Trigger Alert

>>16445861

t. Americlap

>>16445861
There's one area where a manual will always be superior (unless you have something with zero computer interference that only does what the user tells it to), and that's control.

>>16445861
Maybe on modern high end cars, but not on the cars the posters on this board own and jerk off to.

>>16445861
>professional drivers let an automatic shift itself
Really gets the noggin joggin'

>>16445861

I went faster in an autoX course with an automatic C4 Corvette than any of the manual C4s did.

I chalk it up to being allowed to focus exclusively on taking the best lines and hitting my braking points rather than having to fiddle about with changing gear all three times the course required. I just dropped it in 2 and always felt like I was in the correct gear.

>>16445861
It's a fact. Manual is more fun but auto has been superior for a long time

Didn't some recent track race have an automatic have faster lap times than its manual counterpart?

>>16445861
I definitely disagree with pic related primarily because of how they present the material. I'm sure this'll be a long post, but I'm going to break it down as to what I see them writing and why it seems really biased to me.

To begin, they're making some pretty selective claims as to why automatic is 'better' and only want to say 'manual is funnn to driveee i guess xDDDD' but quite literally nothing else regarding manual. Now on the contrary, the claims made about automatic range from
>...It's faster...!!
>It's ALWAYS been better!
>moar speedz = better xDD
>cvts are great

Now, this is all they said about automatic transmissions, and none of this was meant to be negative towards them in the article. Manuals, on the other hand they completely shit on or complain about

>it's an ''''affectation'''
>it worsens your gas mileage!!!
>yeah it might make driving more fun, and it might be a reason you'd want one, BUT that's all it does!! automatic is better!!!

From the quotes above it's entirely evident that the person who wrote this snippet has a huge bias to automatic. Why? I have no idea, but quora is a platform for normal fags to talk to 'professionals' so that's one place to start. They also talk more about automatics and give way more reasons as to why they're 'better', in such a leisurely manner. That in itself is a red flag for bias. All this aside, there are some things that were not mentioned about manual transmissions such as:

>most are rated to take more power than automatics, so if you want to have an aftermarket system (many people do) an automatic may not be able to handle the power
>can be serviced from home; most automatics are sealed preventing anyone but the dealer from working on them or changing the fluid
>automatic transmissions have more points of failure, as they have more computer/electronic incorporation. (ie more things to go wrong)

Ran out of space, next post I'll pick apart their assertions

Who cares? Manual is more fun. Yes there are good autos. Yes autos in expensive cars are good and faster than manual.

There is nothing to argue here, it is all just facts.

>>16446578 cont
Some of the claims made by this person are a bit bold.

Automatics:
>...It's faster...!!
Not necessarily, depends on many factors
>It's ALWAYS been better!
No. This is not true. See below for mpg example. Early automatic transmissions also had more problems than manuals. They have not 'always'
>moar speedz = better xDD
This is not true and is not a universal rule. Some cars only need 5 or 6 speeds. Again, depends on the car. Not a concrete rule
>cvts are great
lol

Manuals:
>it's an ''''affectation'''

'Affectation' meaning 'it's just a driving style people do to IMPRESS, people who drive manuals are pretenders!!' This really doesn't make a whole lot of sense being in their paragraph as this is more of an opinion and not a 'fact' as to why manuals are bad.

>it worsens your gas mileage!!!

This is not true.
1984 Ford Escort
>21mpg city 26mpg highway (auto)
>28mpg city 39mpg highway (manual)
2016 Fiesta
>27mpg city 37mpg highway (auto)
>28mpg city 36mpg highway (manual)
This day in age manuals and automatics are very similar in mpg, especially with econoboxes. There are some exceptions, however claiming it'll 'worsen your mpg' isn't necessairly true.

>yeah it might make driving more fun, and it might be a reason you'd want one, BUT that's all it does!! automatic is better!!!
Not much as I can really say to this, as this is more of an opinion. However it is safe to say that 'making driving fun' is not 'all' a manual will do.

and out of space

>>16446602
There are pros and cons for both however the person who wrote that paragraph in the picture really didn't want to discuss that. Manuals may be better for some people who want to actually drive a car and want to focus on the road, or want to do aftermarket. Automatics may be better for your average everyday normalfag who doesn't care about driving or dislikes driving and would rather have driving be presented as a mindless task. Or for those who don't want to sit through traffic in a manual. There is a lot that could still be touched on, however I'm going to end the rant here. But to answer your question OP, yep I was TRIGGERED HARD. ya got me boy

File: twinstick.jpg (75KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1280x720px

>>16445861

>europoors can only handle one shifter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2zwd1iazvU

I'm never going to track a bone stock street car on the track, and everyone know automatics are faster for drag racing.

This is why laptimes are pointless and modern BMWs suck.

>>16446169
Even with a manual you just leave it in second the whole time. You probably just a better driver.

>>16445861
Franlky the performance of the manual depends more on the driver
And the automatic just get the driver out of the equation so sometimes it's better sometimes not
But manual gearbox will always be cheaper to build