I took the time to count the number of automatic transmission vehicles that get better fuel economy than manuals listed in the article containing the statement “The vast majority of vehicles listed here suffer a slight fuel mileage penalty for selecting the manual.”.
There are 34 automatic transmission vehicles listed that have a higher fuel economy rating than manuals. About half of those are equipped with CVT or dual clutch auto.
There are 21 manual transmission vehicles listed that have a higher rating than auto.
11 vehicles listed have the same fuel economy rating.
I omitted some vehicles from the count like the Dodge viper which is only available with a manual transmission and one of a twin offering such as Compass/Patriot.
Manual transmission vehicle with a greater fuel economy rating than autos are still available and it is not difficult to beat the EPA rating.
As a non-gearhead following this discussion it seems that which is best, manual or automatic transmission, depends on a combination of factors including but not limited to the needs and abilities of the driver, type and use of the vehicle, typical driving conditions, etc. etc. etc. The discussion has added to my admittedly scant understanding of transmissions.
And again, the autos that beat the manuals do it on the EPA test, not necessarily in real life. We all know a kid that could ace his standardized tests, but didn’t fare as well in the real world. ATs are that kid. The MFRs know the exact sequence used on the test, and can employ strategies tailored to beat it.
EPA doesn’t test all vehicles. Manufacturers are free to post a lower estimate. Posting a lower estimate for manual helps to sell automatics.
Now that we have established that manuals are mechanically more efficient than a hydraulically activated automatic, what is keeping auto manufacturers from using automated manuals?
In two of the same year/make/model/equipment (except for the trannys) cars, both driven comparably, I seriously doubt that you'd kick anyone's butt with the manual. But this is a purely hypothetical situation, and. we've simply drawn different conclusions.
The whole point of my claim is that the driver makes more difference in mpg than the style of transmission does. Yes I do kick the butts of people who insist on accelerating towards each and every red light as they drive in stop and go traffic when it comes to fuel economy. Yet, I still get there just as fast, their average speed is lowered because of all the time they spend going zero miles per hour in front of the red lights that they raced towards.
Give these people computer controlled transmissions that shift as optimally as possible and I will still kick their butts in mpg.
Eight years ago I was headed to a conference with my research partner in a Honda Civic Hybrid from my institution’s fleet. My research partner is an automobile enthusiast who likes to drive. Her own car is a,Honda Civic with the manual transmission. For an experiment, we filled the gas tank before we left the conference and she drove about 120 miles and we refilled the gas tank and calculated the mileage. She said that the mileage was within a half gallon on the Civic Hybrid with what she gets on her own Civic with the manual transmission. Our trip consisted of some city driving and then open road driving. Her daily commute in her Civic Manual is about 20 miles each way with some city driving to reach an interstate beltline, so the conditions are somewhat similar to the trip back from the conference. From our results, I would rather have the Civic manual than the complexity of the Hybrid.
Remember that recent fiasco, where Honda reprogrammed the PCM to extend the life of the unreliable, expensive and crappy battery pack.
It boiled down to using the ICE far more, and essentially eliminating the auto-stop feature
A lady sued Honda in small claims court and won. She had kept meticulous records from day one and was able to prove that fuel economy massively decreased after Honda flashed her PCM. The fuel economy numbers were barely better than a regular Civic, after the flash. She said she would have never bought the car in the first place, had she known what was going to happen
There are apparently some Civic Hybrid owners out there, who have refused to bring their car to the Honda dealer for the PCM “update” because they want to retain the original programming and fuel economy.
@db4690 “You wouldn’t want a Civic Hybrid, anyways”.
You are 100% correct about that. I have never been comfortable driving a Civic–the driving position just isn’t right for me. It doesn’t have enough leg room for my long legs. My research partner is about 5’ 4" tall and thinks the Civic is great. Mrs. Triedaq was on the road for recruiting trips and of all the cars in the university fleet, the Civic Hybrid was the one she tried to avoid as she didn’t find it comfortable. Mrs. Triedaq is not one to complain, but she really complained after a long trip in the Civic Hybrid. On the other hand, she drove from eastern Indiana to Washington, D.C. and back in a Dodge Avenger from the fleet and had no complaints.
When I started working for the university in 1965, there were still some manual shift cars in its fleet, although these manual shift cars were only available for local use and were deemed too old for over the road use. Even at that time, there were faculty who couldn’t operate a shift vehicle.
I was reading a fairly interesting manual transmission article on msn when I noticed this confusing theory.
“The manual transmission is on the endangered species list. Every year fewer and fewer cars are offered with a clutch and a shifter. Why? Americans just don’t want to be bothered with the chore of working a clutch with their left foot and shifting with their right”. Provided by Popular Mechanics
I admit to steering with my knee a few times but never considered shifting with my “RIGHT” foot! LOL.
