View Poll Results: Automatic or Manual Trans.
Automatic
61
25.00%
Manual
183
75.00%
Voters: 244. You may not vote on this poll
Auto or Manual
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,399
Likes: 0
Originally posted by DmitryZ
Ok. I went back and did a search. I apologize for making my assumption about you. But also note that I said that I wasn’t trying to offend anyone. I will be more careful next time - after all we are all on the same team.
All I was trying to do is correct your previous statement “a Z is not like any other automatic.” To me that implied that the Z auto has no torque converter which it obviously does. Now my PERSONAL view is that a sports car should not come with an auto. Thus, I bought a manual for that reason and the fact that I plan to take my car to the track so those .1 of a second matter to me. So hopefully you see now that I was trying to make a valid point and you had to go and take a personal shot at me, which I don’t appreciate. Personal reasons aside, there is no way anyone can compare a manual to an automatic and definitively say which one is better. It is all a matter of what you plan to do with the car and what your preferences are. For me a manual was the only way to go, for an old fart (we are even-I am here to talk about the Z-leave my girlfriend out of this) an auto might be the way to go. Everyone has their preferences-we will just have to agree to disagree.
I am going to drive my Z.
Dmitry
Ok. I went back and did a search. I apologize for making my assumption about you. But also note that I said that I wasn’t trying to offend anyone. I will be more careful next time - after all we are all on the same team.
All I was trying to do is correct your previous statement “a Z is not like any other automatic.” To me that implied that the Z auto has no torque converter which it obviously does. Now my PERSONAL view is that a sports car should not come with an auto. Thus, I bought a manual for that reason and the fact that I plan to take my car to the track so those .1 of a second matter to me. So hopefully you see now that I was trying to make a valid point and you had to go and take a personal shot at me, which I don’t appreciate. Personal reasons aside, there is no way anyone can compare a manual to an automatic and definitively say which one is better. It is all a matter of what you plan to do with the car and what your preferences are. For me a manual was the only way to go, for an old fart (we are even-I am here to talk about the Z-leave my girlfriend out of this) an auto might be the way to go. Everyone has their preferences-we will just have to agree to disagree.
I am going to drive my Z.
Dmitry
Water under the bridge, I don't hold grudges unless re-provoked, so your preferences are certainly valid, as are mine. Being a preorder, I took a real chance on the 5AT in the Z, so I am an advocate. If it had been just like BMW's Sportronic or AUDI/Porsche's Triptonic, I would have sold the car. I would have made $2K, bought an RSX-S w/6 speed and been happy as a clam.
Fortunately, the Z was a natural for an AT or MT, depending how one wanted to use it and therein are our preferences. I would very much like to drive a 6MT sometime when my dealer actually can have a demo, but it may be a long time before that happens. Believe me, I understand how important it was for me to have a manual for over 30 years, but my wife can't drive a stick anymore. She broke her elbow in 3 places some time ago and she does like to drive fast cars, so I decided to be unselfish, hard thing to do w/my cars.
Where we most differ is 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. I am more interested in 40-60, 60-80, 80-100 times on public roads. I want to be able to walk away from a group of cars or trucks w/o breathing hard and the Z is perfect for that in full auto mode, manual mode and, yes it will do just fine w/the 6MT. So, Pax between us, if I have explained my perspective and you yours?
Boomer babble
I saw this coming.
I think some good points have been made. I personally drove both cars before purchasing one. Prior to my Z, I had a 6MT MKIV single turbo supra and a Lexus SC400 with a high stall converter as my daily driver. Let me just tell you the high stall makes all the difference on an automatic.
Stock for stock the auto Z will be faster in the 1/4. I have heard autos getting as low as 13.67 stock. The fastest stock 6MT was 13.8. One night at the same track both a 6mt and a 5AT were racing with the same mods. (same track, same temp etc.) The auto was 1/2 a sec faster in the 1/4 the whole night. I am sure there are lower times on both sides, this is just what I have seen. With the addition of a high stall, the auto may go down to 13.3 or 13.4 in the 1/4. On that same note a 6MT can put on a light weight flywheel which can also cut some time. The only problem is the horiffic noise it makes.
Both cars are great. I personally preferred the auto. I like the shiftronic system and felt the 6MT was a little rough from what I was accustomed to. The auto is heaiver and will get worse gas milage. It is also necessary to take it to the dealership to have it serviced. The 6MT will put down more power and have a higher top end. However, even with all of these positive features the lower gearing and faster shifting of the auto will make it faster. The shifting feature on the 5AT also helps when you are racing from a role. Most autos can't downshift from 3 to 1. If you are trying to slow down you can shift down and know what gear you are in.
In my experience with autos the Z is different. It is not like the SMG but I would rate it very close. F1 shifting is the future. It is easier and quicker. Many of the high end cars are progressing to this feature.
I hope I have not offended anyone. I speak from my personal experience. Both cars are great but the auto is what I preferred.
Stock for stock the auto Z will be faster in the 1/4. I have heard autos getting as low as 13.67 stock. The fastest stock 6MT was 13.8. One night at the same track both a 6mt and a 5AT were racing with the same mods. (same track, same temp etc.) The auto was 1/2 a sec faster in the 1/4 the whole night. I am sure there are lower times on both sides, this is just what I have seen. With the addition of a high stall, the auto may go down to 13.3 or 13.4 in the 1/4. On that same note a 6MT can put on a light weight flywheel which can also cut some time. The only problem is the horiffic noise it makes.
Both cars are great. I personally preferred the auto. I like the shiftronic system and felt the 6MT was a little rough from what I was accustomed to. The auto is heaiver and will get worse gas milage. It is also necessary to take it to the dealership to have it serviced. The 6MT will put down more power and have a higher top end. However, even with all of these positive features the lower gearing and faster shifting of the auto will make it faster. The shifting feature on the 5AT also helps when you are racing from a role. Most autos can't downshift from 3 to 1. If you are trying to slow down you can shift down and know what gear you are in.
In my experience with autos the Z is different. It is not like the SMG but I would rate it very close. F1 shifting is the future. It is easier and quicker. Many of the high end cars are progressing to this feature.
I hope I have not offended anyone. I speak from my personal experience. Both cars are great but the auto is what I preferred.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,399
Likes: 0
Re: I saw this coming.
Originally posted by whosdady
I think some good points have been made. I personally drove both cars before purchasing one. Prior to my Z, I had a 6MT MKIV single turbo supra and a Lexus SC400 with a high stall converter as my daily driver. Let me just tell you the high stall makes all the difference on an automatic.
Stock for stock the auto Z will be faster in the 1/4. I have heard autos getting as low as 13.67 stock. The fastest stock 6MT was 13.8. One night at the same track both a 6mt and a 5AT were racing with the same mods. (same track, same temp etc.) The auto was 1/2 a sec faster in the 1/4 the whole night. I am sure there are lower times on both sides, this is just what I have seen. With the addition of a high stall, the auto may go down to 13.3 or 13.4 in the 1/4. On that same note a 6MT can put on a light weight flywheel which can also cut some time. The only problem is the horiffic noise it makes.
Both cars are great. I personally preferred the auto. I like the shiftronic system and felt the 6MT was a little rough from what I was accustomed to. The auto is heaiver and will get worse gas milage. It is also necessary to take it to the dealership to have it serviced. The 6MT will put down more power and have a higher top end. However, even with all of these positive features the lower gearing and faster shifting of the auto will make it faster. The shifting feature on the 5AT also helps when you are racing from a role. Most autos can't downshift from 3 to 1. If you are trying to slow down you can shift down and know what gear you are in.
In my experience with autos the Z is different. It is not like the SMG but I would rate it very close. F1 shifting is the future. It is easier and quicker. Many of the high end cars are progressing to this feature.
I hope I have not offended anyone. I speak from my personal experience. Both cars are great but the auto is what I preferred.
I think some good points have been made. I personally drove both cars before purchasing one. Prior to my Z, I had a 6MT MKIV single turbo supra and a Lexus SC400 with a high stall converter as my daily driver. Let me just tell you the high stall makes all the difference on an automatic.
Stock for stock the auto Z will be faster in the 1/4. I have heard autos getting as low as 13.67 stock. The fastest stock 6MT was 13.8. One night at the same track both a 6mt and a 5AT were racing with the same mods. (same track, same temp etc.) The auto was 1/2 a sec faster in the 1/4 the whole night. I am sure there are lower times on both sides, this is just what I have seen. With the addition of a high stall, the auto may go down to 13.3 or 13.4 in the 1/4. On that same note a 6MT can put on a light weight flywheel which can also cut some time. The only problem is the horiffic noise it makes.
Both cars are great. I personally preferred the auto. I like the shiftronic system and felt the 6MT was a little rough from what I was accustomed to. The auto is heaiver and will get worse gas milage. It is also necessary to take it to the dealership to have it serviced. The 6MT will put down more power and have a higher top end. However, even with all of these positive features the lower gearing and faster shifting of the auto will make it faster. The shifting feature on the 5AT also helps when you are racing from a role. Most autos can't downshift from 3 to 1. If you are trying to slow down you can shift down and know what gear you are in.
In my experience with autos the Z is different. It is not like the SMG but I would rate it very close. F1 shifting is the future. It is easier and quicker. Many of the high end cars are progressing to this feature.
I hope I have not offended anyone. I speak from my personal experience. Both cars are great but the auto is what I preferred.
I am no racer, but I can shift an MT very fast when I'm familiar w/it. Even shifting very fast, I drop over 1000revs between shifts. If I drive my 5AT "right", I will drop only a few 100revs, as I was trying so ineptly to say last night, is this what you are saying? Frankly, before the Z, I didn't give a **** about ATs because they were in my wife's car and as long as they shifted OK, it was just OK.
Am I getting close to what you are saying or am I totally off base here. It is my experience, when I shift my 5AT at redline, the shifts are much faster than I could ever shift any MT. So, are you saying I am not dreaming and my 5AT in the Z is as special as I thought it was but didn't know why before? Let me say, I subscribe to almost every car mag in the US and I've read every test of the SMG written, almost. That's what I am reading. Please speak to me further!
Boomer baffled
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
From: NJ
Re: MT vs AT
Originally posted by DavidD
Dmirty I am not saying what you said about the Ferrari is wrong. I am only telling the other people out there about the facts about the F1 transmission on the Ferrari. It is as far as I know and the magazines have tested the only AT/tiptronic tans faster than the MT in the same car. Comparo vs. comparo.
Dmirty I am not saying what you said about the Ferrari is wrong. I am only telling the other people out there about the facts about the F1 transmission on the Ferrari. It is as far as I know and the magazines have tested the only AT/tiptronic tans faster than the MT in the same car. Comparo vs. comparo.
You seem to put the F1 system into the AT camp. I put it into the MT camp. Hence, my disagreement with the previous statement. After thinking about this for some time, I think we are both wrong.
Anything that has a torque converter, I call an automatic or an automatic with a manual mode.
Anything else, such as the SMG, F1 or that continuously variable tranny thing that Audi has, is a whole new ball game. There should be an official generic name for those things because mechanically and electronically they are different from both the MT and AT to an extent where I don’t think they can be in the same class.
To the point - I agree with you 100% the F1 automatic (*cringe*-hate using the word automatic when it comes to Ferrari) will be the ultimate setup (better/faster/more efficient etc than manual) in my opinion. However, I think we should find a way to differentiate between all the systems.
I think that as this F1 and other systems will become more common, we will not be seeing these AT vs. MT threads. Instead there will be AT vs. MT vs. Ferrari style shifter vs. Audi continuously variable transmission.
Just my .02
Dmitry
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,399
Likes: 0
Re: Re: MT vs AT
Originally posted by DmitryZ
My fault. I realize now what you are saying. I didn’t get it initially because all the new transmission configurations introduce some confusion into the pro/cons of the AT and MT.
You seem to put the F1 system into the AT camp. I put it into the MT camp. Hence, my disagreement with the previous statement. After thinking about this for some time, I think we are both wrong.
Anything that has a torque converter, I call an automatic or an automatic with a manual mode.
Anything else, such as the SMG, F1 or that continuously variable tranny thing that Audi has, is a whole new ball game. There should be an official generic name for those things because mechanically and electronically they are different from both the MT and AT to an extent where I don’t think they can be in the same class.
To the point - I agree with you 100% the F1 automatic (*cringe*-hate using the word automatic when it comes to Ferrari) will be the ultimate setup (better/faster/more efficient etc than manual) in my opinion. However, I think we should find a way to differentiate between all the systems.
I think that as this F1 and other systems will become more common, we will not be seeing these AT vs. MT threads. Instead there will be AT vs. MT vs. Ferrari style shifter vs. Audi continuously variable transmission.
Just my .02
Dmitry
My fault. I realize now what you are saying. I didn’t get it initially because all the new transmission configurations introduce some confusion into the pro/cons of the AT and MT.
You seem to put the F1 system into the AT camp. I put it into the MT camp. Hence, my disagreement with the previous statement. After thinking about this for some time, I think we are both wrong.
Anything that has a torque converter, I call an automatic or an automatic with a manual mode.
Anything else, such as the SMG, F1 or that continuously variable tranny thing that Audi has, is a whole new ball game. There should be an official generic name for those things because mechanically and electronically they are different from both the MT and AT to an extent where I don’t think they can be in the same class.
To the point - I agree with you 100% the F1 automatic (*cringe*-hate using the word automatic when it comes to Ferrari) will be the ultimate setup (better/faster/more efficient etc than manual) in my opinion. However, I think we should find a way to differentiate between all the systems.
I think that as this F1 and other systems will become more common, we will not be seeing these AT vs. MT threads. Instead there will be AT vs. MT vs. Ferrari style shifter vs. Audi continuously variable transmission.
Just my .02
Dmitry
CVT needs to come along, nice concept, but too much importance placed on a belt that relies on friction to work. top HP on that has to be pretty low, and with time they will stretch and break.
as for F1, yes please, this is a nearly perfect setup. tho I personally think they should leave a clutch petal in as an option, you can use it, or not. just make the clutch pedal drive by wire, and the computer can accept its input and work the hydrolics accordingly. then you can launch the car, and use the clutch just like a regular manual, but for gear changes, just hit the paddle and its shifting in .02seconds.
as for F1, yes please, this is a nearly perfect setup. tho I personally think they should leave a clutch petal in as an option, you can use it, or not. just make the clutch pedal drive by wire, and the computer can accept its input and work the hydrolics accordingly. then you can launch the car, and use the clutch just like a regular manual, but for gear changes, just hit the paddle and its shifting in .02seconds.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,399
Likes: 0
Originally posted by ares
CVT needs to come along, nice concept, but too much importance placed on a belt that relies on friction to work. top HP on that has to be pretty low, and with time they will stretch and break.
as for F1, yes please, this is a nearly perfect setup. tho I personally think they should leave a clutch petal in as an option, you can use it, or not. just make the clutch pedal drive by wire, and the computer can accept its input and work the hydrolics accordingly. then you can launch the car, and use the clutch just like a regular manual, but for gear changes, just hit the paddle and its shifting in .02seconds.
CVT needs to come along, nice concept, but too much importance placed on a belt that relies on friction to work. top HP on that has to be pretty low, and with time they will stretch and break.
as for F1, yes please, this is a nearly perfect setup. tho I personally think they should leave a clutch petal in as an option, you can use it, or not. just make the clutch pedal drive by wire, and the computer can accept its input and work the hydrolics accordingly. then you can launch the car, and use the clutch just like a regular manual, but for gear changes, just hit the paddle and its shifting in .02seconds.
a chain? I thought the CVT was a belt wedged between 2 discs, then they moved the disks in and out to change the radius that the belt was on. are you saying the belt is actually a chain? there would still have to be rubber sides, so it can grip the 2 discs that its riding on. and still those sides could slip.
well now Im gonna have to go check deeper into the workings of a CVT.
well now Im gonna have to go check deeper into the workings of a CVT.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,686
Likes: 0
From: NOR - CAL
whosdady
I made this same argument (A5T Vs. 6MT ) in the 1/4 to others in the past and got laughed at (could have been another forum, I forget) but my experience has been the same that is why I chose the A5T.
I even started a thread on here about High Stall TC's but never got any solid leads. Install is around 250 bucks plus fluid and I would by say a 3200 in a heartbeat if one was available. Today!
Only con per say to it is worse mpg but this is partly because you are always romping on it because you litterally burn your tires off. Good for .5 and sometimes even a full second off your quarter ET.
TC 500.00
Install 250
750 dollars for a full second. I think that is bang for buck!
W
I even started a thread on here about High Stall TC's but never got any solid leads. Install is around 250 bucks plus fluid and I would by say a 3200 in a heartbeat if one was available. Today!
Only con per say to it is worse mpg but this is partly because you are always romping on it because you litterally burn your tires off. Good for .5 and sometimes even a full second off your quarter ET.
TC 500.00
Install 250
750 dollars for a full second. I think that is bang for buck!
W
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
From: NJ
Originally posted by ares
a chain? I thought the CVT was a belt wedged between 2 discs, then they moved the disks in and out to change the radius that the belt was on. are you saying the belt is actually a chain? there would still have to be rubber sides, so it can grip the 2 discs that its riding on. and still those sides could slip.
well now Im gonna have to go check deeper into the workings of a CVT.
a chain? I thought the CVT was a belt wedged between 2 discs, then they moved the disks in and out to change the radius that the belt was on. are you saying the belt is actually a chain? there would still have to be rubber sides, so it can grip the 2 discs that its riding on. and still those sides could slip.
well now Im gonna have to go check deeper into the workings of a CVT.
Dmitry
Re: whosdady
Originally posted by MaxHax
I made this same argument (A5T Vs. 6MT ) in the 1/4 to others in the past and got laughed at (could have been another forum, I forget) but my experience has been the same that is why I chose the A5T.
I even started a thread on here about High Stall TC's but never got any solid leads. Install is around 250 bucks plus fluid and I would by say a 3200 in a heartbeat if one was available. Today!
Only con per say to it is worse mpg but this is partly because you are always romping on it because you litterally burn your tires off. Good for .5 and sometimes even a full second off your quarter ET.
TC 500.00
Install 250
750 dollars for a full second. I think that is bang for buck!
W
I made this same argument (A5T Vs. 6MT ) in the 1/4 to others in the past and got laughed at (could have been another forum, I forget) but my experience has been the same that is why I chose the A5T.
I even started a thread on here about High Stall TC's but never got any solid leads. Install is around 250 bucks plus fluid and I would by say a 3200 in a heartbeat if one was available. Today!
Only con per say to it is worse mpg but this is partly because you are always romping on it because you litterally burn your tires off. Good for .5 and sometimes even a full second off your quarter ET.
TC 500.00
Install 250
750 dollars for a full second. I think that is bang for buck!
W
also the 6mt is geared shorter, should keep it in the power band better. 6mt is lighter, 6mt has managed 13.7 1/4 times, someone said 13.68 from an auto I think, in this thread, I have never heard this, but I guess Ill give him the benifit of the doubt.
none the less, there is no way that a automatic transmission, with any torque converter is going to manage to go faster than a very good driver in a manual. laws of physics keep this from happening, manual is limited by 2 things, driver skill and hp, if you make the case that driver skill is perfect, then you are limited by hp.
how can the automatic, with the same hp(baring parisitic losses to the transmission) manage .6second faster times than a manual with a perfect driver.
Im sorry, but your logic is deeply flawed, atleast in the Z example, maybe some other cars have 4 speed autos that shift real slow, and by somehow modifying this, you can go as fast as a manual. but that does not instantly mean ALL cars can gain a full second from it.
not to flame, but I am really not understanding your logic in saying that the Z could gain 1sec on its time without adding any power.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,686
Likes: 0
From: NOR - CAL
Ask some track animals about Torque Converters and try and learn a little about it before simply dispelling it, that's my suggestion to those who do not know much about aftermarket TC's.
Most people in the car clubs here in Sacramento consider it common knowledge that the best bang for buck mod for an auto the TC. It is guaranteed at least a .5 reduction in ET and they know that if you have an Auto with a 3200 stall you will beat them. Even the best drivers who live at the track have conceded this to me in my old FireHawk with the Yank TC.
But most people who live at the track go mod crazy for that extra 10th so 6MT or A5T not many of them out there are stock. I am talk9ing about repeat racers not someone just getting a stock time slip.
So how could your 6MT beat a car that is .5 faster minimum?
All other things being equal during the race? Impossible.
When you can explain this to me then I guess we will be on the same page. And I am not flaming or arguing either the claims I am making are well documented all over the country.
Read all about TC's here, the Tech Talk section and FAQ etc.
It's good info. Then again you may still disagree even after that, no biggie. I had a TC so I am convinced, but I can't convince others (unless you line up next to me
)
Most people in the car clubs here in Sacramento consider it common knowledge that the best bang for buck mod for an auto the TC. It is guaranteed at least a .5 reduction in ET and they know that if you have an Auto with a 3200 stall you will beat them. Even the best drivers who live at the track have conceded this to me in my old FireHawk with the Yank TC.
But most people who live at the track go mod crazy for that extra 10th so 6MT or A5T not many of them out there are stock. I am talk9ing about repeat racers not someone just getting a stock time slip.
So how could your 6MT beat a car that is .5 faster minimum?
All other things being equal during the race? Impossible.
When you can explain this to me then I guess we will be on the same page. And I am not flaming or arguing either the claims I am making are well documented all over the country.
Read all about TC's here, the Tech Talk section and FAQ etc.
It's good info. Then again you may still disagree even after that, no biggie. I had a TC so I am convinced, but I can't convince others (unless you line up next to me
)
Forgot the link
High Stall Converter
This is a not a question, it is a fact. An otherwise stock auto with a highstall torque converter will beat a 6MT any day of the week. Infact I would not be surprised to see a 5AT with a torque converter hit low 13's in the 1/4. That is not to say everyone with a HSTC will run low 13's, but the documented case of 13.68 in a 5 AT would have easily hit low 13's. By the way, the highest run I have seen in an auto is 14.6.
In the supra community it was not even a question, it had been proven time and time again that the 5AT with a high stall was faster.
I am not saying my car is faster... however the converter will magnify the power and torque much more so than a standard 6MT. The 6MT will need a few other mods to compete in the 1/4.
Rember though, as the 5AT has the advantage in the quarter, the 6MT has an advantage around the road course, IE circular track.
Both are great transmissions, it just depends what you are trying to accomplish.
In the supra community it was not even a question, it had been proven time and time again that the 5AT with a high stall was faster.
I am not saying my car is faster... however the converter will magnify the power and torque much more so than a standard 6MT. The 6MT will need a few other mods to compete in the 1/4.
Rember though, as the 5AT has the advantage in the quarter, the 6MT has an advantage around the road course, IE circular track.
Both are great transmissions, it just depends what you are trying to accomplish.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: USA
Originally posted by Boomer
Good thing you don't have any say in the matter, isn't it?
Good thing you don't have any say in the matter, isn't it?
There is (at least) one indisputable advantage of manual over sport-automatic. Control.
Because of the shifting delay with the sport-auto, and the fact only one gear may be changed at a time, it will always lack the fine control of a manual.
Straightline Speed is only one factor, and in a drag race the perfect-shifting auto is probably an advantage.
But how about a road course where you're bombing down a straight in 4th or 5th (70-90 mph) then hard brake down to 40mph and want to jam it quick in 2nd for a tight turn.
Can't do this efficiently in auto, it shifts too slowly.
And even though the Z looks to have good torque all over the rpm range, you're probably going to want to keep it in the upper region to maximize power/responsiveness.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,399
Likes: 0
Originally posted by FRVRNGN
Since no one has touched on this point much:
There is (at least) one indisputable advantage of manual over sport-automatic. Control.
Because of the shifting delay with the sport-auto, and the fact only one gear may be changed at a time, it will always lack the fine control of a manual.
Straightline Speed is only one factor, and in a drag race the perfect-shifting auto is probably an advantage.
But how about a road course where you're bombing down a straight in 4th or 5th (70-90 mph) then hard brake down to 40mph and want to jam it quick in 2nd for a tight turn.
Can't do this efficiently in auto, it shifts too slowly.
And even though the Z looks to have good torque all over the rpm range, you're probably going to want to keep it in the upper region to maximize power/responsiveness.
Since no one has touched on this point much:
There is (at least) one indisputable advantage of manual over sport-automatic. Control.
Because of the shifting delay with the sport-auto, and the fact only one gear may be changed at a time, it will always lack the fine control of a manual.
Straightline Speed is only one factor, and in a drag race the perfect-shifting auto is probably an advantage.
But how about a road course where you're bombing down a straight in 4th or 5th (70-90 mph) then hard brake down to 40mph and want to jam it quick in 2nd for a tight turn.
Can't do this efficiently in auto, it shifts too slowly.
And even though the Z looks to have good torque all over the rpm range, you're probably going to want to keep it in the upper region to maximize power/responsiveness.
I was there in 1966 when Phil Hill(F1 World Champion) and his team owner from Midland, Tex. Jim Hall, won the CanAm race in Chevrolet 7 liter V8 powered Chapparals with AUTOMATIC transmissions!! They ran full throttle uphill to the top downshifted their ATs and went down the hill upshifting until they had to downshift their ATs again to get around the 90 degree turn at the bottom.
Don't give me that crap about better control on a road course with a manual because it was done w/an AUTOMATIC in 1966!! The Chapparals were also the first cars to use a WING on any car that day as well. Look in the older archives of this site for the picture of Jim Halls #66, or better yet, go to a vintage racing event where they run the big-block unlimited racers. You may go deaf, but you won't forget it.
This belief is what baffled me at first on a sports car website, people were drag racing sports cars!! WTF?, SPORTS CARS WERE FOR GETTING AROUND CORNERS FAST ON A ROAD TRACK(NOT OVALS) OR OPEN ROADS. Drag racing was for giant size V8s on cars that couldn't turn a corner faster than 15mph or they could crash. I drove a friend's 66 327 Chevelle and couldn't get it over 50mph when the front end started shaking. The only reason the SPORTS CAR mags started to publish 0-60 and 1/4 mile times was only for COMPARISON so we could have some data about how fast we could drive over the road or on a track like Laguna Seca, Riverside, etc. ad nauseum.
Most sports cars you could buy were too low powered to use an AT. They were 4s or 6s mostly, except for the vette, which all the sports car crowd called "plastic pigs". I wouldn't advise you say that to a ZO6 owner unless you know you can beat them up. Sports cars were the first cars to use disc brakes, because a V8 could eat you alive on a straight, but you could catch one on a curvy road and just walk away from it because they all had DRUM brakes, including the vette when it was first built.
Also, sports car owners were the SNOBS who invented the mythology that no good sports car has an AT!! AND, when you give a rendition of no good sports car has an AT, don't do it, because I and other old farts like me INVENTED THE DOGMA you are now purporting as TRUTH. NOT!!!! History's a *****, isn't it? The technology has always been available for sports cars w/ATs, but the DOGMA we coined has blocked its development until now, when there are more cars registered in the USA than PEOPLE, resulting in GRIDLOCK. Nissan expected to sell 1/3 of their US allotment w/ATs, and our little surveys are running about 27+% on a site peopled by sports car nuts. I think they will meet their target.
BOOMER BABBLE
Last edited by Boomer; Mar 3, 2003 at 07:14 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
From: NJ
Originally posted by Boomer
Also, sports car owners were the SNOBS who invented the mythology that no good sports car has an AT!! AND, when you give a rendition of no good sports car has an AT, don't do it, because I and other old farts like me INVENTED THE DOGMA you are now purporting as TRUTH. NOT!!!! History's a *****, isn't it? The technology has always been available for sports cars w/ATs, but the DOGMA we coined has blocked its development until now, when there are more cars registered in the USA than PEOPLE, resulting in GRIDLOCK. Nissan expected to sell 1/3 of their US allotment w/ATs, and our little surveys are running about 27+% on a site peopled by sports car nuts. I think they will meet their target.
BOOMER BABBLE
Also, sports car owners were the SNOBS who invented the mythology that no good sports car has an AT!! AND, when you give a rendition of no good sports car has an AT, don't do it, because I and other old farts like me INVENTED THE DOGMA you are now purporting as TRUTH. NOT!!!! History's a *****, isn't it? The technology has always been available for sports cars w/ATs, but the DOGMA we coined has blocked its development until now, when there are more cars registered in the USA than PEOPLE, resulting in GRIDLOCK. Nissan expected to sell 1/3 of their US allotment w/ATs, and our little surveys are running about 27+% on a site peopled by sports car nuts. I think they will meet their target.
BOOMER BABBLE
I think this AT versus MT will never be settled. I think we should all just give this issue a rest and agree that both a manual and an automatic have their own pros/cons. The choice of getting an AT or an MT in any car depends on personal preference. Otherwise we will just keep going in circles.
Dmitry
P.S. I never knew Phil Hill raced an automatic?! I wish we had another American driver in F1 today-maybe red bull will come through.
so seriously, why do F1, nascar, and lemans all use some form of manual shifter(paddles in most cases, but still no TC)
only one person even agrees that the manual has more control, and the rest think automatic is a faster shifter that is better than manual in everyway.
so again, I ask, why do racing teams continue to use manual shifters? I think they have access to the best TC in the world, yet they dont use them.
Im just not following the logic...
only one person even agrees that the manual has more control, and the rest think automatic is a faster shifter that is better than manual in everyway.
so again, I ask, why do racing teams continue to use manual shifters? I think they have access to the best TC in the world, yet they dont use them.
Im just not following the logic...
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,399
Likes: 0
Originally posted by DmitryZ
LOL. That was pretty funny. Thanks
I think this AT versus MT will never be settled. I think we should all just give this issue a rest and agree that both a manual and an automatic have their own pros/cons. The choice of getting an AT or an MT in any car depends on personal preference. Otherwise we will just keep going in circles.
Dmitry
P.S. I never knew Phil Hill raced an automatic?! I wish we had another American driver in F1 today-maybe red bull will come through.
LOL. That was pretty funny. Thanks
I think this AT versus MT will never be settled. I think we should all just give this issue a rest and agree that both a manual and an automatic have their own pros/cons. The choice of getting an AT or an MT in any car depends on personal preference. Otherwise we will just keep going in circles.
Dmitry
P.S. I never knew Phil Hill raced an automatic?! I wish we had another American driver in F1 today-maybe red bull will come through.
Based on what happened to Michael Andretti and Alex Zanardi, I don't know many American drivers who are interested because of how the teams are organized. It sounds like a pretty miserable venue for successful American drivers, they are treated like they know nothing and their talent doesn't count unless they came up through F2 or F3.
As for AT and MT, I agree, nothing is accomplished beating a dead horse.