lol

Auto transmissions start from the second gear and to initiate from first gear, you need to force-throttle. In most cars, acceleration is sluggish due to the second gear start and the fact that the transmission takes roughly about twenty horse power of your overall net horsepower. Manual transmissions don't hog horsepower and you can start from the first gear. High performance cars start from first gear but requires maintenance (ever so often and expensive replacements). I don't know about the new Mercedes, but in the mid 90's, the V8 E Classes starts from the first gear and it's rapid and you torpedo from zero.

For those of you that are biased towards manual transmissions, try the manumatic transmission from Volvo's Aisin Warner. It's adaptive and as you weave through traffic, it shifts as a manual transmission would. It's a sequential transmission but the feeling is awesome. I think it's called geartronic. It's only serviced by the dealer and Aisin Warner fluids are just too pricy.

Man ual

Modern automatics, even offerings from the lower-end cars, start from first, without the need for "kick-down". Automatics, however, tend to be slighly slower off the mark, when compared to a similar model with a conventional manual transmission.

I run a 2000 model Audi RS4, (2.7 biturbo V6) 6 speed manual. With 380PS in standard form, it IS a lot quicker than a 2005 Audi RS4 (4.2 V8). The example I've been up against for 2 seasons has been modified from the stock 344PS, to the customer's spec. It is now running one of my KKK-04 biturbo set-ups, and produces 455PS. On the standing quarter, my car has run a best of 12.43 secs @ 112 mph, while my customer's car managed a best of 13.02 secs @ 108 mph.

Some may argue that my car has the edge, because it's lighter, but not true. My car is an Avant, and weighs 1,625 kgs, the other car is a saloon, and weighs in at 1,587 kgs. A rolling road session back in February showed the 2005 model with Audi's Tiptronic transmission had a 46PS power loss, as opposed to mine, which had a 39PS power loss. Both models are quattro, so comparison is fair.

My client's next modification, once his finances have recovered, are a 6 speed manual conversion, which I have already sourced.

An auto is a smooth, effortless unit, but sharp standing starts will see them lagging behind a similarly-powered manual one. In terms of top speed, there's little in it these days, similar, but the manual car'll get there first.

@Siena

Your Audi 6cyl might start from the first gear as oppose to the V8 sister and that causes it to take off and brisk through with a purr. The difference is the gear itself. It is a lot harder to make a performance vehicle from an 8 cylinnder than a 6 cylinder and sometimes, the 6 cylinder vehicles outperform 8 cylinder vehicles. This is subject to principles in kinematics and mechanical vibrations. You have 8 reciprocating cylinders and you have to tame those cylinders enough to have your vehicle still. The more rpm you acrue, the harder it is, so engineers have a lot of work and engineering to implement on the structure of that vehicle. The input shaft in the transmission is now connected to the spline which will now be turned by the engine power. Less engineering is required to put a 6 cyl together and also less for a 4 cylinder.

V8's that will start from a first gear would have ASR's with no defeat switch. I don't know anything about Audi. All I know is that they make front wheel vehicles and I don't have interest in front wheel vehicles. All that traction advantage talk is bogus. It doesn't go in line with the laws of physics.

I understand your concept, Ivvie.

It's also a fact, an 8 cylinder engine will be smoother than a f or 6. A 4 cylinder engine would require a lot more balancing than an 8, to maintain smoothness. I have a clients 2003 Audi RS6, in bits. It is going back together, and power will be up from the stock 450PS (4.2 V8 biturbo) to 620PS, but, it won't be using the original Tiptronic auto tranny, but one of my specially modified 01E 6 speed manuals, re-built with a thicker input shaft, but with a narrower "waist" machined into it, to allow it to twist slightly (torsion bar) under full bore acceleration. It'll need to flex, as the engine is going to be making 580Nm of torque.

I only work on high performance Audi, and very few of my clients run front wheel drive versions, the majority are quattro. I too prefer rear wheel drive to front, there IS more traction, as irrespective of how the car's designed, weight will ALWAYS transfer to the rear, which on a front wheel drive car will result in a lot of tire smoking, and little traction.

I've been involved in sprints since '97, and find a high performance engine harnessed to a manual transmission the best option. Of course, modern automatics sap less power than say, an old Borg Warner / Ferguson unit, with lock-up torque convertors, so internal slippage is kept to a minimum.

And one thing, Ivvie, the vast majority of high performance Audi ARE 4WD. But, we both digress, we're diluting this thread, and making it more of a technical forum! But, it's great to hear from someone that understands how cars work.

I thought all Audi's were Front WD. Man, it'll be harder configuring performance on a 6 speed auto transmission. Excuse me for this question, but what is PS? I reside in the United States. That's a huge gain of power that will be gotten (450 to 620). What's going to be done to compensate for the heat?

Poster, please do not be offended. I believe in moderacy too. Accept my apology.

Thanks, everyone.

No sweat, Ivvie. Audi have been building 4WD (quattro) since 1980, with the launch of the Audi quattro turbo 10V.

PS is the German equivalent of hp.

The 4.2 V8 biturbo in the Audi RS6 produces 450PS, in the RS6+, 480PS. These engines are engineered well above the factory outputs, and extracting more is not as hard as it would be, in an older engine.

I don't use stock air-to-air intercoolers on any of my cars, I prefer charger coolers, with a water / methanol mix. I'm currently installing an Audi RS4 2.7 biturbo V6 into my 1994 Audi Coupe S2 bodyshell. A stock RS4 produces 380PS, but this engine's pretty special. It's been tacken out to 3.0 litres (I bored out the block, to Audi A4 3.0 spec, and sourced the correct low comp. pistons from EIP tuning in the US). But, the charge coolers on my car are different. They're specially built units, to my specification, designed for high pressure applications. I'm plumbing these into a seperate air con compressor, running R-134A). You can't get lower intake temps than this set-up will produce!

Heat soak won't be an issue, even running manifold absolute pressure of 1.6 bar boost, with an extra 12 second 0.4 bar overboost under load from 3rd gear upwards.

01E 6 speed tranny, the same spec as the one I'm fitting to my client's RS6, is being utilised.

It's a shame there isn't a technical section on here, I could go into further detail, and post up progress pictures as they come.

Sienna,

I just sent you an eMail. , for the sake of this the thread topic.

manual

That's ok, Ivan. Reply sent,

For me, an Automatic car is d best thing in d world. However i agree completely that your location matters reason being that if you are located in Lagos then you shouldn't be in a hurry to get a Manual gear except if you are looking at using the car as a form of exercise to build some muscles.

I dont agree that Automatics are for lazy people, i have driven tboth of them and my experience a night i got stuck on Lagos - Ibadan Express road for 13hours in a Manual transmission car was the worst nightmare of my life.

So, i will advice you to consider your location and choose wisely!

Yeah i agree with u . AT is better anyday anytime in lagos

automatics are better. so long as it is an improvement on manual, then it's better. performance, durability, etc premium

Auto anyday! Drove a manual in Lagos and my knees really ached especially in traffic. I changed car to auto and had the best time of my life driving in Lagos. Driving away from junctions and traffic lights were pretty fast and smooth. Traffic jams were no longer so much of an issue to me using the auto.

the thing is that it is an african thing to prefer mannies to autos, because we like that feeling of near-impossible

I enjoy MT, but this lagos traffic always make you hate MT. Outside Lagos, MT, in Lagos AT!

I think for a road like nigerian road where port hole is all over, and you have to always shift the gear, i would rather go with an automatic where i dont have to worry about going btw gear one to 3 at all times, maintenace wise, i will suggest manual, cos there are more mechanics in nija that could handle that

In North America, all heavy use vehicles, such a ambulances, police cars and taxis are auto matic. Even the city buses, do you think if money could be saved that they would use auto transmisions?
Regards.

Balckhawk, try to understand what you just said, pls explain, what are the kinda transmission used in America gotta do with what is better in lagos/nigeria as a whole

$$Rhino, I understand very well what I said, it proves the the automatic trans is less trouble and therefore less expensive to operate with harsh usage. If you do not wish to accept that, so be it.
                                  Regards.

I totally agree wid black hawk

I totally agree wid black hawk

I totally agree wid black hawk

I totally agree wid blackhawk

Blackhawk, i am not disputing that, i just wanna know teh correlation btw what u said and how it affects nigerian roads, u are forgetting the fact that american roads and nigerian roads are not alike, forgeting that nigerian mechanics dont have the technology to diagnose the prob with automatic transmission, there are more mechanics that understand manuals in nigeria than auto trans in nigeria, so use those kinda yardstick and not cos it is cheaper in america, it means it will be cheaper in nigeria, besides, we are all on public forum, tryig to understand one another, aint arguing with u bro, so no need for walls, we just rubbing minds,

@ Rhino, Henry , all,

Have all car manufaturer discontinued production of manual trans?. I hardly see manual trans for any of the latest models

They still produce Manual, depend on where you are looking and what kinda car u looking at, but more people are getting into Auto trans now

I stil luv Auto whether or not manual is being produced.As a matter of fact it is

I'll always be a manual man.

Besides the points myself and Ivvie made earlier, an automatic-equipped car lacks the engine braking a manual allows.

@ BlackHawk: Automatics are used by public service vehicles in the States, as well as the UK, not because they're more durable (they're not) but because there's less driver fatigue, when you may have to spend up to 10 hours or more daily on a set route, and boredom MAY lead to less concentration.

Automatics are actually more problematic, the later ones even more so, as besides the hydraulic circuitry, they also have a seperate ECU ( electronic control unit) to initiate shifts to match engine speed, and load.

They also require more maintenance long term. It's quite common to find late model cars with automatic trannies in wreckers yards, because, often transmission failure can mean the vehicle's not economic to repair.

I have on order a 6 speed automatic for a 2001 Mercedes CL600, for a client. The cost? £9,775 + VAT! On a lesser car, I doubt I'd get the go ahead to order it!

Interestingly, when I placed the order, the dealer commented this was the 7th order since last June, he was processing for an automatic Mercedes. I asked him about a manual, and he said, he's worked for Lancaster Mercedes for 11 years, and he's never had an order placed for a manual, not even parts to repair a damaged one.

Dat stil doesnt prove anything.I think we need an auto engineer expert coz dis ,4 now, is only a matter of individual taste and preference.

Dat stil doesnt prove anything.I think we need an auto engineer expert coz dis ,4 now, is only a matter of individual taste and preference.