As some of you may or may not know I own a 6MT '06 RBP TSX.
It was in for a 15k service, but i was given a Black '07 AT Black TSX as a loner. Recently, I've been looking at the 07 TL Type S Automatic, and was kinda wanting more power and an AT due to all the driving I've been doing for work lately. I was excited when I got the keys for the BRAND NEW 07 with only 180 miles on it. Trip A said it had 180 mi too, so it hadn't even had more than one tank of gas!

Wow was i sorry for second guessing my 6MT. The 07 AT was sluggish, and too quiet. It handled well, but i was terribly unhappy with the SportStick shifting and the lurches between shifts when pressed to the limit. It drove like a Camry CE. :-(

Then I rushed back to the dealer to pickup my 6MT after it was done being serviced and pushed it to the limit to remind myself of what that car can do, and i was wiped of all my doubts. If you are reading this and thinking about a 6MT, do yourself a favor, test the AT first, and then the MT. You will buy the MT. It is truly a pleasure to own and is the right choice for the TSX.

 

:ibtheflames:

 

hahahahahahahahahahahaha
" 4 way cigarette lighter outlet splitter" is one of your "listing" mod?
wow lol

 

Put that flame suit on....

 

Camry CE??? You're kidding. There's not THAT much difference. You just don't know how to drive it.

 

I KNOW THAT FEELING..TRUST ME

 

wah forgot that was in there. been a while since i started a thread or had a new post...

 

Thanks for reminding us 2007 Auto owners how sluggish our cars are.

 

Don't know how to drive what? an automatic transmission car? Okay so maybe i exaggerated, but the difference was much more noticeable than i expected.

you must admit 0-60 acceleration times in the MT are considerably better. THAT was noticeable for sure, even in SportStick mode

 

...but the gas mileage IS great, isn't it?

 

i totally agree with PittIsIt....i had 06 AT loaner car, o man~i am so glad i own MT....
it doesn't drive like camry, but i admit MT is a way better.....too much difference.....
i am not saying AT sucks, but MT is more my type......

 

i have an '06 AT and it's not all that bad. sure driving an MT is a lot more better but it's good enough for me. i have to admit i never do use the sportshift on it. the reason i got the AT was only because i am in traffic a lot of the time and it just isn't fun to be shifting in stop and go traffic. i save my MT car for the weekends

 

I've never driven a 6MT, but I have an 05 5AT and there is no way it is like "driving a camry CE".

I've driven a few camrys and that is just an awful drive compared to a 5AT in terms of handling. a V6 camry is probably a bit more power ful, but the drive definitely is nothing like a tsx. I have driven a lexus IS350 even and for handling and feel the TSX I think is still probably better and more connected just far less power.

Everything toyota makes , lexus included just drives softer I'd say.

 

OK I GET IT. Sorry about the CAMRY CE comment. :-)

I just wanted to point out that I was glad I got the manny tranny and that MY second thoughts were unwarranted.

 

I don't think the mileage is all that different between the AT and MT, unless you have a very heavy foot (as it appears the EPA testers who drove the MT did).

 

I get better mileage (slightly) out of my MT than I did my AT.

 

AT is not boring. So shut up. =]

 

Some old folks are shocked that I got a Acura in 6spd they were like wow stick shift did it cost more? hehe I'm like nope and show them how easy it is to shift by wrist-flicking changing gears.

 

Actually, it really did cost "more" in a way. The TSX is one the first cars I ever looked at that offered both an MT and AT and there was no "extra charge" for the AT.

In many other makes when you have a choice of transmissions you pay $1200-$2000 more for the AT than you do the MT. (This is true of BMW and VW). Acura prices them the same, so in effect MT driver are paying a (significant) premium for the MT in the TSX versus most other cars.

 

Coming from the MT, you would probably need more time to adjust to the 5 speed manual shift. It's obvious that the manual is faster, but the gearing is totally different for the auto and you would eventually discover that it's not that much slower once you learn how to exploit the incredibly tall 2nd gear.

 

Actually, if you factor in the fact that there are so many more AT's at the dealerships to choose from and haggle with, and that many of us MT'ers had to special order ours, the MT's end up costing A LOT more to buy for some of us!

 

i think if i had the 6MT (which, now, i wish i did) i would probably drive harder than now with my 5AT. i guess i'd feel like a race car driver, instead of a casual luxury driver instead. so with a 6MT, i'd probably get much lower mpg

 

6mt ALL THE WAY! ...or clutchpedaless manual trans like the SMG or DSG.

4 cyl cars need manual trans or DSG.

 

Shut up!!!

 

SS, obviously. It takes a while to learn. Afterwards, it's not really that much slower.

 

As far as MPG is concerned, i wasn't insinuating that the MT gets better MPG, just that its nice to drive a car (the TSX in General) that is fun to drive AND economical.

Don't be so garsh darn defensive!

 

Yeah and according to some other comments about the long 2nd gear, those unfamiliar with the gearing in the 6 spd might think that 5th gear is too short (which I think it is)...i did notice my 6mt runs at a higher RPM on the highway than the AT, which is curious, and i (OBVIOUSLY) don't know much about gearing and power curves, but the difference is notable, you're right.

 

I don't know why you think 5th gear is too short -- this is one of the main benefits of a 6-speed versus 5. You get a "taller" gear (it's all relative) for cruising, which lets the ratios of the other gears be shorter and more closely spaced.

The TSX turns 2950 RPM or so @ 70 mph in 6th, which was almost exactly what the 2.5L BMW 325I did in top gear (but it's a 5-speed).

As far as AT versus MT ratios, it's almost unheard of nowadays for an AT to turn more RPM on the highway now that 3 speed automatics are basically extinct and 5 speed automatics are very common (even 6 and 7 speeds are now available). An AT will downshift just based on throttle position, so AT cars routinely are geared to turn in the vicinity of 2000 RPM on the highway. 4-bangers will generally be somewhat above this, while 6 and 8 cylinder cars will be less.

Lower RPM generally means lower fuel consumption -- all else being equal -- but AT drive trains are less efficient, losing 5-8% more energy to friction than an MT, so usually MT's get better mileage even if they turn more RPM.



The only problem with the TSX gearing is 2nd gear -- it's too tall relative to 1st. This was clearly done just for 0-60 times just so a shift into 3rd could be avoided before 60 mph, but the car would be more driveable if the lower gears were slightly more closely spaced.

 

I got what you meant. I was just playing with ya..Auto will never drive the same as MT and I knew this when I bought my 07 Navi. Winters in the Midwest made me buy an Auto.

 

Google for "lock-up torque converter."

Don't get me wrong, an MT's clutch has zero loss when engaged, but at highway speeds AT TC's lock themselves and don't have this slop factor. That's one of the major reasons ATs have equal or better milage than the MTs these days.

Personally I'm coming from a RSX-S to an AT TSX, and while occasionally I miss the stick, I'm not as disappointed as I expected. I prefer driving the TSX way more than I did my RSX; maybe that's because it's all busy roads (and lights) here and the RSX was exasperating to drive in any form of traffic, especially having to shift three to four times to just go a short distance.

I think I'm at the point where it makes more sense to get a weekender toy car and drive an AT to and from work.

--W

 

Yes, that helps, but still doesn't completely eliminate the frictional losses in the AT. More than anything else, it lets the engine run at somewhat lower RPM than it would otherwise with just the fluid coupling.

The published MT figure for the TSX is only 1 mpg different than the AT, and actual figures posted here suggest it's a wash.

And the TSX is actually somewhat unusual in having a published MT mileage lower than the AT. In almost every other case -- certainly with sedans versus sports cars -- it's the other way around, with MT's often coming in at 10% or better than the AT mileage wise.