Why I won't buy a G35

Thought that might get your attention! Here's my two word answer:

MANUAL TRANSMISSION.

Yes, for example, BMW sells only a few 5-series with the row-it-yourself box o' gears, and it likely doesn't make sense in cold analytical terms to continue selling 'em that way either.

BUT, a company like BMW realizes that the performance reputation of their few hardcore models casts a "halo" of performance over their entire model range, regardless of the equipment they carry.

I realize Infiniti plans to have a manual in the new G eventually, but the mood is set with this first rollout.

Sorry, it just doesn't matter how many gears are in the slushbox version or how many shift buttons, paddles, levers and geegaws control it: Nothing beats the direct connection of the asphalt-to-crankshaft interface like a set of old-tech "real" gears and a foot-operated clutch.

Somebody has to say these things....... flame on!!!!

Good for you. While I won't buy an automatic or a manumatic G35 I'd happily buy a real manual G35 if I had the money.

I'd share your opinion if Infiniti was not going to offer a manual at all. I suspect, from what I've heard, that there will be a 6 spd manual in the G35 within 6 months.

Simple.....then don't buy one, move on.

the g35 coupe is supposed to be out fall of 2002, with a 6 speed

I'm sure they'll offer a sedan version with a manul as well. It doesn't cost them anything to do that. You might have to special order it though.

They stated I believe at FreshAlloy or maybe it was Infiniti that the manual will be available next year.

Look at it this way. Lexus IS300 sold like hot cakes when it was first released and it had a slap happy auto/manual shift thingymibob. It took Lexus I think 2 years or more til they finally upped the anti with a real manual.

Not much different, it took Cadillac over what 30+ years to put a manual back in their line up. Which is awesome!

There just teasing us with the auto, then BAM!, its manual all the way!

:D

I think Northwestrally is missing the fact that the average Infiniti driver is a 35 year old professional who doesn't care about performance and fun as much as they do about luxury and comfort. With that in mind, a 6-speed means nothing to them, so it means nothing to Infiniti.

If you're looking for a 6-speed, wait for the coupe version.

I was just at the dealership, taking a test drive of the G35 Sedan. They plan to take delivery on 6 spd Coupes this fall. They won't have the 6 spd Sedans till probably later next winter. They are obviously sure they are going to make them, just not sure when they will start receiving them.

I think it might have more to do with supply and depending on Z demand and manual Coupes. The Sedans are just probably down the food chain for the 6 spds.

Yeah, I would want a stick. Manumatic causes lag:hehe:

Is the G35 Coupe RWD?

Originally posted by RonJeremy
Is the G35 Coupe RWD?

Yes.. the G35 series is and will continue to be RWD. I haven't seen it mentioned on the coupe, but my dealer insists that it will have an AWD option within 3 months of the release, and the Infiniti web site says there's gonna be an option for an LSD as well. :D

John David Spoon
(who's already planning for his AWD, 6-speed coupe with aero package, sport suspension, and LSD)

Tanman is right on target; Infiniti won't feed the public with full-fledged manual transmissions at vehicle launch because the percentage of sales are expected to be extremely low...as in under 5%. Here on the forums, the majority of us are enthusiasts who would generally prefer manual over automatic, but in reality, the average consumer would purchase an automobile in this area of the spectrum with an automatic transmission. But there is really nothing with selling most of the G35s with automatic gearboxes. Ghosn has it set up to make great product selectability--the majority of people opting for sports can turn to the 350Z.

My friend has skyline GT8, Japanese version G35 with 8 speed extroidal CVT. I drove it several times and it's quite good. Faster shift change (Nissan said 0.4 seconds for change) than manual and no transmission loss due to its troidal CVT which is supposed to be adopted by R35 GTR.

Yutaco@Tokyo

CVTs in general are supposed to be characteristic of less power loss than a regular automatic. But still, its not as fun as a standard manual transmission.

How bad is the lag with a CVT? BMWs SMG system is much more the route that I would want to go if I had to choose amogst the lot. That being said they would still have to pry the manual shifter out of my cold dead hand first! :devil:

Preach on, brother!

But newer CVTs like those from Audi are known to be at about the halfway mark between automatic transmissions and SMGs. But they are new, and much improvement can be made. They are already significantly quicker than regular automatics, since they have done away with the poor stalling torque converter, and simply use the point picking chain-belt (at each computer controlled movement of the chain, the power is instantly--or more like continuously--transferred throughout the shifts.

But still, nothing compares to a good manual. And from what I've seen, even the best production SMGs can't compare to an average gearbox with a short-throw shifter.

Morpheus,

As you may know, Nissan's new extroid CVT does not use chain-belt. It uses disks and rollers and prouds of its direct and quick response. It also said that extroid CVT is very good for transmitting high power and torque, so new GTR is supposed to use it.

Check it out this page though it is Japanese. Can see some images.

http://www.nissan.co.jp/COMPASS/TECH/EXTROIDCVT/frame11.html

Interesting setup. Who knows what new methods for CVTs will be discovered in the near future. It looks like automakers are finally getting serious about the new technology.

Currently, the best automatic I've ever heard of is Prodrive/Graziano's automated manual transmission. Like most other SMGs, it will have all the internal components of a manual transmission (clutch, etc.) while using hydraulic pumps to change gears, but unlike the others, this one will be built from scratch as a purpose-built SMG, instead of using a manual box, fitted with extra components. Without driver required mechanisms (synchros, etc.), and entirely computer controlled, the result is an extremely quick automatic with 7 gears. It is could be within one percent of a CVT's speed.

manual tranny will definitely coming after 350 z and g35 coupes get into production, they will have first call, I'm interested in the g35 coupe, with stick as the g35 is butt ugly , actually fugly, both in the front and rear. the coupe will change some of that. hopefullly:)

"Lukedds" is right about the supply / demand theory. Nissan/Infinity do not want to run out of transmissions for the soon-to-be-released G35 Coupe and 350Z. After the initial blitz of sales on these cars, the manual will make it's way to the sedan.
I am curious to see what the differences will be between the 350Z and the G35 Coupe. The dealer says the final HP numbers for the coupe have not yet been decided, though it will be at least 275. How nice would it be if we saw 300 HP which is the target # for the 350Z?:D

Dude. Buy the coup if you can... In fact drive anything but a weak ass
G20.

I believe reading some summary saying nissan is targeting an age range of 18-30. And yes, there is a manual coupe comming out so too bad whomever is saying no buy because of AT. And I'd say if a car is over 250 HP, Then it's Sporty......the luxury is just an added bonus for your money. Hondas are for old people, so that when they crash they dont have to worry about damage, lol. ^_^

G35 with AWD? That's pretty interesting. What kind of AWD will it have? 50/50 split, or different, etc?

And the next question: Any plans to put some turbos on that thing?

A G35 with all-wheel-drive? You are describing the upcoming next-gen GT-R. So far, it seems that Nissan is set on using the G35's V35 chassis, with the R34's AWD drivetrain, powered by either a turbo VQ35DE, or the VK45DE V-8. Hopefully this thing won't cost too damn much, otherwise it's going to shy away the already uncommited American market.

I would expect it to be at least $50k, though. I am hoping that won't be too mucht o scare people away!

I agree, sports cars are made for fun, for me an automatic tran. is not fun. sports cars sould allways have a manuel as an option.

i'm very glad that this post is very old, and Infiniti does offere the 6 speed manual. I hope this is also the same case with the mazda rx8 when it's released. It's not supposed to be released with a manual tranny.

i know this is a dated post, but i feel obligated to give my 2 cents as a new g35 6mt owner. first off, i love the 6-speed and am really happy i got that over the auto. i did think about the auto trans and basically told myself if i wanted a real sports car i'd buy the 350z w/ manual. but of course i went and test drove the 6-speed and fell in love.

anyway, there have been comments about AWD on this thread taht I thought I would address. i for one think it would be in nissan's best interest to focus on adding some excitement to the upper end of the rpm-spectrum. be it through a small turbo or supercharger (from the factory). i think their target customers would appreciate the added power over the AWD as i rarely have a problem getting my g35 to grip the ground, especially w/ the 18's and LSD.

Originally posted by VR6punk
i know this is a dated post, but i feel obligated to give my 2 cents as a new g35 6mt owner. first off, i love the 6-speed and am really happy i got that over the auto. i did think about the auto trans and basically told myself if i wanted a real sports car i'd buy the 350z w/ manual. but of course i went and test drove the 6-speed and fell in love.

anyway, there have been comments about AWD on this thread taht I thought I would address. i for one think it would be in nissan's best interest to focus on adding some excitement to the upper end of the rpm-spectrum. be it through a small turbo or supercharger (from the factory). i think their target customers would appreciate the added power over the AWD as i rarely have a problem getting my g35 to grip the ground, especially w/ the 18's and LSD.

Yeah, both AWD and turbo/supercharger-the new Nissan Skyline GT-R. I think they are SERIOUSLY focusing on it currently. Atleast they better be because I am becoming impatient.

Manuals are great but I think everyone has just put too much emphasis on them, look at drag racing for instance, most if not all of their cars have gone the way of automagic trannies. Why?

Because there's less chance of missed shifts, besides the cars with S/C, turbos and especially awd tend to hook up faster with an auto than with the manual.

I guess it's just the whole old 5 speed or four on the floor attitude that we won't let go of, it makes us feel more at one with the car and the road.

I second that. it just feels so different when I can't get the gear I want when I want.

Originally posted by bk2kmax
Manuals are great but I think everyone has just put too much emphasis on them, look at drag racing for instance, most if not all of their cars have gone the way of automagic trannies. Why?

Because there's less chance of missed shifts, besides the cars with S/C, turbos and especially awd tend to hook up faster with an auto than with the manual.

I guess it's just the whole old 5 speed or four on the floor attitude that we won't let go of, it makes us feel more at one with the car and the road.

Disagree. Drag racing automatics aren't true autos. They run one gear all the way to the top. They just slip the clutch to get it to go. These are not automatics by any means. If anything, they're closer to CVT's, where you use the clutch slip to control the amount of power getting to the wheels.

If you know how to drive a manual, and the guys who run their modified stock cars at the track (not the top fuel stuff, they use the clutch like mentioned above) They KNOW how to drive a manual, and missed shift is an oxymoron. The reason you may think autos hook up faster is because the torque converter in autos scavenges some power to get the car going. It hooks up faster because there is less power available to the wheels. A car hooking up has ZERO to do with the transmission, and everything to do with the suspension/tires, and how quickly you can apply power without exceeding the grip of the tires. If you run an automatic, the torque converter brings the power on gradually, which is usually FAR below the grip power of the tires. A good launch in a manual allows the tires gripping power to be pushed from the very start, creating a much faster launch. No torque converter to rob power.

If you know how to drive a manual, you will find it superior in every way to an automatic (except ease of use, but that's why minivans only have autos. Autos are for people who see a car as a way to get from here to there) If missing a shift is something you're complaining about, then you're not versed enough at driving a manual. Practice makes perfect. Once you learn how to drive a manual and drive it well, reevaluate your decision. If you need proof, check the 0-60 times of most any car in an automotive magazine. The manuals almost always have faster 0-60 times (.1-.2 seconds) than a comparable automatic.

good points.. i must say though one of the annoyances is having the VDC or whatever its called always on.. you have to turn it off everytime you get into your car.. failing to turn it off results in a "quick shift" being slown down to hault once a wheel starts spinning. this is mainly noticed shifting from 1st to 2nd.

Originally posted by VR6punk
good points.. i must say though one of the annoyances is having the VDC or whatever its called always on.. you have to turn it off everytime you get into your car.. failing to turn it off results in a "quick shift" being slown down to hault once a wheel starts spinning. this is mainly noticed shifting from 1st to 2nd.

Someone on freshalloy.com did some wiring mod with relays and such so that the car would start with VDC default off, and you could then toggle it to on as normal. He had a very detailed FAQ with relay part numbers and everything. Go there and search if you're interested.

I don't drive crazy all the time, so I like it on. Should I want to race, I just shift into "race mode VDC off" but I rarely run it on the streets. Seen the results of that, and it isn't pretty. A guy I know (25) still doesn't have his license back, and has some nasty scars from a street race when I was in High School. His buddy wasn't so lucky, died instantly, and the car they hit (before spinning into the pole that did most of the damage) had a bunch of kids in it. I think one suffered some brain damage.

Disagree with this statement:

Autos are for people who see a car as a way to get from here to there)

Some people just like the convenience of having an auto as opposed to having to worry about shifting especially in city stop and go traffic and some just like having the other hand free to do some things most stick drivers can't do such as dialing on their cellphones.

BTW, why is it that Turbo autos get better times than sticks on launches from the stand still. Overall I'd have to agree with most of your post.

Not everyone buys a stick uses it for performance, some like the added advantage of the gas economy factor. IMO I believe we put too much emphasis on sticks and their so called advantage, the auto industry is getting better making manumatics and CVT or other such systems that are narrowing the gap in shift vs auto times.

Soon there won't be any advantages at all as far as having a stick, then what, not that they still won't make or offer them. BMW has an awesome sportshift system that has already closed most of this gap.

What will be the point of having a stick once they make autos that shift faster or on par with a stick other than you feel more connected to the road?

Good point on the "Autos are for people who see a car as a way to get from here to there." It's a convenience factor as well. Sorry.

But, I still maintain that a skilled Manual Transmission driver can outperform an automatic transmission driver on ANY car, all other things being equal. (I'm using 0-60 times as my definition of outperform, since it's the easiest number to check...it'd be even more advantageous to have a manual on a racetrack) It's in the mechanics of it. I'm curious as to which Turbos you're referring to. There may be some tests that show an auto as being faster, but odds are that either the driver of the Manual messed up, or the track conditions weren't equal. A turbo engine is only different in that the HP curve gets much steeper as RPM's climb. If a skilled manual driver revs and slips the clutch at higher RPM's, he can still beat an auto. There's just more control.

I agree 100% that not everyone uses a stick for performance. The gas economy is a nice bonus, and that fact alone should show you which transmission is more efficient at putting the power to the pavement. If the engine is exactly the same, why is the Auto getting worse fuel economy? The transmission is far less efficient.

The auto industry's manumatics are getting better and better, so the gap between autos and manuals is getting smaller, and perhaps some day will be negligible, but for now, most every car's manual has a .1-.5 second edge over the auto. I can't speak for CVT's, I have no experience with them. They seem like the could be the best option out there once perfected. I don't consider them an auto or a manual, but another option entirely. If the BMW shift system you're referring to is the SMG shift on the M3's, the one with the paddles on the steering wheel, then you're in for a shock. The actual transmission is a straight off the shelf MANUAL. The SMG is an electronically controlled manual transmission. Instead of shifting with a stick, a computer shifts the gears in a manual transmission. A computer controlls the clutch as well. The transmission innards are off a manual tranny, and there is no torque converter or any other Automatic tranny parts. The reason it is so fast (It IS faster than both Auto and traditional Manual I believe) is that the shifts from one gear to the next take a fraction of a second. So you basically get the advantages of an efficient manual w/o a torque converter, with the benefit of not having to work a clutch.

My point isn't that Autos don't shift faster, because in many cases, they do shift faster. My point is that mechanically, an automatic transmission is less efficient, and delivers power more gradually than an experienced manual tranny driver can. Physically, if driven to their limits, an automatic tranny should not outperform a manual.

***Again, I'm not considering the CVT an automatic, because it doesn't even have gears. It's a CVT, not a manual or an auto. And I'm not considering the SMG on BMW's an auto either, becuase if anything, it's more a manual than an auto.***

Originally posted by bk2kmax

BTW, why is it that Turbo autos get better times than sticks on launches from the stand still. Overall I'd have to agree with most of your post.

Well autos in general have less traction loss compared to manuals aren't prone to wheelspin when you do hard launches from a stand still. Because of this autos have very consistent ET's and 60-foots at the track.

Now throw a turbo in and the traction loss problem for manuals increases. This is because any load on the engine will cause the turbo to generate boost, extra boost will increase wheelspin if the tires on the manual car haven't already 'hooked', which probably will make it even harder for them to 'hook' from that point on.

Originally posted by Ushtang


Well autos in general have less traction loss compared to manuals aren't prone to wheelspin when you do hard launches from a stand still. Because of this autos have very consistent ET's and 60-foots at the track.

Now throw a turbo in and the traction loss problem for manuals increases. This is because any load on the engine will cause the turbo to generate boost, extra boost will increase wheelspin if the tires on the manual car haven't already 'hooked', which probably will make it even harder for them to 'hook' from that point on.

Right, but at this point, is this a problem with the transmission or a problem with the manual tranny driver not being able to control the power in his car?

I appreciate you laying out the differences in the manuals in the BM and the common manual but IMO it is an automatic because it doesn't require you to throw the gears (which again IMO why most manual drivers feel they are actually doing the driving).

Any vehicle that has a trans that doesn't require you to actually shift the gears yourself MANUALLY is an Auto, that is the whole point of having a manual<You want to row the gears yourself and not rely on a computer or shiftless type converter to get the power to the ground for you.

Thanks Ushstang for backing me up on the auto trannies conversion of power to the ground. I was never saying that the auto shifts faster but that it does tend to convert the power to the ground better (maybe due to the actual power to ground loss in the drivetrain) when turbocharged as opposed to the manual.

I believe the problem is with the manual tranny as far as converting or getting that turbo power to the ground, not necessarily or all the time the driver. There are pros who overrev all the time and they have perfect reaction times, however they do have excessive wheelspin at times and end up losing precious .10 in the race.

As far as the CVT, I consider it an Auto as well, because you are not manually shifting a computer and synchros are doing the job for you, again you are not manually shifting the gears yourself, whether or not there's a torque converter or not it doesn't make a difference you are not doing the shifting<that makes it an automatic.

Maybe it's not a traditional automatic like we tend to think of them in today's terms but it's definitely an automatic.
In the future manuals will probably be obsolete, just look at the modern car manufacturer, most cars that they make are automatics, not everyone is about rowing through the gears and most don't feel they need to do that in order to feel like they are the ones who are actually doing the driving.

Manuals will probably even fall behind as far as shifting is concerned because computers will be able to enable smoother, quicker shifts and with less chance of human error as well. Eventually if they don't surpass them they will even the playing field.

Then what are we stick driver's going to do when that happens? Are automatic driver's going to diss stick driver's like the stick guys do guys with autos now?

I think we got off on two paths...the path I was origionally arguing was that CURRENT TRADITIONAL automatics ARE NOT superior to manuals in terms of performance. (TOTALLY ignoring convenience, as that was not the initial arguement posted)

From the initial arguement, I still say that TRADITIONAL automatics are not in any way superior from a performance standpoint. And call them what you will, CVT's and SMG's are not TRADITIONAL automatics. If we're going to throw in every type of hybrid transmission there is, then things get ugly. You can call CVT's and SMG's automatics because you don't change gears, but IMO, the CVT is totally seperate, as it doesn't change gears because there ARE NO GEARS, and an SMG, is mechanically a manual, and it is made to change gears via driver input through the paddle shifter. It does have an auto mode, not for performance, but for the convenience factor. It's not the throwing of the gears via a shifter that make people like Manuals. It's the ability to change gears whenever you want, the freedom to downshift, the ability to control clutch slip, to launch at whatever RPM you want without a torque converter messing things up, etc. You can do all of these things with an SMG...why? Becuase it is mechanically a manual transmission.

Re. wheelspin...again, I'm assuming all things equal, good launches, etc. What initially drew me to this thread was the bashing of manuals by people who claim missed shifts, etc. IMO, if you're missing shifts, it's YOU, not the transmission. I can't remember the last time I stalled, missed a shift, or grinded the gears. Pros in every sport mess up from time to time, but how many pros race conventional automatic transmissions? Why? Because while they may mess up now and then, they know that if they get it right, they'll outperform an auto. To an inexperienced driver, an auto WILL produce more consistant times, and if you're a bad manual driver, it might be faster, but if you learned how to drive a Manual correctly, you'd beat an auto most every time.

Again, the point is that if you stay comparing Traditional Autos to Manuals, Manuals win in terms of performance, if you know how to drive one. You opened a whole other world by throwing in CVT's and SMG's...which are not traditional autos. Totally mechanically different. Totally.

I will agree that as technology progresses, they will make an auto that is better than a manual. And the SMG would probably represent a transmission better than a manual, BUT the problem is that it is STILL a manual internally, just computer controlled, which eliminates driver error. As for what we are going to do...they will simply make a car with a shifter that has no clutch. You row through the gears like you once did, everybody's happy. Manual drivers have complete gear control, automatic drivers have the back-up of a computer controlled shifter.

Simple statement...Automatics eliminate the driver error sometimes found in manuals at the expense of performance. If the performance cost is smaller than the driver error, drive an auto. If the driver error is smaller than the performance loss, drive a manual.

Remember who started bashing what here...I only stepped in to defend manuals when people started trying to say they were all hype. I have no problem with auto drivers. On some cars, SUV's for example, I'd rather have an auto simply for the convenience factor, but on a go-fast car, it's manual all the way for me because it's faster, and I like the interaction.

To each his own, but I still will reiterate that a TRADITIONAL Auto vs. a TRADITIONAL manual w/ a good driver...Manual wins.

No one was ever BASHING as you put it, you just took such a hardnosed stance as to why you thought manuals were so superior and no one disputed the fact that manuals are better for performance and economy.

Just because someone opposes your view you call it "BASHING", which it isn't, it's our opinion, not "BASHING".

Any transmission where you don't manually select the gears yourself classifies as an AUTO period. There is no if, ands, or butts about it. Just because you say they're not to you doesn't mean that they're not.

When you select something by your own controlling actions then it is manual, when a computer does it for you no matter how it does it, it is an AUTO.

There's no need to get angry and say anyone is "BASHING". Gears or no gears, it still an auto if a computer does the shifting or tells a mechanical linkage to select it for the driver who isn't manually rowing threw them himself.

You are not the world's defender of manual trannies because there was no need for one, noone "BASHED" a manual, merely pointed out some differences and what is a manual, maybe SMG or CVT's aren't "Traditional Automatics" but they are automatics nevertheless.
Traditional or non traditional CVT/SMG are computer controlled and shifted, therefore they are automatics.

Nobody here doubts that a person shifting manually will hand an auto his @$$ that isn't even the point here. The only reason cvt/smg was brought in was to show the transformation that the auto world is making with automatics and how they will one day pretty much do away with manuals. You pretty much said it yourself, when you stated how hard it is to find a manual nowadays.

First, calm down...I'm not trying to get into a pissing match with you.

Second, the only reason I brought up bashing was the last line in your one post,
"Then what are we stick driver's going to do when that happens? Are automatic driver's going to diss stick driver's like the stick guys do guys with autos now?"
to me, indicated that I was bashing you, which I don't feel I was. I was merely defending manuals, which IMO, were "under attack." I am not the world's defender of manuals, nor are you of autos.

Some people here clearly do doubt that manuals are faster than autos.
You wrote, "Manuals are great but I think everyone has just put too much emphasis on them, look at drag racing for instance, most if not all of their cars have gone the way of automagic trannies. Why?
Because there's less chance of missed shifts, besides the cars with S/C, turbos and especially awd tend to hook up faster with an auto than with the manual"
I was argueing that point, because, well, you know my reasons by now. Call it bashing, call it opinion.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the SMG/CVT's being automatics, because I disagree 100% that they would be classified as automatic transmissions in that sense. I suppose you look at what a driver has to do, and I look at how a transmission works as the determining factor. To me, lumping SMG/CVT/Conventional transmissions together and calling them automatics is like lumping every SUV into a category and calling them Jeeps, when there are big SUV's, there are SUV's made for road travel, SUV's made for off-road, etc. It's categorization by something that is minor in the grand scheme of things.
"When you select something by your own controlling actions then it is manual, when a computer does it for you no matter how it does it, it is an AUTO." -->Does this mean that when an auto-equipped car is in Manumatic mode it becomes a manual transmission? Because the driver selects the gear by his/her own controlling actions?

But anyway, we'll agree to disagree. As I said, to each his own. I don't want you to get mad at me and I'm not mad at you. Just trying to have a constructive arguement, and I think somewhere back we veered off topic.

Understand I'm never angry at you, you don't know me enough to upset me, besides if I was angry I would type every word in CAPS to let you know that I'm pissed and yelling.

I'm calm, you brought up the word bashing and I merely responded to what I thought that you were saying that I was doing which I wasn't.

I understood your points quite well. Now that that is outta the way, we can continue with the auto vs manual convo.

I know I'm not the defender of everything auto neither was I trying to be, regardless of your failure to realize the differences in what truly classifies as an auto, the fact remains that when a computer tells mechanicals what to do instead of you doing the input then it is an auto, period.

As far as a manumatic, that is the only one here that truly differs in the sense of traditional autos and traditional manuals, so on that basis I would say that it is both just as the name suggests.

I'm uncertain as to what people would think that an auto shifts faster than a manual, I'm not one of them. We will agree to disagree on the question of what classifies as an auto or manual but if you were to poll 100 people and gave them a choice to choose what is an auto, I'm certain the poll would favor my thinking as opposed to yours if people didn't tend to think of autotrannies in the traditional sense.

I'm a fan of both manuals and autos and I would never bash on either, my point is to say don't discount autos just because you favor manuals. People buy what they prefer for different reasons, not everyone is into the sporting thing, I prefer manuals too but I will never discount an auto because I prefer sticks.

OK, we're getting there. Thanks for not typing in all caps ;)

That being said, I agree that each tranny has its place in the world. I won't dispute that. To each his own.

But...
"regardless of your failure to realize the differences in what truly classifies as an auto"

What then does TRULY classify an auto, and who's definition is that?
I beg to differ with you on the polling 100 people issue. Well, sort of. If you asked 100 random people, I'd agree with you, BUT, if you ask 100 people well versed in the in's and out's of automobile mechanics, I'd bet that most would see it as I do, that each transmission is its own unique type, regardless of driver input. But I guess that's something that we'll just have to differ on.

So, let me summarize.
You feel that:
Manuals: --ONLY Manual Transmission
Auto's: --Traditional Autos (NOT Steptronic/triptronic, etc) and CVT
Both: --Tiptronic/Steptronic, and SMG

I feel that:
Manuals: --Manual and SMG
Auto's: --Traditional Auto's and Steptronic/tiptronic
Both: --None
CVT is a CVT transmission, not Manual, not auto.

First. Whether the driveline is engaged with clutch plates, torque converters or is continuosly varible does not make the transmission automatic or manual. A lock-up torque converter has a clutch but no clutch pedal.

Any transmission with the capability, in one mode or another, to change from one gear to another unassisted by the driver is an automatic. Every automatic transmission car I have ever seen allows you to shift gears up or down with a stick on the column or a stick on the floor console. This does not make it a manual transmission.

Any transmission that lacks the capability, in any mode, to change from one gear to another without the assistance of the driver is a manual.

Bottom line, look under the steering wheel.

If you see two pedals (brake and gas) it's an automatic, if you see three (brake, gas, clutch) it's a manual.

There is no clutch pedal in an automatic transmission car.

There is no gear shift in an automatic transmission car. Once you put the transmission into Drive, everything else is automatic.

And if that's still no clear enough, tell your wife or girlfriend to back it into the garage. If you don't hear any grinding noises and it doesn't rocket through the back of the garage it's probably an automatic.

hey there, just signed up on this site and i have been reading all sorts of forums. i recently just got a 03 g35 6mt sedan, and i absolutly love the car. i was too close to buying a 03 325i and i so glad that i didn't. as everyone has said, it beats bmw in every aspect, and i am a huge fan of bmw's. they are just too overpriced to the car you get, unless you opt for a m5. the 6mt is awsome, i was about to get the auto, but the salesman told me to wait for 2 weeks and they would have em in, a week later he called, it came in early, that was in march.

Originally posted by jamG356MT
hey there, just signed up on this site and i have been reading all sorts of forums. i recently just got a 03 g35 6mt sedan, and i absolutly love the car. i was too close to buying a 03 325i and i so glad that i didn't. as everyone has said, it beats bmw in every aspect, and i am a huge fan of bmw's. they are just too overpriced to the car you get, unless you opt for a m5. the 6mt is awsome, i was about to get the auto, but the salesman told me to wait for 2 weeks and they would have em in, a week later he called, it came in early, that was in march.

Welcome to the forum and Congrats on the purchase of a great car, hope to see you on the board more often. If you really want to see some hot drama come and join me over at the maxima forum, it gets pretty hot and heavy over there from time to time.

There are some things that you can do in some autos to increase efficiency off the line. One is break torquing (sp?) If you become familiar with your cars threshold off the line you can usually gain some advantage vs. a manual off the line (in many new cars). This makes up for the loss of power through the torque converter.
Also by slightly fluctuating your throttle position (disengaging slightly. during your cars shift points, it fools your torque converter into thinking that you are going to disengage your throttle and it tries compensate by allowing transfer of more power to the tranny when shifting. As soon as you have it fooled, you reengage full throttle and you get a slight boost going into second gear. This also tricks your air and fuel system into giving you a little more juice during shift points once you reengage the throttle. Because most of the trickery happens while your car is shifting, you do not lose acceleration due to reduced throttle.