larchmont

Not odd at all. First of all they don't really think they're slowing the car down. But even if they were...... To take your idea a step further, would you say that they should be glad to just be a passenger if they could have a driver who drove better than they did? Like, suppose you could have Mario Andretti just drive you around all the time, and you'd just sit there and not have to do anything..... What, no, they don't prefer that? What, they'd prefer to drive themselves, even if they might be slowing themselves down???

There isn't anything odd about people wanting to do as much as possible for themselves, in their own way, even if it makes the task harder, and even totally aside from the results.


BTW: Welcome, glad you found your way here from ClubTSX. Most of us are "refugees" from over there.

schalliol

I concede that if my car drove itself all the time that I'd often take off the auto pilot, as I really do like driving. Mario could drive me around every now and then, but then I'd take the "smaller" Maybach. Joking aside, the driver of a car that is not choosing the shift points is still controlling the direction of the car, the speed of the turns, the amount of accellaration, the amount of decelleration, the distances in which he/she passes cars, the course taken when going around a curve at a good rate of speed, the adherance to traction on various surfaces, the avoidance of people/cars/objects, the level of the audio system, the interior climate of the car, etc. Thus, why do you need to control the gearing and the clutch? We know we'll be able to toss both soon if we like to get the same performance in auto and semi-auto modes. The point about controlling the gear you're in is well founded, it makes a lot of sense to be able to have that ability beyond the standard "up to gear 3 or 2" controls that have been in autos for years. I can start my TSX in 2 if I like for the ice, etc. that can't be done normally (well, some cars have a winter mode).

Is it less fun to ride a bike without gears? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that true racing bikes have only one gear (thus the pushing to get them going).That's fine if you want to open the door yourself at the grocery or send a letter in the mail that could be sent for free much more quickly via email. I am only trying to figure out why people don't want to use that automatic door in this case.

Thanks very much. I was a refugee from TSXClub before that even, I sure wish that people got the word out sooner. This forum is 10X better than either of those!

rb1

Agreed. I tried this today at a stop light in my VW (also DBW) and it works fine.

Maybe DBW disables the accelerator in the AT cars when the brake is activated (courtesy of Audi lawsuits of the 80's). Can anyone with an AT confirm/deny? (Domn? )

ClutchPerformer

Here we go..... For me (manual driver), it's simple: I'm willing to take a performance hit/gas mileage hit (which I HAVE, in fact, taken)/convenience hit/can't use a cell phone hit/etc. for the privelege of doing the shifting. This opposed to leaving it to some computer under my cup holder.

I'll try to make another analogy: Let's say you have some famous painting worth 20 million bucks. Now, let's say that you could have a computer-controlled painting machine paint the exact same picture with 100% accuracy. Everything is the same to the viewer, but everyone will know that this one is fake (because it's not in the Louvre or something). Would that computer-generated painting be worth $20 million? I sure wouldn't pay that much for it.

Modern machines can make much better everything (including shifts) than people can. But handmade objects will always be worth more because of the work/time that went into it. Ok, i'm getting away from the analogy, but you must see my point.

Let's look at it in the limiting case: I could get a bunch of computers and servos and motors, etc. to drive my whole car for me. And those computers would be WAY more effective than me, and could beat my time at any track or drag strip in the world, but it would be NO FUN AT ALL to sit in the car and "watch" the computers do all this great driving. If you don't agree with this, then you'll never understand what I'm saying.

PS. And yes, it's all in good spirit. You're not offending me. I just like to discuss.

Edit: F1 cars use sequential manual boxes because they're not concerned about art. They just need to go as fast as possible 100% of the time (and avoid making mistakes that could cost them a tranny and the race). The computer-controlled box does both for them.

mojo_RENAMED

Do you have much traffic in Madison, WI? And before you say yes, have you driven much in the large cities (LA, Atlanta, etc) that have traffic? Driving a manual is NO FUN AT ALL in traffic jams.

There's times where convienence takes precedence over fun- it just depends on what you want...

schalliol

You do know that your TSX has a number of processors controlling your engine and car, right? In fact, you aren't even controlling the throttle yourself in this car, there's a computer controlling this.Of course a painting is an art that requires advanced control to make something unique. You see all the items I have noted you have to do to drive, why is pulling a lever and pressing a clutch akin to an artwork? Do you all have the traction control off? Taking this, it seems like you'd prefer to have the stability off, it's controlling all sorts of things when active.You do realize the thousands of person hours used to make such a sophisticated automatic transmission, right? I personally love that it can be so smart and, as a technologist, love each shift being performed with stunning accuracy. I personally want the machine made precision, but perhaps checked by a person. I personally feel that that's an art, the machine developed painstakingly to provide microns of precision. And the result, oooh, perfection.I see, but don't agree with your point.In fact, you're almost doing this even with the manual transmission.I'm not asserting to do the full auto-pilot (though sometimes that would be cool on the freeway), as I write above a couple of posts, look at all the different things you have to do to drive a car with an auto transmission. It's FAR from having the car driven as you suggest. I just assert that the transmission is a useless part of fine driving, with the execption of choosing certain geers in some situations, and is no more different than manually controlling the power mix between a left and right wheel. That control would in fact have relevance in driving often, especially on turns....LikewiseShow me a reason why controlling the transmission, as opposed to other things that would allow you to be a "better" driver that the computer does for you, is artistic and the way to go. I realize that the air conditioner is a silly example, so this takes it out to real useful stuff.

Dan Martin

I think this whole thread is getting blown way out of proportion but for what it's worth, if Acura offered a sequential manual for the TSX (even up to $4000CDN extra) I would have got it. I'll stick with the 6MT until then. I have also driven the 5AT and I found it to be quite enjoyable as well.

The bottom line is both transmissions will treat their buyers to a great ride whatever their preference is.


Out of curiosity, has anyone driven the MR2 with the sequential manual? I've heard mixed reviews but more positive than not. Most were complaining about shift noise.

Kwijybo19

I hate to act like a mod here, but I have to agree with Dan here. I think this thread has ran it's course and that all the analogies in the world will not really switch one member's transmission preferences. After all, that's a pretty expensive change of habit!

For me, it comes down to being more fun to drive a manual. How is it fun? I can't describe it, but it really is. The motion on moving that sweet gearbox, the ability to rev as high as you like (or should I say can?). The ability to smoke the tires at any stoplight you choose. Of course, most, if not all of these things can be done in automatic, but the interaction and enjoyment I get is fantastic.

And, ya know, if one day, there's an SMG transmission option for a future car of mine, I would have to say I'd take the clutch over it. If not, gimme a dummy pedal and a fake shifter between the seats!!!

ClutchPerformer

Actually, i have. I am not from Wisconsin. I just moved here in September for graduate school (that's why I have the "?!" after my location info--it's a big change). I'm originally from the Washington, DC area. We have some of the worst traffic in the nation (yes, worse than Atlanta--I've lived there too by the way). And I drove to and from work in it from the time I got my car to the end of the summer. Yeah, it was a bitch, but not enough to make me buy an automatic tranny. The fact that the clutch pedal is so light on the TSX relieves some of those stop-and-go issues.

Yes, I realize that. But that wasn't my point at all. We were talking about performance driving, I think.....

ClutchPerformer

Before we start, this is my last post on the subject. These guys are right about this getting blown out of proportion and you disagreed (kinda) with my prime assumption (that being fully driven is not fun).

Of course I realize this. I know all about this car. The fact is that it's not conceivable (or even possible) to control everything which is computer controlled on a 2004 vehicle. But it still is possible to control my transmission and clutch application. And as a matter of fact, I don't LIKE the drive-by-wire throttle. It makes the throttle knife-edged and the car gets jerky when the gas pedal is lifted/reapplied, especially in the lower gears.

I could say the same thing about a shift.

AHA! Why do you need it checked by a person? Machines are better, right? Precision! Precision! Actually, I'm pretty sure that humans no longer design automatic transmissions. The mechanical "circuits" are too complicated. But we don't design a lot of stuff by hand nowadays.

....and this is why we can never agree and I'm finished discussing this.

OK, One last question: do you know how to drive stick?

schalliol

Agreed. I don't think there's a debate that sometimes it's nice not to have to shift, right? Example, bumper to bumper. It's more about the "recreational" driving, or other circumstances than the bothersome shifts.

At least I'm trying to figure out why shifting (exclusively) is something that people like to do over a semi-auto/auto system that's just as fast, since there are other things on the car that could be done instead of the computers that currently do. I think you guys just like the ritual of it, just like my grandma that doesn't use her dishwasher. Both she and the mechanical washer have about the same performance at cleaning dishes, but it makes her feel like she accomplished something her way. I assert this because it seems that we established that a SMG system with auto mode (like the current - maybe next gen BMW version) can shift with the same performance and precision of a person, want to correct me?

ClutchPerformer

Nope. I'm just like your grandma.

Answer my question!

fdl

Wow... this thread exploded.


Anyways ... I think I said this before ... but driving a manual is not just about performance..its about being "connected" to the car. Having maximum control. The more control you have, the more engaging the experince, and the better the experience (for those who love the MT). Its about driving the car, and not having the car drive you.

Someone brought up the point of..."well how about this and that that is controlled by a computer". Dont compare apples to oranges. If its something that is not part of the actuall driving of the car (accel, decel, steering, etc) then I dont care. And as for DBW throttle...I prefer not to have in the sense that it takes something away from teh driving experience, but at least it tries very hard to mimic a cable throttle and its a small price to pay for the added saftey of VSA.

So for me..its not about...how fast you can shift. Its about being one with the car.

schalliol

I didn't see your post when last I posted. My grandma, unlike you apparently, can read though : Agreed. I guess people just aren't able to tell me why the transmission is key when there are other parts of the car that a person could tweek to make the car run just as they like it. Since this was your last post here, let's look at fdl's thoughts on this:

I argue that at this inflection point the transmission is not part of driving the car, with perhaps exception of wanting to choose a different gear. I see no reason why a shift shouldn't be done in an instant. What possible advantage do you have of not shifting in a smooth instant (hell, use SMG's super-fast shifts or more relaxed shifts, there are options), and as well, for the reasons I indicated, it takes away some of your physical and mental capabilities from being fully observant and able to deal with evasive action. I can see that you want to feel part of the car, by replicating something that a computer can do as well or better than you can. More power to ya, we don't need everything to be automated and if it makes you feel good to replace the electronic controls with yourself, regardless of other costs, do it.I feel the same way, I just don't feel the need to run those shifts myself when it adds nothing for me to dethrottle, clutch, shift, throttle & clutch, beyond the shift.Agreed, I was debating to put in the human check, but at this juncture it takes to get to 6 sigma quality.Well, they don't do it just on pen and paper, but most certainly people pick various components and what they do.

Ok, so with all of this and wrapping up the original question, how about another question: In 10 years, will >5% of cars have what we would consider a manual transmission? I argue no. This doesn't attest to being better or anything, but just what people will chose. I think that the argument for a number of people is the performance and beyond the inflection point I mentioned, there will only be the true manualists, as I'm calling them, buying the type of transmission in the TSX's MT.

Ahh, interesting stuff. Most certainly there are a small number of people willing to discuss the philosophy of the transmissions, I'm in the right place!

fdl

See you still dont get it. When I control the shifts..i can feel the engine engage and feed the power to the wheels in just the way I want. So its a feeling..and its the control. When I let go off the gas...i can feel the engine braking.....I am connected...I can gear down and up as quickly..or as slowly as I want. SOmetiems I want to down shift slowly...let the clutch out easy, etc.

I dont want a computer to drive my car..I want to drive it. What if we had computers to control the steering too (lets just say somehow it was technically possible) would you want that? I want to drive my car.... and I want to feel like I am driving it.

EDIT: When I drove an AT...it was so numb. It involved no thought really. With a MT you are forced to think..(what gear are you in, what gear will you need to be in 100 meters ahead. etc)

Dan Martin

I Agree. You are definitely more aware of road conditions when driving a manual than you are in an AT.

schalliol

I do get what you're saying, I just believe that the control you're getting is a false sense. It becomes artificial in regards to control the shift. What possible extra control do you have when you feel the engine breaking or hit the gas in a certain combination of letting out the clutch that you can't achieve with the auto-stick, besides something like spinning your tires or putting excess strain by popping the clutch. Again, it's taking away some of the control of the rest of the car and I'm pretty positive on the course I mentioned before over the mountains that the AT TSX will win. If this is the case and you have so much control, what are you doing with it? Why don't you want to be able to have control over how the power is distributed to each individual drive wheel? That would certainly help. What if you had a semi auto transmission that allowed you to (easily - same effort as the std. manual shift) distribute power to each of the 2 (or 4 if you want AWD) wheels. I argue that this control on the fly would be much more real control than when the clutch is in and when it isn't.

So, on to the feeling: it appears that the feeling is just something that exists without a function. Form going against function if you will. If you're ok with form going against function to an extreme, fine, have all the feeling you like.Nor I.[/QUOTE]What if we had computers to control the steering too (lets just say somehow it was technically possible) would you want that? I want to drive my car.... and I want to feel like I am driving it.[/QUOTE]You do know that we have power steering, right? I don't think you're complaining about that, but the idea of power steering is like "power shifting," it's not instrumental to driving, but of course steering and adjusting velocity/accel. are.

schalliol

That's just up to you. If you want to be lax about your driving you can be in either situation, but it's insane to suggest that someone driving a manual (with more they have to do) can be more aware of road conditions than someone with an AT because the MT driver has to do more things and has to multi-task (multitasking has been proven to reduce efficiency overall). Maybe that's how you drive when you drive an AT, but it's probably because you're numbed because the "feeling" indicated here is not present. Like when I am walking around without my keys, I feel like there's something missing and I'm distracted.

Dan Martin

That's an interesting view and it may have some merit.

The one thing that stands out in your reply is the "with more they have to do" part. MT drivers have more to do because they have to react to differing road conditions. If you are driving up hill in an AT you probably wouldn't think twice about it. However, if you were to go up the same hill in a MT you would likely realize the loss of power and instinctively downshift. The difference is the MT forces you to be more aware of road not less aware of it.

fdl

What if we had computers to control the steering too (lets just say somehow it was technically possible) would you want that? I want to drive my car.... and I want to feel like I am driving it.[/QUOTE]You do know that we have power steering, right? I don't think you're complaining about that, but the idea of power steering is like "power shifting," it's not instrumental to driving, but of course steering and adjusting velocity/accel. are. [/QUOTE]


Like I said, you just dont get it. If you dont understand what advantages you gain from what I said I am not going to explain it. If AT are so great then why dont race cars use them? That alone is enough proof to my point. Even F1 which is the bleeding edge of technology they use sequential manuals ( oua re still "connnected" but there is no clutch). This is the ultimate in performance, but lacks some of the fun that comes with a clutch.

Or why is it that the mt versions of so many new cars are the "sport" versions. They come with the race suspension, brakes, etc. mt is the enthusiest choice...is the choice for those who want to DRIVE.

And how can you compare power steering to what we are talking about? Thats completely differnt. Its just power assist..which means its not as stiff. And there are things called "steering feel" and steering feedback"...the more of which account for a more sporting experience. Besides, how does another "bad" thing help your argument?

Look I am not saying AT is bad..i have said on another thread i see it as a LUXURY feature. Its just not sporty. Its one more buffer between you and the car. If you see no value in being connected to the car, feeling what it is doing, actually having the car almost be an organic extension to you, then you just arent going to get it. Its about teh experince, its about the fun to drive, its about teh ART.

vwong

Clutch asked you if you know how to drive stick. I remember from another post of yours, you mentioned that you know how to drive stick. Now my question to you is, how competent are you with MT? and how long have (or had) you been driving MT? I have couple of friends who claim to know how to drive stick, but in reality, they only know how a MT car is being driven. The moment they jump into a MT car, they just stalled the car and couldn't even get out of the parking lot.

Aside from "control" stuffs, do you know that most of the AT version of a car will see lower hp at the wheels? Just do a search in the Performance forum on "dyno". Both MT and AT TSX's have the same hp rating (at the crank) from the factory...200hp, but the AT saw something in the 150hp range at the wheels while the MT saw near 170hp at the wheels. You mentioned something about AT being efficient, does this hp difference sounds efficient to you?

schalliol

I did explicitly state that there's an advantage to being able to select your gear. I do agree that you are more disconnected from the driving when using an AT or SMG in fully auto mode. And at the present time only F1 racers really have the performance, if you read all I said the SMG in the BMW doesn't quite match the perfomance.As far as I know there is no SMG or AT in a road car that is faster than a manual when the manual driver is pushing it to extremes. When we talk about tenths of a second for 0-60 or 0-100 times, that matters, and a car can have better times with the MT, which is why (primarily) I believe this is why the sport versions have them. BMW 5 series for example: The auto version of the 540i (540iA) (at least in 2000) had a standard AT shifter, but the sport version of said product had a semi-auto, like the TSX. However, the M series (fastest) only came with a manual, and it appears (like the M3) will be offered with SMG for the new model year. I have no doubt people feel that MT is sportier for the reasons you indicate, though sport is defined by the racing sport, the pinnicle being F1 - SMG. However, just because you can get a 911 Turbo with an Auto/sport doesn't mean that it's a smart decision by the automaker. Certainly there are people who have the money and want to spend it on a fast car and couldn't care less how it drives, so I'm not sure that branding something sport means that it's sporty at any rate (ground effects like AMG's on MB Sport Versions don't really make much difference for example).I'm using it as an example of what you are permitting in your car you want to feel totally connected with. If you aren't concerned with the power assist, then it's not a big leap to power shift, either way, you command a response and you get it. Really high-end sports [road] cars lack the power assist.I agree with you about it being related to "art" (def. up for consideration at another time), but I'm arguing that you're willing to disconnect yourself for other reasons and the clutch/gas shifting is no different. I don't know how many times I said that I feel about it in this way, many, I just believe you have a false impression of your manual clutch's value.

schalliol

A good question. I'm no Andretti family member, but I can hold my own. I've had several years of on and off driving of MTs, so I am sure that it's more second nature to you, but I'm not going to stall it!!If you look back at my posts, you'll see that I speak of an inflection point coming in the future where an MT will be slower than an Auto/SMG in our cars. However, I do know for sure that the AT is a lot slower in the TSX. I spoke of the future because the original poster was asking about whether the MT was a "dying art." As the AT TSX lacks in performance over the MT, there's no question to me which is more sporty (going fast nearly (there's more to it of course) defines the auto racing sport) and connected as a result. I'm talking about when (not if) your calcs. are reversed. Of course the extra gear helps too. Does that answer your question?

fdl

Well. this guy just doesnt get it..and never will get it.

When race cars and sports cars start having automatics only then you will have a point, but i'm afraid in all your posting you still havent said much.

In fact you proved what I am saying by agreeing that high-end race cars would not have power assist. (Although an AT is still much more disengaging that power steering!). So the less assistance you have the more sporting the drive. So the question is..how involved, from an enthusiest and sporty perspecitive, do you want to get in the driving experience? And AT is one more level away from this experience.

If you see a car as a transportation device for getting you from a to b in the most effficient and easiest way possible (which you obviously do), then you are not going to understand.

What do you think an f1 driver, or nascar driver, or cart driver drive on their own time? I'll guarentee you a MT. What do auto journalists always drool over and want to test...the MT version. I guess they are all wrong!

schalliol

Gee, I wouldn't have expected a moderator to get so bent out of shape and defensive when we are talking about the future of transmissions. I assumed that you would read the posts I have been making before commenting: I am indeed referring to this time. We're talking about "a dying art," and whether that is the case. This is not a "now" only discussion. I know I stated this more than once. Moreover, I also noted SMGs or semi-autos (sure they can have a full auto mode for those L.A. rush hours-like BMW's SMG II/future SMGs) was primarily what I was referring to. I have no argument that the ability to decide the gear you like has an advantage. Please read the post, I also stated this more than once.I don't believe I said it was away from the experience, but rather more disconnected from the operation of the car. Whether I did or not, my point is that you all accept power assist now, which was greeted by a similar "not for me in my sporty car" view originally, but has filtered to all but the most extreme cars. My assertion is that we will get to that point where the standard clutching MT will be rare. Many people will be used to the MT beyond the inflection point where cars mainly shift to SMG for a manual transmission, and perhaps will continue to want a standard MT until that generation of people stop buying cars, so this could delay the process.

It may be obvious to you, but you are incorrect. Obviously cars can be used to get you from a to b, but I love driving and spend a great time doing it with no destination in mind, for the enjoyment of the drive. In fact, I work at home and have no normal commute at all. Heck, I don't even really need a car for purposes other than my passion to drive, I could borrow my wife's in the time I need one to get from a to b if I didn't care. Just because you see MT as the only way to drive, doesn't mean that you can make such assumptions about others and assume that you will be correct.I don't know, Mario seemed pretty excited about MB's SL 55 AMG and the BMW's M3 SMG… We're not to that inflection point anyway. I know that the journalists like MTs, but I think that part of the reason is because of the better perfomance. What do you think they'll do when the 2008(?) M3 SMG shifts faster than they can by a half second or so? Do you really think they'll ask for the slower car? If yes, there is a line where this will have to change (is it a .5 second lag, a 1 second lag?). I firmly believe that when we look back at this thread when the next generation TSX is out that there will be a number of big-time SMG lovers in the auto press. Also transmission gears are increasing and even 7-speed transmissions auto & SMG are now out/coming out. The difference will be amplified as this increases.

fdl

I am not bent out of shape at all. Just frustrated by your ignorance.

And we need to clarify something...the high tech sequential manual transmissions on sports cars..are not ATs! Yes..I agree..this is the future. The manual from an F1 car makes it to the street car. This is the future ... but its still a manual transmission! Its not just a faster shifting version of the sport shift in your acura. Its a true clutchless manual transmission. Whereas your sport shift is just an AT than you can ask to change gears for you. And I also agree that we will get to a point when the standard clutch manual will be rare. But there will still be manual trannies. See my point? Your definition of AT and MT are a little off.

As for you enjoying your drive in your AT. Yes you can enjoy your drive..just as my grandmother enjoys riding the bus sometimes. But there are different levels of driving enjoyment, and my point is some people enjoy a more engaginging experiece..where they are connected to the car, and have abolute control. Car and drive r become one. Its an art...and a sheer pleasure when mastered. But ya..there is still pleasure in just steering the car...but thats not my point.

EDIT: And what does me being a mod have to do with anything? I love a good heated argument as much as the next guy. Bring it on.

schalliol

I know this and stated it in one of my first posts, but I can clarify since you didn't understand me: I know that there is a difference from an auto with the ability to say (go up, or go down), like the Acura, and Ferrari's and BMW's SMGs, which I refer to as SMG because they are sequential manuals, but you don't have to hit the clutch with your foot. The "sport shift" is really just an auto that functions like the old auto boxes you see most places that contain gear points that allow you not to exceed a specific gear, but can go to a lower one, except that they allow you to stick to the gear you select and have an easy motion to change (BMW has had an auto gearbox, I think just discontinued, with an A & M button that was not the "sport shift" style, but rather a more crude version of the sport shift functionality in a standard configuration. At least BMW's SMG (don't know about Ferrari or the other MFGrs) has a full auto mode. With this full auto mode it can behave in a way that seems similar to a standard automatic, just because you don't have to do something to allow it to switch gears. I think this is where I confused you.Great! You agree with my principal point!Yeah, there will for quite some time for the reason I mentioned.Ouch. I believe that I get at least as much of pleasure out of driving as someone with a manual would. I believe I am just as engaged and just as in control. I have better control in some respects (awareness, extra mental and physical bandwidth, and a greater capacity to respond to dramatic changes) and you have better control in others (ability to choose what gear you want to be in more precisely). If you come to the bay area, we can run times in the course I mentioned and I guarantee I'd win because you simply can't take the corners and elevation changes at as high rate of speed while you "have your control" because you'd need to be maximizing your gearing all the time and it would be inadvisable not to have two hands on some of the corners (well, we'd want to make sure that there aren't cars, it's 1 lane in some places). If you're so in control and "one with the car", why would you be slower?

Just seems that the statement was intended to be derogatory.

Well, so, it seems that you prefer a different control than I, but would lack some other control by taking your different control. However, it sounds like we're in agreement, aside from that preference, and we both needed to clarify some things. As you can see my posts get kind of long, so I try not to get into too much detail, but it was good that I clarified.

Soooo, poidra02, to your question from the original post on this thread. The consensus seems to be that the conventional manual tranny is a dying "art," and will be replaced by sequential manuals (most will have switches to enable a fully-automatic mode unless they delete those for "non-sporty" connotations), but at least for decades (assuming conventional cars exist) the conventional manual will be around, though with greatly reduced numbers. Saying this though is dated several years in the future, when SMGs offer measurably better performance at a low cost.

vwong

Just want to emphasize what fdl said about sequential tranny is still a manual transmission. The following quote was taken from HowStuffWorks site in How Sequential Gearboxes Work article, here's the link, http://auto.howstuffworks.com/sequential-gearbox.htm.

"A sequential manual transmission is not to be confused with a "tiptronic" sort of automatic transmission. The tiptronic system may duplicate the shift lever motion of a sequential gearbox. However, because a tiptronic transmission is an automatic transmission at its core, it still has the torque converter and usually does not shift as quickly."

Here's my view on the future. MT will never die as long as auto racing is present. AT with Tiptronic/Sport Shift/SMG...whatever you call it, is just a "convenient" feature. I don't see how this "convenient" feature will go along with racing.

fdl

Thanks for the definition vwong. That is exactly the distiction I am trying to make.

And as for beating me with your AT thorugh the moutains. How do you figure this is possible? I will be able to be at just the right rpms at all times. You see once you master the "art" ..it becomes second nature and you just need to think about it and it happens. I will always be in the "sweet spot"., and will have more fun doing it

schalliol

Looks like you posted after I did, but didn't get a chance to read my reply to him. I agree 100%, tiptronic, autostick, sport shift, is not SMG.I too doubt that there will be an automatic mode for the SMG in racing, but the conventional clutch people are saying they want (what creates most of this "art" in shifting) will be missing. Just don't try to tell me that when you're in a 3 hour traffic jam that you wouldn't flip that SMG into an auto mode it will probably have in the future (like BMW's in the M3).

vwong

Just by your statement above, I can tell that you're not competent in driving a MT car. A competent MT driver will have no problem maneuvering (with both hands on the steering wheel) and shifting on the twisties. Hmm...wonder if you've watched the Driving Impression video from vtec.net?

schalliol

I stated this in one of my original posts in this thread. It is VERY curvy, almost all are hairpin on the edge of cliffs without guard rails, and it also goes up and down dramatically with almost every curve. I figure that this is possible because I can have two hands to be able to have more control around corners and more mental faculties available for reacting, as well as the ability to avoid shifting manually every few seconds. I simply don't believe you have mastered it to the point where you always will pick the right gear, where you could gain advantage (if you didn't go off the cliff).You just never learn, do you? I only mean this when taken to extremes, on a road where every few seconds the elevation and road orientation change dramatically not the PCH or something easy like that.Nope. Do you recommend it? If so, why? EDIT: The search function is disabled, got a tip on where to find it?

fdl

The fact that it is very curvy and has varied elevations is MORE reason why the MT will be superior. You can get into the perfect gear as you enter a turn and stay in it. You will always have one hand on the wheel, and both hands 99% of the time, plus staying in the sweet spot of your cars engine. So you will always have maximum power. The AT will be all over the map when braking and accelerating in and through turns, wheare the MT will stay in the right place (Assuming the driver is skilled enough). You've got to at least use the sport-shift if you want to make it close, and then you too will be taking your hands off the wheel.

I really think you are giving too much credit to the AT. It does a decent job for normal driving..but in a perfromance situation it will be extremely inefficient. Thats why you have the "sport"-shift.

I think you would really love the Audi CVT transmission!

schalliol

Perhaps so, it's a good AT, but an AT. My "bet" was predicated on a judgement on your driving abilities, which I judged to be quite a bit better than average, but that very very few people would be able to fully challenge that road at the limits of your traction (man, I loved my Bridgestone Potenza A•03 Pole Position Tires, sigh, at least these will get 2x the miles, work in snow and not cost >$250/tire ).

I would like to add that there is a learning curve with the sport shift. It of course has loads of lag and shifting sequentially up and down by tapping through the stick only 1/2" is much stranger (for me) than using a conventional MT, but I've not had a car with sport shift like this kind before. Paddle mounted for sequential makes so much more sense to me. We'll see when I've had this car more miles (I got #12555 on the last day of August). Not a fan, I don't know, maybe. I like the idea of CVT, but like my "keys not in the pocket analogy" it's not at all comfortable to me and I feel the urge to force it to shift in certain situations, which you can't do (right?). I think over time I'd get used to it, but I'd need more drives with one.

BTW, fdl, it's nice that you guys get more features for less $ up there in CAN (or so I'm told it's less). If there's not a post on that, I'll post one soon - I'd love to get heated mirrors at least (I might move back to Indiana, which "lets" you have frozen mirrors for a few months).

fdl

Ya..we've got a few little things extra like heated mirrors, low winshield washer inidicator, and daytime running lights. We also have the white with ebony which alot of people want.

But on the other hand we cant get carbon grey, meteor silver, quartz interior, and and also can get a navigation system.

schalliol

Yup, not to get too off topic, but in case someone finds this in a search, here's an old ClubTSX page: http://www.clubtsx.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=4825

fdl

I think there was a similar thread here too. I dont feel like looking for it though

vwong

I'm not talking about some easy roads like PCH either.

This must be a tire of your own. Never heard of A03. I assume you're referring to the S-03, if so I don't think they'll provide good traction for you in the snow. Afterall, these are summer only tires.

schalliol

Right you are! a typo here with the "A" next to the "S".

My point exactly. I had them on my old car. I think you misheard me. I spoke past tense about those tires and then said "at least these will get 2x the miles, work in snow and not cost >$250/tire." They're actually 3-season tires, rain is fine, just not snow (or as you know on the coast in CA, all-season tires). Thanks for the clarification on the tire.

fdl

What's PCH?