Well, it worked for them. Up 66% compared to the same model in 2010. And the WRX is still on the old body style, so it's unusual to see a spike in sales so late in the life cycle of a car.
Hence my theory - last manual standing.
Subaru had a phenomenal month - enough to recover from the tsunami and beat 2010. I was shocked.
What if the Ford Focus had a DSG intead of a DCT would that first gear clunk go away.My wife and I have two 6 spds a 2011 BMW and an IS Lexus,but a 2010 Golf 5 spd 5 cyl 2.5 liter thats a winter beater for us and it runs excellent,but it's 170 HP and needs a 6th gear. My wife wants to buy a Focus and any model above a SE comes with a DCT and I don't think The milage would be that much better to justify buying one. I would buy it if it was a six speed. Now Volkwagen has a wet 6pd DSG in a 1.8T coming out and my daughter could drive it.However, she has to put the gas in it.I'm told that a DSG uses more gas.My kid can drive a six spd.,but likes to take 3rd gear up to 55 than drop it into 6th gear. I keep her cell phone with me if she goes outdriving with her friends. So you think a manual tranny beats the DCT and DSG for gas milage?TY Puffin
i owned 06 vw jetta tdi 5-spd manual and 06 beetle tdi dsg for a total of about 200k miles together ; the jetta/M6 always got better mpg than the DSG/beetle, 46 or more compared to 44 at most. i understand jetta tdi dsg owners generally show similar results.
VW most likely would not be producing "those", FWD w/stick, were it not for having come up with the new engine up-rev design technique. The engine will up-rev automatically should the drive inadvertently downshift to a level wherein engine compression braking results in loss of traction.
In the "real world" drivers just do not pay enough attention, consistently (me included) to shifting duties to attain anything close to optimal FE. But even were you fully dutifull, modern day automatics, most especially so a DSG automatic, would defeat you FE wise hands down.
Actually it is LESS true in the shift yourself mode (sequential gate). You can however shift for (more/ less) mpg in the sequential gate. Why even bother when it shifts just fine in D ? My take is why even get a DSG, if one really wants to shift?
There are times, FUN times, drives, when I enjoy shifting, and there are times, boring/mondane/lazy(??)/long distance driving times, when I'd rather have an automatic. At the moment "fun" times involve the Porsche, otherwise the RX300 leaves the garage.
I am not sure what your point about the DSG is,given your Porsche and Lexus? The Porsche I would assume is a 6 speed manual and the Lexus, a slush box automatic?
I'm inclined to disagree with you. I've owned 2 vehicles with ZF 6 and 7 speed automatics. Don't believe a manual would have delivered better FE. The car with the 6 speed got far better fuel economy than the two Honda Accords w/ 4 cylinder w/manual tranny that I used to own.
So, you are saying that like a modern day automatic you can save, conserve, fuel with your stick shift by shutting off ALL fuel to the engine as you begin a coastdown to ZIP from, say, 75 MPH...??
What happens with the engine that prevents it from stalling when you "clutch" for the REQUIRED downshifts keep the engine turning over as roadspeed declines??
And again, in the REAL-WORLD, NONE of us have the ability to, 100% of the time, pay close enough attention, consistent attention to match the 100% attention given to the issue by the ECU.
Ever hear the old story of the watch dog in the commercial airliner cockpit..?
I think a modern 7 or 8 speed automatic could match a manual transmission for gas mileage, because with that many speeds you are really keeping the engine RPM right in the sweet spot. Hard to top that.
So far at least, every real-world test I've read says otherwise. The thing is, automatic transmissions have had lower overall gearing for years (decades) now, and yet the manual transmission still prevails in real world fuel economy, the rigged EPA numbers not withstanding.
Right. The bottom line is slush box automatics have yet to overcome the structural energy waste (I have seen dyno numbers posted on various Corvette web sites and it is like 20% waste automatic, 11% waste manual= app 9% waste differential. . The part that they have over come or tuned is the operating at the most efficient gear and rpm for a particular speed's, ergo mpg operation.
The truth is once you know the parameters of the 4/5/6/7 speed manual (mated to whatever engine. It is just as easy to operate in those sweet spots also.
I think that the automatic, having its own brain, would eventually beat out the manual transmission, which is more subject to human error, over time I mean.
Perhaps in one small road test the manual would deliver better MPG, but I'd bet a fair amount that over time, the 8 speed automatic would win--it would be inevitable.
I think the real revolution is the (automatic) clutch or sequential shifting, aka DSG/DTK. The slush box automatics days are pretty much numbered due to mpg mandates.
As a consequence the manual transmission will pretty much have a "standard" place (no pun intended), albeit smaller role. It is pretty much why Ford (for example) carries the Fiesta/Focus, to sell the fuel guzzler portions of its fleet, aka F150's, etc. in much greater volume and profit.
Might be an interesting discussion. My take is folks who buy these types of cars really do not spend any appreciable time in them nor rack up the miles to where the fuel savings makes any sense in ratio/relation to the purchase price. :sick:
"...slush box automatics...have yet to overcome...energy waste.."
Modern automatics avoid the use of the "slush box", torque converter, MOST of the time. The only time the torque converter is in use, unlocked, is when the TC is used to act as a clutch to prevent the engine from stalling. That leaves us with the torque converter "waste" periods/times being restricted to when the vehicle is stopped, moving VERY slow, or being braked.
Many new vehicles, as a result of the above, now include "hill-holder" functionality. With the torque converter now in use so little of time there is really no need for it being "robust" to the level of yesteryear. So the torque converter's base coupling capability, accordingly, has been downsized. With engine idling the torque converter is no longer robust enough to prevent the vehicle from rolling backwards down a slight slope, making these new "hill-holder" techniques a requirement.
Brain(s), possibly as many as 4 microprocessors(***), solely dedicated to the optimization of FE, or power, through the control of ALL engine and transmission operating aspects, parameters, etc.
Key words are DEDICATED,..SOLELY.
How much of your human brain can you solely dedicate to the optimal operation of the shifting task...100% of the time...?
Answer...NONE!
*** "Micro" in physical size, but not in computing power.
I've always been told that "manual trannys last forever" but is that really true? If you could expect an automatic transmission to last 125K miles without major problems how long would you expect the manual version in the same car to last?
Also what would the routine service requirements be vs. an auto?
I always enjoy listening to people smarter than me.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
So the real question is what does your (slush box automatic) Lexus get mpg wise? Or if you want to keep on topic: what is the Lexus's A/T structural waste? So if you are saying the A/T's waste is ZERO you are wrong. So the real question is it is less than 20% (Corvette A/T's) or less than a manual at 11% (Corvette M/T's)? And what would it get if it had a DSG? DSG has waste, but no dyno's have been published.
Your explanation is like someone asking you the time and you explaining how part of the second hand mechanism works and calling someone stupid for not knowing that. I think you might have issues going on that really are not appropriate for this board, or my post in particular.
I would say both your mileage lines are way too short. I'd be looking to a minimum of 250,000 miles. I fully expect 400,000 miles on my 5 speed manual. I have read some indicators on my Civic A/T and that is IF you have one that is prone to failure they usually fail at 225,000 to 250,000 miles. If not, more like who knows or it fails when it decides to fail.
As for routine service on M/T's, in 172,000 miles, I have not done any service. M/T (happens to be synthetic) is listed as life time. Just for grins, I have decided to do a M/T transmission fluid change at 200,000 to 250,000 miles.
The Honda Civic lists 120,000 miles for the first A/T fluid change. For the second and subsequent A/T changes 90,000 miles if I recall correctly.
The best my RX300 does on the hwy is about 22 MPG. But I don't think a transmission manufactured in 2000 and designed (flaw included) back, at least, in '98, would be a good foundation for discussing FE of modern day 6 speed automatics.
'95 LS400 gets 25-26 hwy, same as the '01 Porsche C4 manual 6.
Unless you have found a way to twist my words I have never said the A/T's waste is ZERO.
"...calling someone stupid for not knowing that.."
Sorry, in writing a textbook, technician dissertation, you MUST assume that the reader/student lacks the knowledge, knowledge in DETAIL, contained therein. That makes it a real [non-permissible content removed] teaching a class wherein the students have a wide variation on their level of knowledge, or grasp, of the subject.
You should/can write a textbook with the assumption that the reader/student is totally ignorant of the subject matter, but you must "teach" to the middle.
Keep in mind that the traditional manual transmission is a much simpler design than an automatic.
Generally speaking, the simpler the design/the fewer the components/the fewer moving parts, the longer the lifespan, be it transmissions or any other mechanical device... Assuming the original design is well done, and the manufacture of the item uses quality parts and workmanship.
They used to teach Latin in High School, because it was tied intimately into so many concepts --as one went up the educational chain. Medicine, Language, Law, Science, Philosophy, etc.
It appears the Manual Transmission is going the way of Latin.
I taught my sons at 15 how to drive a manual transmission--and bought M/T equipped cars for them to drive in HS and College. I was (still am) amazed that perhaps only 15 % of their Peers could even drive a M/T vehicle. It is probably even lower on the East and West Coasts.
In my day it was easily 50 % or greater. (Mid-70's)
I am convinced that it (learning how a M/T works) adds 10 points to collective IQ --if for no other reason, as an applied and analytical model of structured learning.
I blithely learned at 12 --with a tractor (Farmall) and many clumsy starts and stops, until I could manipulate the various controls into an acceptable "glide-Path" of focused engineering efficiency and control. Hooo-Rah!
By learning how to use a clutch, master a bit of 2 level Kinesiology, and the applied concept of synchronized gearing and power reduction/induction, I learned a very valuable bit of Engineering Science.
Everytime I see the rotation of the reducing turbofan blades of a GE jet engine, and hear it wind up at the pre-ignition of an injected JP-45 fuel load, I am reminded of the wisdom imparted by my Uncle to me, at the tender age of 12.
While I tend to coagulate on the side of ..."M/T's are more fuel efficient" than any Automatic Transmission, I mourn the loss of Education occassioned by the demise of the prevalence of a functional M/T and the joy at mastery of it's applied technology.
I also knew many girls who could "double-clutch" with the best of them, ....and adroitly run your [non-permissible content removed] in the ditch....Automatics be damned!
My Uncle, a Farmer who never went to college, always said --"Son, If you can drive a clutch, you can drive damn near anything,... including a D-9 caterpillar and up even to a jet airplane".
For an uneducated man, ....he was quite bright and perceptive. And an excellent teacher.
I also learned to shift, and more, on a Farmall (or was it a Ford Ferguson initially.?), and insisted that both our kids learn to drive, initially, with a M/T.
But the more important thing was that we insisted on their taking typing lessons (on a TRS80) in school. Is the keyboard now giving way to the mouse and touchscreen, speech recognition...?
Does it matter..?
After experiencing the weirdness(coast down fuel cut, etc.) constant shiftiness (most FE optimal gear ratio), of some of these new 6-8 speed automatic transmissions in the rental fleet, I think I'll be defferring my next purchase until the CVT or PSD is robust enough to handle >200HP.
Manual transmissions and clutches have progressed along with the automatic transmission. Nowadays, clutch effort is like BUDDA on most cars, and shifting is fingertip easy. Last week, when I jumped from a long road test, driving of a 4-speed Plymouth Barracuda 340/6Pak (fun!) and back into my MINI, I practically tore the gearshift off while attempting to jam my foot through the firewall.
Ironically, I think I could have beat that car 0-60 as well, or come damn close to it with 22% of the cubic inches.
Shifting a Farmall, NO synchronizers, factory brakes long ago having gone "south", often involved "positioning" the tractor very precisely for attaching an implement. Backing down a slight incline, metal-to-metal braking, to attach an implement with your brother or cousin standing between hitch pin at the ready..nerve-racking.
WWest is *still* harping on the fuel cutoff thing? Dude, are you trolling, or just unbelievably stubborn?
1 - The documentation for the Bosch Motronic ECU in my '88 BMW says explicitly that if the throttle is closed and the RPM is greater than 1200, the injectors are turned off. They get turned back on between 1000 and 1200, depending on how fast the RPM is dropping. Like when you push in the clutch vs. simply letting the car coast. That's true for all applications - manual or auto.
2 - The same algorithm is documented in the later Motronic used in the E36s, and the ECU in my current 2004 does the same thing. Once again, there is *no* differentiation between the manual and auto versions.
3 - When we ditched our Passat, I sold my RossTech SW to a friend whose wife has a manual gearbox Audi TT. Just for grins, we hooked up the laptop and drove around, and guess what? When you're coasting with your foot off the gas, the injectors don't fire. At all. Until you get to around 1100 RPM, when they start squirting again.
4 - A friend of mine who works for Ford told me, "Everything we make cuts fuel on overrun [that's what they call "coasting" in the car engineering biz]. Manual, automatic, sequential. They all do, and as far as I know, so does every other manufacturer. It's the only way to keep the EPA happy."
"...they (injectors) get turned back on...depending on how fast the RPM is dropping..."
You, probably unintentially, are making my point. With a 6 speed automatic transmissions there are "3-4" gears to go through, sequentially downshifted AUTOMATICALLY, as engine RPM declines, until road speed declines to the point that an "above stall" engine RPM can no longer be sustained.
In that last instance the transmission is now automatically up-shifted out of the engine compression range simultaneosuly with fuel flow restoration. The transmission is then only downshifted in 1st once the vehicle comes to a full and complete stop.
This situation is also one that leads to the brief "re-acceleration" delay in engine torque "drive". Just before, or even at the every same instance, the driver applies gas pedal pressure for acceleration, but the transmission has now yet completed, or is even just beginning, that last/final upshift.
You, probably unintentially, are making my point. With a 6 speed automatic transmissions there are "3-4" gears to go through, sequentially downshifted AUTOMATICALLY, as engine RPM declines, until road speed declines to the point that an "above stall" engine RPM can no longer be sustained.
That may be true, if the transmission downshifts at or below the engine "stall" rpm, as determined by the engine ECM (ie, the point the RPM in "coast mode" threshold is passed to prevent engine stall, say 1200 RPM or so). If the transmission downshifts to a lower gear before that threshold is crossed (ie, 1500 RPM, and the stall RPM threshold is 1200 RPM), then the injectors don't begin to fire until stall mode has been detected in the lowest gear... which would be the same as in a manual transmission equiped vehicle.
Hahah; that was me, too. I love that tractor, if such a thing is possible. Fond memories, anyway - I think the best part of using it was finally mastering the seemingly magical sequence of events my father would perform to get it to start. When I finally mastered that, I knew I had arrived. :P
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
"...which would be the same as in a manual transmission vehicle..."
Except....
Coasting down from, say, 75 MPH, in order to get the same level of FE gain, the manual driver would probably have to shift down, double clutch/shift, at least three times.
Probably not. I know somebody has a 7 speed manual but I forget which car.
The idea is that people will accept 7 & 8 speed automatics but probably no more than a 7 speed manual transmission ( and maybe not that, either--we'll see).
Comments
Subaru sold 13,805 stick-shift only WRXs last year. :shades:
Could be that manuals disappear from other models, so those enthusiast flock to Subaru.
Good for them. Perhaps this makes a business case for REAL manuals after all?
Hence my theory - last manual standing.
Subaru had a phenomenal month - enough to recover from the tsunami and beat 2010. I was shocked.
The new Impreza was up 87%! :surprise:
If you fix it, you are out $7500 and have a $5000 car.... (which is still a loss of $7500... you already had a $5K car)
If you junk it, and buy another $5000 car, you are out $5000 and have a $5000 car.. ($2500 ahead... of the first example..)
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
My wife wants to buy a Focus and any model above a SE comes with a DCT and I don't think The milage would be that much better to justify buying one. I would buy it if it was a six speed.
Now Volkwagen has a wet 6pd DSG in a 1.8T coming out and my daughter could drive it.However, she has to put the gas in it.I'm told that a DSG uses more gas.My kid can drive a six spd.,but likes to take 3rd gear up to 55 than drop it into 6th gear. I keep her cell phone with me if she goes outdriving with her friends.
So you think a manual tranny beats the DCT and DSG for gas milage?TY Puffin
Only if the driver dedicates shifting to the engine/transmission controlling ECU.
ABS for engine compression braking.
In the "real world" drivers just do not pay enough attention, consistently (me included) to shifting duties to attain anything close to optimal FE. But even were you fully dutifull, modern day automatics, most especially so a DSG automatic, would defeat you FE wise hands down.
Regards:
Oldengineer
What happens with the engine that prevents it from stalling when you "clutch" for the REQUIRED downshifts keep the engine turning over as roadspeed declines??
And again, in the REAL-WORLD, NONE of us have the ability to, 100% of the time, pay close enough attention, consistent attention to match the 100% attention given to the issue by the ECU.
Ever hear the old story of the watch dog in the commercial airliner cockpit..?
No..?
Another example, which I would think better than a 7/8 speed slushbox automatic would be a 7/8 speed dry lube DSG/DTK.
The truth is once you know the parameters of the 4/5/6/7 speed manual (mated to whatever engine. It is just as easy to operate in those sweet spots also.
Perhaps in one small road test the manual would deliver better MPG, but I'd bet a fair amount that over time, the 8 speed automatic would win--it would be inevitable.
As a consequence the manual transmission will pretty much have a "standard" place (no pun intended), albeit smaller role. It is pretty much why Ford (for example) carries the Fiesta/Focus, to sell the fuel guzzler portions of its fleet, aka F150's, etc. in much greater volume and profit.
http://www.worldcarfans.com/110071927443/mercedes-developing-9-speed-automatic-t- ransmission---9g-tronic
Modern automatics avoid the use of the "slush box", torque converter, MOST of the time. The only time the torque converter is in use, unlocked, is when the TC is used to act as a clutch to prevent the engine from stalling. That leaves us with the torque converter "waste" periods/times being restricted to when the vehicle is stopped, moving VERY slow, or being braked.
Many new vehicles, as a result of the above, now include "hill-holder" functionality. With the torque converter now in use so little of time there is really no need for it being "robust" to the level of yesteryear. So the torque converter's base coupling capability, accordingly, has been downsized. With engine idling the torque converter is no longer robust enough to prevent the vehicle from rolling backwards down a slight slope, making these new "hill-holder" techniques a requirement.
Brain(s), possibly as many as 4 microprocessors(***), solely dedicated to the optimization of FE, or power, through the control of ALL engine and transmission operating aspects, parameters, etc.
Key words are DEDICATED,..SOLELY.
How much of your human brain can you solely dedicate to the optimal operation of the shifting task...100% of the time...?
Answer...NONE!
*** "Micro" in physical size, but not in computing power.
This is not anything like road rage...more like a gentleman's duel. If you win, I salute you, but not with one finger.
I'm only remotely concerned with gas mileage...as long as it is "reasonable", I'm okay. Right now, 26-28 mpg works.
If I could get similar performance and 40 mpg, would I take it? Sure!
Also what would the routine service requirements be vs. an auto?
I always enjoy listening to people smarter than me.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Your explanation is like someone asking you the time and you explaining how part of the second hand mechanism works and calling someone stupid for not knowing that. I think you might have issues going on that really are not appropriate for this board, or my post in particular.
As for routine service on M/T's, in 172,000 miles, I have not done any service. M/T (happens to be synthetic) is listed as life time. Just for grins, I have decided to do a M/T transmission fluid change at 200,000 to 250,000 miles.
The Honda Civic lists 120,000 miles for the first A/T fluid change. For the second and subsequent A/T changes 90,000 miles if I recall correctly.
'95 LS400 gets 25-26 hwy, same as the '01 Porsche C4 manual 6.
Unless you have found a way to twist my words I have never said the A/T's waste is ZERO.
"...calling someone stupid for not knowing that.."
Sorry, in writing a textbook, technician dissertation, you MUST assume that the reader/student lacks the knowledge, knowledge in DETAIL, contained therein. That makes it a real [non-permissible content removed] teaching a class wherein the students have a wide variation on their level of knowledge, or grasp, of the subject.
You should/can write a textbook with the assumption that the reader/student is totally ignorant of the subject matter, but you must "teach" to the middle.
Generally speaking, the simpler the design/the fewer the components/the fewer moving parts, the longer the lifespan, be it transmissions or any other mechanical device... Assuming the original design is well done, and the manufacture of the item uses quality parts and workmanship.
It appears the Manual Transmission is going the way of Latin.
I taught my sons at 15 how to drive a manual transmission--and bought M/T equipped cars for them to drive in HS and College. I was (still am) amazed that perhaps only 15 % of their Peers could even drive a M/T vehicle. It is probably even lower on the East and West Coasts.
In my day it was easily 50 % or greater. (Mid-70's)
I am convinced that it (learning how a M/T works) adds 10 points to collective IQ --if for no other reason, as an applied and analytical model of structured learning.
I blithely learned at 12 --with a tractor (Farmall) and many clumsy starts and stops, until I could manipulate the various controls into an acceptable "glide-Path" of focused engineering efficiency and control. Hooo-Rah!
By learning how to use a clutch, master a bit of 2 level Kinesiology, and the applied concept of synchronized gearing and power reduction/induction, I learned a very valuable bit of Engineering Science.
Everytime I see the rotation of the reducing turbofan blades of a GE jet engine, and hear it wind up at the pre-ignition of an injected JP-45 fuel load, I am reminded of the wisdom imparted by my Uncle to me, at the tender age of 12.
While I tend to coagulate on the side of ..."M/T's are more fuel efficient" than any Automatic Transmission, I mourn the loss of Education occassioned by the demise of the prevalence of a functional M/T and the joy at mastery of it's applied technology.
I also knew many girls who could "double-clutch" with the best of them, ....and adroitly run your [non-permissible content removed] in the ditch....Automatics be damned!
My Uncle, a Farmer who never went to college, always said --"Son, If you can drive a clutch, you can drive damn near anything,... including a D-9 caterpillar and up even to a jet airplane".
For an uneducated man, ....he was quite bright and perceptive. And an excellent teacher.
Perhaps that is why I drive a 5-speed car, today.
Res Ipsa Loquitar......
But the more important thing was that we insisted on their taking typing lessons (on a TRS80) in school. Is the keyboard now giving way to the mouse and touchscreen, speech recognition...?
Does it matter..?
After experiencing the weirdness(coast down fuel cut, etc.) constant shiftiness (most FE optimal gear ratio), of some of these new 6-8 speed automatic transmissions in the rental fleet, I think I'll be defferring my next purchase until the CVT or PSD is robust enough to handle >200HP.
Ironically, I think I could have beat that car 0-60 as well, or come damn close to it with 22% of the cubic inches.
Progress, gentlemen, progress.
I learned on a '57 Chevy column shifter.
Same as a Farmall, in other words. :P
Shifting a Farmall, NO synchronizers, factory brakes long ago having gone "south", often involved "positioning" the tractor very precisely for attaching an implement. Backing down a slight incline, metal-to-metal braking, to attach an implement with your brother or cousin standing between hitch pin at the ready..nerve-racking.
1 - The documentation for the Bosch Motronic ECU in my '88 BMW says explicitly that if the throttle is closed and the RPM is greater than 1200, the injectors are turned off. They get turned back on between 1000 and 1200, depending on how fast the RPM is dropping. Like when you push in the clutch vs. simply letting the car coast. That's true for all applications - manual or auto.
2 - The same algorithm is documented in the later Motronic used in the E36s, and the ECU in my current 2004 does the same thing. Once again, there is *no* differentiation between the manual and auto versions.
3 - When we ditched our Passat, I sold my RossTech SW to a friend whose wife has a manual gearbox Audi TT. Just for grins, we hooked up the laptop and drove around, and guess what? When you're coasting with your foot off the gas, the injectors don't fire. At all. Until you get to around 1100 RPM, when they start squirting again.
4 - A friend of mine who works for Ford told me, "Everything we make cuts fuel on overrun [that's what they call "coasting" in the car engineering biz]. Manual, automatic, sequential. They all do, and as far as I know, so does every other manufacturer. It's the only way to keep the EPA happy."
A: He's just a Troll.
You, probably unintentially, are making my point. With a 6 speed automatic transmissions there are "3-4" gears to go through, sequentially downshifted AUTOMATICALLY, as engine RPM declines, until road speed declines to the point that an "above stall" engine RPM can no longer be sustained.
In that last instance the transmission is now automatically up-shifted out of the engine compression range simultaneosuly with fuel flow restoration. The transmission is then only downshifted in 1st once the vehicle comes to a full and complete stop.
This situation is also one that leads to the brief "re-acceleration" delay in engine torque "drive". Just before, or even at the every same instance, the driver applies gas pedal pressure for acceleration, but the transmission has now yet completed, or is even just beginning, that last/final upshift.
A: He's just a Troll.
Yes. I had the same experience over on the Toyota UA forums with the poster.
That may be true, if the transmission downshifts at or below the engine "stall" rpm, as determined by the engine ECM (ie, the point the RPM in "coast mode" threshold is passed to prevent engine stall, say 1200 RPM or so). If the transmission downshifts to a lower gear before that threshold is crossed (ie, 1500 RPM, and the stall RPM threshold is 1200 RPM), then the injectors don't begin to fire until stall mode has been detected in the lowest gear... which would be the same as in a manual transmission equiped vehicle.
Except....
Coasting down from, say, 75 MPH, in order to get the same level of FE gain, the manual driver would probably have to shift down, double clutch/shift, at least three times.
The idea is that people will accept 7 & 8 speed automatics but probably no more than a 7 speed manual transmission ( and maybe not that, either--we'll see).