How much faster is a Manual Transmission over an Auto?

[Kaptain Sloth]

I know a manual transmission is noticably quicker than an automatic, however I was wondering how MUCH of a difference there was between the two - specifically for the mazda 3. Are we talking a difference of 1 sec 0-60? 0.5 sec? 2 sec?

Just curious.

[PearlM3]

That all depends on how quick you can shift, basically how well you drive stick. If you don't know how to an automatic will toast you every time!

[hastiej]

That all depends on how quick you can shift, basically how well you drive stick. If you don't know how to an automatic will toast you every time!
+1, driver counts for alot, auto will give you a fairly even run each time, only real time changer in an auto will be reaction time in an auto.. with a manual... who knows.. you could shiftware just before readline.. mis your shift... clutch to late and lose a bit of power band...

I don't think you will get your side by side, perfect run on auto and manual, this one is this much faster comparison, to many outside/inside contributing factors..

[Kappa]

most super cars are auto or at least triptronic type of thing... because a human cant keep up with the power / speed... just going to add that

[mit-gee-mui]

http://www.torontomazda3.ca/forum/showthread.php?13329-Post-0-60-times&highlight=manual+automatic

?

[PearlM3]

most super cars are auto or at least triptronic type of thing... because a human cant keep up with the power / speed... just going to add that

That doesn't count for our cars though, the ferraris and cars like that have computers that cost twice as much as our car alone, their transmissions are amazing. In the mazda, someone who knows how to drive stick will always kick the automatics butt!

[Kappa]

That doesn't count for our cars though, the ferraris and cars like that have computers that cost twice as much as our car alone, their transmissions are amazing. In the mazda, someone who knows how to drive stick will always kick the automatics butt!

this is very true lol

[bluemazda3]

this is very true lol

yup very true

[MistaChin]

the manual is 100x faster than the automatic

:gone

[Unoriginalusername]

The default answer has been that automatics were always slower than a manual transmission and delivered worse MPG. That has started changing from the supercar level on down... you can see examples all the way down to the chevy camaro where the auto is eqaully quick if not a 10th quicker in some of the performance tests before you start getting back to the traditional slow slushboxes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWa6Is2XkLA

[MajesticBlueNTO]

That doesn't count for our cars though, the ferraris and cars like that have computers that cost twice as much as our car alone, their transmissions are amazing. In the mazda, someone who knows how to drive stick will always kick the automatics butt!

"computers that cost twice as much..." is not the entire reason as to why the "automatic" transmissions in those cars are faster than the manual.

a traditional automatic, which is what the mazda3 auto has, uses a torque converter to transfer the power from the engine to the transmission. A torque converter is a fluid coupling -- it is the "clutch" in an automatic -- that uses fluid within it to turn an impeller that turns the gears within the transmission. The fluid in the torque converter is what allows the car to idle in gear without stalling the engine... at idle, there isn't enough force transferred from the flywheel, through the fluid to turn the impeller but, at the same time, there is no resistance to the turning of the flywheel so the engine stays running.

As such, it is also because of the force required to be transmitted through the fluid that causes a greater power loss in an automatic transmission (also called "parasitic drag"). Therefore, between a manual vs. a conventional automatic, the manual will always produce more power at the wheels and, with a good manual trans driver, the manual will always be faster.


In the "automated manuals" like in VW's DSG, the one in the Ford Fiesta, and the Porsche PDK and other variants in the supercar realm, there is a computer actuating the clutch for you. Often times there are 2 clutches for every other gear so that in the 1-2 shift, the computer is preparing the next clutch (this gives the super quick upshifts). There is no torque converter in these "automatics", they are essentially a manual with no clutch pedal...which is why they are faster than their manual transmission counterparts -- the computer will all ways upshift faster than a human can; and, in the case of downshifts, the computer will execute a rev-match for you.

In short, it isn't just expensive cars that have the "automated manuals", VW's DSG has had the "affordable" market for some time now and Ford's Fiesta also has this type of transmission.

[MajesticBlueNTO]

forgot to add that, when you start getting into higher hp and tq, a traditional automatic programmed to execute shifts quickly, will be close to or slightly faster than a manual. I've seen this back in the day when the 2002 Maxima came out with the 3.5L... the automatics were consistent in putting down low 14s stock - about the same as the 6-speed manaul.

Gearing also plays a role as you can use the greater torque multiplication provided by a numerically higher final drive to make up the power difference (makes it 'feel' faster from a dig so to speak)

[Kappa]

wow thats a lot of great information.. i never did know how it worked.. cool.. would the lancer or evo be the same thing i hear them talk about it having two clutches..

[Unoriginalusername]

wow thats a lot of great information.. i never did know how it worked.. cool.. would the lancer or evo be the same thing i hear them talk about it having two clutches..

similar setup to vw's dsg... they also blow apart into tiny pieces if you mod your car too much on the evo's

[Kappa]

well... that sounds like a fun time? lol warranty? im guessing no

[Unoriginalusername]

well... that sounds like a fun time? lol warranty? im guessing no

not with a DP and intake on the car

[Zoom Zoom Boy]

similar setup to vw's dsg... they also blow apart into tiny pieces if you mod your car too much on the evo's

As they also do on the Nissan GTR's... Transmission Fail, big time.

[sunnyhomeboy]

I know a manual transmission is noticably quicker than an automatic, however I was wondering how MUCH of a difference there was between the two - specifically for the mazda 3. Are we talking a difference of 1 sec 0-60? 0.5 sec? 2 sec?

Just curious.


so how many sec(s) faster is consider faster to you? because even in formula one races are decided in split second (Millisecond)...
and are you willing to compensate for the lazy drive of auto compared to stick where you have to use more of your limbs...not just about faster or not just total different experience overall ~ go test drive manual if you haven't to see for yourself vis versa if you had an manual already ...

[sudz]

A manual 2.0 against an Auto 2.3 mazda3 would be very close. I have beaten. in my younger days I had proved this. :-)

That was also when I had just gotten the car in 2007... Buddy had a 2005 hatch. so weight difference and engine wear may change it as well.

Just putting that out there.

[Kaptain Sloth]

so how many sec(s) faster is consider faster to you? because even in formula one races are decided in split second (Millisecond)...
and are you willing to compensate for the lazy drive of auto compared to stick where you have to use more of your limbs...not just about faster or not just total different experience overall ~ go test drive manual if you haven't to see for yourself vis versa if you had an manual already ...

It was more out of random curiousity than whether I'd consider a manual car vs an automatic next time.

The reason I was wondering (partially anways) is because I recently rode in my buddy's 2009 corolla s with a manual transmission, and it felt about as quick as my mazda 3 with the 2.3 litre engine. Maybe I'm wrong, but the Corolla has like 130 hp and 130 tq, vs the 3 which has 160 hp and 150 tq. To me, that seems like a pretty high gap of horsepower/torque to "feel the same" from a power/acceleration perspective. So I'm thinking "does an auto really suck THAT much power from the wheels?"

[shu5892001]

It also depends on how you drive it, if you drive in auto mode, the transmission shifts gear automatically to like 4th or 5th, and when you floor the car the computer has to tell the transmission to downshift like 2 or 3 gears, after the leg, the car goes... But if you put the in manual mode, you can stay in 2nd or 3rd gear, and when you floor it, the car just bursts, which is a pretty significant difference than the latter method, you can actually feel you are being pushed back to your seat.



It was more out of random curiousity than whether I'd consider a manual car vs an automatic next time.

The reason I was wondering (partially anways) is because I recently rode in my buddy's 2009 corolla s with a manual transmission, and it felt about as quick as my mazda 3 with the 2.3 litre engine. Maybe I'm wrong, but the Corolla has like 130 hp and 130 tq, vs the 3 which has 160 hp and 150 tq. To me, that seems like a pretty high gap of horsepower/torque to "feel the same" from a power/acceleration perspective. So I'm thinking "does an auto really suck THAT much power from the wheels?"

[Rob23]

i have an 04GT manual and my dad has his 04GT auto and i can feel a difference when im driving his compared to mine, even with the triptronic.

[gotak]

It was more out of random curiousity than whether I'd consider a manual car vs an automatic next time.

The reason I was wondering (partially anways) is because I recently rode in my buddy's 2009 corolla s with a manual transmission, and it felt about as quick as my mazda 3 with the 2.3 litre engine. Maybe I'm wrong, but the Corolla has like 130 hp and 130 tq, vs the 3 which has 160 hp and 150 tq. To me, that seems like a pretty high gap of horsepower/torque to "feel the same" from a power/acceleration perspective. So I'm thinking "does an auto really suck THAT much power from the wheels?"

Feel is really subjective. I don't take much noticed of people who say they can feel a difference after doing tiny changes to their cars. For example studies have shown one of the reasons why people have more accidents in bad visibility is because they feel their cars are moving slower. It makes sense with a reduction in the visual cues that people use to judge speed it's not surprising they feel they are going slower. People's perception is highly colored and unreliable. It's also been shown that eye witness to a crime often mistaken what they saw and whom they saw.

For all you know the feeling of faster for you is maybe the corolla makes more noise, different noise that sounds "faster, or even just that your friend thrashes his car more than you do. I suspect that in reality most manual drivers are actually slower than someone in similar car with an automatic. For the simple fact that they mostly aren't going to destroy their car trying to accelerate fast.

[Fuyuzora]

I suspect that in reality most manual drivers are actually slower than someone in similar car with an automatic.

I've experienced this / a related effect myself... Previous car was a 2000 Civic SE (4-spd auto, 100hp) before changing to my MZ3 (6-spd manual, 167hp).

Dunno if it's because I'm paying more attention to my total driving (due to shifts etc), because of different cabin noises, or simply due to unconscious attempts to take care of the new car, but I find I'm often travelling about 10km/h slower on my usual roads in the MZ3 than I typically took them in the Civic. That is to say, when I drive at a "comfortable speed" by perception alone, when I glance down at the speedo I'm surprised to find I'm going slower than I was expecting.

Back on subject now, great writeup by MajesticBlueNTO. Loads of information there.

And as for dual-clutch setups... Having driven a Fiesta with the dual-clutch, I can confidently say there's no way in hell I could shift that fast with the MZ3's manual. I can scarcely imagine the shift speed in a Ralliart, GT-R or other performance setup.

[SomeGuy]

Another thing not mentioned here is gear ratios. If you put the 2.0 4 speed auto up against the 2.0 5 speed manual, the manual is going to be quicker because the ratio's are closer and therefore you are in the power band more often. Also, manual transmissions are lighter than auto's (by about 50lbs or so on these cars) so a very slight weight advantage too.

[gotak]

I've experienced this / a related effect myself... Previous car was a 2000 Civic SE (4-spd auto, 100hp) before changing to my MZ3 (6-spd manual, 167hp).

Dunno if it's because I'm paying more attention to my total driving (due to shifts etc), because of different cabin noises, or simply due to unconscious attempts to take care of the new car, but I find I'm often travelling about 10km/h slower on my usual roads in the MZ3 than I typically took them in the Civic. That is to say, when I drive at a "comfortable speed" by perception alone, when I glance down at the speedo I'm surprised to find I'm going slower than I was expecting.

Back on subject now, great writeup by MajesticBlueNTO. Loads of information there.

And as for dual-clutch setups... Having driven a Fiesta with the dual-clutch, I can confidently say there's no way in hell I could shift that fast with the MZ3's manual. I can scarcely imagine the shift speed in a Ralliart, GT-R or other performance setup.

I find the same effect with the speed 3. I actually drive slower and more carefully than I used to because now I have to think what someone's going to do ahead of me and whether I have time to down shift if I need to etc etc. I guess when I get more used to the car maybe I'll be driving faster but somehow i doubt it. It's not like I am arriving couple minutes later now than before.

[Unoriginalusername]

I find the same effect with the speed 3. I actually drive slower and more carefully than I used to because now I have to think what someone's going to do ahead of me and whether I have time to down shift if I need to etc etc. I guess when I get more used to the car maybe I'll be driving faster but somehow i doubt it. It's not like I am arriving couple minutes later now than before.

if you're having to think about it you're just not used to a stick... eventually it will become second nature

[bubba1983]

In the "automated manuals" like in VW's DSG, the one in the Ford Fiesta, and the Porsche PDK and other variants in the supercar realm, there is a computer actuating the clutch for you. Often times there are 2 clutches for every other gear so that in the 1-2 shift, the computer is preparing the next clutch (this gives the super quick upshifts). There is no torque converter in these "automatics", they are essentially a manual with no clutch pedal...which is why they are faster than their manual transmission counterparts -- the computer will all ways upshift faster than a human can; and, in the case of downshifts, the computer will execute a rev-match for you.

In short, it isn't just expensive cars that have the "automated manuals", VW's DSG has had the "affordable" market for some time now and Ford's Fiesta also has this type of transmission.

this has also worked its way into the heavy truck market
eaton and allison both now can be put into a truck with a 2 pedal (gas and brake), or 3 pedal (gas brake clutch) system
in the 3 pedal system, you only use the clutch for first, and reverse. the new allisons will outshift you up and down the highway all day


but what are we really arguing here folks? which 4 door econobox grocery getter is faster, auto or manual? oi

[PearlM3]

but what are we really arguing here folks? which 4 door econobox grocery getter is faster, auto or manual? oi

+100000000 lol

[rob3]

does it really matter which one is faster? We are talking tenths of a second on cars which are slow to begin with. They're spirited and fun in the corners, but its no drag car. Nor is it a rally car, or a superb track car. Its FWD. Its a car we use to for a year round car thats spirited, fun to drive through the corners, but great on gas, and cheap to maintain.

At the end of the day all that matters is, do you enjoy driving your car?

I love driving mine. It's a lot slower than my Nissan 240sx I had. But it's brand new and reliable.

[Kaptain Sloth]

does it really matter which one is faster? We are talking tenths of a second on cars which are slow to begin with. They're spirited and fun in the corners, but its no drag car. Nor is it a rally car, or a superb track car. Its FWD. Its a car we use to for a year round car thats spirited, fun to drive through the corners, but great on gas, and cheap to maintain.

At the end of the day all that matters is, do you enjoy driving your car?

I love driving mine. It's a lot slower than my Nissan 240sx I had. But it's brand new and reliable.

I totally agree - 100%. I was just curious really.

[Kinn]

I find the same effect with the speed 3. I actually drive slower and more carefully than I used to because now I have to think what someone's going to do ahead of me and whether I have time to down shift if I need to etc etc. I guess when I get more used to the car maybe I'll be driving faster but somehow i doubt it. It's not like I am arriving couple minutes later now than before.


I find the same effect with the speed 3. I actually drive slower and more carefully than I used to because now I have to think what someone's going to do ahead of me and whether I have time to down shift if I need to etc etc. I guess when I get more used to the car maybe I'll be driving faster but somehow i doubt it. It's not like I am arriving couple minutes later now than before.

The Speed is the same for me. I'm not sure I'm driving any slower but it certainly feels calmer. In my 06 sedan I really let the engine rev to get the car moving. Now with the huge increase in power in the speed I can't do that, it just gets up to speed to fast. So I find myself driving...calmer...for lack of a better term. I still doing the same speeds on the same roads...it just feels like I'm more relaxed getting to them. That car just doesn't have to work as hard.

As for the difference in cruising speeds you're experiencing between cars. I find that different engine/transmission combinations have a "happy" place where they like to sit at. A certain RPM where the car "feels" right, comfortable...it doesn't feel like it's working too hard, it's quiet, not lugging and it's where I'm happy with how the car feels. I'm sure it's different with each driver. In the 2010 speed I find it seems to like around 3300rpm. It's possible that the difference in cruising speeds from your civic and Mazda are just that the happy place between the vehicles is different.

I've recently spent some time in a 2011 BMW M3 and the thing i noticed most was how impressive the "automatic" transmission was...its changing soo fast it feels like a CVT...It just doesn't stop pulling...and a V8 sounds wonderful run through the gears at 8000+rpm.

[kckev99]

"computers that cost twice as much..." is not the entire reason as to why the "automatic" transmissions in those cars are faster than the manual.

a traditional automatic, which is what the mazda3 auto has, uses a torque converter to transfer the power from the engine to the transmission. A torque converter is a fluid coupling -- it is the "clutch" in an automatic -- that uses fluid within it to turn an impeller that turns the gears within the transmission. The fluid in the torque converter is what allows the car to idle in gear without stalling the engine... at idle, there isn't enough force transferred from the flywheel, through the fluid to turn the impeller but, at the same time, there is no resistance to the turning of the flywheel so the engine stays running.

As such, it is also because of the force required to be transmitted through the fluid that causes a greater power loss in an automatic transmission (also called "parasitic drag"). Therefore, between a manual vs. a conventional automatic, the manual will always produce more power at the wheels and, with a good manual trans driver, the manual will always be faster.


In the "automated manuals" like in VW's DSG, the one in the Ford Fiesta, and the Porsche PDK and other variants in the supercar realm, there is a computer actuating the clutch for you. Often times there are 2 clutches for every other gear so that in the 1-2 shift, the computer is preparing the next clutch (this gives the super quick upshifts). There is no torque converter in these "automatics", they are essentially a manual with no clutch pedal...which is why they are faster than their manual transmission counterparts -- the computer will all ways upshift faster than a human can; and, in the case of downshifts, the computer will execute a rev-match for you.

In short, it isn't just expensive cars that have the "automated manuals", VW's DSG has had the "affordable" market for some time now and Ford's Fiesta also has this type of transmission.

I believe Nissan GTR also uses a similar sophisticated system. Very expensive to replace if things go wrong. But essentially faster than a typical manual tranny.

The slush box manumatics (what people call tiptronic) you find in our cars is a joke. They should just make them regular Autos as they used to with P, R, N, D. This +/- business in the tiptronic tranny is a marketing ploy. I drove a 2010 GX hatch with a tiptronic and the shifts are harsh when pushing the car hard. So I'm not sure this is necessarily good for the life of the tranny if people decide to shift for themselves. I noticed down shifting is also a very harsh transition. It does not appear the computer does a good job at any type of rev-matching. It's best to leave the auto tranny do it's thing not to mess with it.

[kckev99]

does it really matter which one is faster? We are talking tenths of a second on cars which are slow to begin with. They're spirited and fun in the corners, but its no drag car. Nor is it a rally car, or a superb track car. Its FWD. Its a car we use to for a year round car thats spirited, fun to drive through the corners, but great on gas, and cheap to maintain.

At the end of the day all that matters is, do you enjoy driving your car?

I love driving mine. It's a lot slower than my Nissan 240sx I had. But it's brand new and reliable.

+1

As for reliability... I'm still on the fence since my car is brand new.

[rob3]

I totally agree - 100%. I was just curious really.

haha fair enough!

[izikk]

The default answer has been that automatics were always slower than a manual transmission and delivered worse MPG. That has started changing from the supercar level on down... you can see examples all the way down to the chevy camaro where the auto is eqaully quick if not a 10th quicker in some of the performance tests before you start getting back to the traditional slow slushboxes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWa6Is2XkLA

Specs-wise these days autos and manus are pretty comparable in their 0-100 times. It depends on the driver also of course, but the difference is typically rated to be about .2 or .3 seconds, sometimes even equal.
As for manuals saving gas, that really depends how you drive it. If you actually want to take advantage of a manual and rev slightly higher in lower gears, it will waste more gas.