Fuel consumption: Auto vs Manual

Home > Gari Forums > Others Forums > Others Other Forums > Others Other Fuel Economy Forums

Fuel consumption: Auto vs Manual

Dear Guyz,

Ppl say that automatic transmission cars comsume more fuel than their manual counterparts. In am especially talking about new City Auto vs New City Manual. Your expert comments are needed in the regard.

Gari.pk User 1606 asked on 22 Jun 2010 15:46:11 pm

1 Answer

330 views |

Maani - on 22 Jun 2010 15:46:20 pm

Default
Okay its not like a huge mammoth difference. insignificant when the cars are new, but rather significant with age as the usual wear and tear sets in.
Think of "autos" as preprogrammed gearshifters, it'll shift when its programmed to shift given various inputs which vary to a certain extent. Now we know that a human brain is capable of rational thought (dont let the people of this forum convince you otherwise)and a manual tranny...is well lets say more versatile.

An automatic transmission wears down the brakes. A manual transmission wears down the transmission and the clutch. Brake pads are cheaper, but need replacing more often. Repairing the transmission is expensive and sometimes non existant in area of Pakistan but then again, the transmission itself can handle a much greater amount of wear and tear.

I'm not saying that autos are bad. Its like comparing Apples and oranges. They both have their pluses and negatives although the manual as you'd agree is more intune with a cars engine. A manual will have better deceleration and more efiicent use of engine braking..

But to cut a long story short, the key difference b/w and manual and an auto is that a manual locks and unlock a variety of gears to the propeller shaft for different gear ratios while a slushbox the same sets of gears produce the different gear ratios thanks to planetary gear...

And ir just gets technical from there onwards...
lol