+- babyRR.com - The Range Rover Evoque Forum (https://babyrr.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Regional Discussions (/Forum-Regional-Discussions)
+--- Forum: Europe (/Forum-Europe)
+--- Thread: Manual or Auto ? (/Thread-Manual-or-Auto)
Manual or Auto ? - bell-auto-services - 16-03-2011 09:33pm
Im undecided, do i choose:
6-speed manual transmission including Stop Start technology
or
6-speed automatic transmission including Drive Select with Paddle Shift & Sport Mode
I cant think which would be a better driver, im used to the D4 auto which is loverley but i fear the Evoque will be weak in an auto version because of the smaller engine. But i do like the idea of paddle shift and sports mode combine with not having to change gear as per the D4.
Though the manual will good for developement of tuning and the stop start technology is appeling as its new to LR.
Hummm, im really not sure
Pete
RE: Manual or Auto ? - XFullFatTim - 23-03-2011 02:17pm
You don't read of many Freelander2 owners complaining about weak automatics - in fact many who went for the manual version first time round have specced the auto for their next Freely2. TBH the only underpowered Land Rover TD with an autobox I have owned was an early Disco2 TD5 Auto, and LR realised fairly early on that it wasn't as good as it could be and gave the auto a bit more power and torque than the manuals the next model year.
I've since owned a TD4 Freelander1 auto, TD6 L322 auto, RRS TDv6 2.7 auto, RRS TDv8 auto and currently a FFRR TDv8 with autbox - not one has felt stoggy or under powered, although the 2.7TDv6 could have used a few more horses and torques but it never felt underpowered.
I know where to come though should my recently ordered SD4 Auto feel wanting a little more oomph Pete!
RE: Manual or Auto ? - vision*R - 23-03-2011 03:05pm
I don't think the auto / manual choice should be based on the power / weakness of the engine. I think you can safely trust the LR engineers - they wouldn't have made an automatic version if it were going to be underpowered or lazy to drive. If you fancy an automatic, I wouldn't hesitate.
On the other hand, personally I'm stunned so many people here seem to choose the auto version. In Belgium, we don't have a tradition for automatic gearboxes - it's something old people tend to choose around here. We tend to think of stick shift as part of the fun, but it's tradition more than anything else, I guess, and the paddles do make up for most of it.
My choice for the manual version was obvious: I wanted a car with relatively low taxes and emissions, and the eD4 doesn't come with the automatic.
RE: Manual or Auto ? - bell-auto-services - 23-03-2011 07:44pm
May be i should rephrase.
The power/weakness im talking is about the feeling and the delivery of the engines power to the user not the engine its self, Autos are sliippy in the connection to the wheels due to the torque converter so sometimes dont give the punch when they come on song, manuals are connected and pull hard as soon as the clutch is let out.
Its hard to explain what im asking.
Pete
RE: Manual or Auto ? - cjfp - 03-04-2011 01:41pm
BAS - did you come to a conclusion as I am currently dithering between Manual and Auto ?
RE: Manual or Auto ? - Kermit - 05-04-2011 03:01am
(23-03-2011 07:44pm)bell-auto-services Wrote: Its hard to explain what im asking.
I can relate to what you are saying. It is basically all about control. Your best bet is to drive a FL2, as they have the same engine and gearbox combinations, and they aren't that much heavier.
RE: Manual or Auto ? - XFullFatTim - 05-04-2011 09:59am
If you really believe Evoque is a Range Rover and not a Freelander in a frock then it has to be an automatic - luxury cars don't have manual shifters! One tip - without a low ratio gearbox and just relying on electronics and a Viscous Coupling for it's 4WD then from experience you are better off with an auto if you want to take the car off into the wilds where there isn't much tarmac. Freelanders with manual gearboxes cook clutches quite quickly. Also if you read the Freelander2 forums linked from this forum you will find that many of the guys there who tow a large boat or a caravan wish they had bought the automatic. Unlike BMW/Audi/ and a host of lifestyle SUV's Land Rover's autoboxes come with transmission oil coolers as standard. Anyway who says you don't have full control, these days with "tipronic" , if you choose you can drive the car as an automated manual and make your own shifts with the flappy paddles and they will always be faster, smoother shifts than you can make in with a manual gearbox.
Sorry for a car with a luxury image this car has to have an autobox.
RE: Manual or Auto ? - Kermit - 05-04-2011 01:57pm
(05-04-2011 09:59am)FullFatTim Wrote: Sorry for a car with a luxury image this car has to have an autobox.
Agree. I'll bet the manual isn't offered in OZ; limited market.
RE: Manual or Auto ? - BFGEvoqueMan - 09-04-2011 08:22am
I have owned two FL2. The first was a 2.2 TD4 and was auto. It was very smooth, but the auto and my caravan didn't really get on as it was always huntig between gears when towing. We got 23 to 25 mpg on my wifes 10 mile drive to work, and stuggled to tow (1950kg caravan at 60mph) at better than 18mpg. We now have a manual (pre- facelft) FL2 manual with stop start and get 33 to 35 mpg day to day and tow at 23 to 25 mpg. The gearshift itself is lovely and smooth (volvo 6 speed box) which I presume is what will be in the RRE and the stop start is realy quick (and since been improved on the latest FL2) and the car feels a damm site quicker to accelerate. Personally I wouldn't go back to an auto and have specced my new RRE as a mamual for these reasons.
I would agree with the advice to test drive the new FL2 as the engine/gearbox combo will give you a reallly good feel for the options.
RE: Manual or Auto ? - bell-auto-services - 09-04-2011 03:39pm
Up to now ive chosen Auto with the paddles, but as said which is good advise ill drive the FL2 at the dealers in both manual and auto options for my final thoughts.
Thanks for all your inputs.
Pete