Done with manual trans.
- Thread starter wander2039
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: rshunter
The DSG transmission, and its peers, makes your point moot. It gets better fuel economy than a traditional manual transmission equipped variant. Oh, and it leaves the manual equipped version of the exact same vehicle in its dust, too.
...They're also brutally unreliable, unless we're talking about heavy commercial applications (at which point they still are, compared to the automatic and manual applications available).
The DSG transmission, and its peers, makes your point moot. It gets better fuel economy than a traditional manual transmission equipped variant. Oh, and it leaves the manual equipped version of the exact same vehicle in its dust, too.
...They're also brutally unreliable, unless we're talking about heavy commercial applications (at which point they still are, compared to the automatic and manual applications available).
DSG transmissions are technically interesting, but for whatever advantages they have, they are much more expensive than a manual, require more maintenance, and, if you're a person who likes driving stick, aren't as much fun. That last point cannot be debated.
jeff
jeff
The few times I've driven an automatic, I've disliked it.
When my wife dropped her 2005 Accord 5-spd off to be serviced, they gave her a 2009 automatic loaner. She told me that entire drive back from Mechanicsburg to York on I83, the transmission kept shifting in-and-out of overdrive. Drove her nuts.
When she dropped it back off, they asked her if she wanted to trade up, and she asked if it came in manual (answer: no) - she told them to stuff it, she wasn't interested.
When my wife dropped her 2005 Accord 5-spd off to be serviced, they gave her a 2009 automatic loaner. She told me that entire drive back from Mechanicsburg to York on I83, the transmission kept shifting in-and-out of overdrive. Drove her nuts.
When she dropped it back off, they asked her if she wanted to trade up, and she asked if it came in manual (answer: no) - she told them to stuff it, she wasn't interested.
I used to only own vehicles with a standard transmission but then I moved to Pittsburgh, with lots of hills and stop-and-go traffic. Then, I injured my lower back and have dealt with flair ups of sciatica down my left leg for most of the past decade. I've switched to automatics and there's really no going back.
The DSG still has gears so it shouldn't be as efficient as a simple stick. When researching FuelEconomy.gov the only transmission I saw exceed a stick was the Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT) found on late model Nissan, essentially a snow mobile clutch in a car. The trick is that a computer controlled CVT can maintain maximum BSFC at all times which no transmission with gears can do.
Part of the problem is that the EPA may drive like your mother but not like those of us who try to keep MPG decent. A DSG may beat a stick on the EPA test but an experienced driver will be best with a stick.
Will the maintenance required for a CVT make up for the fuel savings?
Part of the problem is that the EPA may drive like your mother but not like those of us who try to keep MPG decent. A DSG may beat a stick on the EPA test but an experienced driver will be best with a stick.
Will the maintenance required for a CVT make up for the fuel savings?
I own both and hope to be able to continue to buy both in the future.
Would you guys around here call it "nanny state" if I said I think it should be a mandatory part of drivers ed? I think it's stupid that so many these days cant drive a MT.
Would you guys around here call it "nanny state" if I said I think it should be a mandatory part of drivers ed? I think it's stupid that so many these days cant drive a MT.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I understand the speed point, but could you provide an example of the mileage point? DSGs are still heavier than manuals and their only advantages are shift speed and consistency.
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
I also see better mileage (and reliability for that matter) in my trucks equipped with AMTs. The transport industry has routinely seen superior fuel economy with the introduction of AMTs into their operations. There is some good information about the UltraShift AMTs at Roadranger.com.
While an AMT costs more up front, the reduced costs for repairs and downtime, from eliminating driver abuse of the drive-train, more than recoups that. The improved fuel efficiency is just a nice bonus...
I understand the speed point, but could you provide an example of the mileage point? DSGs are still heavier than manuals and their only advantages are shift speed and consistency.
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
I also see better mileage (and reliability for that matter) in my trucks equipped with AMTs. The transport industry has routinely seen superior fuel economy with the introduction of AMTs into their operations. There is some good information about the UltraShift AMTs at Roadranger.com.
While an AMT costs more up front, the reduced costs for repairs and downtime, from eliminating driver abuse of the drive-train, more than recoups that. The improved fuel efficiency is just a nice bonus...
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I understand the speed point, but could you provide an example of the mileage point? DSGs are still heavier than manuals and their only advantages are shift speed and consistency.
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
I also see better mileage (and reliability for that matter) in my trucks equipped with AMTs. The transport industry has routinely seen superior fuel economy with the introduction of AMTs into their operations. There is some good information about the UltraShift AMTs at Roadranger.com.
While an AMT costs more up front, the reduced costs for repairs and downtime, from eliminating driver abuse of the drive-train, more than recoups that. The improved fuel efficiency is just a nice bonus...
Sorry sir, but in the bus industry, that is nothing short of a lie. ALL the AMT's are pure JUNK.
Now keep in mind, we drive them like automatics, and we do LOTS of in-town cruising.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I understand the speed point, but could you provide an example of the mileage point? DSGs are still heavier than manuals and their only advantages are shift speed and consistency.
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
I also see better mileage (and reliability for that matter) in my trucks equipped with AMTs. The transport industry has routinely seen superior fuel economy with the introduction of AMTs into their operations. There is some good information about the UltraShift AMTs at Roadranger.com.
While an AMT costs more up front, the reduced costs for repairs and downtime, from eliminating driver abuse of the drive-train, more than recoups that. The improved fuel efficiency is just a nice bonus...
Sorry sir, but in the bus industry, that is nothing short of a lie. ALL the AMT's are pure JUNK.
Now keep in mind, we drive them like automatics, and we do LOTS of in-town cruising.
Originally Posted By: rshunter
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
You mean anecdotes. Okay.
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
You mean anecdotes. Okay.
Originally Posted By: firemachine69
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I understand the speed point, but could you provide an example of the mileage point? DSGs are still heavier than manuals and their only advantages are shift speed and consistency.
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
I also see better mileage (and reliability for that matter) in my trucks equipped with AMTs. The transport industry has routinely seen superior fuel economy with the introduction of AMTs into their operations. There is some good information about the UltraShift AMTs at Roadranger.com.
While an AMT costs more up front, the reduced costs for repairs and downtime, from eliminating driver abuse of the drive-train, more than recoups that. The improved fuel efficiency is just a nice bonus...
Sorry sir, but in the bus industry, that is nothing short of a lie. ALL the AMT's are pure JUNK.
Now keep in mind, we drive them like automatics, and we do LOTS of in-town cruising.
I'm talking about the over-the-road freight business. I didn't think that Eaton was even promoting the AMT for coaches. I know that I'd be using Allisons for stop-and-go operations, if for no other reason than eliminating the drive interruption during shifts. Heck, trip times should even show an improvement using an Allison in such an operation.
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I understand the speed point, but could you provide an example of the mileage point? DSGs are still heavier than manuals and their only advantages are shift speed and consistency.
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
I also see better mileage (and reliability for that matter) in my trucks equipped with AMTs. The transport industry has routinely seen superior fuel economy with the introduction of AMTs into their operations. There is some good information about the UltraShift AMTs at Roadranger.com.
While an AMT costs more up front, the reduced costs for repairs and downtime, from eliminating driver abuse of the drive-train, more than recoups that. The improved fuel efficiency is just a nice bonus...
Sorry sir, but in the bus industry, that is nothing short of a lie. ALL the AMT's are pure JUNK.
Now keep in mind, we drive them like automatics, and we do LOTS of in-town cruising.
I'm talking about the over-the-road freight business. I didn't think that Eaton was even promoting the AMT for coaches. I know that I'd be using Allisons for stop-and-go operations, if for no other reason than eliminating the drive interruption during shifts. Heck, trip times should even show an improvement using an Allison in such an operation.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: rshunter
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
You mean anecdotes. Okay.
The current mileage figures from Volkswagen, for both the DSG and manual versions, is 21 city and 31 highway. That's hardly a loss of fuel efficiency with the DSG. The DSG will make its numbers, day after day, regardless of driver attention and actions. In order to do the same with the manual, you'd better be on your "A-game" every single day.
My experience, both as a professional driver and as an employer of them, says that such an expectation is absurd. Reality and the hypothetical are two entirely different things, and reality always wins...
Originally Posted By: rshunter
For the DSG specifically, I can't provide links as I haven't looked for any. All I can provide is real-world experience. I consistently achieve higher mileage, in my GTI, than similarly tuned counterparts do with their manual equipped GTIs.
You mean anecdotes. Okay.
The current mileage figures from Volkswagen, for both the DSG and manual versions, is 21 city and 31 highway. That's hardly a loss of fuel efficiency with the DSG. The DSG will make its numbers, day after day, regardless of driver attention and actions. In order to do the same with the manual, you'd better be on your "A-game" every single day.
My experience, both as a professional driver and as an employer of them, says that such an expectation is absurd. Reality and the hypothetical are two entirely different things, and reality always wins...
Originally Posted By: rshunter
The current mileage figures from Volkswagen, for both the DSG and manual versions, is 21 city and 31 highway. That's hardly a loss of fuel efficiency with the DSG.
Hold on there, let's not change the subject. I never argued that DSGs get worse mileage. I was only disputing the claim that they are inherently better. Your numbers seem to agree with me.
Originally Posted By: rshunter
The DSG will make its numbers, day after day, regardless of driver attention and actions. In order to do the same with the manual, you'd better be on your "A-game" every single day.
In the city, maybe. But on the highway, both transmissions are just sitting in top gear as you bumble along at part throttle. I guess I can't speak for you but I don't need my A game for that and I don't know anyone who does.
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Reality and the hypothetical are two entirely different things, and reality always wins...
Agreed. Which is why we need numbers on these things, otherwise we can't claim anything is real.
The current mileage figures from Volkswagen, for both the DSG and manual versions, is 21 city and 31 highway. That's hardly a loss of fuel efficiency with the DSG.
Hold on there, let's not change the subject. I never argued that DSGs get worse mileage. I was only disputing the claim that they are inherently better. Your numbers seem to agree with me.
Originally Posted By: rshunter
The DSG will make its numbers, day after day, regardless of driver attention and actions. In order to do the same with the manual, you'd better be on your "A-game" every single day.
In the city, maybe. But on the highway, both transmissions are just sitting in top gear as you bumble along at part throttle. I guess I can't speak for you but I don't need my A game for that and I don't know anyone who does.
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Reality and the hypothetical are two entirely different things, and reality always wins...
Agreed. Which is why we need numbers on these things, otherwise we can't claim anything is real.
I ignore EPA fuel economy ratings with straight drives.
My car has less than 10k miles on it (a.k.a. likely hasn't seen the best mpg levels while it is still breaking in) and is EPA rated at 22/31, respectively.
On an entire tank of gas, the worst mpg I have gotten has been about 28.5 or so, and the best was fractions from being 30 mpg.
I drive at least 60/40 highway to city, if not 50/50. And I mean stop light, 20-30 mph garbage. You would think that would kill my mpg but guess what...knowing how to drive a manual pays off.
I wouldn't be surprised if on a tank of gas on flat roads driving 60-65 if I pushed 34-35+ mpg with ease.
Find an auto that gets nearly the highway mileage on an average tank of about half-and-half driving and I'll be shocked.
My car has less than 10k miles on it (a.k.a. likely hasn't seen the best mpg levels while it is still breaking in) and is EPA rated at 22/31, respectively.
On an entire tank of gas, the worst mpg I have gotten has been about 28.5 or so, and the best was fractions from being 30 mpg.
I drive at least 60/40 highway to city, if not 50/50. And I mean stop light, 20-30 mph garbage. You would think that would kill my mpg but guess what...knowing how to drive a manual pays off.
I wouldn't be surprised if on a tank of gas on flat roads driving 60-65 if I pushed 34-35+ mpg with ease.
Find an auto that gets nearly the highway mileage on an average tank of about half-and-half driving and I'll be shocked.
What are you calling highway?
1994 Pontiac Grand Am 4 cyl, 2.3 L SOHC, Automatic 3-spd, (FFS) (MPFI), Regular, EPA old=22/32, new=19/29.
3 speeds are maligned for bad gas mileage. I get 30 average at 50/50 and 33 pure highway on E10. That means city is 27.
Is my mixed 29+1 or 32-2?
1994 Pontiac Grand Am 4 cyl, 2.3 L SOHC, Automatic 3-spd, (FFS) (MPFI), Regular, EPA old=22/32, new=19/29.
3 speeds are maligned for bad gas mileage. I get 30 average at 50/50 and 33 pure highway on E10. That means city is 27.
Is my mixed 29+1 or 32-2?
I've driven manuals all my life and far prefer the driving experience of a manual. But, old father time convinced me that, when it came time to replace my old ride, I had to go with an automatic. That left knee of mine just couldn't handle the job anymore. Just a simple trip down to the market left it sore and aching. I can't imagine what a bumper-to-bumper rush hour would feel like.
I 'thought' I was ready to give up manuals, but after I drove the Mazda5, I was glad I stayed. they have it set up w/ a real short clutch throw, and the shifter is in just about the perfect position. VERY easy and satisfying to drive.
my previous, a 5 speed VUE, was showing its age. probably could've been fixed up w/ some new bushings, but we've since moved on.
I've realized I'm not very good at driving automatics; I always find myself trying to keep it from downshifting out of OD on the hwy, but when I DO want to pass, I find it doesn't downshift when I want it to, or it downshifts two gears, and all I'm thinking about is how much gas I'm wasting.
my previous, a 5 speed VUE, was showing its age. probably could've been fixed up w/ some new bushings, but we've since moved on.
I've realized I'm not very good at driving automatics; I always find myself trying to keep it from downshifting out of OD on the hwy, but when I DO want to pass, I find it doesn't downshift when I want it to, or it downshifts two gears, and all I'm thinking about is how much gas I'm wasting.
It takes time to perfect a automatic just as it does with a manual. On our Escape without the cruise I can keep it from downshifting.. or lock the torque converter or down shift completely. Only the really steep hills it downshifts twice. With the DOHC and lack of torque versus SOHC's makes climbing hills a bit harder. Have a automatic Festiva now and I'm just as happy driving it as the 5 speeds. Could really use 4 gears and blow away the 5spds in fuel economy.
- Status
