Automobile magazine "Blood Feuds"!
08-22-2009, 01:30 AM
#1
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: DFW
Posts: 743
Automobile magazine "Blood Feuds"!
So in the airport before heading back to dallas from tampa I couldn't help but search the magazine racks for something mustang-related to read on the plane. And then I found this little gem; Automobile Magazine Blood Feuds edition! Some GREAT reads here, if y'all haven't already picked it up I'd advise it. It's got an article on Mustang GT vs. Camaro SS which, IMO, sounds EXACTLY like the Mustang-Camaro-Challenger lineup in Car & Driver a while back.
On the Mustang vs. Camaro article it talks about the sons of Parnelli Jones and that donehue camaro guy comparing modern versions of the two, ending on the note that while the camaro is consistently faster, the Mustang has better handling and less weight which makes it "more rewarding and fun to drive". Stupid article.
But here's why I posted this. There was an article on Manual transmission vs. Automatic transmission which raised my eyebrows, (I get a lot of crap for having an auto), and I'll post it and disclaim I didn't write it...don't want that legal crap.
Automatic Vs. Manual
It used to be so easy: Manuals were for real drivers, automatics were for lame-os. No we've got dual-clutch gearboxes that drive like automatics (scads), wet-clutch automatics that can tach up from a standing start like a manual (Mercedes-Benz SL63 AMG), and manuals where a computer heel-and -toes for you (Nissan 370Z). The debate is less about performance-the Porsche 911 Turbo does 0 to 60 mph quicker with an auto than it does with a manual-and more about control. Sure, automatics execute rev-matched downshifts, and dual-clutch boxes may be faster around a track than manuals, but neither allows the driver complete control. And that's all the manual has left, really. The battle is now technical perfection versus imperfect humanity. A manual gearbox rewards you for skill but also metes out punishment when you goof up-the grinding of gears, and the helpless zing of pistons attesting to a missed shift. When actions carry consequences, driving becomes more interesting. By most rational measures, automatics are superior to manuals. An automatic won't smoke the clutch, or stall, or shift into third when it meant to shift into fifth, and the manuals fuel-economy advantage has all but evaporated. You can't shift as quickly, or launch as perfectly, as Porsche's PDK dual-clutch unit. And still, the manual survives, an analog machine in a digital world. The death of the manual always seems to be just over the horizon, but the stick shift remains. Because for some people, tactility always trumps capability. Your computer can access infinitely more information than a book, but which one would you rather take to the beach?
-Ezra Dyer
So that's the article, I thought it was an excellent read. The whole magazine is actually pretty great; They have articles over Lamborghini vs. Ferrari, Porsche 911, Mercedes Benz vs. BMW, Lincoln vs. Cadillac, Diesel vs. Gasoline, '32 Ford vs. '55 Chevy, and more.
On the Mustang vs. Camaro article it talks about the sons of Parnelli Jones and that donehue camaro guy comparing modern versions of the two, ending on the note that while the camaro is consistently faster, the Mustang has better handling and less weight which makes it "more rewarding and fun to drive". Stupid article.
But here's why I posted this. There was an article on Manual transmission vs. Automatic transmission which raised my eyebrows, (I get a lot of crap for having an auto), and I'll post it and disclaim I didn't write it...don't want that legal crap.
Automatic Vs. Manual
It used to be so easy: Manuals were for real drivers, automatics were for lame-os. No we've got dual-clutch gearboxes that drive like automatics (scads), wet-clutch automatics that can tach up from a standing start like a manual (Mercedes-Benz SL63 AMG), and manuals where a computer heel-and -toes for you (Nissan 370Z). The debate is less about performance-the Porsche 911 Turbo does 0 to 60 mph quicker with an auto than it does with a manual-and more about control. Sure, automatics execute rev-matched downshifts, and dual-clutch boxes may be faster around a track than manuals, but neither allows the driver complete control. And that's all the manual has left, really. The battle is now technical perfection versus imperfect humanity. A manual gearbox rewards you for skill but also metes out punishment when you goof up-the grinding of gears, and the helpless zing of pistons attesting to a missed shift. When actions carry consequences, driving becomes more interesting. By most rational measures, automatics are superior to manuals. An automatic won't smoke the clutch, or stall, or shift into third when it meant to shift into fifth, and the manuals fuel-economy advantage has all but evaporated. You can't shift as quickly, or launch as perfectly, as Porsche's PDK dual-clutch unit. And still, the manual survives, an analog machine in a digital world. The death of the manual always seems to be just over the horizon, but the stick shift remains. Because for some people, tactility always trumps capability. Your computer can access infinitely more information than a book, but which one would you rather take to the beach?
-Ezra Dyer
So that's the article, I thought it was an excellent read. The whole magazine is actually pretty great; They have articles over Lamborghini vs. Ferrari, Porsche 911, Mercedes Benz vs. BMW, Lincoln vs. Cadillac, Diesel vs. Gasoline, '32 Ford vs. '55 Chevy, and more.
Last edited by UpTo11; 08-22-2009 at 05:33 PM.
08-22-2009, 06:34 AM
#3
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,056
If I had to do it all over again I pick the automatic.I love the shifter but it gets old in traffic.New automatic valve body's have come a long way.With proper maintenance auto's seem to last longer than a clutch.Hi stall converters,line lock's and what ever else they can think of make 's an auto hard to beat.
I'm still kind of miffed about the press telling us SS and even V-6 models being quicker,I've knocked both models out in some street action.Its over pretty quick and I'm usually out 1-2 cars when I take off.
The media may write what ever they want but putting sugar on B.S. is still B.S.
I did get stomped pretty bad by my friends GTO who had installed a s/c,that thing in extremely quick.Nice car to boot.
I'm still kind of miffed about the press telling us SS and even V-6 models being quicker,I've knocked both models out in some street action.Its over pretty quick and I'm usually out 1-2 cars when I take off.
The media may write what ever they want but putting sugar on B.S. is still B.S.
I did get stomped pretty bad by my friends GTO who had installed a s/c,that thing in extremely quick.Nice car to boot.
Last edited by Poco; 08-22-2009 at 06:38 AM.
08-22-2009, 08:04 AM
#4
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 903
or shift into third when it meant to shift into fifth,
And like mygt500 said, I don't have anything against an auto trans either. I prefer one to a stick on a dd anyday. but when it comes to the stang I personally would not have it any other way. and that writer made say WTF when I read that part lol
I think everyone on these forums are way past the stick is for real drivers comments anyways. Good read though
08-22-2009, 08:34 AM
#5
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ATL
Posts: 2,955
That's a decent article. I do think that one day manuals will be something only had in inexpensive economy cars sold in the less developed countries only. Auto's will definitely be the way to go as their technology constantly evolves and as more government mandates are made.
Like the article said, today's auto are just as fast if not faster than manuals and the fuel economy difference is minuscule. I wouldn't be surprised if auto's started having better mpg than manuals in the near future.
Like the article said, today's auto are just as fast if not faster than manuals and the fuel economy difference is minuscule. I wouldn't be surprised if auto's started having better mpg than manuals in the near future.
08-22-2009, 10:57 AM
#6
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Henry County, Georgia
Posts: 1,636
If someone offered to put an Auto in my car for free, id do it. The manual is fun, and really makes me feel like im driving, but it gets to be a pain in traffic or when trying to multi task. And as a DD i find myself always trying to eat/drink or something that makes shifting a pain
![Widowmaker[X]'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%23a7c460' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>W</text></svg>)
08-22-2009, 11:57 AM
#8
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ATL
Posts: 2,955
I would, especially seeing as how their current design makes that impossible.
If someone offered to put an Auto in my car for free, id do it. The manual is fun, and really makes me feel like im driving, but it gets to be a pain in traffic or when trying to multi task. And as a DD i find myself always trying to eat/drink or something that makes shifting a pain
If someone offered to put an Auto in my car for free, id do it. The manual is fun, and really makes me feel like im driving, but it gets to be a pain in traffic or when trying to multi task. And as a DD i find myself always trying to eat/drink or something that makes shifting a pain
Oh yeah, I really get a kick out of the "manual makes you feel like you're driving" stuff. Driving a manual just means your responsible for 1 more thing, which is also 1 more thing that can go wrong. I'll stick with just taking care of speed and direction.
Last edited by Bmr4life; 08-22-2009 at 12:00 PM.
