I'd be hard pressed to have this being the determining factor... I've rode with manual Z's and now that my AT's been tuned, its a minute difference over a manual shift. The only difference is the lag between dropping power, and picking power back up. A human being simply can not shift as fast as the AT. So if anything, it's
still quicker. I still feel just as connected to the car. I think this mindset works for 70's-80's even 90's era MT vs ATs, but with modern ATs, I don't think there is as much of a gap between them anymore.
Trust me, if someone wants to steal your car, your car won't be there in the morning. And if in the attempt they figure out they Can't steal it, they will 1. f*** up all the internals, and 2 trash the hell out of it just because.
You also forget that most of the people who steal cars also drive late 80's early 90's hondas, which were primarily manual...
To be honest Frank, I agree with you on most cases, but in this point... Gotta disagree. If you want performance and ease of function/fixing, Manual is better for power.
1. Given
2. Given
3. Gonna have to see what the AT's can handle after they've been effectively modded the same as manuals are with upgraded clutch/flywheels/etc. Though stock for stock, given.
4. Data to support this?
5. No clutch pedal either. So is the weight difference (flywheel only) really going to have a dramatic impact on a 3300lb car?