Battle of the Transmissions: M/T vs. A/T

[Egan101]

MT on Mondays and Sunday.
AT on other days and saturdays
Mas fun yun MT above 3k rpm.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

Yung AT (CVT) ko fun din sya from 3k to 6k rpm

I'd want an MT for a project or weekend car but it has to be quicker, faster, and more nimble than my daily ride.

[Sleepcare]

Yung AT (CVT) ko fun din sya from 3k to 6k rpm

I'd want an MT for a project or weekend car but it has to be quicker, faster, and more nimble than my daily ride.

STI

[Egan101]

STI

Don't tempt me! Kahit yung old bug eye or Evo 8. Hahahahaha

[nikko.bags]

Sa work, we use A/T, okay naman kasi during business hours, medyo roads talaga are traffic, so AT advantage, tsaka puro AT comp vehicles namin . but after work going home. especially late hours na. I drive M/T (personal car), nakaka relax mag drive ng Manual lalo na at walang traffic

[rdgyap]

Hi guys! me and my friend was on a passionate debate on what's the better type of transmission. He plans to buy a new car one in place of his old A/T car. Personally, having driven a car M/T for 5 yrs now, i encouraged him to get a M/T instead of his usual A/T. I haven't driven A/T cars that much, so i really really can't tell the better one objectively. Based on car racing games naman... manual trannys get the better edge, d ba? and i prefer it too. Pros and Cons..., maintenance cost, acceleration.. etc. Love to hear your insights mga pare. I appreciate it!

Hi, newbie here. IMO, to each his own bro. Most of my colleagues prefer AT due to manila traffic situations but one preferred MT because he simply likes to drive with the stick. His route? valenzuela to NAIA to valenzuela everyday. Personally i like to drive MT but my wife prefers AT. I don't feel like driving is a chore but kind of like a hobby, perhaps that is why I like MT.

[rdgyap]

uh una...
hehe, di ata masyado'ng realistic yung reference.
anyway, for the past 19yrs, been driving mainly M/Ts, with occassional A/Ts. my take on the topic: is basically the same with the previous posts, it all depends on the driver's needs, so to speak. personally, I've come to appreciate the A/Ts for city driving riddled with traffic jams.

True. And AT nowadays are much more advanced than before.

[crosswind]

Automatics are more cheaper to maintain nowadays take for example the 30k kms PMS of a euro 4 Isuzu dmax; Mt variant costs around 10k pesos while AT variants costs around 8k pesos


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dr. d]

Automatics are more cheaper to maintain nowadays take for example the 30k kms PMS of a euro 4 Isuzu dmax; Mt variant costs around 10k pesos while AT variants costs around 8k pesos


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

what about the cost of fuel appetite?

[sirkosero]

what about the cost of fuel appetite?

Read somewhere modern automatics are more fuel frugal than their manual counterpart

Sent from my MI MAX 2 using Tapatalk

[Egan101]

Read somewhere modern automatics are more fuel frugal than their manual counterpart

Sent from my MI MAX 2 using Tapatalk

Modern automatics (6-speed torque converters, CVTs, DCTs) have proven to be as efficient or better than MTs without loss of performance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dr. d]

are we talking about local stop and go traffic, or are we talking about long, traffic-free highway drives?

i have both AT and MT versions of the same car, and i can easily say that in everyday city driving, the MT gives me at least 10% more km/li than the AT.
i also noticed, that, on the highway, my MT was doing about 2200 rpm to do 80 kph, while my AT did about 1800 rpm to do 80 kph.

a few years back, i vaguely remember a fuel-efficiency challenge involving various locally-sourced cars, sponsored by a fuel company (?). the cars traveled on actual local roads, but with some amount of traffic control. i do not remember the results. does anyone remember this? did any of the AT equivalents out-km their MT versions?

[kisshmet]

^Automatic transmissions are heavier than the manual counterpart that accounts for the fuel savings

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

[Dr.Kamiya]

Yeah AT is still heavier, and still has slightly more parasitic loss. The main advantage is now in having more ratios for better gear spread, allowing the car to be in a more efficient RPM range more of the time.

6MT vs 6AT version of the same car the MT will definitely win in fuel economy. What's interesting is when we now compare 6MT vs 8AT, or even 9AT or 10AT of the same car.

[oj88]

More than a decade or so ago, iba pa definition ng A/T and M/T.

A/T would have a torque converter and typically have 1 or 2 less gears than their M/T counterparts.

M/T would have a manual dry clutch and stick shift.

Nowadays, that line has blurred to a point that we have A/Ts that behaves more and more like an M/T.... Dual dry clutch, manual gear selection, etc. which oftentimes makes it at par with conventional stick-shift M/T in fuel economy.

Then there’s also CVT.... technically also an A/T, but not quite in the same ballpark as traditional A/Ts.

But one thing is still certain, A/T and all its variants will always have a higher TCO.... the price of convenience.

[yapoy86]

Basta 3 ang pedal manual.. pag 2 lang automatic

[oj88]

Basta 3 ang pedal manual.. pag 2 lang automatic

That’s basically automatic vs manual clutch.

Yan na lang ang distinction kasi ang A/T madalas may manual mode na rin. At meron din A/T na counter-shaft gearing ang design (parang traditional M/T) at hindi planetary gears.

[babkalakal]

More than a decade or so ago, iba pa definition ng A/T and M/T.

A/T would have a torque converter and typically have 1 or 2 less gears than their M/T counterparts.

M/T would have a manual dry clutch and stick shift.

Nowadays, that line has blurred to a point that we have A/Ts that behaves more and more like an M/T.... Dual dry clutch, manual gear selection, etc. which oftentimes makes it at par with conventional stick-shift M/T in fuel economy.

Then there’s also CVT.... technically also an A/T, but not quite in the same ballpark as traditional A/Ts.

But one thing is still certain, A/T and all its variants will always have a higher TCO.... the price of convenience.

ano sir ibig sabihin ng TCO? thanks

[oj88]

ano sir ibig sabihin ng TCO? thanks

Total Cost of Ownership (cost for the whole lifetime of anything)

1. Purchase cost - Mas mahal vs M/T
2. Preventive maintenance - Mas mahal at marami din (liters) ang ATF vs MTF, plus kung may filter pa na papalitan or kung ipapa-dialysis
3. Repair maintenance - Mas mahal ang baba, baklas, palit ng mga parts like clutch packs, solenoids, etc. Mas mahal din diagnostics dahil sa dami ng electronics
4. Resale value - Mas mababa resale value usually pag A/T

All in all, talagang binabayaran mo sa A/T ay convenience. Talo ka kung outright monetary value lang magiging basehan.

[ninjababez]

Total Cost of Ownership (cost for the whole lifetime of anything)

4. Resale value - Mas mababa resale value usually pag A/T

All in all, talagang binabayaran mo sa A/T ay convenience. Talo ka kung outright monetary value lang magiging basehan.

itong last 2nd hand purchase ko bro mas mahal na AT

Sent from my MI MAX 3 using Tapatalk

[XTO]

A/T tama si oj, purely for convenience at mas willing magkasa sa gastusan pagdating sa maintenance at repair. Masama naka A/T pero ayaw gumastos puro convenience lang gusto pagdating sa huli.

M/T pangmatagalan at para sa matyaga (challenge yan) at praktikal pagdating sa maintenance at repair. Meron din naka M/T pero hindi kuripot