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.
Options

The Future Of The Manual Transmission

19394969899205

Comments

  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    I still think a real manual transmission with a shifter and clutch pedal will become the province of very low-cost cars and specialized sports cars because twin-clutch sequential manuals have advanced enough they could become effective replacements for conventional manuals.

    Besides the efforts of BMW and Porsche recently, Ford is heavily investing in DCT technology, possibly that by the 2011 calendar year we could see Ford's Powershift six-speed DCT offer on every model from the entry-level Ka all the way up to large SUV's powered by turbodiesel engines. Because DCT avoids the inefficiency of a torque converter, it means better fuel economy, especially with highway driving.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    OK, here's a question:

    As more gears are added to the power band to take advantage of the power and also add efficiency, how many gears does it take before manually shifting becomes illogical?

    Eight, nine, ten?

    Regards,
    OW
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 265,497
    Yeah.. I get that.. City driving is where it shines.. amazingly so..

    But, if you rack up really big fuel bills, chances are you have a long commute, and that means a lot of highway driving (hard to run up the miles going stoplight to stoplight)..

    So.. that was my point about the highway mileage... The hybrid powertrain doesn't have a whole lot to do with it..

    The stuff that BMW is doing is very cool.. Like, a disconnect at cruising speed, so the engine isn't constantly charging the battery... They say that can save 8-10% on highway mileage.

    But, getting back on topic (mea culpa)... the Prius doesn't come with a stick.. :(

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    I still think a real manual transmission with a shifter and clutch pedal will become the province of very low-cost cars and specialized sports cars because twin-clutch sequential manuals have advanced enough they could become effective replacements for conventional manuals.

    Except for they currently are more expensive than a conventional automatic which is still more expensive than a conventional manual. People who want an automatic aren't going to pay extra for some silly technology that lets them pretend they are shifting sometimes, and people that want a stick aren't going to want it because it doesn't have a clutch pedal.

    Besides the efforts of BMW and Porsche recently, Ford is heavily investing in DCT technology, possibly that by the 2011 calendar year we could see Ford's Powershift six-speed DCT offer on every model from the entry-level Ka all the way up to large SUV's powered by turbodiesel engines. Because DCT avoids the inefficiency of a torque converter, it means better fuel economy, especially with highway driving.

    Which will make a great automatic transmission, if they can get people to pay for it. Ford North America has a much harder time getting people to pay a premium for new technologies and features than Ford of Europe. The case in point is a Mondeo is a 40k car while the Fusion is a 20k car.
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    Ford's Powershift box is still relatively expensive because only two models--the European Focus and the C-Max--offer it currently. But as production ramps up, expect this new DCT to be widely available on the entire Ford line, including the Ka.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    Yes I saw that posting, but it sounds like the replacement for the automatic, not the manual. Like I said, it is at the very least more complicated than the true manual, and likely more complicated than a standard automatic (although more efficient) so we will see how the costs play out.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I think down the road we will see CVTs replacing the Automatic Transmissions and the DSG style transmissions replacing the MTs.

    Perhaps in very low end cars you may see traditional manuals being offered but, for the most part I think it is a dying breed.

    Heck it's already fairly uncommon to find it as an option really.

    -mike
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    and the DSG style transmissions replacing the MTs.

    But Mike, right now the DSG is even more expensive than a regular automatic. I don't see how that is going to replace something that was cheaper to begin with.

    Not only that, I think the people who care are going to want 3 pedals, and the people who don't care are just going to get a regular automatic.

    The trend (as Boaz likes to point out) is for the driver to have less control over the car (can't really shift, stability control can over-ride driving decisions, etc) and i think this is part of it.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Well the CVT is cheaper, so in effect we will probably see that replace the manual, if you think DSGs will be offered as the standard automatic in all cars.

    And quite frankly, no-one who wants a manual is going to opt for a CVT over a DSG, right? I suppose there will be a few CVT takers to save the $1000 and that will be it. And I will have to learn to live with the DSG, and the enjoyment of my lifelong car hobby will dim from then on. I may buy up a fleet of my favorite cars with manuals so that I never need to buy new again - I can just keep the fleet going in perpetuity.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    "And quite frankly, no-one who wants a manual is going to opt for a CVT over a DSG, right? I suppose there will be a few CVT takers to save the $1000 and that will be it. And I will have to learn to live with the DSG, and the enjoyment of my lifelong car hobby will dim from then on. I may buy up a fleet of my favorite cars with manuals so that I never need to buy new again - I can just keep the fleet going in perpetuity."

    This is how I always pictured you solving the problem. And I believe many manual drivers will do much the same if or when that day ever comes. I also believe the defense of continued manuals is as much a hope as a conviction by many pro manual posters. Manuals have been with us almost from the beginning and it is like watching part of history slipping away. Yes it takes more skill to drive a manual vehicle well than it does to drive an automatic but we live in a society that favors ease far more than it does skill.

    We hear words like, "but I like", or "I prefer" as if the principal of the individual matters one bit to the corporate world. In real life it doesn't. 10 percent may be enough to keep manuals around for a while but if CVT and DSGs make any inroads into the manual market the number can get much lower. If the percentage reaches about 5 percent the trend may be irreversible. I would imagine that long before they stop offering manuals in the US they will become simply options for those who would rather order one. But as we have seen with cars like the CR-V manual customers can fall to a point where they simply don't offer one at all. Manual owners can shrug their shoulders all they want and say they can simply buy another manufacturers vehicle but that isn't always the case.

    As for the CVT, it has the potential to be less expensive and at least as simple as a manual. It would take a lot less skill to drive one and could make single production lines for entry level cars a reality. Some companies are already investing heavily in that direction as we know. Nissan isn't letting any water run under the CVT bridge.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Have you guys seen the Top Gear with the GTR, which coincidentially comes only in a DSG. I'm not talking a shiftable automatic, my 1974 Oldsmobile 98 had a 3-speed shiftable automatic!

    I believe that as time goes on and the Video-game generation becomes the primary sports car buyer, who have grown up driving games that all have DSG transmissions will want these over a traditional manual for performance driving.

    Currently the only MTs on the market really are sports cars, BMWs, and really really cheapo cars, even on cheapo cars, ATs are becoming more and more popular.

    As much as I'd like to see MTs stick around, I think that 10 years down the road they may be museum pieces. :(

    -mike
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Let's not discount the ability of niche automakers to continue manuals ater the really high-volume manfacturers (the so-called Big 6, with VW probably following right behind them) have abandoned them.

    A company (Mazda comes to mind, maybe Subaru also) that sells a couple hundred thousand cars a year is making more individual profits on each one, and as such can afford to offer options more countoured to their fan base.

    For instance, it is really hard for me to imagine a day when Subaru doesn't offer a 3-pedal manual on the WRX, a car with like a 99.999% (yes, I'm exagerating, but it's high) take rate on the manual. Ditto Mazda with the Miata.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I think you'll see it go away quicker than you think, even in the niche market makers. Not as fast but I think it's coming. I have a 5MT in my LGT, but I wouldn't be suprised to see a DSG offered as the "performance" alternative to a CVT 10 years down the road.

    -mikw
  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    "I think you'll see it go away quicker than you think, even in the niche market makers. Not as fast but I think it's coming. I have a 5MT in my LGT, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a DSG offered as the "performance" alternative to a CVT 10 years down the road. "

    I tend to agree. But even as Nippon says that cars like the WRX are mostly manuals just look at what the WRX was supposed to be when they decided to bring it to the US. It was supposed to be a street version of the WRC Subaru. Many of them even made it to the rally groups in the US. But what transmission does the WRC Subaru use? What takes it from the Clark Kent street car to the Superman racer rally machine? Not a third pedal. So if we are talking a true sporting cadre of game boy buyers think how the DSG would play?

    People that buy small entry level commuter cars are mostly point A to point B commuters. Most of those people simply don't care how there car is shifted as long as it gets good mileage and is inexpensive. Nippon and few others might be an exception. My contention is that "real" Sporting enthusiasts are interested in any technology that will give them and edge over their sporting buddies. If the DSG does for them what the SMT and such have done for the fastest racing cars those enthusiasts will bail on the third pedal.

    Traditionalist may not agree and I understand why but every year they come up with better solutions for the connecting of the engine to the drive line in most modern cars. we are seeing 8 speed automatics, CVT, DSGs and they all have drawn interest. Some are pulling for niche markets and that may help manuals as well. But when the economy goes into the tank the niche market suffers and Subaru hasn't been the strongest company in the first place. Mazda isn't exactly free to move into the future by themselves either.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Exactly, the only thing that a Rally Car has to do with a production car is the frame itself. And even that is seamwelded on a rally car!

    :)

    -mike
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    In fact, Ferrari's new California hardtop convertible sports car is their first model to use a true dual-clutch sequential manual as compared to their older one-clutch automated manual. The DCT found on this new car will eventually migrate to their entire sports car line over the next few years.

    If DCT's are being favored by Ferrari and Porsche, then you know that conventional manuals will start to disappear rapidly as production costs fall over the next several years.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 265,497
    Spotted this article in my local paper, this morning.. This link comes from the web, though...

    Mexico fines diesel smugglers

    (Warning: you'll get a couple of innocuous pop-up ads, when clicking on the link)

    So.. I think I may have been correct about it being illegal.. Just got the part about which country considers it illegal wrong...lol

    regards,
    kyfdx

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Is that like the folks using home heating oil in their cars? No road-tax on that fuel.

    -mike
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    Anybody see the article in Consumer Reports about manual transmissions as a logical choice to save fuel. They compare the MT to AT of many popular cars and the difference in mpg and 0-60 times is quite astounding. Usually saving over a second to 60 mph and gaining 3 or more mpg overall.

    For example the 2008 Accord went from 9.8 to 60 down to 8.4 and went from 23 mpg to 26 mpg overall.

    These high gas prices may mean we see more sticks, not fewer.

    Here is the article.

    http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/news/2008/10/save-gas-and-money- - -with-a-stick-shift-10-08/overview/manual-vs-auto-ov.htm
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That's some good press for the manual to a wide audience. Maybe it'll slow the disappearance of this alternative.
  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    I liked reading that article after all the naysayers here had me nearly browbeaten enough to believe that manual trannies rarely yielded any performance or economy benefits anymore.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 265,497
    Speaking of manuals... did you ever pick up your new one?

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    No, I am dying to get it. It is still in Florida and I probably won't be able to get it for another two weeks.
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    I'm embarrassed to admit that I too had accepted as fact that today's automatic transmissions were just as fuel efficient as a manual. While that may indeed be true for some models, CR certainly proved that for a number of popular models, that's not the case.

    I guess this is a good example of the old saying: If you tell a lie often enough, people will eventually start believing it ;)

    -Frank
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Confirms exactly what every fan of the manual already knew: fuel economy will be better with the manual even when the EPA has rated the automatic higher.

    And good God! Look at those acceleration times - more than a second faster to 60 in most cases, and NONE of these are sport models except possibly the Mini. Just IMAGINE how much these automakers could boost their fuel economy if they geared them to be only as fast as the automatic versions!!

    When will they wake up and smell the $4 gas?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    Yes - you can see a little bit of the gearing difference in the chart. Toyota tends to gear their small cars quite tall - not so much different than the automatic verison, and the Scion has the least gain in 0-60 (.7 seconds), but the greatest gain in mpg (5 mpg)

    To get the 0-60 time down to the automatic numbers you could probably put in a smaller more efficient engine and really gain in mpg.

    For example - the manual Civic goes to 60 in 8.6 and the automatic Accord does it in 9.8. If you added 500 lbs to a manual Civic would that 8.6 still be under 9.8? If so that engine in an Accord would offer the acceleration of the automatic with mpg that is significantly imporved (somewhere between the 31 mpg of the Civic MT and the 26 mpg of the Accord MT)

    Now the Civic 1.8 may not be the ideal choice - I only mention it because Honda makes both vehicles and they were both on the chart. A 2.0 or 2.2 liter engine in an Accord may be a better choice and could offer astounding mpg for the size vehicle while still beating the typical Accord (with an AT) to 60 mph.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,669
    I've touched on this before but the truth is there is no statistically significant difference in the mileage ratings of manual and A/T versions of the same car/engine combo.

    As for the differences in gearing, most of that one second advantage in 0-60 times would disappear if taller final drives were introduced into manual versions.

    Do you think anyone can detect a one second difference in 0-60 times except with a stopwatch?

    There are lots of good reasons to prefer a manual over an auto but mileage and acceleration times are no longer a factor.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    In a friendly way, I'd like to assert that you've gone loco. Any enthusiast worth his salt can detect a one second difference in 0-60 times. For example, you can't detect that a Corvette is faster than a Mustang GT?

    Also, if taller final drive ratios were introduced into manual versions, they would increase their highway MPG. That's the point.
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    There are lots of good reasons to prefer a manual over an auto but mileage and acceleration times are no longer a factor.

    Everything I've read or experienced personally is the complete opposite. While the two may be much closer these days, there is still a difference. For example, when I test drove an auto and stick Accord back to back a couple of years ago the acceleration and response was very different in the manual.

    Sounds like CR would disagree with you too. ;)
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    Also, if taller final drive ratios were introduced into manual versions, they would increase their highway MPG.

    I agree. Highway mileage is very close and sometimes actually better in the auto because of the taller gearing. City and overall mileage is better in the manual.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    "Do you think anyone can detect a one second difference in 0-60 times except with a stopwatch? "

    Interesting since the I4 MT Accord is only 1 second slower (7.4 vs. 8.4 using CR numbers again) than the AT V-6. Not much point in the V-6 then is there - probably can't tell the difference. ;)

    As far as taller final drives go - there is a magic bullet. No need to change final drive - put in an extra gear (6th) and keep the first 5 the same. That way you have identical acceleration and better highway mpg.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    "Do you think anyone can detect a one second difference in 0-60 times except with a stopwatch? "

    Interesting since the I4 MT Accord is only 1 second slower (7.4 vs. 8.4 using CR numbers again) than the AT V-6. Not much point in the V-6 then is there - probably can't tell the difference. ;)

    As far as taller final drives go - there is a magic bullet. No need to change final drive - put in an extra gear (6th) and keep the first 5 the same. That way you have identical acceleration and better highway mpg.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,669
    what you guys are going to say as these twin-clutch sequentials with only 2 pedals are introduced and achieve both better mileage and better acceleration than their three pedal counterparts. I believe that is already the case with the PDK-equipped '09 Porsche 911 Carrera.

    My guess is you'll say the difference is statistically insignificant. :P

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    That is pie in the sky.

    We are talking about right now with cars that most people buy - the difference is staggering.
  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    that wouldn't be a slushy then would it?

    I prefer three pedals for personal reasons, but any non-slushies should be similar in performance and mileage. I'll happily concede that point.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    That is pie in the sky.

    We are talking about right now with cars that most people buy - the difference is staggering.


    Well, not exactly. The current Jetta GLI and Rabbit GTI can be had with both a manual 6-Speed as well as a 2-Pedal 6-Speed DSG automatic. Both cars can be had for the low to mid twenty thousand dollar range, and the automatic is only an extra $1,075. That said, the mileage difference favors the automatic in the city and the manual on the highway (the GTI has combined ratings of 25 for both transmissions, however the city is 21 for the manual and 22 for the automatic, and the highway is 31 for the manual and 29 for the automatic).

    Best regards,
    Shipo
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    I've touched on this before but the truth is there is no statistically significant difference in the mileage ratings of manual and A/T versions of the same car/engine combo.

    Ah ha! Another Koolaid drinker who bought into the party line :)

    As for the differences in gearing, most of that one second advantage in 0-60 times would disappear if taller final drives were introduced into manual versions.

    At first blush that sounds like a good theory but have you ever done a 0-60 run for time? I'm guessing not since in most cars you'll still be in 3rd gear when you hit 60 :P

    Do you think anyone can detect a one second difference in 0-60 times except with a stopwatch?

    Yep you pretty much confirmed my suspicion that you're not the type to "see what a car can do". Maybe while driving an under-powered econobox that has 10+ sec 0-60 times a one sec difference isn't all that noticeable but the faster the car the more obvious the difference.

    Certainly for someone who views a car as nothing more than a means of transportation (and millions of Americans fit that description), an automatic is an excellent choice. But if you value performance, mpg, or just the pure act of driving and being one with the machine... nothing beats a manual :shades:

    -Frank
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    OK - lets talk VW

    VW DSG tranny on the TDI 2.0.
    manual 30/41
    DSG 29/40

    This is EPA not real world and the manual is still better. Real world the diff will be greater.

    Look at EPA on the Accord and the other cars in the CR list the MT and AT are about the same, but in actual driving the MT is significantly better.
  • mcdawggmcdawgg Member Posts: 1,722
    As far as taller final drives go - there is a magic bullet. No need to change final drive - put in an extra gear (6th) and keep the first 5 the same. That way you have identical acceleration and better highway mpg.

    Yes, put a 6th gear in all manual transmissions! I read a few months ago that Toyota was going to be using 6 speed manuals in NA - they already are selling them overseas. I will have to find the article.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,669
    Yep you pretty much confirmed my suspicion that you're not the type to "see what a car can do". Maybe while driving an under-powered econobox that has 10+ sec 0-60 times a one sec difference isn't all that noticeable but the faster the car the more obvious the difference.

    Sorry to blow the socks off your theory but I am an auto enthusiast of long standing having owned cars such as the Pontiac GTO ('70 convertible/MT-4) and a Mustang 5.0L ('86 Convertible/ MT-5)and I have participated in Autocrosses and Rallys numerous times. My current ride is an A/T '00 BMW 528i.

    I'd drive an M/T if I could but physical disability prohibits that. I'm thankful that in the real world slushboxes have improved to the point where you are not condemned to life in the slow lane or to mediocre mileage, my Bimmer gets
    22-23mpg in town and 29-30 on the highway (I drive fast and have the tickets to prove it. :blush:) I have no idea what it's 0-60 time is, all I know is that when I floor it to pass on a country road it does the job very quickly. :shades:

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I hadn't even thought of that! Of course, automakers will never do it because it adds expense and they are all cost-cutting to the max and beyond these days, but manual-equipped cars could offer smaller engines in order to match performance with their larger-engined, automatic-equipped counterparts, while saving even more gas. I love that idea! To bad we will never see it. :-(

    andys120: did you actually read the linked chart from CR? I think it makes it pretty clear that EPA ratings aren't a good frame of reference when comparing between manual and auto models of the same car. The nature of the EPA test favors the auto. And besides that, I feel that someone actually focusing on fuel-saving has a lot more options for gas-saving in a manual than in an automatic, simply by the way they drive it.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I did read that article, and perhaps modern automatics haven't quite closed the gap as much as we thought.

    Our Forester is getting great mileage, a whole lot better than the 22 mpg they report for their auto. Still, the 5 speed they tested was significantly quicker as well.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    The mpg they report in the article is their calculated average. It is the same procedure for all cars and it involves a city test (quite grueling), a highway test (steady 65 mph) and a 150 mile loop of mixed driving. If you drive carefully you can do much better, as you have reported.

    The numbers themselves are less meaningful than their relation to each other, as everybody drives differently.

    They said the Accord stick averaged 26 mpg, and I am at 33.4 mpg lifetime over 41,000 miles in my '07 Accord I4 MT.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yeah, I think our worst tankful (after break-in) on our Forester easily beats their average, by about 2 mpg or so.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,669
    The nature of the EPA test favors the auto. And besides that, I feel that someone actually focusing on fuel-saving has a lot more options for gas-saving in a manual than in an automatic, simply by the way they drive it.

    I've always known the EPA ratings were crap but I wouldn't be so sure about their methodology favoring an autobox. Of the many cars I've owned since those ratings were introduced the only one in which I've been able to consistently outdo the EPA numbers is my autobox Bimmer, one of two A/T cars I've owned.

    I'm more inclined to agree with your second statement. A dedicated hypermiler ought to be able to do better in a manual than with a juicebox but to me that's irrelevant. I like to drive fast and there's a good chance my next car will have a twin/clutch sequential that will out-perform it's manual counterpart and get better mileage. :shades:

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    If some sort of DSG had exactly the same ratios as a three pedal manual, how exactly would it get better mileage? Manual transmissions don't consume power in the way an automatic does. Does a DSG have sort of low friction gears or something that somehow allow it to be even more efficient than a manual? I can understand the argument that it can shift faster than a person allowing it slightly better acceleration times. I just don't get the better MPG claim.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,669
    I can understand the argument that it can shift faster than a person allowing it slightly better acceleration times. I just don't get the better MPG claim.

    As I understand it the main reason is that there is less interruption of power going to the drivetrain as there is when you disengage the clutch to put it into another gear , a DSG is always "in gear" so to speak, this helps with acceleration too, IIRC.

    The quickness and smoothness of the shifts also means less variance in RPMs and steady-state rpms generally deliver better mileage and less pollution, a big factor in Europe where car mfrs are under pressure to decrease carbon emissions dramatically.

    I won't pretend to know exactly how those things work but that's my understanding of how they work.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    Always in gear means less ideling and coasting hence more fuel.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    One thing that CR does do right is that they test 0-60 times like normal people. No revving it to 6000rpm in 3rd and slamming the clutch or manually shifting the automatic when it hits redline.

    Fifth Gear(U.K. Car show) recently tested to see if they could get close to the listed times. Now, these are car guys who drive cars for a living, day in and day out.

    They got to 80% of the listed time with a Mini Cooper S and flogging the hell out of it. Completely unrealistic. Most cars were 3-5 seconds slower driven by mashing the pedal in first and letting it do what it wanted.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Member Posts: 4,116
    One thing that CR does do right is that they test 0-60 times like normal people. No revving it to 6000rpm in 3rd and slamming the clutch or manually shifting the automatic when it hits redline.

    Wow, so they manage to take something totally objective in measurement and make it fuzzy to the point of being a subjective measure? Yup, another meaningless number, sign me up.
Sign In or Register to comment.