I have a 2010 Mazda 3 that's a stick. It's a fun little car with the optional 2.5l engine. Paddle shifters are nowhere near the same kind of fun.
Sedan or hatch?
Sedan. I bought it at the end of the model year and didn't have much choice, but I did get a good price. Besides, I'm too old to drive a hatchback, although this car was meant for my daughter. -- "You lie!" Talk about an understatement, Joe.
Yeah they are, love what Mazda has done the past 10 years. The new 6 is REALLY nice and I am not a fan of pure sedans. What I love with the hatch is the versatility.. easily fits my bike or flagging/camping gear with room to spare.
I agree, Mazda has done some good things over the last few years. This is the first one I've owned and I really like it. I like hatchbacks, but I see too many young people with them in this area. Maybe in a nicer warm area where the versatility comes in handy for the biking and camping gear it makes sense. In cold-ass gray dreary Chicago, I don't think it fits my age. -- "You lie!" Talk about an understatement, Joe.
The sunroof I like. That's one of my requirements. Leather, power seats, sunroof, satellite radio and power windows and mirrors. I prefer automatic climate control too The car has all of these, so I do enjoy it. -- "You lie!" Talk about an understatement, Joe.
The sunroof I like. That's one of my requirements. Leather, power seats, sunroof, satellite radio and power windows and mirrors. I prefer automatic climate control too The car has all of these, so I do enjoy it.
I didn't get the leather goodies... my active lifestyle would not have been good for it.
Loved it today.. mid 60's, beautiful sunny skies, sunroof open, windows down, music blasting... even got to play a bit. Shame I live in an area with nothin but 45's, 2nd gear at 5K RPM is all that is needed.
Oh I know.. had to bury my grandfather in Rochester, NY last December and got some snow while I was up there. Man oh man the sludge, the snow, the way the melting shit stuck to your car and hung off the wheel arches... I would be pissed.
The 458 has two clutches and still must be shifted. Therefore, it is still a manual. Same as an F1 car.
Automatics are advertised as having higher fuel efficiency because their running gear is geared lower than the manual. It's a marketing tactic. The truth is, it works both ways in practice. It takes more gas to maintain speed, even though the engine is running lower rpm the load is higher. I have NEVER driven an automatic that returned better fuel economy than the manual version.
Automatics are less reliable, on average failing at approximately 100-120k miles. Many manuals are sealed and are rated to be reliable for over 1 million miles. This is one of the main reasons big rigs are still primarily manuals.
A manual will always be faster and more efficient. A clutch has less power losses, and has less power draw than a torque converter.
There really is no replacement for selecting the ratio of torque output of your engine. So called 'manumatics' help with this problem, but are still controlled by logic and still shift only when the computer shifts it for you. I drove a Lexus IS350 with such a system a while back, and sometimes the shifts would be delayed by upwards of 2 seconds. Very annoying.
Driving a manual does not require more work. When you learn the amount of pressure required to activate the pressure plate, it really only requires a few pounds of force by your foot. Most modern manuals have synchros that rev match for you, guides that slip it into gear for you, etc. you really only need to tap it for it to fall into gear. Again, minimal effort required. If this is too much work for one to perform, I'd love to hear what you do for a job. I exert more energy taking a crap than I do shifting gears. -- Fairy Blessings, Stefanie
Actually, with some cars stick still costs a little less.
And I've actually seen at least one car where the base models with AT were more expensive, but there were no difference in case of the upscale model.
In my case, the vehicle I drive wasn't even available with stick shift (for that particular engine, a 351W), although in theory I can get a 5 speed tranny and other needed parts out of a F250/F350 and install it myself.
Lastly, I agree on stop-and-go traffic. It really sucks, even with AT.
I took my driver's license test on a manual and I have always had manuals until a year ago. I had to spend $1000 extra to get automatic on my new Honda. I did it only because I am getting up there in years and I had times in my previous sporty coupe in the last few years I had it with bad cramps suddenly in my left calf, bursitis a few times in my left hip which was aggravated by the clutch, and right frozen shoulder for a year that made it very painful and difficult to drive a stick....so seemed best to transition to an "old folks" car which is what automatic is to me. It is zero fun to drive and the only reason to ever get automatic is because you are getting old or you live in San Francisco...a lot of hill driving is not too much fun in a stick. I don't mind a stick in city traffic. I always drove a lot in neutral.
The owner of the body shop I have used through the past three cars told me a few years ago that he admired me because I was a wahine who could drive a sports cars with a stick. He said that was a lost art in Hawaii among younger people and especially unusual to find a woman who owned a stick. He said when he bought his new truck for the first time he got auto tranny for one reason. He goes hunting a lot alone, way out away from civilization, and he worried that he might get injured and not be able to drive for help (cell phones don't work in many areas of this island). -- When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson
You must be tall. A short person needs extenders to do a clutch proud. Plus, you must be young...wait till you get frozen shoulder in the right shoulder or bursitis of the hips...especially if you can barely fully depress the clutch because of being short and you have the seat pulled up as close as possible and are at risk for air bag injury/death because the seat is so close to the steering wheel. My last car took a lot of effort to drive. It was fun when I first got it ...but I was almost 14 years younger then. The ones before it were lots of fun and they had no power steering...but I was young then. One chooses auto only because they are getting old and it is the right choice at that stage of life for almost anyone. -- When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson
Only by EPA - I can get more MPG from a manual. Manual has a major advantage over the automatic - you shift when you want. I shift early in all of the manuals I drive and I get between 10-15% more MPG than the EPA. If I have to get into the gas then I can shift early after that and mitigate the damage of getting into the throttle - this is pretty much impossible with an automatic.
EPA numbers are a guideline - there is zero guarantee that you will get the MPG on either side but it is a TON easier to beat EPA in a manual by begin smarter when driving.
I am currently getting about 24 MPG around town in my 2001 330i -
So I am getting about 20% more than the EPA for city - mainly because I can go into 5 the gear at 35 mpg. I also get 30-33 mpg highway at 70 mph - a good deal better than EPA. I can get these numbers with the mid-range gas (89 octane).
If I get on the highway - even for 10 minutes then I can get as much as 25.5 mpg - beating the EPA by even more. -- Brian
"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain