[Closed] Why do people drive automatic cars?

I always used to sneer at automatics, and then I got one. Now I quite like them.

I blame the tories

CZ, so what you're saying is there is no engine braking with an auto gear box. Am I correct?

I noticed that certain Merc's slowed for bends etc but fast on straights (following and being followed). I posted a ? on Pistonheads and someone mentioned 'supercharged merc's and autobox's arent a great-combo as apperently they have a habit of kicking up or down mid-bend'.....EEK!

Nothing against auto's in general- some are better for efficiency/0-60 etc like the dual-clutches and if your doing alot of work miles its less stress on you.

I drive automatic because it makes round town easy and I don't like driving particularly.

Bugger - joke didn't make sense with intervening posts! 🙂

I wonder if a thread about auto gears on bikes would create so much interest on this forum. Or anything else about bikes for that matter.

I have both, and i like them both for different driving. My fun car is a manual and is great for driving around the English country roads, my other car is an auto, but it also has 7 gears so screw changing gear that many times!!

Never liked auto's with turbo diesels - seem to kick down, just as the boost comes in and suddenlly you don't need the torque, your revving and getting nowhere fast. It ruined my merc for me, can say I enjoyed my automatic 4WD's either. I don't really feel I have control of the engine braking. Can't see me owning another one.

If you spend so much time sitting in queues of traffic - you're part of the problem...

A bicycle has only two pedals you know.

[i]Tis true, they are all different. But the vast majority are horrible. I've not tried the 330Ci, but if it's anything like a 5 series box it's 'orrible. [/i]

I've an older 5 series with the 6-speed auto box - can't see what there is to dislike? Changes are so smooth its difficult to actually count the gears, and its got the sport 'side' for keeping the revs up plus the sequential/manual side for holding gears.

[i]so what you're saying is there is no engine braking with an auto gear box. Am I correct? [/i]

Pretty much, a bit like a 2-stroke motorbike, although if you've driven neither it doesn't help you...

I'm talking about column change manual transmission - showing my age as somebody has pointed out, but that made driving much more fun ! Although did mean when you went to drive a floor change you would attempt to tear off the indicator stick for the first few kms.

so what you're saying is there is no engine braking with an auto gear box. Am I correct?

Pretty much, a bit like a 2-stroke motorbike, although if you've driven neither it doesn't help you...

5 series blah, Merc slck x blah, Porch blah, blah. Honda 2000 blah, blah, blah.

Not sure what you're waving but I doubt you've got enough of what one would normally wave to wave it.

Given the money and the choice of a new car, I'd have a DSG 'box; auto for slooooooow city traffic, which isn't that often for me, usually just the occasional trip into Bath Or Bristol, then flippy paddles for A/B-road driving. Generally I prefer manual because I use engine braking a lot,

If you get a DSG get rid of it after 70k miles!

OP

Why do people drive automatic cars?

they're easier

Next

I drive an auto (with flappy paddles) because the manual box BMW make can't handle the torque of a 335d engine 😈

It's a pretty decent 6 speed ZF box though and sport mode is super "aggressive" - also stops you stalling and is handly in town. I very rarely use the paddles - the sport mode just gets it right almost all the time.

The other car is a basic manual - I enjoy both.

Right.

Honda autos are famously rubbish.

Traditional autos use fluid coupling and are very heavy and inefficient which means worse MPG and slower, and you can't tow unless you fit an oil cooler (I think). They are also terrible to drive on windy roads, which is why a lot of people still think they are rubbish.

Modern autos like the VW DSG gearbox are actually almost the same inside as a manual gearbox, just computer controlled, and are as fast and almost as efficient as manuals. In the case of VW, the new 7-speed auto is actually MORE economical than a manual, but not the slightly older 6 speed one (supposedly).

You CAN very much engine brake in an auto, even a traditional old skool one. Most of them have a D4 or D3 setting (or similar) which means that it'll go no higher than 3rd or 4th, which helps if you want to drive fast on windy roads or engine brake in mountains. In a VW DSG box it engine brakes the same as a manual (since it's the same internally) but you can also have full manual control so you can select any gear you like. Speaking from just having got back from the Rockies driving a traditional American auto and engine braking all over the place.

I got a DSG auto because I do a lot of motorway, and it's great when you get to heavy traffic. I got thoroughly sick of faffing about with the clutch for 45 mins on the M4. Auto makes it much easier. I do really like it in normal driving, but there are two issues for me. One is that it can be a little jerky in car parks and stuff, you have to be quite gentle with it; the other, which is worse, is that it's really hard to pull out of junctions fast. Even in 'sport' mode the car won't let the engine revs go high enough to spool up the turbo before letting out the clutch. But even with those two flaws, I still like it. Although if I were buying again, I'm not sure, mainly because I regret the 2mpg hit on fuel economy.

Even if you don't have the flappy paddles on a VAG DSG, you can still change gear manually with the stick. But I never do this, as in Sport mode (once you're moving) it is great for fast driving as it keeps the revs higher to keep the turbo going.

they're easier

Next

I never really had that much trouble driving a manual. Do you really find it that difficult?

No matter how easy something is, jon, it can always be easier. I find manual driving easy, but auto is easier. See?

[i]also stops you stalling[/i]

It would appear you're right Tortoise. As skill substitute.

[i]"clutch foot"[/i]

Well if you insist on filling every tiny gap in front of you the instant it opens.

mol - our car for NZ travelling was a Honda Accord 2.0 auto - the car was actually really good (and we lost less than £100 when we sold it) but the box was tragically poor. It liked changing down just at the wrong moment and making us look like cretinous chavs. Other than that, it was superb.

Most ultra powerful cars (with loads of torque) now have some form of auto - from AMG Mercs to Ferraris. I think part of the attraction is that they stop stupid mistakes - imagine a missed gear/mashed cogs with supercar bhp and torque - not good at all. Autos allow a bit of "stupidity" prevention. I'd certainly hate to botch a gearchange in the Bimmer - and however good anyone is at driving, the odd mistake happens. In a weedy car - nasty noise. In a powerful car - gearbox explosion.

And did I mention that autos also stop you stalling which is handy.

Sure they make sitting in traffic a little easier, but it's at the expense of some part of your soul dying every time you get in it

CK wtf did you take this morning? 🙂 If you think that 2 hours on the M4 on a Monday morning nourishes your soul in ANY way.. then.. well, you're lucky. Weird, but lucky. All I want from my commuter is comfort, peace and quiet, and ease of use.

And I did find it annoying to have to use the clutch all the time, obsessive gap-closing or not. In fact, the worst is when you have to drive at a constant speed that is lower than you can do in 1st gear. And that's happened to me loads before you start moaning.

I quite fancied a Civic diesel when I was looking for a new car, one of the reasons I didn't get one was that there's no auto - partly because I just wanted a motorway cruiser and partly because the wife finds the auto a lot easier. However there is an auto in the Petrol but it gets terrible reviews.

No matter how easy something is, jon, it can always be easier. I find manual driving easy, but auto is easier. See?

Just cos something is easier it doesn't make it better. I was responding to this;

they're easier

Next

which is one of those annoying 'I've said my bit, end of...' type statements. The fact that's it's easier (marginally) isn't a reason to drive one. See?

[i]The fact that's it's easier (marginally) isn't a reason to drive one.[/i]

So what are your reasons then? Using more fuel? Greenhousing the planet a little bit faster? Removing one of the built in safety factors, engine braking? Adding potentially dangerous overides for example the Toyota lock out?

Edukator - I don't drive an auto, and don't want to - that's my point.

[img] [/img]

Nah sorry mate, it's auto only. I'll stick with my hardcore drivers car and it's manual box thanks.

[img] [/img]

Are Auto's generally more reliable long term, cause less stress to the engine, etc?

i.e.

For the folk here who cannot afford to buy a new car, yep that's me 😉

If you had a choice of two totally identical used cars, say with 80k on the clock, FSH, six years old, but one was an auto and one was a manual, would it make more sense to go for the auto?

ski - depends a lot on the car.

Older autos tend to be more annoying but some are decent. They suit grunty cruiser type cars. They are hateful in little town cars.

People drive autos for the same reason they ride singlespeeds.

ski - depends a lot on the car.

Older autos tend to be more annoying but some are decent. They suit grunty cruiser type cars. They are hateful in little town cars.

Yep, thought it might not be that simple a question to answer 😉

ski - tell me what car (or cars if you're looking at several), I'll tell you if it's better as an auto or manual!

Removing one of the built in safety factors, engine braking?

You can engine brake in an auto, and modern ones do so automatically.

Adding potentially dangerous overides for example the Toyota lock out?

You can shift into neutral in an auto simply enough.

Using more fuel?

Also not the case necessarily these days.

Ta Surf Mat,

We are looking to spend £3-4k on a small family hatch.

Mrs likes the Ford Focus (petrol 1.6).

Me, I am not fussed tbh, as long as its cheap to run 😉

Bear in mind not all auto's are equal,

The metro's auto was CVT, so the engine hits peak power for a given throttle opening, and the transmission adjusts itself to translate that to the correct speed, so you're always in a perfect gear. These were banned in F1 for being too quick.

DSG is essentialy a manual gearbox (with a second clutch) with someone else doing the shifting.

Older autos were complex beasts that used planetery gears and valves opened and closed to let the transmission fluid through as the pressure built up, more revs = more pressure = more valves closed = the next gear selected. The loss of power (and efficiency) was because in all but top gear which was like a normal clutch and coupled the engine to the gearbox output shaft, the drive was transmitted through an impeller which was woefully ineficient.

Most modern autos fall into the category of a computer controlled manual which is why they can be as fast and efficient as a manual.

Ski - I'd opt for manual then. Ford don't make the best autos but they make decent manuals. Auto also slows the 1.6 down a fair bit which can be annoying. The engine is a good one (a mate has just sold one with 150,000 miles on it - almost no issues at all) but needs working hard on long hills.

Perfect car for the budget IMO - always recommend these to people on that budget - handle nicely, cheap to run, good on fuel and actually pretty well made.

People drive autos for the same reason they ride singlespeeds.

I was thinking the opposite TBH 😆

I drive an auto and a manual. My wife bought an ace little car in a nice colour and we both thought it looked cool. The fact it was auto was neither a reason to buy it nor a reason not to buy it. However I cannot think of a better adjective than "easier" as to why someone would drive an automatic car. I suspect the people who don't see that don't spend much time stuck in traffic jams, or are just being disagreeable for the sake of it (which is my usual fault!)

Plus, you can eat and drink much more easily in an auto 🙂

Yep, as pointed out above, the answer to the original post is simply that they're easier. That doesn't make people who drive them less able drivers, it's just that they prefer things that way.

There is, I've found, a massive difference between a Eutopean auto and an American auto though. We had a hire car in the states once that claimed in it's brochure, that had 200bhp. Now a 200bhp car in the Uk would be very quick indeed, auto or manual and while I'm prepared to accept that a hire car might be tuned down a bit, this thing was quite possibly one of the slowest cars I've ever driven, and I've driven a 1.4 ford escort.

One friend likened American automatic gearings to a propshaft attached to the gearbox, on the end of the propshaft was a propeller which sat inside a bucket of treacle. And the bucket is attached to the wheels.

It really felt that distant from pressing the accelerator to actually moving forwards.

Samurai - in the USA people adopted autos way back when they were rubbish, so they are happy with the rubbishness and manufacturers still sell the rubbish ones because they are cheaper. The same cars here are often not available with the rubbish gearbox and you can only get the nice one, or none at all.

As for 200bhp, what car was it? It's also worth noting that petrol varies in octane rating a lot. So you could be driving a car tuned for 93 gas (dunno if that's the same as our RON or not) but if you fill it with 83 it'll be rubbish. Plus if you are driving at altitude (as you can in the US without noticing it) this makes cars slower too.

Oh and another thing - speedos in the US are calibrated to be accurate, whereas ours are calibrated to read 10% under. So if you think it's taking a long time to get to 60mph you are actually accelerating to what would read as 66mph here. If you get my drift.

Samuri - if it was American, then it probably weighed more than the Moon.

To pass emissions standards in the US "my" model of car is not only down 21bhp, it also has to have urea added to the fuel supply. So they have pi55 in their cars - s**** s****...

[i]You can shift into neutral in an auto simply enough.[/i]

No you can't on the Toyotas I refered to in my original quote that you truncated. You have to press the engine stop button for several seconds in which time a lot could happen.

If you can find me one or two autos that return better fuel consumption than their manual equivalents I'll find you hundreds that don't. The autos that do well are semi-autos and very high geared autos with lock outs. That's not many.

Well you've made up your mind Edukator so that's that.

I find all sorts of cars, some manual, some auto, are great. But you can't be swayed and must be correct. Clearly you haven't driven many cars and can't get the best out of those that you do drive.

Right, off to tell BMW, AMG, Ferrari, Porsche and all F1 manufacturers now silly their gearboxes are...