Geez, the last 2 or 3 pages seemed like a heated discussion on whether a frog is greener than a Ferrari is faster. EPA numbers are one thing, real life driving is another. EPA may be quite close to the average step-on-it-and-go driver, but it says nothing about how good the car can really do. Yes, some new autos get better EPA numbers than their manual counterparts. Yes, some autos get better instant fc than a manual. And, actually, that's where the thread started. But the auto may get better EPA numbers because it's already optimized for fe in typical driving, yet it has less room for improvement. (I know, I just rephrased what everyone else has been writing. It's like rewriting a friend's book report and saying I wrote it myself
)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb
Manual allows for technique, and for you to use that awesome processor between your ears to make better energy management decisions, and it all becomes second nature in no time.
|
Not everyone's processor is multi-cored (or not everyone uses more than one core at a time), so it can't handle more than one task. If the processor is driving, it can't spare any load for shifting. And if the phone rings while driving, then it gets priority, not the wheel
__________________
e·co·mod·ding: the art of turning vehicles into what they should be
What matters is
where you're going, not
how fast.
"... we humans tend to screw up everything that's good enough as it is...or everything that we're attracted to, we love to go and defile it." - Chris Cornell
[Old] Piwoslaw's Peugeot 307sw modding thread