[s-cars] Mmmm, shifty business...

[LL - NY]

Much to my surprise, the loaner car at the Saabaru dealer is an older 9-5 V6
wagon with an
autobox. It is surprisingly unobtrusive, and perhaps even somewhat
responsive. Considering
the mission of the car, it's really not out of place. Then again, I find
that my Mom's Passat 2.8
30V Tip 4-motion really just can't keep up with the needs of the car (it's
too heavy for the 2.8),
or it's simply poorly programmed. The car is somewhat infuriating in a
number of little ways,
the Tip is one of them.

LL - NY

On 4/20/07, QSHIPQ at aol.com <QSHIPQ at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> Taka
> I believe that you find the goodness of the machine, and that a   manual
> trans can make some machines better, but many times it doesn't do
> a  thing, and
> more often (these) days, a manual can take away from the  goodness of the
> machine.
>
> I use weight as my main argument, because manual shifting causes weight
> shifting.  When you have a heavy luxurious sports sedan, shifting
> can  redefine
> luxurious and sport.  As a former Saab salesman when the SPG and  the
> 9000t came
> about, I agree with David E that the 9000t auto was a  monster.  There is
> a
> lot less wastegate and bypass valve intervention on a  auto turbo, the
> torque
> converter becomes the bypass vavle, read no lag between  shifts.  The
> 9000t
> auto did a great job of banging the turbo at full tilt  into the next
> gear.
> Racing the manual against the autobox wasn't even  close.  Maybe with a
> drop
> clutch burnout, but not in any comparo you would  do to your own car.
>
> It's your preference Taka, that's all, and I can respect that.  I also
> understand that there is a long list of cars I could take in a autobox, a
> long
> list in a manual, and a short list I could take in either.  I believe
> that  is
> because the trans defines the character of the car.  If it's 'out of
> character', it loses it's appeal.
>
> I've learned to respect the choice by some of the manufacturers
> to  recognize
> that as well.
>
> cheers
> SJ
> In a message dated 4/20/2007 10:17:19 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> t44tqtro at gmail.com writes:
>
> I've  driven a Roush 360R, Corvette Z06 and Audi RS6- all of those cars
> have
> tons  and tons of torque and
> there is no way I'd take an automatic in any of  them.
>
> How much torque does a blown TLC make?
>
> I disagree with  David E Davis as well, then. Anyway, that's a terrible
> point- Saab 9000  Turbo with a slushbox? Yuck.
>
> Something like a Bentley Turbo R, Arnage,  MBZ S600, that's where a
> slushbox
> might not be really annoying- something  that you're going to drive rather
> sedately and has such immense power  reserves that you don't need to
> downshift hardly ever. However, change that  to a MBZ E63 and I'd still
> want
> a decent manual transmission over a  superlative autobox (and I like MBZ
> slushboxes as far as automatics  go).
>
> Taka
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************** See what's free at
> http://www.aol.com.
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>