A10 PP1 vs PP2

[Silver Bullitt]

back in the 1900's I'm sure there were a lot of fellas that thought whipping a horse in the ass was a lot more fun than pressing a pedal down to go fast...but they lost...same thing with stick shift in last ten years,,your going slower and losing money on mileage...for what? the satisfaction that your going slower and losing money...? the pp2 shoulda had auto....fast is fast...no matter how u get there.. and I WAS a stick man I even had a stick fusion..its over I get it

I hate to bust your nuts, but autos have been outrunning manuals for a loooot longer than 10 years, just saying. And, how am I losing money with a manual? Manual is rated 15city/25hwy/18comb vs 16city/25hwy/19comb for the auto. At $2.75/gal, that puts the breakeven at roughly 200,000 miles (based on 18comb vs 19comb) to recover that $1,595 upcharge for the auto, just saying. I think I prefer to just keep whipping that horses ass, just saying. :cheers:

Sponsored

 

[gbgreen]

back in the 1900's I'm sure there were a lot of fellas that thought whipping a horse in the ass was a lot more fun than pressing a pedal down to go fast...but they lost...same thing with stick shift in last ten years,,your going slower and losing money on mileage...for what? the satisfaction that your going slower and losing money...? the pp2 shoulda had auto....fast is fast...no matter how u get there.. and I WAS a stick man I even had a stick fusion..its over I get it

I don't want to get in any sort of flame war over this, and I certainly don't want to flog any kind of horse (dead, alive, or otherwise), but I do wish to respond (respectfully) to a few points (and let's keep in mind that I did, in my previous post, concede that "flappy paddle automatic gearboxes are the future (and even the present) - even for racing gearboxes at the highest levels").
First, there is no skill whatsoever in whipping a horse.
Second, anyone who thinks whipping a horse is fun needs counseling.
Now, if you had said that there were some fellas (and perhaps ladies) back in the 19th *century* (the 1900s went all the way to 1999, after all) that derived fun from skillful horse-drawn buggy driving (like knowing the horse(s), their behavior, how to extract maximum performance from both horse and buggy), at least *that* would have been somewhat closer an analogy to my post. But back then there was skill both in buggy driving and "motor carriage" driving, and each driver - however begrudgingly - would have had to admit that there was skill in the other. However, in discussing current manual and "manumatic" transmissions, there is essentially *zero* skill in pulling on a paddle - either for upshifts or downshifts. So your example is not analogous in the least bit.

Next, as far as far as "...your(sic) going slower and losing money on mileage...", the difference in speed between the two is minimal - as long as one has a skilled driver in the manual. And mileage? I assume you're referring to EPA figures, which assumes an "average" driver, which today is anything but "skilled". Once again, with a skilled driver, the difference will be negligible. Yes, the manumatic greatly assists the less talented driver. However, the more talented the driver, the less advantage is gained by the manumatic. And before you dismiss my statement as opinion, I can tell you that it is most certainly not. I have many years experience as a racing data acquisition engineer and data acqisition-based driver coach, assisting "gentleman drivers", comparing them with professional drivers in the same car. So my statements are backed by years of empirical evidence.

Next, I will bet actual money that if we had a test where a number of people listened to external audio recordings of a (rolling start) run through the gears with two cars: a PP1 manual with me driving, and a PP1 A10 with, well, anyone driving (with enough repetitions of listeners to get a statistically significant sampling), the listeners would not be able to tell which transmission was being used in which recording (with any statistically significant difference). Again, this is no mere brag. I may not have been the fastest racing driver of all time, but I was known for my quick upshifts.
On a road course, a skilled driver in a manual can save time and engine stress by skipping multiple downshifts entering a corner (going from, say, 6th gear directly to 2nd entering a hairpin at the end of a long straight). Again, this is based on empirical data acquisition analysis. I had an ally in no less than Randy Pobst when trying to convince an up-and-coming young professional driver of this very fact.

I do agree with one thing you say, though: "...fast is fast...". A talented driver will be fast no matter the transmission. However, in the case of the manumatic, it is the (expensive) technology providing the speed: not the talent of the driver.
Ah, speaking of expense, we have not yet discussed the cost of the transmission itself. The $1,595 (plus tax) cost of the A10 will buy a *lot* of gas - even at today's prices. And the A10 is much more complicated. And complication usually results in a higher rate of failure, as well as a higher cost to repair.

We don't know why Ford did not offer the A10 on the PP2 package, but I applaud them for it. Would they have sold more units if they offered an A10? Yep. But folks that want a performance oriented 'Stang with an A10 still have the PP1. Just not *quite* as much performance as the PP2.

Technology can be a wonderful thing, making new things possible (or old things easier). I prefer to maintain my skills and control over a vehicle by using a manual transmission. I also prefer to maintain vigilance while driving, instead of abdicating responsibility for safety to the "Safe and Smart" package - or as I like to call it, the "Inattentive and Clueless" package (this is just a general rant on a creeping reliance on technology at the expense of basic skills: I'm not attempting to imply that you are advocating abdication of responsibility). There are many reasons others may choose to employ technology for assistance in driving, from lack of certain skills, to stress reduction, to simple love of things technical. To each their own. But *I'm* not going any (significant amount) slower (especially on a road course). And *I'm* not losing any money on mileage. And *I'm* certainly not losing $1,595 (plus tax) for something I don't need to be fast or efficient. And I certainly *will* derive more satisfaction from maintaining my skills and concentrating on being more involved in the driving process. So please don't try to tell me it's over, because it's not. At least for me.

Peace?

 

[growler]

lmao.. here's a less verbose response... I had a mt-82 in 14 gt..had a tremec in a gt500..the gearsets these days are very thick to handle all the torque and are slow to engage.... I used to WIN bracket races in late 80's early 90's with a 85..gt t-5,before computers,.. ..I lived 10 min from dragstrip..your NOT shifting as fast as an auto ,your not as consistent as an auto, but keep on believing...and 2, your going to get the extra money you spent on auto back and then some when you move on.....but then again some people never move on I guess...get on your smith corona and type me out a response after you have done the math on your abacus.....i'm out

 

[Angry50]

not sure if we are talking road course only or drag too.. the auto has shown to be around .5 faster in the 1/4 which is a good gap. resale value on autos is much better as there is a wider market range. I will not argue any ones enjoyment of a manual and sure on a road course the differences are probably negligible as it will be based more on the driver experience with speed and cornering more than shifting. which just makes the auto equal to the manual. the auto down shifts superb in track mode skipping gears on up or down when appropriate.

not sure what listening to the shifts has to do with anything. but i guarantee you if you run the 1/4 in a manual and then an auto runs the 1/4 i could hear the difference.

both are great and have there purpose. i never understood this argument of manual vs auto..

 

[Rash]

We don't know why Ford did not offer the A10 on the PP2 package, but I applaud them for it. Would they have sold more units if they offered an A10? Yep.

This part I don't get - why would you "applaud" Ford for not offering an option that others may want and that, as you stated, would sell more cars? What difference does it make to you? You don't want it, don't buy it, but don't deny others what they want.

 

[GTP]

My order of important choices is this:

1. Engine (Eco vs v8)
2. Transmission
3. Premium vs Base
4. Performance bits

This is also the order of difficulty to change your mind later.

Even if you go to the track, 95%+ of your miles are on the street, and most of those are in a straight line. Don't feel bad that your car on Day 1 is not fully optimized for track use.

If it was me, I would order GT, A10, Premium, PP1. I would dismount the tires, and put on A/S for DD. Then I would order a square set of light wheels for track use, and put the OEM summer tires on them. When a pair of tires wear out, I would then always buy the tires as square, too.

 

[airfuel]

Moot!

Soon you youngins will be driving electric cars and pushing down on rheostats!

Bragging will be driving range and how fast you can re-charge.
Plus, that electron buddy app makes the car feel hella fast yo!

Ever watch formula E races? No thanks!

 

[Silver Bullitt]

Interesting point considering resale on at least the GT's with manual vs automatic. I'd be interested to see actual sales comparisons. In looking at current inventory of three larger Mustang dealers, there were 146 GT's in current inventory, 94 w/ manual transmission and 52 w/ automatic transmission. That's nearly a 2:1 ratio. Now I know the auto guys will immediately claim that manual inventory is high because they don't sell and automatic inventory is lower because they are selling. But, I would think these higher volume dealerships would carry inventory based on what they think they can sell, not what will linger in inventory. I know when I sold my GTO, the first question I was usually asked was manual or automatic transmission, and everyone of these were looking for manual.

 

[howlins550]

They did a good test between the ZL1 manual vs auto, Randy pobst was driving and during the test, official times the manual was .1 faster around streets of Willow.

However.... Unofficially, letting the car cool and adjusting tire pressure he took the auto out again and ran over a full second faster. So I think this auto has done made a huge statement in terms of performance.

I was dead set on a PP2 but taking other things into consideration, mainly tires, I'm going with a PP1 with auto to build up

 

[Angry50]

Interesting point considering resale on at least the GT's with manual vs automatic. I'd be interested to see actual sales comparisons. In looking at current inventory of three larger Mustang dealers, there were 146 GT's in current inventory, 94 w/ manual transmission and 52 w/ automatic transmission. That's nearly a 2:1 ratio. Now I know the auto guys will immediately claim that manual inventory is high because they don't sell and automatic inventory is lower because they are selling. But, I would think these higher volume dealerships would carry inventory based on what they think they can sell, not what will linger in inventory. I know when I sold my GTO, the first question I was usually asked was manual or automatic transmission, and everyone of these were looking for manual.

fact is trading in and selling out right i have seen autos go for at least the original difference of 1500-2k if not more.

 

[gbgreen]

lmao.. here's a less verbose response... I had a mt-82 in 14 gt..had a tremec in a gt500..the gearsets these days are very thick to handle all the torque and are slow to engage.... I used to WIN bracket races in late 80's early 90's with a 85..gt t-5,before computers,.. ..I lived 10 min from dragstrip..your NOT shifting as fast as an auto ,your not as consistent as an auto, but keep on believing...and 2, your going to get the extra money you spent on auto back and then some when you move on.....but then again some people never move on I guess...get on your smith corona and type me out a response after you have done the math on your abacus.....i'm out

Even shorter:

Like I said, a lesser talented driver will get a sizable improvement by using technology because they need it to be fast. The more talented driver, not as much.

You have no clue how fast I can shift, or how consistent I am. The a10 may beat me, but it won't be by a significant margin.

I find a good thing, and I hold on to it. So there is no need to move on.

I don't need a typewriter. I dictate to voice recognition software on my desktop, laptop, tablet, or smart phone.

And having a minor in mathematics, I can do the math in my head. Once again, some people don't need technology (even ancient) to be fast…

I'm done as well.

 

[Silver Bullitt]

fact is trading in and selling out right i have seen autos go for at least the original difference of 1500-2k if not more.

I think you are missing my point. The point was that the market for resale might not be as big for the auto as it is for the manual in a sport coupe like this.

 

[gbgreen]

This part I don't get - why would you "applaud" Ford for not offering an option that others may want and that, as you stated, would sell more cars? What difference does it make to you? You don't want it, don't buy it, but don't deny others what they want.

The reason I applaud Ford is for keeping it a *driver's* car.
If someone wants a car with a higher level of performance, then let them learn the skills that will help them handle it better. I would guess that Ford's reasoning was something similar to this.
Ford's sales figures are of absolutely no concern to me. The skill level of the drivers getting behind the wheel of the cars that they sell, however, is of concern to me.
I'm not denying anyone anything. That's Ford's decision. But I can let them know that I appreciate them requiring a higher skill level of the drivers getting behind the wheel of a higher performance car.
I sincerely hope that everyone gets the car that they want... and has the skill to handle the car that they get.

 

[Angry50]

I think you are missing my point. The point was that the market for resale might not be as big for the auto as it is for the manual in a sport coupe like this.

They are at least equal. and at least in my area automatics are in demand, good for DD people, best for Drag racers, good for grannys and people in between.

Even shorter:

Like I said, a lesser talented driver will get a sizable improvement by using technology because they need it to be fast. The more talented driver, not as much.

You have no clue how fast I can shift, or how consistent I am. The a10 may beat me, but it won't be by a significant margin.

I find a good thing, and I hold on to it. So there is no need to move on.

I don't need a typewriter. I dictate to voice recognition software on my desktop, laptop, tablet, or smart phone.

And having a minor in mathematics, I can do the math in my head. Once again, some people don't need technology (even ancient) to be fast…

I'm done as well.

100% bet an A10 will drag you in the 1/4 with an 18 stock vs stock. the fastest M6 i seen an 18 is 12.6 stock.. i am not against manuals i applaud people that are skilled with them and get full enjoyment out of them. i drove many manuals from 2002 and up my main reason for a manual in the past was because they were faster thats all that matters to me is straight line speed. its jsut fact the auto is faster for multiple reasons. road course sure driver is the decision maker there.

 

[gbgreen]

... the auto down shifts superb in track mode skipping gears on up or down when appropriate.

not sure what listening to the shifts has to do with anything. but i guarantee you if you run the 1/4 in a manual and then an auto runs the 1/4 i could hear the difference.

both are great and have there purpose. i never understood this argument of manual vs auto..

I was not aware this a10 was skip-gear capable (not all sequential manumatics are). Good point.

The point about the listening test was that I would bet real money that (statistically) one would not be able to tell the difference (if I drove the manual). I can appreciate the fact that you believe that you could tell the difference. Respectfully, I still hold that one would not.

Sponsored