owned an automatic. My wife's car is an auto, however, that's her choice. My first car was a 1950 Mercury with 3 on the tree. How many of you young folks know what that means?

My beater truck is a 5MT, My Harley is a 5MT. Makes me feel part of the experience, plus after all these years I'm pretty good at it. Infiniti gave me an automatic loaner about a month ago, and I hated it, I also don't like to drive my wife's car. Not only an automatic, but front wheel drive. A sacrilege to me, but not for her. Shall we also start a thread on RWD vs. FWD?

My last car was a Lexus SC300 with a 5MT. This was a very rare car, that I never would have bought had I not found the manual. When I bought it there was only two in all of Southern California.

Again, Personal Preference. Let's just hope they keep makin' 'em. I know I don't want a car with paddles. Oh, Oh - Maybe I started another debate.

Lou

Primaltone

I don't think we have to worry too much about a RWD vs. FWD debate, since everybody made the same choice.