Mizter T wrote:
On 27/10/2014 12:40, Recliner wrote:
[...]
Autos are usually more expensive, and traditionally had higher fuel
consumption. As cars and fuel are already much more expensive in the
UK than the US, I suppose this is a significant factor with the small
cars that are more popular here than in the US. But with the pressure
for cleaner, more economical cars, auto transmissions will become the
norm here, too, as computers can control the (larger number of) ratios
better.

The issue highlighted upthread of the potentially astronomical cost of
fixing an automatic if it goes wrong is also a consideration.

In my experience, it's clutches in manual transmission cars that most
often need attention, and that takes a lot of labour. Auto gearboxes
have a very long life.

Perhaps (?) that's because your experience over the years has been with
higher end automatics?

Yes, that's true. In fact, with my current car, there wasn't even a manual
option, as there would be no demand for one. And with with one of my
previous cars, there was no manual option because they didn't have one that
could handle the torque.


I'm by no means an expert on any of this - a quick google brings up all
sorts of differing 'expert' opinion (of which the world of motoring has a
particular surfeit of), including varying views on fuel consumption
(though plenty sticking with the traditional 'autos drink more fuel'
line), but the potential expense of repairs to automatics does seem to
feature significantly.

Yes, if you're unlucky enough to have an auto box fail outside the guaranty
period, it's very expensive. Fortunately, they tend to last a long, long
time if they didn't have any manufacturing faults which normally show up
early.

The other significant thing of course being the higher initial purchase price.

Yes, that's certainly true, though with higher end cars, the resale value
is much worse with a manual box, so they actually work out more expensive
to own. But it's certainly a factor with cheaper cars.


Note that I've no particular dog in this race! Ultimately I'd say
whatever is most economical with fuel consumption is the way to go, and
if autos are now starting to better manuals then that's all good.

I don't think torque converter gear boxes are more economical than manuals,
though the extra gear ratios of the latest boxes probably mean they
approximately equal them. But dual clutch autos are certainly more
economical than manuals as well as torque converter autos, though they're
not quite as nice to drive as a classic slush box auto.

I've always had the latter, and just love the smooth, seamless gear
changes (you can only detect a gear change if you watch the tach) and easy
driving in stop-start traffic. Mine only has six speeds, but the latest
model of my car has eight, and the next will probably have nine and I
suppose ten won't be far away. That certainly helps the fuel consumption,
which is the main factor behind the increase in the number of ratios. I
don't think car manual gear boxes are likely to go beyond six speeds, so
there's less chance of being in the optimum ratio.