Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
One thing I look forward to is the 110 miles downgrade coming down out (7,200 ft) of Lake Tahoe, CA to sea level. Now grant you, it is hard to keep a steady 85/90, but if you just let it coast you can surely do 65/70 mph.
Survey. Automatic transmission preferences for a manual-transmission person:
Favorite: old-school hydraulic/lockup-torque converters.
Hated it: CVT. (had minicooper with CVT in the househould)
It would also appear that the diesel has the slight advantage on the downgrade also (given Volkov's post of strong engine braking on a DSG) as it has WAY reduced engine braking (TDI/DSG combination).
There are old fashioned ATs I've driven that were good and others which I hated. Same goes for MT. 4sp in my wife's 88 Tercel and the 91 Pathfinder were awful - my 89 Civic was sweet.
For driving experience I would probably take the DSG as it does allow semi-manual driving.
In the twenty minutes I drove a 2011 Legacy Limited (EJ25 w/ CVT), I found it to be a very nice automatic transmission. It was far smoother than any other I had ever driven, with ample and responsive power delivery. Of course, it also had paddle shifters, which I used for part of the drive, and those allowed for mimicking the familiarity of a "regular" automatic.
Taking nothing else into consideration (towing, durability, etc), I would prefer that transmission over the 4EAT previously offered with that engine.
Toyota MR2 SMG was a close 2nd.
I think the automated manuals are the worst, neither here nor there, expensive, not smooth, etc.
M's head of engineering, Albert Biermann, admitted this week that there were no plans to fit three pedals in the next-generation M6 and M5 because the order rate was too low to justify the added work."
BMW Official Says No Manual Transmission for Next M5 (Inside Line)
The day can't be that far off when the WRX and the Corvette are CVT-only (with totally crappy electric steering of course, because saving that extra gallon of gas per year really was THAT important).....but what does it matter, by then everyone will be plugging in their destinations on their touch-screen interface and answering e-mail while the computer guides the car....since no-one will be driving anyway, what difference does it make what transmission choices we have?
Sigh.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
FWIW, I'm 5 days into giving up my 3rd pedal for an Audi with a DSG and I sure don't miss it.
To me anymore, I pretty much go effortlessly between 4 speed slush boxes, 6 speed manual, 5 speed manual, and 8 speed automatic and 6 speed DSG.
I've already lept, and yes of course I have many reasons.
1. My wife can't drive manual. She has no interest in learning, and I have no interest in her burning up the stock clutch in my Evo. (Which is a 5 speed, not 6, and has 107k miles.)
2. Our other car is a Suzuki Grand Vitara V6 4WD with 5 speed slushbox. It works fine, but the DSG is highly superior. Just one example of why-- cruising RPM @ 80 mph is 2500 vs 3400.
I've noticed that many vehicles that still offer a manual but come standard with an automatic let you switch to the manual as a zero cost option. The automatics cost more, so this switch is pure profit to the manufacturer!
Equal - maybe in some extreme cases, but superior - not too sure.
VW DSG for example is considerably slower and uses more fuel than their manual (per consumer reports tests).
Not too concerned about M5 losing a stick. A 3 series losing the stick would concern me though.
Very happy to see Honda offering a stick on several models of the upcoming accord.
A DSG or similar technologies under other names is superior to a manual in the following ways:
- There are two input and output shafts, and the one which is not in use is pre-selecting the next gear. If you're decelerating or coasting, it will preselect a lower gear (5 to 4 for example). If you're accelerating, it will select a higher gear.
- When it comes time to shift, if the pre-selected gear is correct, you have milliseconds of shift time. No human can shift a single clutch manual so fast. This directly results in DSGs besting the acceleration times of manual transmissions, often by .2 to .3 seconds 0-60 and obviously larger gaps as you go through more gears (quarter mile, 0-100, etc).
- Nearly all DSGs rev-match downshifts. Very, very few manual transmission drivers do this at all, and even fewer do it effectively.
- A DSG never selects a truly improper gear. I haven't driven a 7 speed manual, but I've driven a 6 and it's all too possible to find the wrong gear especially when downshifting. I'm sure there are a few perfect humans out there who have never done this, and there are many more who will never admit to having done this.
Here's the only ways a manual is superior--
1) cheaper
2) lighter
3) subjectively, some drivers like them better.
On #3, get real. If you want to truly accomplish something under your own power, try a bicycle. :P
Ford and VW DSG are way behind the performance of a manual. :P
really, you just like them better. that is fine. it's not technically correct to say they are better, other than weight and cost.
Indeed, Ferrari does not make its own "DSG" (SMT) transmission but the uses a vendor (Getrag) . Borg Warner did a lot of the initial work.
Here is just one article about the DSG.
Invented in 1935?
Another DSG- dual clutch transmission
Now since MOST cars in the US are equipped with so called SLUSH BOX A/T's (a tad less than 80% with app 20% being manual and an unknown percentage (not really measurable) as "other", i.e., CVT. The CVT not well accepted nor popular) The real issue which is probably HUGE, but goes largely unnoticed and unheralded is: it is WAY better than the normal and ubiquitous SLUSH BOX A/T. Noteworthy is better mpg, which is probably a driver, toward. dual clutch applications.
So if you come at it from a European perspective where most (90%) cars are equipped with M/T's, then who really knows why a European would buy a dual clutch transmission, aka MINUS 3rd pedal? It would be an exception, not the rule.
It is really hard to demonstrate an apples to apples comparison because there are no oem's that do all three transmissions. So for example, it is pretty easy to show the difference between A/T and M/T, ala 03 TDI @ 39.7 (real world)and @ 46.5 mpg, the M/T getting 17.1% better mpg. (EPA is different also)
FF to same engine 2.0L TDI (VW Jetta 09 TDI) but DSG 6 speed/M-T 6 speed . So by INFERENCE when we compare a 6 speed M/T (41 mpg real world) against a 6 speed DSG (39.6 mpg real world) we see that both the EPA and probably more importantly the real world are very close. (www.fueleconomy.gov)
Indeed VW (inference) has done WAY better using the DSG vs slush box AT (as shown by Real World numbers) going from 17.1% to 3.5% differences (less difference)
It is also logical (lots of reasons) the MT is capable of greater RANGE of mpg than the DSG.
Curious-- have you visited Europe lately, or driven there? It's not 90% manual that I saw. There unquestionably are a lot more manuals than the US and Canada, but 90% cannot be correct.
A lot of the little cars have CVTs. Some of the big cars have automatics.
Driving in traffic is tons easier with any form of automatic, and the large cities have plenty of traffic.
Well I think the same could be said about the death of M/T in the US. The actual population is @ 20% even as if the perception is dead to dying. Obviously it is not. That percentage actually had to be gleaned. IF the NHTS agency knows the numbers they are certainly keeping it off line.
In the 6 years since then, surely it has decreased. 2013 Audi S4 and S5 are DSG-only in Europe for 2013.
Plus as I said before, CVTs are increasingly popular on tiny cars because of the superior mpg. It's enough to overcome the cheapness of a manual, with high fuel costs.
1) cheaper
2) lighter
3) subjectively, some drivers like them better.
Generally you make good points, but another factor has to do with maintainability and the cost/hassle of repair. The new alphabet-soup transmissions are complex beyond anything done previously and often can't be repaired at all by anyone but the OEM -- you remove and replace the whole damn thing, assuming there's a replacement available.
And, at what cost and delay?
That's my #4.
Manual transmissions are stone simple and rarely break. The clutch may need replacement from time to time, and most mechanics can figure out how to do it.
Some of the new stuff doesn't even have replacement hardware available in the field for the first weeks & months. If your magic transmission packs up, you're in a loaner.
Again, it is the same situation (only a micro) with CVT's. Again real percentages would add to the discussion. I could say that 100% of Z06's come with 6 speed manuals. I'd be 100% correct. SO WHAT !!?? ..., in the over all scheme of things, absolutely meaningless.
I guess less and less people, enthusiasts included, do "get it" about the joy of having a manual transmission, and if a racetrack advantage (where most drivers will never drive their car) of 0.03 milliseconds is the way we will celebrate the rise of the DSG, then the manual is already lost. For now it seems support of the automatic is at less than 50% at TFOTMT, which will give me some pale comfort, but I can see it is changing quickly.... :-(
But hey, the FRS and BRZ have launched, and at least they offered it initially with a proper 6-speed manual, eh? Will it last? The tC still offers a manual after (6?) years, which I will take as a good sign. ;-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
That's at least half incorrect. I've read the Ford DSG is pretty miserable, but the VW unit has proven quicker than its manual counterpart.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
On the other hand, let me call your attention to the VW line, particularly the Passat. The Passat is hardly an "exotic" offering, even as it does have "exotic options, TDI, DSG, in a so called family sedan. One of its target markets is the ubiquitous Toyota Camry/Honda Accord, etc., etc., field, to name two competitors. Anybody who has tried to buy either or both in a 6 speed M/T has probably had a tough go of it. Yet there is not a model of Passat that does not offer a 6 speed M/T.
Putting aside the few people that track a car (and even auto-X to a large degree, since you don't drive flat out), how many people normally do clutch drops (or brake torque an AT), run it to redline in all the gears, slam off speed shifts, etc. around town or in normal driving?
I tended to take it relatively easy on my trans and clutch, and when driving an AT I also am not looking for it to be banging off 6K shifts all the time. So the "real world" advantage is going to be pretty negligible.
So, to me, the real argument is about feel, control, extreme conditions. But mostly the experience (just liking to shift) 99% of the time.
and after 30+ years driving a stick, I will say you can be just as distracted (and multi-tasking) with a manual if you want to. Just takes a little more dexterity!
Oh, and I also know plenty of people that drive a stick, and I don't think it made them any better of a driver (adding the component of having to remember to shift gears on occasion). They did not suddenly know how to drive situationally, or become more aware. Or learn real car control. being in the wrong gear all the time is not really an art form.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I know that guy's like you have probably read about the DSG, but for the general discussion, DSG (in my mind) has pros and cons. It is a dual clutch system so they can and do wear out. The hope is of course after several hundred thousand miles. It is COSTLY to both service / repair/ rehab them. When you compare it to a R/R clutch, it sports a factorial extra cost. You can do the rocket/ricer racer gig: shift like you have A.D.D :P You do not have a 3rd pedal, and what that means to a slush box A/T driver. It gets way better fuel mileage than an A/T. Now the important part is the computer and DSG conspire if you will (got to keep the host intrigued) to value add over the slush box, in the mpg dept. It also has matching EPA C/H to a M/T.
Range of a M/T, anecdotally is much greater. Indeed on a Passat TDI, the "Taylors" did 84 mpg plus (on a EPA H of 43 mpg) @ 5 under the speed limit and for a whole tank full, posting 1600 + miles. (6 speed M/T) I do not think the DSG could even come close. If it could I am sure they would have done it.
All that is really left is the ability to rev the engine and the joy of rowing your own gears.
Here's my oh-so-horrible DSG equipped car. Just terrible! :P
I suppose those same people still write letters on paper and put them in envelopes too. :shades:
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
A DSG would not be a cheap transmission to repair. No problem on a used Ferrari, but on a used Ford you might as well just junk the car if that tranny goes south on you.
I'd imagine that even a good low miles DSG is going to cost you as much as a used engine.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Greater supply always lowers prices unless that supply doesn't outdistance demand.