mind boggeling presumption? (manual more efficient than automatic?)

[niky]

DSG, DCT, Dual clutch. Mentioned it in the post above yours.

Downsides: complex to build, rather expensive, and sort of heavy. Also, supposedly has fewer wear parts and less wear than a traditional manual. If you're lucky, this holds true, but oftentimes the clutch packs do wear down and need to be replaced.

This costs more than in a regular manual.

Some side-step the problem by using a torque converter... which adds weight, drag and fuel consumption.

Me, I'm looking forward to the day that DSG/DCT clutch replacement jobs are as easy as ordinary manual clutch replacements...

[dirtydave]

older cars are no doubt more efficient with a manual.

[user removed]

Every new technology means you have a certain amount of lag time before the repair industry becomes familiar then profeciant at repairing that technology. CVTs are just getting there and they have been out for over a decade in the US even longer with the early Subaru Justy.

Dual clutch automated 6 speeds are still mostly under warranty by manufacturers. When that time period runs it's course then they too will repaired by transmissions shops.

Any human action in operating a car can be automated. The hydromatic came out in 1939.


regards
Mech

[tony_2018]

Originally Posted by dirtydave

older cars are no doubt more efficient with a manual.

No....you don't say