2k5pony

To start a conversasion of course and see others opinions. Obsol3te what I meant to say (sorry was in mutliple threads) was that remeber the cars were built in the last 10 years. what you are refering to are older cars. This power xfer issue is minescule. Less than 1%. Both Manual and auto have power loss involved. Technology is great. I have done this experiment incorperating RT's driver ect and found that out of 10 races on 10 diferrent days with a professional driver (not myself) the auto won every time. we used my 01 TA RA and his Auto TA RA. Anyway I love how everyone thinks the "shift" better than anyone in the world and can beat even a computer. I find it very funny.

96SilverLT1

And I find your ignorance funny. You started a thread with a question to which you already desided an answer for the sole perpous of insulting the people that don't agree with you. No matter what proof you are to be shown in this thread you will never change your mind. That kind of closed minded thinking is what keeps the internet filled with people just like you.

2k5pony

Insulting people? I didnt know you were so sensitive. My appologize sine that is the case. I started the thread to have a discussion. If you are feeling hurt maybe you should post on http://www.disney.com or http://www.nick.com. I have yet to se proof and would be glad to read it. So far I just have opinion. Send the proof Ill be glad to review it. I am opened minded to your so called "proof" that has yet to exist.

96SilverLT1

Think about it.. take a 325HP car with a manual that has a 10% loss. now take the same 325hp car with a 15% loss from a auto. the manual will put down 292 to the wheels. the auto will put down 276. Couple that with the fact that you can shift higher in the RPM band which whill mean your next gear will start at a higher RPM ban which will get you into the power faster. Along with the fact that the sudden shock of weight transfer from the stock leads to a quciker launch and you have youself a faster car. Even the mustang guys who compare the GT's say that the auto is a lot slower. But hey, assume what ever you want. It's your call, the only one that can change your mind is you.

2k5pony

If this was 1990 I would agree. The hydrolics compared to the sheer Plate xper of a manual was laggin behind back then

96SilverLT1

only way you can prove that is with a motor and chassis dyno of an auto and manual car. Even if the manual says at 10 or 11% loss the auto is still going to be around 13-14% ish. and you still get converter lag unlike a manual.

2k5pony

For sake of argument lets say your numbers of "Even if the manual says at 10 or 11% loss the auto is still going to be around 13-14% ish" are acculate. You would still be losing 90% RWHP between shifts compared to 40% with the auto with a good driver. Ill take a max of 4% total of over a RWHP loss at 4 diff times during the 1/4 mile of 50%. Not to mention Hitting each gear perfectly. Anyway I do prefer the maual its a hell of alot more fun the puttin around driving Ms. Daisy

96SilverLT1

have you heard of inertia? It keeps you moving. The loss from dumping the clutch for the short short time that your shifting gears is marginal at best. And where did ths 90% and 40% come from?

2k5pony

Dino runs I have seen. Correct even if you cut the engine you will keep moving. Obviously are you "manually taking the gear and moving it" When the computer does it. It is done quicker and more effiently. If you have driven both you would be able to tell this from mearly being in the car.

96SilverLT1

I have driven both. The reason that it's quick and smooth in an auto and you don't feel it is alllll that power loss going in with teh gear change. Thats why when you pound second in an manual the car hits hard. your transfering all that power at once instead of sliping that power through a slush box.