5-Speed or Automatic?

[mb2319]

I do know a 5-speed is quicker but is the 95+ auto triptronic a good buy if I found a good deal? Or should I just wait for the right 5-Speed to come along. I do not plan on racing the car so a couple of tenths will not kill me. Can someone out there with a 95+ auto triptronic please give me some feedback on how it drives. I have driven a couple of 5-speeds so I do know what they are capable of. Also do the automatics have problems or are they pretty bulletproof?

Thanks

 

[David]

Sounds like you want a 5-spd, but are considering an auto because of a good deal. If that is the case, wait until you find the car you really want to own for years.

 

[ilya]

You sound exactly like I did when I bought an automatic C5. Biggest car mistake I have ever made (ok, second biggest

).
Sold it in 6 months because I was bored. The thrill with the manual NSX is unmatched. Wait for the manual. There are lots of good NSX deals ou there.
My first stick was a 96 vette. I didn't even know how to drive one when I bought the car. 1 week later I couldn't believe what I was missing all those years. I will never buy a sports car with an auto again.

 

[steveny]

I agree dont buy a automatic sports car. Leave the automatics for those who wish to drive suv's or minivans

 

[hejo]

All my past sports cars were manuals until the NSX and since I own an auto NSX I can give you a perspective from automatic ownership versus speculation. First I have the auto for 2 reasons: 1) I have a hip problem where using a clutch is painful, 2) I use my NSX as a daily driver and in stop&go traffic a manual is a pain period. If I didn’t have a hip problem would I drive the manual? If I had never driven the auto before I would have dismissed it. However after owning the auto for 2 years it would be a very hard decision. My preference would be to have an F1 trany in a new Modena spider but that’s about 18 months and $100k away.

So let me answer the question this way. If the NSX was going to be my daily driver I’d get the auto if not then I’d get the manual.

So netting it out. A stock manual NSX is faster, period. More fun? Depends on what you’ll be doing. Auto boring? No because your attention will be diverted to other areas most people have a tendency to forget – driving lines smoothly and setting up for the future turns.

So if you’re looking at the auto because of price – bad approach. Decide what is important to you and how you’re going to drive the car. As far as modifying the car and increasing the HP, you can do everything to an auto that you can do to a manual. Instead of putting in gears and clutch you’ll be beefing up the auto trany to handle the power. It’s about $3k from Level 10. They’ll guarantee the trany to handle up 700 hp and also claim you could smoke manuals because they lose time due to shifting. I wish I had the cash to see if it’s true

and wouldn’t care about the outcome.

As far as how the auto drives in manual mode, private me and I’ll tell you everything you’ll ever want to know. One day I took a BMW driving instructor for a nice little ride in my auto NSX. Afterwards he said he was really going have to look into the triptronic. Why because I was able to drive faster, smoother and pick better lines than the majority of people he instructs because they end up spending more time learning how to shift than driving.

So don't dismiss the auto just because it's an auto. A lot of muscle cars from the 60's and 70's came with autos pushing more HP and torque than the NSX.

------------------
Hal Jones
Lake Oswego, Oregon
95T Blk\Blk SportShift

 

[hejo]

Originally posted by steveny:
I agree dont buy a automatic sports car. Leave the automatics for those who wish to drive suv's or minivans

Don't dis us auto owners.

Formula 1: Semi-automatic sequential electronically controlled gearbox (sequential electro-hydraulic 7-speed gearbox)

A Pro driver from the UK in a completely stock Boxster (non S) with the triptronic smoked every club driver. Demonstration of what the future will bring as all manufactures are moving towards "automatic" type gear boxes.

BTW I've never owned or plan on owning a SUV or minivan.

------------------
Hal Jones
Lake Oswego, Oregon
95T Blk\Blk SportShift

 

[steveny]

Hal didnt mean to offend you. I had a feeling someone would give me some flack for the comment I made. BTW I read your other post here and you have some good points. You have to admit though that your last example is a pro driver. I am sure a pro could out race most people that follow this forum. Also a 5 speed tranny is a lot better into and out of a corner. You dont heat up the brakes to much in and your revs are up for the exit out. I must admit I have never driven a auto nsx and may have a different opinion if I ever do. So my statements are only from past experiances with with other sports and race cars.

 

[hejo]

Originally posted by steveny:
Hal didnt mean to offend you. I had a feeling someone would give me some flack for the comment I made.

Hey none taken. That's what I like about this forum, we get to learn from each others experiences.

I think a lot of people dismiss the auto without really looking at it. The NSX auto was about 10 years ahead of it's time.

You have to admit though that your last example is a pro driver. I am sure a pro could out race most people that follow this forum.

That was my point. Going fast doesn't mean you have to have a manual transmission. There's a lot more to driving fast than the type of transmission you have in the car.

Also a 5 speed tranny is a lot better into and out of a corner. You dont heat up the brakes to much in ...

You'll find that pro's don't use the transmission to brake, they use the brakes. The whole point of heel-toe is to match the revs of the engine with the proper trany speed so the engine isn't being used to slow down the car. Missing this into a turn is what causes most cars to spin.

It's much harder to match the engine revs to the trany in an auto which is why they have a really hard time surviving. Usually heat and exceeding pressures from this activity is what blows them up.

... and your revs are up for the exit out.

Once again this depends more on gearing not the mechanism to put a trany into a gear. If I'm exiting a turn at 4500 rpm I'm in the power band and my trany is fully locked into gear. However the disadvantage of the auto NSX is only 4 gears. However if you had 5 or 6 gears in an auto this would most likely not be a factor. I really wish I had one more gear. Lucky for me the auto NSX gearing is just about right for the local race track configuration and works pretty well through the local hill country.

BTW the MB SLK 320 AMG is available in Europe pulling around 350 hp. It only comes with an automatic. Anybody from Europe or who spends a lot of time in Europe knows that automatics are hard to find. For MB to do this I find really interesting.



------------------
Hal Jones
Lake Oswego, Oregon
95T Blk\Blk SportShift

 

[nsxtasy]

Please note that the term "Tiptronic" is properly applied only to Porsche automobiles. The NSX automatic with the ability to select the next gear is called the "SportShift".

Thanks,
The Language Nazi

 

[David]

Originally posted by hejo:
BTW the MB SLK 320 AMG is available in Europe pulling around 350 hp. It only comes with an automatic. Anybody from Europe or who spends a lot of time in Europe knows that automatics are hard to find. For MB to do this I find really interesting.

This is due only to the insular, narrow-minded culture at MB. I used to do some consulting for them and they are locked into a wierd, self-fullfilling mindset regarding transmissions. They would constantly tell me "Mercedes buyers want automatic transmissions' and I would respond 'that's because you only sell autos. If you sold manual transmissions, you would have buyers that liked manuals. As it is, potential buyers that want a manual buy a BMW." And they would respond 'but we surveyed our customers and they like autos....' and I would say, 'because if they don't they can't be your customers' and on and on and on and on. Nearly drove me crazy.

I sure hope they break out of it some day. The only thing I would change about my C43 is to install a nice 6 spd.

 

[hejo]

Originally posted by David:
This is due only to the insular, narrow-minded culture at MB. I used to do some consulting for them and they are locked into a wierd, self-fullfilling mindset...

It sure seems that way sometmes.

 

[hejo]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
Please note that the term "Tiptronic" is properly applied only to Porsche automobiles...

The Language Nazi

Thanks - trip ... tip I can tell you that I find the SportShift lever much easier to use than the 2 buttons on the Boxster. Couldn't compare it to the F1 as I haven't been able to get seat time other than shotgun.

 

[NetViper]

The first NSX i ever drove was an auto. It had competch exhaust and headers and was said to be pushing near 270 HP. It was a lot of fun. Unfortunately it was the only NSX I have ever driven, so I can't be of too much help. I did get a ride with wei-shen chen in florida in his 6-speed, SC NSX, and there was no comparison. Shifting is half the fun. So no more auto NSX for me. However, that being said, I am planning a move to dallas and that traffic might make me regret getting a 5-speed. Who knows? I will tell you in 6 months

------------------
NetViper -= looking to get an NSX before I turn 26! =- Didn't make 25

 

[David]

Driving a manual NSX in traffic is no more difficult than driving a manual Accord in traffic unless you have gone to an aftermarket clutch with higher pedal effort. Even so, there are performance clutches with light pedal effort. My custom clutch (good to 600hp) is at least as light as the stock one.

 

[swede]

Hi guys, with the risk of being beaten silly if i ever run into you guys, but since we are talking Europeans and automatic transmissions, just my statement.
I beleve for 2 reasons, automatics are rear in high performance european cars.
1. I if you in the '70, '80 and even '90's if you think of an American luxury car, it is like a ford towncar or caprice classic, who have, in european meening, quite "soft" suspension and weigth quite a bit. (ride over a speed-bump and the car is swaying for a mile ) for those kind of car an automatig is #1. that kind of car you are RIDING. on the other hand, an European luxury car has often been a high performace light car, made for track racing and converted to street use, with stiff suspension and a manual transmission for "active driving", not for confortable long rides. in the past, Mercedes has been deliver Extreme Confortable Riding vehecles, and BMW more Sporty cars, but nowadays Merc has baught the AMG factory to try to attract the younger "sportier" kind of people.
2. European sportcars have alvays been racing on tracks with (mostly) standard cars. we have the DTM, BTCC, STCC and so on. most of them are based on standard cars, and when you are racing on the margins(you are only allowed to to tune the cars mildly), coming out of a corner you dont want your gearbox to loose torque and pull trying to shift gear in the middle of a corner.
that is my humble euro opinion.
-currently driving an prelude auto that i wouldn't change for a manual for all the money in the world. But looking on a supercar, manual in the thing for me

 

[hejo]

Like I said earlier I think a manual is more fun. However which transmission depends on what you're going to be doing with the car. Sitting in stop and go traffic in the morning or at night is one thing. But if you're driving throughout the day hitting traffic all day long it gets to be not fun and becomes work. I liked the performance of my M3 but hated to drive it during the week.

With that said if the car was going to be primarily my race toy I'd get the manual. Manuals are more fun because there's more gears and more control. Also David's right about the NSX clutch, it's one of the lightest and easiest to engage. If I was forced to drive a manual then I'd hope it was an NSX manual. I also think the throw on the NSX is one of the best too. Too bad for me that I have a bad hip and now have a company car that sits.

As I made in one of my earlier comments, I hear confusion between the number of gears and type of transmission. A 7 speed F1 is an automatic. While not type hydralic type in the NSX, it's still an automatic. The function performed is to get from one gear to another, not to brake the car. So if you had a 6 or 7 speed automatic in the NSX I would suspect that it could be competitive with the manuals.

David I think you could also shed some light on the differences in HP and torque through the rpm range. With stock NSXes there's about 20 hp diff between the auto and manual. I suspect this is at peak and not linear. So in effect the cars performance difference may be more balanced between gearing, hp and torque.

If you took gearing out of the equation I would suspect that we're talking less than 8% difference. With gearing added into the equation the difference is more significant because the auto has to pull through a longer rpm range at an overall lower hp because it has less gears.

So racing in straight lines the manual will have an advantage with more gears to keep the power band up. However on a tight track with lots of turns and 1 or 2 long straights I would think the difference would not be as apparent.

Anyway just more thoughts and a long ways off from the original post. So back to the original post.... Get a manual if that's going to fit your needs best. Don't get the auto based on price, only get it if you're looking for an NSX that is going to be a daily driver or you've got a health issue like me.

[This message has been edited by hejo (edited 07 May 2001).]

 

[nsxtasy]

Interesting, constructive comments above.

I think you could also shed some light on the differences in HP and torque through the rpm range. With stock NSXes there's about 20 hp diff between the auto and manual. I suspect this is at peak and not linear. So in effect the cars performance difference may be more balanced between gearing, hp and torque.

The automatic (all years) gets 252 hp. The manuals get 270 hp 1991-96, 290 hp 1997+. Yes, this is peak hp. However, the torque curve on the NSX is very flat over most of the revband, so acceleration within a given gear is constant.

If you took gearing out of the equation I would suspect that we're talking less than 8% difference. With gearing added into the equation the difference is more significant because the auto has to pull through a longer rpm range at an overall lower hp because it has less gears.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. The automatic has about 7 percent less hp at the crank than the '91-96 5-speed. So that's 7 percent less power, without even taking into account the gearing. This is significant, but not huge - not trying to quibble over wording here though. However, your point about the gearing is a good one. Having more gears allows them to be spaced closer together which means fewer power-robbing upshifts. So another way of saying all of this is that there is a 7 percent difference in power between the two models, and on top of that is an additional gearing disadvantage of one gear fewer in the automatic. Unless I'm misunderstanding your point...?

Get a manual if that's going to fit your needs best. Don't get the auto based on price, only get it if you're looking for an NSX that is going to be a daily driver or you've got a health issue like me.

Or if you do not like driving an automatic, for whatever reason (including, but not limited to, not knowing how and not wanting to learn).

I think this is very good advice. Basically - get the automatic if you want an automatic; don't get it if you really want a manual.

 

[hejo]

You pretty much got what I was trying to ask. The only thing I was wondering is how much difference in the 1/4 mile does the 7% hp diff make versus the gears?

Say you had the same hp. Add headers and exhaust to an automatic for another 20 hp roughly to where it's close to a stock pre-97 manual. Now we're comparing 4 speed versus 5 speed. For grins lets assume the 5 speed can shift as fast as the auto. How much difference would there be in the 1/4 mile? Is this greater than 7%?

BTW the auto will rev out in 1st and 2nd and in the power band at the finish in 3rd. I'm not as familar with the 5 speed but assume the 5 speed will be in the power in 3rd about to shift to 4th. So both cars have 2 shifts.

The other thing I'm wonder is what the effect of kicking in the vtec earlier would have on the auto to reshape the hp curve some.


------------------
Hal Jones
Lake Oswego, Oregon
95T Blk\Blk SportShift

 

[nsxtasy]

The only thing I was wondering is how much difference in the 1/4 mile does the 7% hp diff make versus the gears?

Gee, it would be nice if Bob Butler would add quarter mile figures to his "What are the numbers" charts in the FAQ (hint, hint)...

The other thing I'm wonder is what the effect of kicking in the vtec earlier would have on the auto to reshape the hp curve some.

Probably none. VTEC doesn't add power; its effect is to keep the torque curve flat as the revs increase, instead of dropping off. It kicks in at the optimal point to accomplish this.

 

[David]

Originally posted by hejo:
A 7 speed F1 is an automatic. While not type hydralic type in the NSX, it's still an automatic. The function performed is to get from one gear to another, not to brake the car. So if you had a 6 or 7 speed automatic in the NSX I would suspect that it could be competitive with the manuals. ]

The 'auto' in an F1 car has nothing to do with what we are referring to as an 'auto' in this thread. F1 type shifters are a standard manual gearbox with hydraulic shifting. That is a completely different setup than the disc-based system referred to as an 'auto' in this thread. The difference is significant. Most of the discussion in this thread has focused on the time required to shift and the number of gears, but disc-type automatic transmissions are inherently less efficient than manuals in transferring power. They almost always have a higher drive train loss.

As for the 'drag racers use autos' argument, those are also very specialized transmissions that have only a passing similarity to the transmission in a street car. I promise that if you take apart a Jericho air shift drag tranny, you will find it is a completely different beast than what you would find in a production car.


[This message has been edited by David (edited 08 May 2001).]

 

[1BADNSX]

Originally posted by nsxtasy:
The only thing I was wondering is how much difference in the 1/4 mile does the 7% hp diff make versus the gears?

Gee, it would be nice if Bob Butler would add quarter mile figures to his "What are the numbers" charts in the FAQ (hint, hint)...

With everything being equal (stock 5-speed) and 7% increase in horsepower at every RPM, the 1/4 mile time would be decreased by roughly 0.35 seconds. I will send Lud the results that were published in NSX Driver to update the FAQ.

Bob

 

[dswartz]

Here's another $.02.

I ran a comparison of a 91 5-speed and a 91 Auto using "Car Test".

91 5-speed 0-60=5.6, 1/4 Mile=13.9@104mph
91 Auto 0-60=5.7, 1/4 Mile=14.3@100mph

Car Test comes with all of the NSX factory performance data for both cars. What I found suprising is that the 5-speed has a 4.06 ring&pinion while the auto has a 4.43! In addition, the speed in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd at optimum shift points are 45, 80, and 110 for the 5-speed and 47, 78, and 117 for the automatic. So up until 117 mph there's little advantage for the 5-speed.

I believe that this performance difference can eliminated with a Level 10 transmission upgrade and a higher stall speed torque converter.

Finally, I believe that a built up auto with twin turbos would be unbeatable.

By the way my car is 6 speed, so I'm just giving an objective $.02.

 

[nsxtasy]

Everything seemed to make sense there, until... until I got confused, I guess. Here goes.

With everything being equal (stock 5-speed) and 7% increase in horsepower at every RPM, the 1/4 mile time would be decreased by roughly 0.35 seconds.

This implies that with no change in gearing, the difference in horsepower between the '91-96 manual (270 hp) and automatic (252 hp) would result in a difference of .35 second in the quarter mile. So far, so good.

I ran a comparison of a 91 5-speed and a 91 Auto using "Car Test".

91 5-speed 0-60=5.6, 1/4 Mile=13.9@104mph
91 Auto 0-60=5.7, 1/4 Mile=14.3@100mph

...which means that the difference in the quarter mile is 0.4 second - with rounding, exactly what Bob's model attributed to the difference in horsepower. Seems to make perfect sense so far.

So up until 117 mph there's little advantage for the 5-speed.

Agreed. It seems that, aside from the (presumably minor) difference in the time it takes to accomplish a shift, the gearing wouldn't make much difference, and the 0.4 second difference in the quarter mile is attributable to the horsepower difference.

What confuses me is when you say:

I believe that this performance difference can eliminated with a Level 10 transmission upgrade and a higher stall speed torque converter.

I don't understand why you say this. If there is virtually no difference due to the gearing, and a significant difference due to the difference in horsepower, how would a change in the transmission eliminate the performance difference?

 

[dswartz]

Level 10 has proven time and again that there transmission modifications can produce significant (.5 second) differences in 1/4 mile performance. Their improvements reduce the losses due to the drive train, much faster shifts, and produce significant increase in torque off the line due to the higher stall speed.

 

[nsxtasy]

That .5 second difference may be true for other cars, but not necessarily true for the NSX. If it is true, then the Level 10 automatic transmission would need to produce significantly quicker shifts than a manual transmission, since it would still need to overcome that 7 percent horsepower disadvantage to achieve the same acceleration. Is this what you are suggesting?

Just trying to understand...