ChiefsPlanet - Home and Auto Manual or Automatic transmission..which do you prefer?

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)

- -

Manual or Automatic transmission..which do you prefer? (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=265504)

Quote:

Originally Posted by loochy (Post 9038574)

I use the manual mode on my car almost exclusively. I can get better and quicker acceleration when I manage the gears myself. I only use automatic when my right hand isn't free (like when I'm eating something).

Cool, sounds like we're on the opposite end of the deal. I mainly drive highway though, maybe that's where we differ. I'm up to merging speed quick fast in a hurry in auto, that's about all the acceleration I need.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 9038581)

I'm saying that you're looking at 1 of 2 possibilities here.

1) The car isn't going to stay at 3500 rpm - it's going to simply idle down. Unless you're referring to the second it will take for the computer to realize that you're not accelerating (and if you were in overdrive, it shouldn't even take that long), there's no practical difference there. Take your foot off the pedal and your ECU will get to work keeping your mileage up - it's a cheap and easy way for Ford, etc... to improve fuel economy without drastically changing the motor design. Now, the other possibility is what I think you're referring two and thats when you're coasting down the hill (foot not on the gas) and your RPMs have come up to keep you from going 100 mph - in other words, 'involuntary' engine breaking.

2) Again, engine breaking does not have any impact on fuel economy. You may be right, on your steeper grades in Colorado your manual might be pushing 3500 going down the hill. But that's not a true 3500 - it's an idle speed that your transmission is running up to 3500. You're not using any more fuel there than you would if you stepped on the clutch. The fuel isn't what has you at 3500 - the wheels are.

The only difference in MPG would come from the fact that by engine breaking, you're reducing the distance you travel. If it takes you 5 seconds to stop, you will have used the exact same amount of fuel over those 5 seconds as you would have if you'd have just stepped on the clutch - but if you just step on the clutch you'll still be traveling, so your MPG goes up. Presuming, however, that you're stopping for a reason, you're just going to use your brakes to stop at the same point there's no actual travel gain.

There is a very surprising lack of information about this on the net, I read the popmechanics article which basically seemed to just say it's unsafe to be in neutral. I am surprised frankly, I know nobodies lives depend on this but I would think there would a definitive test done at some point.

I am basing most of this on my personal CO driving experiences which are not typical for sure, situations where I just hit neutral (exceeding the speed limit and coasting distance certainly come into play here) and coast for miles then the road evens out and I definitely would have had to get back on the gas earlier in an auto. This is mostly what drives me crazy about now being in an automatic here.

Oh, and I was basically talking a little point 1 and 2. I know #1 savings would be minuscule but they are savings none-the-less, #2 is interesting to me as if this actually held up that neutral at 800rpm would burn more fuel than the entire drivetrain spinning at high rpm. It makes sense until you engine brake an s2000 down a mountain road at 8000 rpm and realize it might be more efficient than sitting quietly at idle at 800 rpm. Know what I mean?

Automatic transmissions are for women. And minivan drivers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosty (Post 9038629)

That's right. I may have misunderstood your point. I thought you meant coasting in neutral gives you better mileage (over just driving) is a myth.

I'm saying that the idea that coasting in neutral saves gas over coasting in gear, is a myth. You should coast in gear.

too old for "fun"

just give me an automatic so i can still drive with my knee while i eat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 9038752)

I'm saying that the idea that coasting in neutral saves gas over coasting in gear, is a myth. You should coast in gear.

Agreed to a point. As mentioned, you can coast much farther in neutral than you can in gear so you have to consider that. I have some hills that I can't maintain speed in gear but can in neutral so I save gas over slowing down in gear and then having to accelerate back up to speed or just driving normally. You have to figure out when each method is best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 9038395)

What's efi?

I'd totally forgotten about starting the car with the clutch. My dad did that a few times with older cars when I was a teenager, and I thought it was magical. How did that work exactly?

It’s called a “bump start”, lots of race cars are still started that way.
With the ignition on put transmission in gear, first or second works best, push in the clutch and get the vehicle rolling. Once rolling along release the clutch and give the throttle a tap, it’ll usually fire right up.
You're just using the rolling wheels and transmission to spin the motor over to start it instead of the starter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar Chief (Post 9038796)

When I had my '66 Bug (with the 6V electrical system) in high school, I became a master of the bump start. I would always try to park on a hill or at least a long flat section. At home, I had to park at the top of the driveway. Then in the morning, I would push it to get it rolling, jump in and throw it in gear to try to start it and then slam on the brakes so I wouldn't crash into the garage door. It was a bad morning if I didn't get it the first time because I would have to push the car back up the driveway to try again. I was frequently late to first period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by COchief (Post 9038227)

Doesn't mopar drive you nuts with the constant slushboxes? I like so many of the SRT8 models (particularly the 300) and it makes me insane that every single god damn one is an auto (challenger excepted I guess). One thing I like about GM is they only made the CTS-V in manual, I wish Chrysler/Dodge would get on board. I would hope anyone buying a SRT vehicle would only want stick. My old man had a SRT Grand Cherokee, while it was definitely fast as shit, it got old so fast just smashing the gas pedal and feeling the front end "hover".

You are right, only the Challenger is offered with the Tremec 6 speed, odd. Many of the Charger owners would like to have a 3 pedal option.

I am surprised they don't offer it in the Dart, but guess they don't.

That being said, this auto in my Challenger is a pretty nice piece, guess it is made by a Daimler plant here in the states.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 9038459)

Electronic fuel injection.

I didn't know that either. I've hill-started my motorcycle a few times by popping the clutch and I know it's an EFI bike, so it must be exclusive to cars.

I guess if the car has been running the day before or something like that, there could be enough residual fuel to restart it via popping the clutch. I've had a few that hadn't been started in a couple of months, so maybe that had something to do with it.

My daily driver = automatic.

My Hot Rod = 5 -Speed. Yea you can't out shift an automatic but damn its fun trying.

Paddle Shifted Automatic.

Best of both worlds.

We just finished off a car (Likely, our last full build we'll ever do) that was a paddle shifted 6 Speed Auto. 392 C.I with a single Turbonetics GT-K Turbocharger making about 700HP at the wheels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 9039100)

My daily driver = automatic.

My Hot Rod = 5 -Speed. Yea you can't out shift an automatic but damn its fun trying.

I won't lie, I wish the '67 had a manual in it, but the wife wouldn't let me get it without an auto in case she wanted to drive it.

If you have the horsepower and the wherewithal, nothing beats a manual for pure exhilaration. That said, that doesn't make most of the old saws about the 'benefits' of a manual any more accurate.

That said, throwing a shift-kit in a 700r4 makes a torquey little beast in its own right. Sure, it downshifts into the wrong point in the power band if you're in 4th, but if can break the back end loose at 30 mph using nothing more than my foot when it drops down to first, so there's that...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 9039118)

It's still not quite as satisfying as feeling that mechanical 'thunk' as you hammer through your shift points, but the flappy paddle is a nice middle-ground for most applications. And most of them will keep you from being too stupid and/or dropping from 5th to 2nd by overshooting the gate.

If I lived in bumble**** nowhere I'd have a stick. They are fun.

They are not fun, however, when you're in heavy suburban Chicago traffic 95%of the time.