...

...

I drove MT for a year, before that I drove AT for 5 years. Then back to AT, then CVT.

I like CVT, though I wish they had a regular 6AT instead. The CVT performs well, but it can be sluggish and it jerks a lot at low speeds. Just kind of miss the gears.

I also love MT though. Once my Civic financing is up in a few years, I will probably be looking into a Mustang GT or Camaro SS as a summer car and keeping the civic. Ill likely get an MT just so my fiancee can't drive it but really, some cars are fun with MT.

Now, would I get an MT in my daily driver? Absolutely not. I hate hills. I am sure I would go insane again.

I dislike people who bash ATs just as much as people who bash MTs. A gearbox does not dictate who is a car enthusiast. Even if I got a Mustang with AT, though it would be by force of the fiancee, it doesnt mean that its any less of an enthusiast's car.

I don’t buy the argument that you have to drive manual to be auto enthusiast, especially nowadays when automatic transmissions work much better than they did in the past. Being an auto enthusiast can involve following auto racing, automotive trends, automotive engineering, and enjoying the aspects of the car that you drive regardless of what type of transmission it has (e.g. the sound of the engine, how it handles, how it accelerates and brakes, how well it’s engineered, etc.).

I enjoy driving manuals when I’m on roads where you can get the most out of them. It feels good trying to synchronize the throttle, clutch, and shifter to pull off a nice gear change. During the years when I had the space for a weekend car it was always a manual. During that period my commuter cars were automatics or CVTs.

I wrestled with the decision on what to get now that I’ve moved and don’t have a good spot to park a spare car. I went back and forth several times and finally decided to go with an automatic given the heavy traffic in my area and the lack of curvy roads that make sporty driving more pleasurable. My current automatic has a manual sequential sport shift mode gives me the capability to wind the engine up through the rev range without having to mash the throttle to the floor. I rarely use that mode due to the traffic but it’s nice to have it there for when I encounter a situation when I have a bit of open road and I'm in the mood to use it.

Man, you people really ARE slow in Arkansas! Took you this many weeks to take offence to those jerks in the other thread?!? *Laugh*

It's like Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge. Fans of a particular tech aren't willing to listen to reason about the flaws of their particular pleasure. For the record? I, too, think stick shift is the 'best' from an enthusiast's point of view. With the analog clutch and your immediate choice of gears, it's very low parasitic power loss and simple maintenance and operation, plus the 'pleasure' you can get on a racetrack or challenging back road, it's technically the best. If you're a perfect driver and are willing to shift all the time. Many are also forgetting the fact there are many cars with absolutely HORRIBLE transmissions, in feel and operation.

I do feel that every car guy 'should' know how to drive a stick. If you don't, how are you going to know how best to work an automatic? But it doesn't exclude anyone from being a car guy... I got the automatic so my wife can drive it when she has to. Doesn't faze me any. "I can get behind anything..."

...

Heh... Well, there's letting the automatic drive, then using your feet to drive IT... I was watching a review last night where they took a Civic coupe around a small track, and the driver complained because the CVT was a second too slow to do everything. Sure, you can keep driving like that, or you can anticipate and have it all ready for when you need it, if you time things right.

I don't really care, as long as it's fucking reliable.

The slushboxes from the 2000's that Honda put in with their V6's were made of glass. And truthfully speaking, the Civic CVT is exponentially better than some of the other CVTs out there.

And as @Troy Jollimore said, if one proclaims to be an enthusiast, there are ways to learn how to drive with the CVT to minimize the "bad" effects of it.

Gavnzdad said:

I didn't take offence any transmission related comments, I just dont get it. If all someone is gonna do is put down other people for their choice, why even join. I mean, do some people enjoy just telling others that they're stupid for not picking the same car as them? Unless they're paying for it, why do they care? Is a MT better for racing, that's debatable with me. But then again, doesn't matter to me either way. And who the hell is bying a 2016 Civic to race it? Yeah, because we know that would be the first choice of an "enthusiast", using the type of logic I've read from some of you guys. Would I say an AT is better than a manual? Totally depends on that particular person. Would I put down others for wanting either one? I don't care, it's their choice. But to say someone isn't a "car guy" because of the transmission, is just showing that persons ignorance, not superiority. If someone wants a MT, great, have fun driving around jerking on a phalic shaped object all the time.

.

Click to expand...

The way I see it, a properly built car is a properly built car, regardless of the type of tranny. For instance, some of the fastest drag cars in the world use Powerglides. I'm personally more impressed by highly tuned suspension setups and engine work than the mere fact that someone can row through the gears (whoopty-do! want a cookie? Lol )

However, I completely disagree with the notion that Civics are not race worthy. Civics are, in fact, one of, if not the best value in performance cars out there. For less than 10K, the K20 in our cars can be tuned to produce in excess of 500 whp, reliably, and the body can be modified and cut down to a curb weight of less than 2,000 lbs. That is simply not possible with the majority of production cars today. Check out K20A.org and see what kind of performance people are getting, versus the cost.

Personally, I could have bought any car I wanted, up to $40k, but I bought a Civic because of the relative ease of tuning, reliability, low cost of replacement parts and insurance, and extensive aftermarket support. That means more money in my pocket and more time at the track.

What other car can you buy that will annihilate Ferrari's and get 30+ mpg's for under 40k?

...

Gavnzdad said:

You're right, and I wasn't trying to imply the Civic isn't "race worthy". With the right parts, just about ANY car can be race worthy.

I was just talking about the people who talk about "melting into the car", or having "full control over the road". I mean, it's a Civic, which is great car, but it's not a F1 racer.

Click to expand...

Oh, you're talking about that guy. He's obviously very proud of his uncanny ability to move a gear leaver and a pedal, and if you're not doing it too then you can't possibly be in his league. It reminds me of grade school, like rubbing your tummy and patting your head at the same time lol.

And obviously, nothing on the street compares to F1.

This argument always aggravated me also. The whole automatic=non enthusiast thing. My dads got a 2012 Camaro, an 89 Vette and a 67 Supernova with 600+ hp that he built in his garage.....all automatics. He drove trucks for 20 years at work and always says he's not in his 20s anymore. His entire life is absorbed by NASCAR, Indycar and F1. Wears Dale Earnhardt hats and Chevy t- shirts lol. Definitely not an enthusiast right???

Me? I've always drove automatic cars, I do have a bike though so I'm familiar with shifting. I couldn't care less if your car is stick or automatic, I'll always give a thumbs up out the window to a beautiful Z06 driving by.

Gavnzdad said:

I started this thread so that all you guys could come here to talk about which you think is better, air your grievances, and talk smack, since this subject seems on par with an oil thread.

Let me start by saying you guys that talk up how much better a MT is, you gotta come up with better excuses to justify your reasoning than "gives you more control", or some crap like that. I've had auto, and I've had manual, and they both have there good and bad points. I had a Mustang with a 302 boss and 3 speed auto that was pretty wicked. Same could be said about a Camaro with a 5 speed that my dad had. Also, I would love to see you MT guys that say how only real car guys drive a manual go to a car show and walk around telling all the guys with street rods that have automatic transmissions in them, that they aren't enthusiasts, and their car isn't a real car. Let's see you do that and get out without needing serious medical attention. I mean, last time I checked, we were all car people, or we wouldn't fucking be here. Same goes for the AT guys. Your tranny isn't better or worse than a manual. Judging by some of the responses on this forum in other threads, you would think we were discussing something that actually matters.

Hey admin...think we could change the forum name to civicx/CVTvsMT.com?

Let the games begin.

Click to expand...

the more control argument is a good argument. Besides driving "pleasure" and control theres no reason anymore to get a manual over an automatic. Manuals aren't offered in many vehicles and they're usually base models or high performance models. Autos tend to shift faster and get better MPG.

with that said I won't buy one. Theres very few cars I'd buy that have an automatic. All of them are out of the price range I can afford. Exotics, alfa 4c, GTR etc etc. But give me a choice, I rather have a manual. Doesn't matter if it makes any sense or not.

Before civic, I drove a manual mini cooper. The stick shift was fun for a little while I didn't know driving could be that fun. Then it was just whatever/didn't matter. I don't miss it so far.