“You haven’t tasted the BMW kool-aid it seems.”
Actually, I have.
I prefer a nice Merlot …
That’s right. That’s why you can get ventilated and heated seats, and a climate control system that takes into account the position of the sun and the car’s direction.
$100,000+? How about $450,000+?
Yes, you could argue that only an incredibly advanced automatic transmission can take the place of a manual transmission. But why did Mercedes-AMG even bother developing an automatic for this car? Because sometimes shifting gears is just a nuisance.
Why not have the best of both worlds, and get a three-mode sports transmission? Have you driven one recently? My 540i is amazing in manual mode. A quick flick. No clutch. Faster than I can shift with a manual transmission. And, in my opinion, more control.
But most of the time it’s in automatic.
The thing is, I don’t think MB-AMG did anything new and special for the automatic in the SLR. It’s still got a torque converter. I’m pretty sure it’s basically the same transmission used on some lesser MBs (if you can call a $180K CL65 “lesser”).
I think the question is why didn’t MB-AMG develop an autoshifting gearbox like Ferrari uses or the BMW SMG.
I had a 540i automatic. It was nice, just not as fun as the 6-speed. I can certainly understand why the vast majority of 540is have automatics but I’m just glad BMW offers them with stick shifts. Heck with the new 545i you have a choice of three different transmissions.
Large, hard-working pickup trucks ($45k?) with automatics make me giggle–that auto tranny won’t last long if the truck is used for the hauling & pulling it’s designed for. Not as long as a properly operated manual any way.
Were I to put down a chunk of money for a high end coupe I’d want the clutch. I like me a clutch. Given the lower end cars I’m usually seen in, a clutch has saved my bacon countless times (bad starter, dead battery…).
But even when I’m not in trouble I like the feeling of being in control of the machine even when, given current technology, that means the machine might not perform optimally as a result. I can’t stand power steering either because I feel I have less idea about what’s going on under my front wheels.
And yes, you CAN downshift an automatic, but when you’re driving one you’re not thinking that way. It’s only when the engine starts groaning immediately before the automatic does its thing that you think, “Yeah, a lower gear would be a good idea.”
My (new) car is similar to this, but its not nearly as fun as a “true manual”. When it shifts, it is just kinda “not the same” as the punch you get from dumping the clutch.
This being said, the car is magnificant and for a giant luxo-cruiser with traction control, it out-performs all my 4x4s in the snow. Whoulda thunk it?
Me neither. I love driving manual trannies. It’s just so much more fun, so much more enjoyable, and it keeps me more alert. Lots of people say “oh, it must really suck driving through Chicago traffic with a stick shift,” but I say “hell no!” It gives me something to do and occupy myself with other than riding the brake for an hour.
There are some very good automatics out there as well. However, most of the ones I’ve driven leave much to be desired. I hate when the car shifts mid-turn, disrupting the weight and balance of the car. I hate when the passing gear doesn’t always quite kick in when I stomp on the throttle. I hate when you’re going right at that speed and the automatic can’t quite figure out which gear it wants to be in. Now, most high-end automatics don’t have this problem, and with the normal automatics, you the driver eventually learn how to feel the car and avoid these problems. But as a driver, I like controlling what gear to be in and keeping the car in that gear if I so choose.
For certainly applications, though, automatics seem to be better. For really hard-core off-roading, most dedicated off-roaders I’ve spoken with say automatic transmission is superior for careful low-speed crawling and terrain traversal.
But for high-performance driving, manuals (well, clutchless transmissions with user input for shifting) have the edge over automatics. Personally, I like driving with a clutch. Those Tiptronic systems and the sort bore me, but I far prefer a clutchless manual transmission to an automatic.
Manuals give me control, keep me more alert, and make driving much more fun.
Manuals give you far more control, especially on narrow, twisty roads, and especially when you’re driving fast: once you’re used to it, you don’t even notice the process of changing gear, it becomes instinctive, but it makes the car do exactly what YOU want it to - tight corner - chop down through third to second -coming out of the corner - third for a blast of power, then slip it back into fourth. Coming up to another corner - don’t need to brake, chop it back into third to slow it… You just don’t get that degree of control with an automatic, and no chance to exercise any skill. No FUN, dammit! The OP talks about changing gear as if it were a boring chore, unnecessary in an expensive automobile, but if I were paying top dollar for a sports car, I’d want something I could make DANCE.
Glad it’s not just me. I couldn’t imagine driving an auto version of my car (Mazda RX-8), although I know they do sell them in the US (but not in the UK). The rotary engine doesn’t really start pulling hard until about 3500-4000 rpm, and I have a feeling that the auto would shift too early to really have fun. If I’m driving it for fun I keep the revs up in the 6000-8000 rpm range. It even beeps to let you know you’ll soon be hitting the rev limiter. You can just about hit the national speed limit (70mph) in second 
Very obvious you don’t live in the UK. 
There aren’t many straight sections of road where I live.
To answer the OP, the reason you might want a manual in an expensive (sports?) car is driver enjoyment. If you’re splashing out that much on a car, the idea is to enjoy the experience of driving it (unless it’s a vanity purchase ). For a lot of drivers, manual gearshifts are an important part of that.
Personally, I find driving on twisty roads with steep gradients a lot of fun. I’m not trying to drive at stupid speeds, just make good progress and keep the car under tight control. With an auto it would be much less involving.
While I appreciate the convenience of autos for a lot of everyday driving, for driver enjoyment I’d prefer a manual family car to an auto sports car. If you’ve grown up with autos, your perspective is likely to be different to mine. If you find a manual too much hassle for too little return, by all means buy an auto.
Well, there must be a lot of vanity purchases …
All of the following cars are available with automatic (some only with automatic, and not just in the U.S.):
Aston Martin DB9
Audi A8
Bentley Continental GT
BMW 760i
Jaguar XK
Lexus SC 430
Maserati Quattoporte
Mercedes-Benz S600
Having enough money to buy an expensive, powerful car does not make you a better driver. And having a manual transmission probably creates more problems for most drivers, especially those who think that they are one of the Schumachers.
But it’s an enjoyable illusion.
For years, I drove a 92 Toyota Camry with stick shift. Having paid some debts, I am currently driving an 04 Lexus ES330 with automatic.
I like the Lexus better, but I miss the manual transmission.
There are good reasons, although in the end it just boils down to a preference. They are about equally easy to drive – after a few years driving manual is pretty automatic. You do feel more connected to the car and driving experience (not VASTLY so, but there is a difference). Manuals are cheaper to buy, cheaper and easier to repair and purportedly are stolen less often than automatics. Less importantly, many wimmins and care enthusiasts are also more impressed by manual than automatic.
In the end, differences are relatively minor compared to other features of the car. It never ceases to amaze me the lengths people go to debate very minor differences. If you think Coke and Pepsi are VASTLY different drinks (a cola is more like another cola than a ginger ale), you are a slave to this mentality.
But what about Dr. Pepper? 
I was answering the question “why would you want the option of having a manual in an expensive car?”. I never said there was anything wrong with putting an auto in an expensive car, or even a sports cars. Manuals are only more enjoyable to drive if you like changing gear yourself. It’s all about driver preference. Auto makers will sell either, unless they perceive there is a very small market for a particular combination.
As for the boy racers, they are lethal whatever they drive.
This thread is better suited for In My Humble Opinion. I’ll move it for you.
Cajun Man
for the SDMB
No no, almost the opposite. I’m saying that some people like manual transmissions. Sometimes, it’s cause they wnt to feel in control, other times it’s for performance, and other times it’s cause they just plain like the manual better.
Having taken part in the last tranny choice thread, I’m not sure if I can add much more to the conversation other than:
-
Transmission choice is not always the overriding factor in buying a car. This thread presumes that, all things being equal, the tranny is the deciding factor. It isn’t.
-
What’s ‘low tech’ or ‘mechanically wrong’ with a Torque converter? This kind of comment ranks right up there with ‘pushrod engines are low tech’ and ‘power per liter is the most important factor of engine design.’ It smacks of repeating hearsay and rumor and really doesn’t add to the conversation.
As far as MB not making a SMG tranny like Ferrari, it’s a different way of accomplishing the same thing - getting power from the pistons to the ground. Until just receintly, SMG (a manual transmission controlled by hydraulics) was rather crappy in normal around town driving.
In the tranny department, Audi’s dual clutch setup is pretty good at minimizing the shortcomings, but the reviews have mentioned that it can still get confused.
By the same token, the slushbox in the C6 Corvette is ‘just’ a 4l65e, which is a slightly improved 4l60e, which is a slightly improved 700r4, it’s just a series of gradual improvements year after year that add up to quite a piece of equipment. Further, improvements in ECU control reportedly let it hold gears in race situations to get it to perform closer to a stick on a track (no doubt aided by the included lateral G meter standard in all C6s) – I haven’t been able to verify how well it works yet. In the meantime, there are rumors of a 7 speed paddleshift auto coming out for the vette, and 5 6 and 7 speed conventional slushboxes are all over more expensive european and italian vehicles.
Am I getting more than just a hint of snottiness from Claudio here? He’s out to prove his case that his choice in transmissions is the only smart one, and everyone else is deluded. He’s not listening to any of the fine arguments being made.
Here’s another one: An automatic transmission simply doesn’t give you as much control over the vehicle. For example, in a car with a small turbo engine, to get responsiveness you want to hold the revs up. Not just under full acceleration, but when going around corners, lane changing, etc. In an auto, your revs are going to be wherever the curve of the tranny is set. If you want to downshift, you may only have the choice of two gears, neither of which is appropriate (most autos only have two or three manual ratios available). Also, shifting in and out of manual mode in most automatics sucks.
For example: a rear-wheel-drive sports car will usually be tuned with a hint of understeer, which can be converted to oversteer with the throttle. This allows you to find the ‘sweet spot’ by choosing the right gear and throttle setting for going around corners. After you get comfortable with the car, this because second nature. When you add a touch of gas going around the corner, you can just feel the car settle in and hug the track. It’s a great, addictive feeling. And you don’t have to be driving like a maniac to ‘get it’. Just driving around in the city with a nicely set up, manual sports car allows you this level of control.
In an automatic, that is much more difficult. The revs may be too low, requiring you to really power through the corner. Then you hit the accelerator pump, and suddenly the thing downshifts and blasts you forward. No fun. I want the car to do exactly what I command it - not what the logic inside the transmission decides is right.
There are very good auto transmissions out there, but they still take the decision away from the driver, and making your own decisions is part of the fun of driving. Even if the auto is smarter than me, it’s still less fun. I’m sure that if I sat in the passenger seat and let Mario Andretti drive me around town, he’d do it better than I can. But I wouldn’t enjoy it as much as driving myself.
You’re going to have a hard time finding a real sports car enthusiast anywhere who prefers an automatic to a manual, Claudio. And it’s not because we’re all stupid or bought into marketing hype or are deluded. It’s because we recognize that manual transmission cars offer a very different driving experience, and it’s one we prefer.
More likely that it’s derived directly from the McLaren Formula 1 car, or at least the team’s development work. And for people buying that car, having something that’s as close as is legally and reliably possible to having an F1-type control of the car is crucial.
That, sir, is a phallacy. 
Most, if not all, 3/4, 1 ton, superduty, whatever haulers today come with automatic transmissions with tranny fluid coolers and programming to handle load situations. They also typically come with tranny cooler temp gauges to keep ya from cooking them. Pull it back out of overdrive, press tow-haul, and you’ll have no problems hauling within a trucks ratings.
:smack: And on THIS board of all places.
I’ve got nothing against automatics. I’ve got nothing against torque converter automatics.
But the MB SLR is a half million dollar exotic. They make a lot of noise about using F1 technology in it. It strikes me as odd that they didn’t put an F1 style SMG transmission in it too.