Quote:
Originally Posted by SentraSE-R
It doesn't matter whether you ever used the word "reliability" or nor. Your argument is all about the supposed reliability of automatic transmissions v. the maintenance needed for clutches.
|
Reliability is not the issue. Both are reliable. One has a component that will wear out and the other doesn't. And that isn't merely "supposed", it's real. That you choose to ignore.
Quote:
|
The price of a clutch job in Barcelona isn't relevant. Hong Kong and London clutch jobs will cost more than NYC, also irrelevant. Clutch jobs are maintenance costs, minor compared to bodywork, fuel, airport fees, and other costs.
|
One has maintenance needs and costs, the other doesn't. That you choose to ignore.
Quote:
|
What's relevant is your point falls flat when the rest of the world drives manual transmissions despite your claims about the superiority of automatics. I don't buy your assertion that they're all wrong, and you must be right. You're arguing from your limited world view, thinking that everyone must follow your NYC 40 year (not 50 year) model. Your logic falls apart when you jump into a cab in any other country's major metropolitan city, excluding possibly Canada.
|
Quote:
|
I don't buy your assertion that they're all wrong, and you must be right.
|
When did I ever say that "they're all wrong"? You have a real talent for putting words in the mouths of your opponents that they never said. That's the old 'straw man' tactic. It's the equivalent of 'hitting below the belt'.
What "the rest of the world drives" is irrelevant to me; I am concerned what works best for my conditions. And THAT is what this thread was supposed to be about - not why automatics are inherently inferior or are to be derided.