From: eliot@lanmola.engr.washington.edu (eliot)
Subject: Re: Manual Shift Bigots
Organization: clearer than blir
Lines: 34
NNTP-Posting-Host: lanmola.engr.washington.edu

In article <C5LIw2.CAx@news.rich.bnr.ca> Peon w/o Email (Eric Youngblood) writes:
>In article <1qn2lo$c9s@vela.acs.oakland.edu>, mje@pookie.pass.wayne.edu (Michael J. Edelman) writes:
>The big disadvantage of automatics is the ~10% HP they consume that never
>gets to the wheels.  In this respect they are at a disadvantage to a manual.

only when the torque converter is not locked up.  there are autos out there
with converter lock up in 2nd, 3rd and 4th gears.

>Dont forget that now that new 6 speed manual trannys are available the drive
>train is more optimally geared to get the most out of the engine.

rare.. so are 5 speed autos.. but very real.

>Bottom line is both manuals and automatics have vastly improved.

i think that automatics have advanced far more than manuals.
especially in shift intelligence.  i say that a smart automatic is
better than the majority of drivers in terms of being in the right
gear at the right time, which to me is more important than torque
converter losses.

>I prefer the stick for fun and the auto for traffic.

who says you can't have your cake and eat it too?  a well designed
shifter will easily facilitate manual, clutchless shifts.  i am
referring to the much copied mercedes jagged gate.  the only
department where you lose out is in the number of ratios available,
and of course the converter losses..

if ayrton senna can drive a racecar with fully automatic transmission,
it can't be half bad..  :-)


eliot
