Originally Posted by donutsina911
"In theory an automatic is slower but in practice not always - when you see the 0-60 times on cars they really thrash them - a manual will soon burn out it's clutch if you rev it to 5000 and let go!!!"
cant be arsed to read 12 pages of this thread, but assuming someone has corrected this crap from codders.
Porsche 911 Turbo -
Manual: 0-60 in 4.2
Tip S: 0-60 in 4.9
through gear acceleration and top end both superior in manual car
this is the same for most cars where 0-60 sprints are relevant and some (ie LR3 TDV6) where its not. Exceptions include DSG from audi which is allegedly quicker than manual changes and more economical than an auto..
Excuse me - "this crap from codders" - I seemed about the ONLY one sticking up for manuals - nearly everyone else said they were a waste of time!!!
Yes a manual is faster than an auto - no contest BUT as I said - when the mags or manufacturers post their 0-60 times they have to seriosuly abuse the cars to do it.
I have often read - and also have experience of - people in many cars - INCLUDING 911s - wrecking clutches after maybe only 2 or 3 attempts to get fast times. the standard technique is to bring the revs up to about 5,000 and then let go!!!
An automatic will take 0-60 runs all day long(conventional auto) - a manual most certainly will NOT!!!
The hardest cars to get good times out of are 4wd turbos like an Imprezza - to keep the engine in the max powerband you have to slip the clutch as there is too much traction to spin the wheels.
Without abusing a car day in day out an automatic IS quicker for most drivers - it only takes a fraction of a delay changing up etc for the auto to have won.