That’s a coupe, because it has a roof. A_D,USAF linked to the roadster version.
It’s not offered with the manual, but the auto 'box does have a sequential semi-auto mode.
BOOO!! That’s not a proper manual. :mad:
Ahhh, I see you’ve played “Coupey-Sedany” before.
I’ve never really understood why people don’t like semi-auto transmissions. To me, they provide the best of both worlds, but some people just gotta have their third pedal I guess.
Simpler, more control, more feel, more interesting to drive. More efficient but the newer autos are closing the gap.
Torque steer, for one. Particularly since American cars typically have such big, torquey engines (as opposed to the high-revving 4s common in Japanese cars). My parents used to have one of those Lumina dustbuster minivans with a 3.8L V6 and big wheels – you needed both hands on the wheel anytime you opened the throttle more than about halfway.
Also, better acceleration, at least in theory. During hard acceleration, the rear wheels bear more of the vehicle weight. I’ve also seen the argument (don’t know if it’s valid) that you get better steering performance because the front wheels only have to provide lateral traction – IOW, they only have one job to do, not two. And when the drive wheels spin for whatever reason, it doesn’t come back through the steering wheel.
FWD is better for most drivers and most purposes, and it’s what I have now, but RWD has its advantages. Especially on bigger cars.
These are both true, although the former depends somewhat on engine placement and mounting aspect. There’s a very good reason why there are no front-wheel drive Formula 1 cars- it’s because mid-engined, rear-wheel-drive vehicles accelerate quicker and can go around corners faster.
That said, 4WD F1 cars would be even quicker, but they’re banned.
ETA: The advantages of front-wheel-drive have less to do with driving and more to do with packaging:
-
Saves space - since you don’t need a whacking great driveshaft running down the middle of the car, you can offer more interior room or a smaller overall package or a bit of both.
-
Saves weight - again, no big driveshaft needed.
-
More efficient - again with the driveshaft, having to transfer power from the front to the back results in some power loss. That’s offset by the weight distribution and handling advantages if the engine is sufficiently powerful, but in a typical front-wheel-drive car (ie., a small or at least medium sized one with an engine producing less than 200 horsepower) it won’t be.
-
Saves money - simpler transmission = cheaper to design and build.
In fairness, there are driving advantages as well, just not performance advantages. FWD trades off some at-the-limits handling for a wider margin of error. Generally speaking (subject to variations in front/rear balance, suspension design, etc.), FWD is prone to understeer and RWD is prone to oversteer. That means that when a FWD car loses traction, the turning radius gets bigger. When a RWD car loses traction, it can swap ends. When a FWD car loses traction and encounters understeer, an ill-prepared driver’s panic reaction – steer more into the turn – is correct. When a car experiences oversteer, OTOH, the driver must react immediately and turn the wheel hard the the other way.
That’s not impossible to learn. I learned to drive on a Ford Aerostar in Western New York winters, so reacting to oversteer was second nature to me by the time I was 18. But the trend in auto design is toward demanding less and less of the driver; see also the disappearance of the manual transmission (my beloved Aerostar was one of the few of its kind so equipped :() , or the ubiquity of ABS.
That’s true, but I don’t believe that it’s something automakers consider when designing cars. FWD caught on in Europe long before it did here (thanks to the Mini) and there hasn’t been a trend toward dumbing down driving in the European market until quite recently. Also, it’s not difficult to set up a (front-engined) RWD car for the same predictable understeery tendencies as an FWD one.
Highly debateable.
AWD/4WD systems add significant weight and complexity. Under good conditions, the lighter RWD car will be faster without a doubt.
You’re right on the other points, though.
True, unfortunately. However, I think you can make the assumption when considering that most RWD cars are still set up to mildly understeer at first, that FWD’s handling characteristics are indeed a safety consideration.
(Likely considered well behind cost and packaging, I agree, but don’t ignore the fact that FWD cars are significantly easier for the average goober to handle when traction is limited)
No. Two words:
“Torque converter.” and two more, “response time”
Recent advances with dual-clutch transmissions are changing this as they really are automated manuals, but they are entirely different from an automatic transmission which allows you to suggest a gear change by button press.
ETA: I swear I’m not trying to stalk or pick on Really Not All That Bright, I just don’t have the foresight to multi-quote.
The OP lives in Chicago. With RWD he has an excuse for not being able to get to work every time it snows - the wheels go round but the car doesn’t move.
Wow, that’s even cynical by my standards! And I know about cynical.
However, unless I have an excuse for why my feet don’t work or the L isn’t running those excuses won’t fly.
Incidentally, a similar thread could have been started about the dearth of AWD options among American automakers. Things have improved recently with the likes of the new Taurus AWD but they still are kinda rare. I had a theory that GM should have taken Pontiac (or Olds) and essentially pegged it as a Subaru killer by making all it’s cars geared towards sporty AWD platforms. It would have given the brand a identity and sporting credibility and if priced right could have really dominated cold-weather markets.
The auto/manual transmission hybrids (tiptronics, paddle shifters, etc) are not much different in many cases than the run-of-the-mill automatics that were always built. You are not shifting gears when you tap the shifter up/down, or flip the paddles. You are merely giving the transmission permission to choose the gear you selected, and it will when it damn well pleases. You tap up from 2 to 3, but the engine/tranny computer might decide to shift three seconds later, now that you gave it permission to do so.
Or…You could wind the engine past every practical shift point the computer would have selected anyway and as soon as you tap up from 2-3 the comp (dying for permission to make the upshift) goes ahead and upshifts immediately upon receiving permission from the driver to do so, and the driver is given the illusion they 'shifted gears". Well, they didn’t shift.
Take a regular automatic tranny and do the same thing. You can move the PRND321 selector all around give yourself the same illusion. Actually, you can do a real downshift on a PRND321, which actually makes it MORE like shifting than the modern paddle/tiptronic type shifter, because modern comps will deny the so-called downshift if conditions (especially RPM) aren’t right.
What hard core drivers of true manual might consider is a manual transmission set up to paddle or tiptronic type shifting, wherein the mechanical action of the actual transmission is, at its heart, a manual… not some automatic hydraulic torque converter deal in one heck of a lame-ass disguise (as they are now, making a bunch of people thing they are ‘shifting’).
Automatics are somewhat disconnected from the drive shaft because they have natural slip built into them and are hydraulic (more or less). A true manual is bolted to the drive shaft more or less. Think like that. Don’t even get me started on clutches.
Thanks. I love shifting through all 6 gears of my G35. I don’t race anyone ‘driving’ an automatic. What exactly is the driver doing, per se, to win the race?
It might have even worked until GM made Buick, Chevy, Cadillac, and Saturn versions of the same car.
Because you know that’s exactly what would happen.
All valid points, but I think that in general practice the fetish for manual transmissions is a bit of a joke. Unless you spend considerable time on the track or in remote mountain roads the number of downsides that a manual carries offset the “authentic” driving experience they provide. Manuals are a nightmare in rush hour stop-and-go traffic and a pain in stoplight-to-stop sign routes in urban landscapes. Having to use all 4 appendages to drive in today’s uber-connected world can be a legitimate safety hazzard. We simply can’t ask more from drivers in terms of participation. Ideally drivers will put down the cell phone, turn off the radio and nav system, get their hand out of the McDonald’s bag and actually drive but that’s not really gonna happen.
Autoshifters or Manumatics are a pretty solid compromise when done properly. The Germans tend to do them right, I’ve never driven an American or Japanese version. Yes, you lose a little when it comes to the track but if you are keeping your revs up like you’re supposed to then the shifting is truly on-demand. Essentially what they prevent is stalls, something that I have a hard time seeing as an advantage for a manual.
A drive-by-wire solution isn’t worse than a traditional one so long as the implementation is there, much like in aircraft engineering. Those were slow to gain acceptance but now they offer superior performance. Cars could follow suit.
Yeah, I thought up that concept as an anti-badge engineering solution. Of course what you suggest would just be badge engineering solution flowing the other direction.
They’d have to ensure that the Pontiac AWD platform was the cheapest and purest version of the concept. And if they limited the porting to luxury brands as a pricey option, Cadillac and Buick on just the top trim level, it might work out OK. Taking it to Chevy and Saturn in water down versions would be destructive.
An AWD G6 GT coupe or an AWD G8 would have been pretty sweet cars. The G8 IS a sweet car.
Just buy a foreign car. A poster upthread mentions the Mazdaspeed 3, which by all definitions is an awesome performing, highly sporting car. I test drove one. It’s performance is awesome.
Then I bought a Scion Xa. Go figure. Gas was $4 a gallon and it gets almost 40mpg with the manual. I just keep telling myself “It’s a vagina, not a clown car”. Or something.
Did you even read the OP? I want a 2-Door Rear Wheel Drive car.
I would buy a foreign car, I’m by no means a flag waving F-150 owner. However to get what I want my options are essentially limited to much more expensive German cars and the Infinity G37 and Hyundai Genesis Coupe. The Americans could do it more in my price range. When it comes buying time I’ll probably be getting the Genesis unless my finances improve unexpectedly.