Originally Posted by DesertFox
You have a point, automatics have gotten better, but automatics are still not as efficient at power transfer as manuals, and don't let those EPA numbers fool you. The manufacturers will sometimes use more aggressive gear ratios (usually on the axle) for the manual version, and a more highway-friendly ratio for the automatics. This accomplishes a few things:
- It makes the manual "feel" much faster than the automatic
- It gives the automatic better fuel economy, at the expense of that "kick".
- It also gives people the impression that automatic is equal to, if not better than, manuals in fuel efficiency (to counter the ingrained beliefs of an older generation that was raised in an era where automatics were always seen as inferior mileage-wise, as well as in other aspects)
The manufacturers seem to want to ween the general public off automatics, and I've heard that while automatics are still not prevalent in Europe, the numbers are rising quickly.
I agree, the automatic shouldn't get better milage than the stick because the stick is a direct drive system when it is cruising in 6th. gear. You can't get more efficient than that.
It has to be that the stick and automatic have different final drive ratio's. Does anyone have those numbers? It would be interesting to compare them.
The owners manual lists the stick in 6th. at 0.838 and the automatic in 5th. gear as 0.833.
I don't know what those numbers mean. I'm used to seeing rear end ratio like 4.11:1 and 3.80:1 etc. where the higher the number the higher the rpm will be at a given speed and the poorer the gas milage but it will give better acceleration performance.
What is the difference in RPM @ 60 MPH with the stick in 6th. , and @ 60MPH with the automatic in 5th? I think the automatic would be turning less RPM which would account for the higher mileage numbers.