Lately we're seeing automatics that are more efficient than

>>17879289
They're called overdrive gears OP

>>17879289
Fuck yeah I want 8 gears in my manual or a hi/lo spliter. Both would be excellent compromises. The way it's set up now is appropriate for the car and its intended use, but still a compromise of which 6 ratios to use.

>>17879289
because jews

>>17879289
Most modern small cars are designed for city dwelling yuppies. They gear cars low so they feel more "peppy" and accelerate to 60 quicker. Most people rarely travel on the highway and if they did they'd get something with long, high gearing and a V6.

An overdrive would just add weight or lug the engine down to the point of making the OD pointless, Especially on a pigfat 4 cylinder accord.

Small engines on the highway are usually a meme anyways. A small engine revving it's tits off is going to use less fuel than a big V8 just idling along.

>>17879289
Real world fuel mileage is still better weighted towards manuals because normies don't know how to drive and automatic control algorithms are fucking retarded.

Which is a shame

File: vettempg.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

>>17879346
>use more fuel

>>17879346
Old manual subarus with little engines like 1.8 probably 1.6 used to come with hi/lo, at least in foreign markets. I forget whether that was with 4 or 5 gears, but it's a brilliant solution because highway cruising and crawling or autoxing are different situations.

My N/A 2.0L is definitely ready for a higher gear by about 70MPH when cruising. I'm going to downshift anyway if I need to do any serious passing.

>>17879346
4k at 70mph is fun tho

>mfw I still get 35mpg

>>17879289
i suppose manufacturers realize that making a "better" manual car is a diminishing return for American markets with autotragic being so prevalent.
an automatic that gets 40mpg is going to sell better than a manual with 42mpg in America

>>17879369
Hmm neat. We didn't get too many old Subaru's here in NA. Or most had a big enough engine to not need the hi/lo switch.

>>17879376
My 1.8 only has a 4 speed auto and gets almost 35 mpg at over 90mph. It sits at less than 3500rpm. Yeah it accelerates like a pig from a standstill but the low rippems on the highway is nice.

Now with modern turbo 1.4's and shit you don't got that much HP to play with when off boost.

>>17879289
>tfw the highest mpg ive ever gotten in my ej253 5m legacy is 26.4mpg

lel

>>17879559
Subaru's AWD is great at doing what it does, but that doesn't include drivetrain losses. I used to get just over 27MPG in my 5MT Impreza. Got 28 for a while while I had a ricer exhaust on it.

>>17879346
That's literally bullshit you fucking busrider. I've driven v6 and 4pot cars and the higher revs needed on the 4pot will suck more gas than the lazy revving v6

>>17879628
I know. That's why I corrected myself.

>>17879346
>Most people rarely travel on the highway
I live in middle America so you have to jump on the highway to get anywhere here. Even when I was driving a 1992 Civic that probably wasn't making but 90hp I didn't feel underpowered on the highway.

I just noticed that a 2018 Mazda 3 I drove the other day was turning 2k RPM at 65mph. It would get better mileage if it had another gear or two. I'd like to be down around 1200rpm at highway speed.

>>17879355
>automatic control algorithms are fucking retarded.
True as well. I drove a "sporty" automatic Hyundai Sonata the other day and all it did was hold the gear about 700rpm above where I would have shifted.

>>17879628
Eh, my v6 Altima gets about 32mpg turning 1.5k rpm on the highway. A 4cyl turning higher still gets better at the same speed.

>>17879655
I should clarify that the Mazda still had no problem going from 65mph to 95mph in 6th at WOT. I quite liked it.