Quote:
Originally Posted by JARblue
Sub par performance?  with that 
The MT is just as good at the AT minus a few hydraulic issues that are easily remedied. The AT is slightly better in some aspects, and the MT is better in some aspects. AT has imperceptibly quicker shifts in stock form; MT can hold way more power in stock form.
Terrible analogy  I would say it's more like comparing a plain jane calculator (simple - MT) to a graphing calculator (more technologically complex - AT) when all you're doing is addition/subtraction. The both do exactly what you need them to do just fine. The graphing calculator might be slightly faster due to the internal components, but you won't notice anything significant. |
the only aspect that the MT wins is the initial holding power of TQ over the AT. however any and everyone who goes over said power limit ends up changing to a bigger/stronger clutch regardless. soooo it's not really a strong argument unless you then go to compare prices. yes a MT can be upgraded for slightly less money. but that is due to the fact most places pretty much just build the AT to be good for 1000hp which costs a bit more.
and yes my analogy was meant to be the way it was lol obviously yours was literal and more accurate but that wasn't my end goal......I was just bashing
