Why do you drive an automatic (unless you don't)?

[robertwb70]

I got a deal I couldn't pass up, and it had an auto...so now it's a challenge to get it to average 50 MPG regularly, not quite there yet but getting closer with every mod.

[TheMarkofPolo]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

When the highest speed limit in suburbia is 40 on major roads and there is a stop sign on virtually every corner it's not a 'clutch friendly' environment.

And the dreaded 4-way stop. There is a multitude of Suburban/H2/Excursion driving suburbanites (on cell phone of course), where I live near campus, who can't navigate stop signs, reducing fuel economy and safety!

Automatics and standards would both benefit from roundabouts instead of stop signs.

I do WISH I had picked up a manual Vibe...some of the folks here have squeezed them up and over 40mpg.

[Thymeclock]

Originally Posted by TheMarkofPolo

And the dreaded 4-way stop. There is a multitude of Suburban/H2/Excursion driving suburbanites (on cell phone of course), where I live near campus, who can't navigate stop signs, reducing fuel economy and safety!

Automatics and standards would both benefit from roundabouts instead of stop signs.

Forget the roundabouts. All that would be needed is to replace most of the stop signs with yield signs. But the trial lawyers lobby would oppose it vehemently. If you run a yield sign and cause an accident there isn't much opportunity or need for litigation.

[koihoshi]

My wife used to drive auto only, she now drives manual. I only drive manual. Do not like automatics. I have more control over my vehicle that way and I am more comfortable driving a manual.

[KITT222]

For me, automatics is all I know (sad, I know), but my next car for sure will either be manual, or electric/hydrogen. Or maybe if I go through with a diesel conversion I'll put in a 6-speed stick.

[user removed]

CanadianDriver Technology Auto Tech: Nissan’s CVT transaxle

According to this article the Nissan "push belt" CVT approaches 97% efficiency. The torque converter locks up at 18 KPH, about 11 MPH. It feels like a direct mechanical connection. I can say that from experience.

I know my Altima Coupe has some neat features. If you shift to neutral and coast, then go back to drive, even at 50 MPH the engine is only running at 1100 RPM unless you depress the accelerator pedal. Since the car is rated as a partail zero emissions vehicle that would mean it has DFCO and that RPM would be sufficient for DFCO. If you do not shift to neutral then the RPMs are higher. Pulse and coast (engine on) is a breeze at any practical speed.

I know it coasts very well in neutral, from 47 MPH to half that speed takes .5 mile.

Cruise control does not change engine speed, just the load applied to maintain speed. I am sure if you had a sufficient grade it would change RPM, but the torque converter stays locked up with the huge range in ratios working to keep speed constant.

You can accelerate to 50 MPH and never exceed 1500 RPM, with a decent rate of acceleration. The highest "gear" ratio is equal to or higher than my old Honda Civic VX.
70 MPH is 2150 RPM indicated. If that stayed constant it would be 3000 at 100 MPH.

regards
Mech

[puddleglum]

My car isn't available with a M/T, but even if it was, I couldn't have got one. We are a one car family and my wife will not drive a standard, so, it's a moot point. Suggesting that she hypermile is taboo as well, but that's a lament for another time. Still, I think that a modern auto. is probably just as fuel efficient as a m/t if you take EOC and all the related techniques that rely on it out of the picture.

[darcane]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

City dwellers usually understand this implicitly and rural dwellers often don't.
When the highest speed limit in suburbia is 40 on major roads and there is a stop sign on virtually every corner it's not a 'clutch friendly' environment.

I let it slide the first go around, but not twice...

I think I drive in the city often enough to be considered a city dweller. And the city I drive in is one of the worst when it comes to hills (Seattle). I'd still much rather have a manual than an auto. You have little more to do, but you are far more in control of what your car does with a manual. You can get better performance (whether that performance is spirited driving or driving for efficiency) with a manual. Manuals aren't just for braindead freeway cruising. In fact, part of why I like manuals is that it keeps me actively thinking about what I an doing.

[cfg83]

darcane -

I'm a city dweller that carves out as much clear highway time as I can, but the traffic destroys my MPG. About the only place I would consider an auto is the streets of San Francisco (I'd probably burn the clutch).

CarloSW2

[dcb]

city is where a manual really shines in the mpg department, it's no serious effort, just part of driving.