auto or manual

[Michael G 2]

Automatic cars don't have better acceleration figures than manuals. They're slower. The reason why they can be quicker away from the lights is that any fool can floor the throttle in an auto and achieve the maximum acceleration possible fro that car. In a manual you need to have a bit of skill, but the manual will be faster.

However, I still reckon automatics are now the way to go - I just don't think that the Mercedes slush pump is the way to go. I'll go for a double clutch semi-auto on my next car. If electrics ever catch on then gearboxes will be a thing of the past anyway, but I suspect electrics are a dead end.

Not true they DO have better figures then a manual the C220 CDi blueffeciency for example Manual 0-60 8.4 Auto 0-60 7.6. Can I ask have you ever driven a Merc Auto there not slush boxes, there very smooth. These DSG's are good and Merc have put one in the SLS its getting good reviews. I'm sure it will be introduced in other models soon.

 

[Pontoneer]

Automatic cars don't have better acceleration figures than manuals. They're slower. The reason why they can be quicker away from the lights is that any fool can floor the throttle in an auto and achieve the maximum acceleration possible fro that car. In a manual you need to have a bit of skill, but the manual will be faster.

NOT TRUE .

In the case I was referring to : the 230SL automatic has better mid range accelearation ( 50-80 mph ) the range important for good overtaking performance on cross country journeys than the manual version and nothing to do with standing starts .

Whilst it is possible that test drivers carrying out full throttle 'snatch' gear changes on a manual box can shave a few fractions of a second off 0-60 times , at risk of damaging the transmission , a 'skill' that is dubious at best , in the real world the typical case of even a skilful private owner being careful for his/her own property then the interruption in power flow occasioned by manual gear changes will incur greater losses than the efficiency loss of a fluid coupling .

It is also evident from some of the comments in foregoing posts that many people are totally ignorant about automatic transmissions and completely lack the necessary skills to get the best out of them .

It may come as something of a surprise to some that Mercedes-Benz ( the inventors of the motor car ) know rather more about automotive engineering than most everyone else and if they choose to build the best automatic transmissions in the world and promote them in many of their cars , offering no other option on some , it is because they ARE the best option .

 

[turbopete]

NOT TRUE .

In the case I was referring to : the 230SL automatic has better mid range accelearation ( 50-80 mph ) the range important for good overtaking performance on cross country journeys than the manual version and nothing to do with standing starts .

Whilst it is possible that test drivers carrying out full throttle 'snatch' gear changes on a manual box can shave a few fractions of a second off 0-60 times , at risk of damaging the transmission , a 'skill' that is dubious at best , in the real world the typical case of even a skilful private owner being careful for his/her own property then the interruption in power flow occasioned by manual gear changes will incur greater losses than the efficiency loss of a fluid coupling .

It is also evident from some of the comments in foregoing posts that many people are totally ignorant about automatic transmissions and completely lack the necessary skills to get the best out of them .

It may come as something of a surprise to some that Mercedes-Benz ( the inventors of the motor car ) know rather more about automotive engineering than most everyone else and if they choose to build the best automatic transmissions in the world and promote them in many of their cars , offering no other option on some , it is because they ARE the best option .

if autos are so good, why bother offering a manual at all? i wasnt going to have anything more to do with this thread, but its comments like that, that really annoy me. automatics are wasteful on fuel, you cant hold a gear without moving the selector to a different position (surely defeating the object of an auto box), they change down for no reason at times, they downshift too far if you are a spirited driver (as i am)
ive driven autos fitted in fords, vauxhalls, merc, bmw, nissan, volvo, rover, jaguar, i could go on, and in every case, they have all had the same problems FOR ME! and this talk of autos having no delay when changing gear is also utter rubbish, in my experience. i can feel mine hesitate before it changes when driving it gently, when driving harder i can feel the power 'lift off then on again' much like you would in a manual when you clutch, change gear and release clutch again. your auto may be brilliant on your 5 litre or whatever it is FOR YOU, but FOR ME, with MY CAR living in the area i do, with my driving style, i can think of NOTHING WORSE

rant over. need to pick up the hair i keep pulling out every time someone says auto's are the only way to have a car.

 

[whitenemesis]

auto's are the only way to have a car.



Bald yet??

 

[turbopete]

auto's are the only way to have a car.



Bald yet??

getting close!

 

[whitenemesis]

getting close!

 

[splang]

Auto's only on mercs tbh.....

(its the only way to have the car!)

 

[Michael G 2]

Autos the only way to have a car. :lol::lol:

 

[Pontoneer]

if autos are so good, why bother offering a manual at all?

In many cases - THEY DON'T

 

[Pontoneer]

your auto may be brilliant on your 5 litre or whatever it is FOR YOU, but FOR ME, with MY CAR living in the area i do, with my driving style, i can think of NOTHING WORSE

rant over. need to pick up the hair i keep pulling out every time someone says auto's are the only way to have a car.

Sorry , but I wouldn't have anything else , even on my humble 2 litre 190E .

Sorry also about the hair loss ; can I recommend a wooly hat this weather ?

 

[television]

The reason why they do not make many manuals is no one wants them

 

[Alex M Grieve]

Deja vu

It is also evident from some of the comments in foregoing posts that many people are totally ignorant about automatic transmissions and completely lack the necessary skills to get the best out of them

Well said. This, coupled to your point on mid-range acceleration says it all.

I recall that there was a great lobby of driving enthusiasts who espoused "heel and toe" gear changing rather than rely on the synchromesh in the gearbox. Synchromesh in manual gearboxes is now so good, I have not heard from the "heel and toe" lobby for some time. The same is true in the manual v auto debate (and typewriter v word processor).

Where people have acquired skills of which they are proud, they will always want to use them in favour of newer technology which they feel cheats by making their skill redundant.

I am sure that most of us are doing this at present - using a keyboard in preference to a voice actuated PC - "because we can".

Deja vu, or what?

 

[Thincat]

NOT TRUE .

In the case I was referring to : the 230SL automatic has better mid range accelearation ( 50-80 mph ) the range important for good overtaking performance on cross country journeys than the manual version and nothing to do with standing starts .

Possibly you didn't notice that the 50-80mph figures quoted by magazines are kickdown for automatics, while they're in usually top gear for manuals. The figure is meant to give an indication of the torque of the engine. Sorry, but a manual is MUCH better for overtaking than an automatic (a Merc auto anyway).

Whilst it is possible that test drivers carrying out full throttle 'snatch' gear changes on a manual box can shave a few fractions of a second off 0-60 times , at risk of damaging the transmission , a 'skill' that is dubious at best , in the real world the typical case of even a skilful private owner being careful for his/her own property then the interruption in power flow occasioned by manual gear changes will incur greater losses than the efficiency loss of a fluid coupling .

I know some magazines used to use full throttle changes for 0-60 times - I don't think they do any more. The manufacturer's acceleration times for, say, an SLK320, show the auto and manual to be the same (0-62 in 6.9 secs). As I've said before the manual is at a bit of a disadvantage here because it needs to pull third gear before reaching 62 (nasty low 2nd gear to blame here) - yet it still matches the auto.

It may come as something of a surprise to some that Mercedes-Benz ( the inventors of the motor car ) know rather more about automotive engineering than most everyone else and if they choose to build the best automatic transmissions in the world and promote them in many of their cars , offering no other option on some , it is because they ARE the best option .

You cannot be serious! Mercedes may build the best slush pump but these are old technology now. Like I said they've put a double-clutch semi-auto on the new SLS but it's made by Getrag - and it's not very good by all accounts. But Merc don't have one of their own so they're having to rely on other manufacturers and this is where a lot of their reliability problems come from too - being too reliant on bought-in components. Mercedes may have invented the motor car but, as is often the case, other manufacturers have overtaken them in the development of the technology (e.g. VW/Audi). Other manufacturers have also overtaken them in the standard of manufacture (e.g. any Japanese manufacturer you care to name).

 

[richyba]

Can I name Honda?, a friend of mine has a 04 accord diesel with a list of misery that would put even the worst merc to shame, how many Merc cdi's have you seen with the remains of the timing chain lying in the sump at 120K and believe me it is not rare, neither is the inlet manifold cracking at 80K, not suggesting merc s are the be all and end all but then neither are japs!

Just as an aside I know TC autos are old hat but mine is just toooo smooooooth for words, never been in a dry clutch auto that compares for effortless progress and isn't that what merc ownership is about?

 

[Pontoneer]

Thincat ,

I would need to get back the book with the 230SL road test I was referring to , but I think it was a comparison of 'through the gears' acceleration tests ; in fact IIRC although the automatic was slower from 0-50 or 0-60 , it was actually faster all the way from 50 upwards to its maximum speed - so it probably depends more on the ratios chosen for each box than on the type of transmission .

For a completely valid comparison , you would need to have a manual and automatic box with the same number of gears and the same ratios , usually it is just a matter of comparing manual and automatic versions of the same car since those are the options available .

The point I was making , and which you seem to support in your second comment , is that the efficiency loss in an automatic gearbox is of less significance than the time lost changing gear in a manual box .

I don't care that hydraulic/mechanical automatic boxes are 'old technology' : they ARE more robust and reliable than the electronically managed offerings of today , as were many other aspects of earlier cars and that is why I won't go any newer than W201/124/126 - even with these cars the most trouble tends to be with the limited amount of electronics in them ( I just had to pay an Indy to diagnose and fix an ABS fault in my W126 , although I can do most everything else myself ) .

Getrag boxes ? Had one in my 5 speed manual 280E ( M-B 'borrowed' it from IIRC the Porsche 928 ) it was a clunky , unpleasant thing with a dog leg 1st , heavy clutch and most unpleasant to drive in traffic - not noticeably any faster than my automatic 280CE or TE .

Japs overtaken M-B in build quality ? Nope . I see PLENTY of W201/W124/W126's running around Glasgow on a daily basis - you just don't see Jap stuff of the same age because they have all gone to the car park in the sky . A guy at work has a Lexus LS400 , which would have been a direct competitor to my W126 - his is always breaking down with one thing or another going wrong ; we had another one in the compound for cutting up the other week too . Another friend who likes his Nissans always went on about his Primera and how good it was - anytime I was in it , it sounded like a bag of bolts ; he then changed it for an Almera which sounds like a tinpot toy when you shut the doors , needed all the brakes replaced at a little over a year , plagued with electrical problems from day one . Jap stuff tends to hold up for the first five years or so , then it just falls apart around you .

I'll stick with Mercedes-Benz .

 

[Thincat]

Japs overtaken M-B in build quality ? Nope .

Well in my own experience they are better. What's more to the point is that Japs always seem to top the JD Power surveys. My own MR2, which I had for 12 years never broke down and didn't need a single part replacing (other than consumables) - it also didn't have a spot of rust on it when I sold it.

Back to auto/manual, it's interesting that the likes of Jason Plato and Tiff Needell always seem to go for 6 speed manuals. Plato has a 911 Turbo manual. When it comes to autos they seem to think that they don't have the control that they need - except with the extremely expensive sequential boxes that they use in touring cars. I reckon the VW/Audi DSG box is pretty nearly there but there are still some slight niggles with it and it's expensive when it goes wrong.

However, the bottom line is that when people buy a Merc they will most probably choose an auto. This is mainly because MB have an unenviable reputation for making absolutely cr@p manual boxes, and this was entirely justified up until a few years ago. The new manual boxes (about 2004 on) are pretty good but a bad reputation sticks. My own SLK320's gearbox was absolutely terrible when I bought the car. I complained to the dealer about it and was told I shouldn't have bought a manual - "Mercedes can't make a manual box" the "salesman" told me. After a bit of research I found a technical note which said that there was a known problem in that the drain plug on the box was set too high - it required a further 300mls drained out. I got the dealer to do this ("it won't make any difference" they said) and it the box was immediately a great deal better. I then changed the non-synthetic oil for fully synthetic and the change is pretty good now. But it just confirmed my opinion that MB don't put much effort into their manual boxes.

 

[turbopete]

The reason why they do not make many manuals is no one wants them

funny that coz i know enough people that wouldnt touch an auto. ive added myself to that list now that im almost bald!!!
ive driven many worse manual boxes than merc ones, kia boxes werent great (last one i drove,) nor were subaru (too much gearstick travel and slop) i could probably think of more, but wont bother.

merc dont offer manuals on many models as they cant make the boxes strong enough. but also they have to de tune autos as they break too. and as the autos are bought in, and a decent manual could also be bought in, why not? no wonder merc are losing sales to audi and bmw. i could be forced to going to 1 of them next time i change, as only 10% of new uk mercs are manual. and that must mean that theres a market there for more! imagine how many more c63's would be sold (instead of m3 and rs4) if they got a stronger box from a gearbox specialist and gave it a manual? it would be amazing!
ive got my potential project outlined, all i need is the engine sorted, then the right parts at the right price and you could see the 1st ever (that im aware of) 210 e300 turbodiesel manual

 

[whitenemesis]

Back in the '80's Aston Martin used to fit GMC truck manual gearboxes into the Vantage as none of they own boxes could handle to power

 

[turbopete]

Back in the '80's Aston Martin used to fit GMC truck manual gearboxes into the Vantage as none of they own boxes could handle to power

and theres some pretty good truck boxes out there now, especially in the smaller stuff!

 

[television]

Then fit a 16 speed truck box