Auto VS Manual

[TheInsanity1234]

[
Worth bearing in mind that 99.somthing % of miles driven in RRs will be on the road. Having driven a RR on a pretty challenging off road course (the LR experience centre in Honiton) I didn't find having auto caused any problems, especially given the multitude of systems it packed, such as hill descent control.

Two classes of car where you don't often see with auto, but I think would far better suit it, are city cars and small hatchbacks (Ford Ka/Fiesta, VW Up/Polo, etc). Often these are rarely taken out of a local urban environment, and driven by people with little interest in driving who might not relish the joys of a perfectly executed heel and toe downchange on the B4560 (and there's no reason why they should). For their duty cycle and demographic, I believe an auto box would be beneficial for the majority of applications. However, they are also very price sensitive segments and opting for auto would represent a large bump in price proportionate to the cost of the car, which probably explains their lack of popularity here.

I've read reviews of RRs and they always point out how brilliant the car is off-road so I'm not bothered too much by the presence of an auto box (and in fact, for people who are new to off-roading, an auto would be more benefical to them than a manual as they don't have to think about the gearing and clutch control whilst at a 45 degree angle! )

That is a good point. Most of the people I see chugging around in tiny city cars are very often the ones that could do with a bit more assistance in their driving!

[jameslb101]

BMW i3 and Smart FourTwo are the only new cars I can think of that meet your criteria of being both auto and RWD. Upcoming Twingo is going to be rear-engined, RWD, but at this stage I haven't heard anything about auto being available.

Trouble is, the i3 is going to be electric, so perhaps not.

The i3 (which incidentally has been out the best part of a year and I have driven) is indeed electric. However, although technically there is only one gear ratio, so it is neither auto or manual, it has no gear stick or clutch, so from the perspective of an end user is an "auto".

That is a good point. Most of the people I see chugging around in tiny city cars are very often the ones that could do with a bit more assistance in their driving!

Exactement

[triquet]

Hello, I'm just reviving this one for a reason.

Did my IAM recently and failed (own fault, largely a so-called "progress" issue, which i won't go into here). I did it in an automatic and I did feel there was some unwritten anti-automatic agenda by the examiner. Anybody else had this issue?

[Gareth]

Did my IAM recently and failed (own fault, largely a so-called "progress" issue [...]

Splitting out because it often relates to the main part of your question ... (and because it's a fairly low threshold to be able to demonstrate making close to maximum safe & legal progress for the duration of a short test).

I did it in an automatic and I did feel there was some unwritten anti-automatic agenda by the examiner. Anybody else had this issue?

Often people drive automatics as if they can't accelerate; there's no reason that brisk acceleration can't be used. If an examiner thought the candidate wasn't using the available acceleration, he or she might be less than impressed.

If you were to say some more about the issues you perceive then it might be possible for others to add useful comment ...

[jcochrane]

Hello, I'm just reviving this one for a reason.

Did my IAM recently and failed (own fault, largely a so-called "progress" issue, which i won't go into here). I did it in an automatic and I did feel there was some unwritten anti-automatic agenda by the examiner. Anybody else had this issue?

If I were on an IAM test with an auto box I would change to "Manual" on the approach to an NSL and select a gear that would give me the rate of acceleration I wanted when my foot is at the end of the acceleration pedal travel but before kick down comes in, and back to "Drive" on the approach to a 30 limit.

I would do this as a general rule anyway but particularly on a test such as IAM or RoADA. Doing so gives better overall control and the ability to demonstrate "pace" (progress). Also better for managing balance (weight distribution) through bends. Examiners like to see "Manual" demonstrated so another reason for using it.

Not everyone agrees with this but it is my preferred way of driving a car with an automatic gearbox.

[triquet]

Mmm. Takes way the point of having an automatic doesn't it? It all smacks to me a bit of "if you want to be an AD you shouldn't drive an automatic ..."

[michael769]

Mmm. Takes way the point of having an automatic doesn't it? It all smacks to me a bit of "if you want to be an AD you shouldn't drive an automatic ..."

I think you are misunderstanding. Part of AD is using the right tool for the right job. Generally I'd expect associates to use Auto and it do it's job for the most part, but there are situations where an auto box does not make good choices (the hunting behavior on hills of some old auto boxes is a prime example), and using hold or manual modes can give the best results. It's about demonstrating that the driver understands the features and capabilities of the gearbox and is able to make well judged (ie advanced) choices about how to utilize those features, both manual and automatic. Flexibility is one of the key attributes of AD.

I would criticism someone who always used manual just as much as someone who always used auto. "Always" and "never" has no place in AD.

I too find that some associates with auto boxes tend to have an ingrained "lazy" style that is not conducive to making good progress. Under the stress of the test such ingrained habits do sometimes reemerge and cause candidates issues, sometimes without them being unaware of it.

Having said that my auto candidates have all got Gold as far as I can recall.

[jcochrane]

Mmm. Takes way the point of having an automatic doesn't it? It all smacks to me a bit of "if you want to be an AD you shouldn't drive an automatic ..."

Not really. Michael769 has already answered your point well. I would add that, with few exceptions, an "automatic gear box" is not just Automatic BUT also Manual. So to use it to full advantage one expects to use any of its capabilities available to suit the situation.

[triquet]

I originally learned to drive automatics years (1975-ish) ago, fresh off a plane into LAX, and was presented with an auto, "stick shift" hire cars being like hen's teeth. Full of jet lag (etc) I had slightly erratic progress until catching on to right foot braking. Thereafter tended to drive old three speed autobox style and never used the manual part of the box at all. Over the years I've had a mixture of manual and autos without any great issue until recently.

I have now cottoned on to its use for restraining the beast in a 30 limit and stopping it hunting on steep country minor roads. But I am concerned that there is an underlying anti-auto bias with IAM, and wondering whether I might be better off pitching up next time with t'other old banger which is manual, but a stiff cable clutch, somewhat worn synchro in 5th and which has a definite mechanical preference to change up and down through the gears and not block change ....

[GJD]

If I were on an IAM test with an auto box I would change to "Manual" on the approach to an NSL and select a gear that would give me the rate of acceleration I wanted when my foot is at the end of the acceleration pedal travel but before kick down comes in, and back to "Drive" on the approach to a 30 limit.

Do you actually go for "Drive" in 30 limits? I quite often find with autos that in built up areas, if I give the car complete freedom over its gearbox it can change up to a higher gear than I am comfortable with, leaving me with less deceleration control available from the accelerator pedal than I would like. So while I might not want to be fiddling with the gears as much as I perhaps would on a fun B road, I sometimes want to at least limit the range of gears the car can choose from in a built up area.

[Gareth]

But I am concerned that there is an underlying anti-auto bias with IAM, and wondering whether I might be better off pitching up next time with t'other old banger which is manual, but a stiff cable clutch, somewhat worn synchro in 5th and which has a definite mechanical preference to change up and down through the gears and not block change ....

Why not set yourself the challenge of passing in whichever car you find it most difficult to meet the expectations of the examiners?

If you're prepared to accelerate briskly leaving hazards, and prepared to use the manual over-ride to hold an appropriate gear for stability through NSL bends and maybe when going downhill, then passing shouldn't present much of a problem.

[Gareth]

Do you actually go for "Drive" in 30 limits? I quite often find with autos that in built up areas, if I give the car complete freedom over its gearbox it can change up to a higher gear than I am comfortable with

My starting point in an unfamiliar auto is "Drive" for urban areas but I've often found the same as you - that for reasons of economy the 'box picks unreasonably high gears - so I'll often be using a manual gear selection.

[jcochrane]

If I were on an IAM test with an auto box I would change to "Manual" on the approach to an NSL and select a gear that would give me the rate of acceleration I wanted when my foot is at the end of the acceleration pedal travel but before kick down comes in, and back to "Drive" on the approach to a 30 limit.

Do you actually go for "Drive" in 30 limits? I quite often find with autos that in built up areas, if I give the car complete freedom over its gearbox it can change up to a higher gear than I am comfortable with, leaving me with less deceleration control available from the accelerator pedal than I would like. So while I might not want to be fiddling with the gears as much as I perhaps would on a fun B road, I sometimes want to at least limit the range of gears the car can choose from in a built up area.

Generally as a default but as with all things stay flexible. So I would on occasions come out of Drive as you suggest. Also for motorways and dual carriageways I would usually go back to Drive. As has been said I try to be flexible with the auto gearbox and do what is most appropriate for the situation.

[triquet]

After a bit of experimentation the old bus certainly likes being in manual 3 in a 30 and manual 4 in a 40 and accelerates nicely up to 50 still in manual 4. She has real problems keeping to a 30 in drive: foot completely off the loud pedal she will still creep up, particularly on a bit of downhill. That's sorted then.

The hill thing only really happens on two locations I regularly use and that can be sorted.

[jameslb101]

While the 'J-gate' boxes in my Jags were slow and clunky when used in the manual mode, they were useful in that they could be used purely to limit the highest gear the box would go into. For 30 limits and small country lanes it was useful to limit it to 3rd, while on faster A and B roads I tended to limit it to 4th. In both cases it would still change down if necessary though. I also found myself permanently leaving the car in Sport mode (which tended to keep it one gear lower than it would otherwise) to give myself more engine braking and a better throttle response. Probably didn't help the economy but what's a few mpg between friends when you're running a V8!