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

**babkalakal** · November 30th, 2009 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by p_borj

+1. Sabi kasi nung isang tsikoteer ALL M/T daw ay iphe-phase out na. Sa PUV's palang hindi na ito maaari dahil for extreme use ang mga ito like I said before, uphill climbing with heavy loads etc.

OT: May nasakyan ako before actually mga 8 years before na hehe, A/T na bus tapos kakaiba ang shifting nito. De-pindot. Yup, buttons yung A/T hehe, cool!

sir kung yung tinutukoy nyo na de-pindot na tranny sa bus malamang hinde matic yun. manual pa din po yun meron clutch electronically actuated nga lang both clutch and shfter pa. marami nito sa mga modelo nissan UD at isuzu na tourist bus karaniwan.

**willvill** · December 7th, 2009 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by LeOxe

i prefer fuel savings than comfort so i go with Manual Transmission. you will definitely get more fuel mileage than an Automatic.

How much kaya can we save in one month or one year if we use an MT over the AT. Any rough estimate?

**oj88** · December 7th, 2009 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by willvill

How much kaya can we save in one month or one year if we use an MT over the AT. Any rough estimate?

This will depend largely on the car being compared. Comparing apples to apples, in the case of the Civic FD 1.8S, below are their typical fuel economy:

A/T city: 10.63 Km/L
A/T highway: 15.31 Km/L

M/T city: 11.05 Km/L
M/T highway: 14.45 Km/L

As can be readily seen, the M/T has a 0.42 Km/L advantage in the city. However, since the Honda 5-speed A/T has a taller overdrive gear ratio, it has a 0.86 Km/L advantage in the highway over the M/T.

The efficiency of A/Ts have dramatically improved through the years. Developments such as drive-by-wire (ECM-controlled throttle), smaller/lighter torque converters, lock-up clutches, etc. has made them at-par with M/T variants in terms of fuel economy. The difference in fuel consumption isn't that too far as they were 15 years ago.

**roberto_minosa** · December 7th, 2009 04:13 PM

^That's correct. I always hated the A/T Crosswind, and thought all diesel A/Ts sucked. But when dad got his A/T D4D Innova last year, I had a complete change of perspective on A/Ts on diesels. But too bad, there hasn't been any change on the automatic Crosswind.

**willvill** · December 8th, 2009 07:36 PM

Originally Posted by oj88

This will depend largely on the car being compared. Comparing apples to apples, in the case of the Civic FD 1.8S, below are their typical fuel economy:

A/T city: 10.63 Km/L
A/T highway: 15.31 Km/L

M/T city: 11.05 Km/L
M/T highway: 14.45 Km/L

As can be readily seen, the M/T has a 0.42 Km/L advantage in the city. However, since the Honda 5-speed A/T has a taller overdrive gear ratio, it has a 0.86 Km/L advantage in the highway over the M/T.

The efficiency of A/Ts have dramatically improved through the years. Developments such as drive-by-wire (ECM-controlled throttle), smaller/lighter torque converters, lock-up clutches, etc. has made them at-par with M/T variants in terms of fuel economy. The difference in fuel consumption isn't that too far as they were 15 years ago.

Can we conclude then that the FC betwen the AT and MT Civic is negligible and insignificant? Then, fuel saving as the reason for choosing an MT over AT may now be put aside.

**chua_riwap** · December 8th, 2009 07:55 PM

I have both M/T & A/T cars. I do use the manual more frequently though.

Ang ayoko lang sa manual yung ma-traffic ka sa lugar na inclined!

I've been driving M/T for years now, pero nahihirapan pa rin ako sa mga paahon ( like dyan sa Quezon Bridge, yung ramp sa Ayala/Buendia to EDSA & those shopping mall ramps), lalo na kung bumper to bumper ang traffic. Nakakahiyang mamatayan ng makina........

He-he!

Yung tigil, andar, tigil, andar....yun ang parusa sa M/T, pag nasa paahon ka.

Pero, kung stagnant ang traffic, what I do is brake, neutral then handbrake ako. Pag umusad na, sabay primera, gently stepping also w/ the clutch & gas, at pag humila na yung makina, sabay bitaw sa handbrake. Walang patay na makina........

**water** · December 8th, 2009 08:04 PM

Pag pareha nabaha mas madali ayusin manual

Sa philippines tayo every year may baha. Kahit hindi ondoy type typhoon eh abot above sa gulong. So abot transmission.

**jonski** · December 8th, 2009 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by chua_riwap

I have both M/T & A/T cars. I do use the manual more frequently though.

Ang ayoko lang sa manual yung ma-traffic ka sa lugar na inclined!

I've been driving M/T for years now, pero nahihirapan pa rin ako sa mga paahon ( like dyan sa Quezon Bridge, yung ramp sa Ayala/Buendia to EDSA & those shopping mall ramps), lalo na kung bumper to bumper ang traffic. Nakakahiyang mamatayan ng makina........

He-he!

Yung tigil, andar, tigil, andar....yun ang parusa sa M/T, pag nasa paahon ka.

Pero, kung stagnant ang traffic, what I do is brake, neutral then handbrake ako. Pag umusad na, sabay primera, gently stepping also w/ the clutch & gas, at pag humila na yung makina, sabay bitaw sa handbrake. Walang patay na makina........

pareho tayo sa lahat ng sinabi mo.

**crossdx** · December 19th, 2009 10:26 PM

My preference would be: For a sports car, M/T without a doubt. For a daily commuter, with the traffic we encounter here regularly, A/T is just more practical. That said, if I had to pick one only it'd be manual. It's just a purer driving experience. Ideally, one would have a matic for driving to work, and if one can afford it, a manual sporty ride for those weekend getaways and for having fun at the track.

**alwayz_yummy** · December 19th, 2009 11:50 PM

how ironic.. i love MT cars, pero eto, rides ko ay both AT....kia pride 1.3 GTX AT and xtrail 250x...

small displacement engined car + AT is good for the city... and my big-engined car for my fun/highway runs... both di nagkakalayo ang FC...