Automatic or Manual..

[Salar]

I'd be weighing her right foot, only car I've had that could get down that low was the Subaru .

Same here, I was lucky to get anything over 25mpg in my Subaru AWD. Had it less than a year then traded it in.

 

[Electric_Andy]

I'd be weighing her right foot, only car I've had that could get down that low was the Subaru Impreza, even the 3.0L Toyota Surf with full-on slushbox running on veg oil was better than that.

That was/is definitely a factor, but the same goes for her lead foot in a manual so conditions were the same. She doesn't quite know how to drive frugally

 

[mickle]

My '86 412i was an auto - which is why the 'cognocenti' look down their noses at it. It had a GM gearbox out of a school bus - being the only thing then available which could handle 5.0 V12 hauling two tons. Boy was it thirsty. The fuel guage could be seen moving.

 

[Cycleops]

I’m surprised more hasn’t been said in favour of the CVT system. It’s the only truly automatic box. Most others try to mimic a manual but the CVT is step less and can also cope with hills which can confuse other boxes.

 

[Jason]

Had an expensive and very new automatic hire car last year. Hated it. Had 9 gears and it was always the wrong one. Constantly changed itself up down.

probably a jag or range rover evoque thingy

the Mercs and BMW's have 8 or 9 speed auto boxes which are sublime. flick it over and you have a semi automatic which will hold any gear you select, and drop down the gears as you slow down.
my car has the flappy paddles and whilst they are fun for about 30 seconds - pretty useless in normal driving

 

[green1]

I’m surprised more hasn’t been said in favour of the CVT system. It’s the only truly automatic box. Most others try to mimic a manual but the CVT is step less and can also cope with hills which can confuse other boxes.
View attachment 379392

I had one in a hire car last year in the states. It was truly horrific. It's was worse than an 80's slushbox.

 

[vickster]

I had one in a hire car last year in the states. It was truly horrific. It's was worse than an 80's slushbox.

Yes most American autos are awful. 3 litre engine but couldn't pull the skin off a very wobbly rice pudding!! With endless delays between gear changes even with the pedal to the metal!

 

[green1]

Yes most American autos are awful. 3 litre engine but couldn't pull the skin off a very wobbly rice pudding!! With endless delays between gear changes even with the pedal to the metal!

It was a Nissan. I'm not a fan of automatics at the best of times, but I hate CVTs. I swear the only thing that changed in that car when you put your foot down is the the engine note changed from howling to wailing.

It's said that the fastest car in the world is a hire car. That would change if all hire cars were the same as that thing. Even the snails were overtaking me.

 

[Profpointy]

[QUOTE 5004679, member: 45"]I do about 8k miles a year with a CVT. It does about 90mpg and would beat most of your cars away from the lights. The CVT is great. It's a scooter.


A neighbour of ours had one of these...

View attachment 379394 [/QUOTE]

My dad used to have the daf 66 version. It was horrid but to this day he goes on about how great it was.

edit: there wasn't per se much wrong with the rubber band drive itself, we'll apart from spontaneously zooming off at high speed if the choke was out, but it was just a horrid car generally. Now I think about it, the zooming off at high speed thing was a bit of a flaw which caused my dad two accidents - but he still defended it after my.mum rightly made him sell it.

 

[mustang1]

My '86 412i was an auto - which is why the 'cognocenti' look down their noses at it. It had a GM gearbox out of a school bus - being the only thing then available which could handle 5.0 V12 hauling two tons. Boy was it thirsty. The fuel guage could be seen moving.

View attachment 379391

Good god man, a Ferrari with a torque converter automatic? Are you insane? What will they think of next.. a Ferrari SUV!???

Edit: ps that was a 3 speed auto wasn't it?

 

[mustang1]

I’m surprised more hasn’t been said in favour of the CVT system. It’s the only truly automatic box. Most others try to mimic a manual but the CVT is step less and can also cope with hills which can confuse other boxes.
View attachment 379392

I drove a 1990s Nissan Micra with a CVT around town. It was actually far better than I thought it would be.

 

[mustang1]

[QUOTE 5004679, member: 45"]I do about 8k miles a year with a CVT. It does about 90mpg and would beat most of your cars away from the lights. The CVT is great. It's a scooter.


A neighbour of ours had one of these...

View attachment 379394 [/QUOTE]

I've always said a scooter is the best form of transport, especially around town.

 

[Cycleops]

Good god man, a Ferrari with a torque converter automatic? Are you insane? What will they think of next.. a Ferrari SUV!???

Edit: ps that was a 3 speed auto wasn't it?

I believe it was known as the old mans Ferrari.

 

[Cheddar George]

My dad used to have the daf 66 version. It was horrid but to this day he goes on about how great it was.

edit: there wasn't per se much wrong with the rubber band drive itself, we'll apart from spontaneously zooming off at high speed if the choke was out, but it was just a horrid car generally. Now I think about it, the zooming off at high speed thing was a bit of a flaw which caused my dad two accidents - but he still defended it after my.mum rightly made him sell it.

Was it an urban myth that it could go as fast in reverse as it could going forward ?

 

[Cycleops]

I think it was true. My friend had one and there was just a lever, leave it in the middle for neutral and push it back or forward for forward and reverse.