Manual Versus Auto

[bexupnorth]

Dumb question I know, but I've never driven an auto.

My favourite type of driving is, shall we say "spirited" down country roads, so I think I prefer a manual gearbox. However, I've seen some nice auto cars and I don't want to discount them based on something I've read if you know what I mean.

So, is there a noticeable difference in performance or economy between the two types of transmission or am I being overly fussy.

thanks

Ade.

[kam05]

Auto IS200 is slightly heavier on the MPG (possibly slower as well?) than a manual IS200.

[PHILLP]

Dumb question I know, but I've never driven an auto.

My favourite type of driving is, shall we say "spirited" down country roads, so I think I prefer a manual gearbox. However, I've seen some nice auto cars and I don't want to discount them based on something I've read if you know what I mean.

So, is there a noticeable difference in performance or economy between the two types of transmission or am I being overly fussy.

thanks

Ade.

0-60 is quicker in the manual and also mpg is better in the manual

pp

[Carles]

Dumb question I know, but I've never driven an auto.

My favourite type of driving is, shall we say "spirited" down country roads, so I think I prefer a manual gearbox. However, I've seen some nice auto cars and I don't want to discount them based on something I've read if you know what I mean.

So, is there a noticeable difference in performance or economy between the two types of transmission or am I being overly fussy.

thanks

Ade.

0-60 is quicker in the manual and also mpg is better in the manual

pp

IMO the mpg is better in the auto and in normal drive is quicker too

[si_is300]

my 300 auto has best of both worlds

i like driving so would have a manual if possible but only four months after a full knee rebuild in my left leg (im only 25!) not having a clutch is a god send!

[Monster-Mat]

Dumb question I know, but I've never driven an auto.

My favourite type of driving is, shall we say "spirited" down country roads, so I think I prefer a manual gearbox. However, I've seen some nice auto cars and I don't want to discount them based on something I've read if you know what I mean.

So, is there a noticeable difference in performance or economy between the two types of transmission or am I being overly fussy.

thanks

Ade.

0-60 is quicker in the manual and also mpg is better in the manual

pp

IMO the mpg is better in the auto and in normal drive is quicker too

even the official Lexus figures state the auto is slower, and uses more fuel than the manual....

[PHILLP]

Dumb question I know, but I've never driven an auto.

My favourite type of driving is, shall we say "spirited" down country roads, so I think I prefer a manual gearbox. However, I've seen some nice auto cars and I don't want to discount them based on something I've read if you know what I mean.

So, is there a noticeable difference in performance or economy between the two types of transmission or am I being overly fussy.

thanks

Ade.

0-60 is quicker in the manual and also mpg is better in the manual

pp

IMO the mpg is better in the auto and in normal drive is quicker too

even the official Lexus figures state the auto is slower, and uses more fuel than the manual....

thats what i was thinking too

[Carles]

Dumb question I know, but I've never driven an auto.

My favourite type of driving is, shall we say "spirited" down country roads, so I think I prefer a manual gearbox. However, I've seen some nice auto cars and I don't want to discount them based on something I've read if you know what I mean.

So, is there a noticeable difference in performance or economy between the two types of transmission or am I being overly fussy.

thanks

Ade.

0-60 is quicker in the manual and also mpg is better in the manual

pp

IMO the mpg is better in the auto and in normal drive is quicker too

even the official Lexus figures state the auto is slower, and uses more fuel than the manual....

thats what i was thinking too

[griderjn]

the figures posted in handbooks and magazines for fuel economy and performance are based on data acquired from professional drivers.

i have been driving for about 20 years, and i am very confident about my driving.

but i believe that drivers with proper training, attendance at driving schools, hours of track time, and experience driving all kinds of different cars,

are capable of much more consistent and efficient driving results than the common individual.

those numbers are as close to best possible as one can get.

i am under the impression that the average guy would be hard pressed to reproduce those figures, on a daily basis.

all that to say this,

manual = best possible performance and fuel economy for experienced drivers

auto = better decision for the novice if fuel economy and consistency is your goal

the difference in fuel economy and performance would be most likely be negligible anyways...

maybe you should buy a cheap manual transmission to drive around for a few months, and get an idea for yourself.

[Parthiban]

Auto only has 4 speeds, so is a fair bit slower than the manual and has worse fuel economy. It is very smooth and comfortable though......

However, if you want a manual, don't bother with the autos :)

[aido]

Have to admit I liked the IS in an auto, it's a much more relaxed car, it was smoother too :)

I much prefer driving the Aristo with the autobox to a 308 I've got that's a manual. The Peugeot is actually alright, I do like it to be fair and it can be a lot of fun as it does feel pretty quick, although I know deep down the Aristo would murder it even when I'm having a relaxed drive :D

It's seeing the MPG counter sitting at 50+ that gets me though as opposed to the 12 in the Aristo that keeps me happy when I'm going slow though!

[Paradroid]

I prefer manual boxes but am getting sick of disappointing ones.

I had a Hyundai Coupe V6 which had a nasty snatchy clutch, also my IS200 is hard to get a smooth change sometimes and it's very notchy going up into second, I've tried loads of different shifting techniques and two different gearbox oils.

The trouble with the IS200 is the auto box really dents performance, otherwise I'd have been tempted.

I think if I can afford an IS250 next I'll seriously look at the auto, the manual box is supposed to be even worse than the IS200, and the manual has shift paddles too. That sounds good.

But I'd stick with a manual IS200 unless you really want an auto box.

[si_is300]

Auto only has 4 speeds, so is a fair bit slower than the manual and has worse fuel economy. It is very smooth and comfortable though......

However, if you want a manual, don't bother with the autos :)

never knew the 200's were only a four speed auto, whereas the 300's are a 5

[Parthiban]

never knew the 200's were only a four speed auto, whereas the 300's are a 5

Yep if the 200 had the 5 speed box it would be a lot better on fuel and performance - it's a shame that.........