|
|
|
nzkiwiman: I do have manual shifting in the Mazda 3, but it doesn't seem to work the way I expect it to - shift down, bring up the revs and then shift up = no power (I expect I was doing it wrong)
Mazda follows the same convention as BMW - push for a shorter gear and pull for a taller gear. This is the opposite way around from Toyota and Kia. If you're doing it the wrong way around it should be obvious from your tachometer.
You'd think the manufacturers would try to achieve some consistency around this.
nzkiwiman: In my manual, I always used the handbrake
In my new auto, I use hill assist - take foot of brake, move foot to accelerator and go - car will hold for 2-3 seconds
If I could afford to own and operate two cars I would
Auto for around town, stop/start traffic and a manual for the open road.
I do have manual shifting in the Mazda 3, but it doesn't seem to work the way I expect it to - shift down, bring up the revs and then shift up = no power (I expect I was doing it wrong)
DravidDavid: The paddle shift in normal day to day cars is an automatic transmission with buttons or levers instead of a console mounted selector stalk. It's the same as putting your car in to second when you hit the shifter.
More expensive cars have mechanically driven clutches, which is effectively a manual controlled by a computer. But in a normal car, you're stuck with a torque converter which spins all your smiles per gallon away.
alasta:DravidDavid: The paddle shift in normal day to day cars is an automatic transmission with buttons or levers instead of a console mounted selector stalk. It's the same as putting your car in to second when you hit the shifter.
More expensive cars have mechanically driven clutches, which is effectively a manual controlled by a computer. But in a normal car, you're stuck with a torque converter which spins all your smiles per gallon away.
The Mazda Skyactiv automatics actually engage the lockup clutch at low speeds so the energy loss is pretty minimal. I really like mine.
The problem with those dual clutch automatics is that they can be jerky at very low speeds - e.g. while performance parking manueouvres.
Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.
lagbort:
- Clutch in
- Foot flat to the floor on the throttle
- when the engine is bouncing off the rev limiter:
- release the handbrake and drop the clutch as quickly as possible
MikeB4:alasta:DravidDavid: The paddle shift in normal day to day cars is an automatic transmission with buttons or levers instead of a console mounted selector stalk. It's the same as putting your car in to second when you hit the shifter.
More expensive cars have mechanically driven clutches, which is effectively a manual controlled by a computer. But in a normal car, you're stuck with a torque converter which spins all your smiles per gallon away.
The Mazda Skyactiv automatics actually engage the lockup clutch at low speeds so the energy loss is pretty minimal. I really like mine.
The problem with those dual clutch automatics is that they can be jerky at very low speeds - e.g. while performance parking manueouvres.
My Nissan has a CVT which has lowered my L/100 km down to average 6.5. My understanding is it is the way it managers revs and peak power. It also has aluminium body parts to reduce weight.
My wife's Skoda has a dual clutch DSG automatic manual in which magic happens fast and has her L/100 km at 4.8
Modern transmissions have assisted conventional engines achieve great fuel economy
Mike
MadEngineer: 10km/L is likely typical, depending on what sort of driving you do. According to the display, my 2005 3.5L V6 Diamante did 10.2km/L after 3000KM of travel during a road trip around most of the South Island from Palmy, with a slightly heavy foot. Around town it's considerably higher than that :)
alasta:MadEngineer: 10km/L is likely typical, depending on what sort of driving you do. According to the display, my 2005 3.5L V6 Diamante did 10.2km/L after 3000KM of travel during a road trip around most of the South Island from Palmy, with a slightly heavy foot. Around town it's considerably higher than that :)
It's better to calculate your fuel consumption from your log book rather than relying on the vehicle's trip computer. In my previous vehicle I found that the trip computer tended to understate quite significantly.
|
|
|