Last post on Dec 03, 2013 at 10:03 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views
What is this discussion about?
#9872 of 10039 Re: . [fintail]
Mar 11, 2013 (6:38 am)
You'll enjoy the new MB, I'm sure.
Didn't you have another vehicle besides the fintail? I didn't think the fintail was your daily drive.
#9873 of 10039 Re: . [srs_49]
Mar 11, 2013 (9:25 am)
Yes, fintail hasn't been a daily driver for many years. Latest modern car was an 02 E55 that I bought in 06.
#9874 of 10039 saw some stats today
Mar 12, 2013 (10:41 pm)
that cheered me up: so far the mix is 51% of all sales are manuals for the FR-S and 70% of the BRZs sold are manuals. Yay!
I do know the only BRZ my Subaru dealer can keep in stock is an automatic - it is white and is gathering dust on the front lot. The guy that sold me my last Subaru tells me the manuals don't stay longer than a couple of days. Now if only Subaru would see the success of the manual in the BRZ and begin to offer a Forester XT with a manual for 2014. I still can't believe they will only offer a CVT (blecch!) with the turbo!
#9875 of 10039 Re: saw some stats today [nippononly]
Mar 13, 2013 (8:13 am)
They do have 6/8 simulated steps and paddles to let you choose.
#9876 of 10039 Re: saw some stats today [nippononly]
Mar 13, 2013 (11:20 am)
Well, the Forester decision was based on experience, apparently. I don't remember the numbers on the 2008 model, but I want to say the take rate was sub-five-percent, which is why they nixed the manual option in 2009. So, while me and you might want one, we didn't put our money where are mouths are when it mattered.
I'm curious at what percent of the manual takes on the BRZ were premium trim level vs. limited.
The Forester's XT variant only comes in the gussied-up versions, and I'm generally not a big fan of "gussy."
Mar 13, 2013 (1:55 pm)
A little more proof of manual superiority.
TOV dyno tested an Accord Sport with CVT. It is rated at 189 hp and put down 159 on the dyno.
They also test an Accord EX with the 6MT. It is rated at 185 hp and put down 179 on the dyno.
No wonder the 6MT I4 hit 60 in 6.6 seconds. Not only does it look like the engine is underrated, but it is also much more efficient at getting power down with the 6MT.
#9878 of 10039 Re: - [dudleyr]
Mar 13, 2013 (2:45 pm)
179 at the wheels is 200 plus gross, wow.
#9879 of 10039 Re: - [dudleyr]
Mar 13, 2013 (3:15 pm)
The CVT MIGHT be better than a similar but discontinued Accord 6 speed A/T slush box.
Parasitic losses are basically unchanged (min of 11.2% to more like 13.3% ) and still HIGH OVER the 6 speed M/T, despite the more "efficient" CVT. My further take is that the "higher" power output still doesn't help too much.