So my first experience with an automatic gearbox was on a holiday to the US. And I loathed it. It felt like all the controls were connected to the road via rubber bands --- everything seemed to happen a couple of seconds after I moved the controls. If that had been my only experience of an automatic, then I too would be saying how horrible they were.

But then, much, much later I tried driving a hybrid with a CVT automatic gearbox. (I can't even remember what it was now.) And it was... amazing. It felt just right. There was no lag, there was no uncomfortable feeling of being in the wrong gear. It was like it was reading my mind. I put this down to being an expensive hybrid with lots of low-end torque from the electric motor, but then just this year I drove a Nissan X-Trail, also with CVT, and it was just as good.

So I'm willing to say: not all automatic gearboxes are the same.

Her car has a bigger engine than my Prius (also with a CVT as well as the motor/generator), though. My car does very well around town, being quite peppy in the 0 to 30 range, but a bit more doggish getting up to freeway speed. But it makes a good daily driver otherwise.

Traditional automatics seem to change gears and re-clutch slowly. The 5 speed on my old small pickup was fun to drive, once I learned how to do it years ago :-)

The fastest gear switching is on DSG/DCT engines, or electric cars which don't have gears in the first place. Both of those should beat a manual car in speed and mileage.

BTW, as an American who can't drive manual or ride a bike, and grew up in a city which didn't even have sidewalks, I recommend this as a great way to become a computer expert.

Manual are cheaper and ubiquitous. If you want an automatic car in Europe, you pay premium on a new car, and a very large premium each time you rent a car.

I'm not sure how that works for second hand cars - there are less but less people interested too, so not sure where the balance tip. In any case, automatic car tend to be expensive cars to begin with (BMW Series 5, ...) - you won't find as easily a regular joe car that is automatic.

This is absolutely false. Not every car is offered with manual transmission, but cars that can be configured with both are almost always cheaper with a manual. I cannot recall every seeing a case where it was the more expensive option.

My girlfriend's car got stolen a few years back. When I asked the cop how much this happens locally he asked me what I drive, and when he found out my car had a manual transmission he laughed and said nobody would steal my car - the kinds of people who steal mass market cars don't know how to drive a manual any more.

$800 more with automatic, about 5% of the cost of the car.

If you are lucky the dealer might have a cancelled order on the lot with a manual transmission.

On top of that, automatic transmission cars are more fuel efficient, so the operating costs might be a wee bit lower.

What's funny to me is the observation that only low end and high end cars have had manual transmissions. I started out with a low end Honda and either had to give it up or jump to a high end vehicle a decade later. I bought a second hand Audi to keep going with a manual at the time.

Car's are a heck of a depreciating asset.

Enjoy it all you like, as long as you keep it to yourself. The point was about the argument, not the enjoyment. But "perception" is correct. After driving a '16 Corvette (Mom's) and a '15 BMW 428 (rental), I'm convinced that a manual transmission is good only for nostalgia or a mis-placed sense that one can do better with a manual. With double-clutch transmissions attached to an eight speed gearbox, I am now the bottleneck in the equation. I've played with the flappy paddles and concluded, "meh, who am I kidding, the computer can do this better and faster than I can". Let alone having to push a foot pedal and move a lever. To add insult to injury, a lot of cars I've looked at get better mileage with the auto than the manual. sigh

In conclusion, those with the smug attitude along the lines of "a real driver would drive a manual" can stuff it, the machines have won. There's no more need to manually shift the gears than there is to manually advance the ignition with a lever on the steering column. That said, four out of five vehicles in our house have manuals (the Leaf doesn't have a transmission at all), but were I to buy a modern performance car today it would have one of them there fancy DCT eight speed autos.

As for the mid-range being auto-only, makes a bit of sense to me. Low-end offers manuals for economy. High-end for performance, even if it's not entirely accurate these days. Mid-range? You mean the people that just want to drive to work in some thing other than an econo-box? Yeah, I guess they'd go auto since they're not trying to save money nor are they really "into" cars.

It is slightly amusing that my current manual car has a display I can't turn off which tells me when it thinks I should change gear. The software which issues these instructions can tell when I am trying to accelerate rapidly or navigate hills and changes its instructions accordingly, so it might as well be changing the gears for me.

The book figures said it gave just about the same economy as the manual version, but real life use gave me far further from those than I ever remember experiencing with a manual.

I'll never have another unless it is a sporty thing with 8 speed, paddles and a prancing horse on the bonnet.

That may be an issue with the particular model?

In all the "automatics" I drove, American as well as Japanese models (the latter only several Hondas), I had no problem to know and control very precisely when the shift up or down would occur. I would drive up a hill and I knew exactly if I pressed down just a millimeter more the care would shift, which I delayed from happening until the ascend got less steep. That level of control was easy to get with only a little bit of experience with the specific car/transmission.

I suspect I'd have noticed or cared far less if more of my vehicles hadn't been sports and I'd bought more mobile sofas, driving accordingly. :)

Overall I prefer the lazy V8 approach to avoiding gearchanges - have vast torque on tap.

The high price of gas in Europe is a key reason why people chose manuals for a long time.

I know that personally I can tell I'm a much worse driver in an auto. I'm lazy - so in a manual that means paying extra attention to lights and the traffic so I can engine brake and coast more and avoid stopping and starting from first. In an auto I'm simply lazy period so I end up driving more stop-and-go. I wonder how much of an outlier I am.

Somebody else mentioned this too. In the US, there are different driving tests for manual and automatic cars. It would be plausible to me that passing the test in an automatic meant a license that was restricted to automatics, but I just looked over my license and didn't see anything obvious. The "restrictions" section says only "corrective lenses".

However... I can't drive a manual transmission. I know I can't, and that's why I don't try. It's completely superfluous to restrict my license; I suffer the harm of trying to drive one.

And similarly, if you're not planning to drive manual, there is no benefit to having a license that says you can. If you can't drive manual, there's really no benefit to having a license that says you can. The benefit comes from having the skill, not the license. If you could, like me, get a license that allowed you to drive manual cars without knowing how, would you go out and start driving them without knowing how?

Just like having a permit saying you can legally own firearms would not mean that you are in any way proficient at their use; just that you know when you should and shouldn't use them.

But somehow multiple people are presenting the license as a reason to learn to drive manual when you otherwise wouldn't. Logically, that doesn't work.

The tranny has to be removed in either case, so it's a question of what's easier once the tranny's out. For me, I'm happy to put a clutch in. I haven't the first clue how an auto tranny works Well, I have an idea of the principal, but no working knowledge of what those little check balls and the like do.

And apparently that's very difficult when you don't have the clutch to moderate speed, or so I was told. It might just be that American drivers aren't used to going in any sense slow at all.

(But those damn bikers, always zipping by! By the cries, you must think cyclists in America have some magic potion that makes them go 50mph instead of, you know, <=20mph peak)

> It might just be that American drivers aren't used to going in any sense slow at all.

We have traffic jams here too. They are a huge percentage of time spent driving. (Since they're so slow.)

It is much easier with a manual transmission. It isn't going forward with some power from you. Ease up on the clutch a bit and give just a bit of gas and you have no problems.

My 1999 Rover 75 has an automatic transmission and I have no trouble driving slowly (if I must). Never had any trouble driving cars in the US either (many visits over the last 20 years) and quite a lot of that was pretty slow (freeway from Raleigh to RDU on a Friday afternoon can be pretty much walking speed sometimes).