Like the automatic volkswagen gti? It shifts faster then a manaul.

 

why not? Because it would be really nice to just use paddle shifters on and off. The civic would be perfect with it

 

I don't think so.

 

negitive ghost rider the pattern is full....

 

If you wanted an automatic why didn't you go with an ex?

 

i don't see why not, eventually the manual tranny will be completely replaced by double clutch setups that shift faster than a human can using a standard manual tranny.

 

They claim to be the fastest shifter in the world but I seemed to out shift my buddies new GTI

nothing beats the feel of being in total control!







j/k j/k

 

In Gran Turismo maybe, but in the real world manual transmissions are a very cost effective means of power transfer. Most people would not be willing to shell out an extra 3k on a 16k car to "shift faster." Especially considering it's an economy car.

 

I've only driven one car with paddle shifters, and I didn't like it at all. It is still an automatic no matter how much they try to say otherwise. If I didn't upshift, the car would automatically upshift for me once it reached a certain point.....and that point would vary depending on how much throttle I was giving it. To me, it seems like they should have just left the paddles out and saved some production cost.

I hope they never ever put a paddle shifter double clutch 'super fast' shifting system in the Si. Standard manual transmissions FTW!

 

I also hope they never put dual clutches in the si. I have always known honda's for there bulletproof trannies that love to be powershifted. Plus i think its gay to mash the gas and hope you win. Manual is FTW, theres nothing like downshifting and taking like a bat outta hell.

 

bulletproof? you must not be familiar with the k-series 6-speed .

did you know that technology keeps getting cheaper and cheaper? once upon a time the standard auto tranny was probably too expensive for economy cars too. maybe not $3k on a $16k car, but $1-2k on a car that's already $20k+ wouldn't be unreasonable, considering that it actually makes the car faster. it's an improvement in performance. you can be as much for the old fashioned manual tranny as you want to be, but you can't argue with the better performance of the dual clutch trannies.

 

My gfs vw jetta has the tiptronic six speed. basically auto or a clutchless manual. The first time i drove it I was amused with how i could shift by just flicking her shifter forward to upshift. I wouldnt say it was "faster" but i think the speed of shifting with a manual comes down to the driver and the car. A subaru sti with a standard manual can EASILY beat a vw gti with twin clutch. Seems to me that the tranny does effect the speed but a fast car is fast with or without twin clutch trannys

 

no. its a civic

 

I was thinking the exact thing.

 

you can't compare completely different cars and say it's proof that a regular manual tranny is better . no **** an sti will be faster than a gti, regardless of what trannies are used.

i remember reading an article in motor trend where they compared a standard 6-speed 911 to one with a dual clutch. guess which one was faster? according to porsche.com, a 911 turbo with a 6 speed does 0-60 in 3.7 seconds, while a tiptronic does it in 3.4. afaik the newer tiptronic trannies are double clutch.

 

honda's in General, not just the k series 6 speed. However I owned the SI and felt like tranny was good to me. I like the 6 speed on the si better then the 6 speed in my speed 3.