Base Elise? Nah, give me an Evo X MR. Fatty FTW, duke.

If you're going to get an Evo X at least make it the GSR. Honestly, the MR is starting to push into Corvette, Boxster, Z4 3.0si, etc. etc. pricing territory and it doesn't have what it takes to compete with any of those vehicles. The MR has lost all sense of value-for-money that made the Evo VIII and IX so appealing. The GSR's still got it somewhat, though (and the manual beats the hell out of the TC-SST).

^Yeah I was looking at the pricing a few weeks ago. The MR is just stupid, it totally doesn't seem worth the money. You can take the money you pay for the less fun transmission and put it into other, more useful things (or not spend it at all).

Agreed on the absurdity of these Exige variants. I mean, I'm sure it's awesome but certainly not worth the money. I hope it's the interns that are churning out these things and the real engineers/designers are working on the successor to the Elise!

I'll take the TC-SST over some run-of-the-mill 5-speed. Give me a GSR with the MR styling and interior with that upcoming HKS 6-speed and you've got me... but then you're over MR pricing.

EDIT: On what basis can you say the "manual beats the hell out of the TC-SST"... look, I'm not sure if you read any of the Evo forums, but apparently that 5-speed is pretty poor, both in terms of build quality and performance (ratios, etc.)?

Thats because STi > EVO X

Anyways, clarkma .. i dont see any of the cars you mention sell for $38k or less. Just saying. And as far as performance goes .. i dont see a Boxter or a Z4 get away from a EVO on any track. Not quickly in any case.

Wheeeeeeeee understeer!

(Why am I getting into this? I like trophy wife cars).

No you're right, but an Evo X MR with the technology package is $41,515 (plus other accessories if you so choose). A Z4 Coupe 3.0si is $40,700 to start, and though the Evo X may be faster around a track (honestly I have no clue if it is or not), the Z4 is a true sports car and the Evo is an economy sedan with as much motoring technology as God. To me the choice there is obvious, but the main point is that the Evo X MR is no longer the screaming performance bargain it once was...luxury-brand sports car speed at 2/3rds the cost is what it used to be. Now you get luxury-brand sports car speed but without the luxury brand or sports car at a pretty insignificant discount over, say, a BMW Z4 or 335i or Audi A4 3.2 S-line or TT, Mercedes C-Class Sport, Acura TL Type-S, etc. Please note that the same complaint could also be leveled against the STi, at least when equipped with Nav and the BBS wheels.

And Razor, as for the TC-SST vs. manual, you should read Edmunds' long term blogs about their MR:







There are, of course, a lot of compliments to TC-SST as well as these complaints. But, simply put, none of these complaints would exist with a manual transmission. With a manual transmission you get full control of everything, you're not letting the computers dictate how they want to save you clutch life and ruin your fun and you're not at the mercy of the servos to serve up a quick, nice shift (or not).

I was never a fan of the MR. I was talking more in terms of the base GSR just to be clear. Now which of the two ( EVO or Z4) makes for a real sports car .. lets just leave it at personal preferences.

Well I'm really just talking about the MR as well. The GSR strikes me as being a significantly better value and also being more entertaining, and of course it's far too cheap to compare against the Z4 or Boxster (a 350Z comparison could be warranted, though...maybe a Infiniti G35/G37). But for the most part I'm just trying to talk Razor out of the Evo MR.

Agreed. The starting price for the MR is just $2k under starting price for an A5.

The same goes for VWs DSG.

I'd still much rather have the DSG than a six-speed.

POOOOOSSSAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

So basically your performance/build quality argument (which as shown by Clark is at least 1/2 an incorrect claim) is just a cover up for the fact that you're a...


?

He's afraid to learn stick. I was too...when I was 15 and just learning to drive. Now I can't live without it, even if the non-stick is a fancy twin-clutch job.

Twin-clutch transmissions are nothing more than automatic replacements, with a slightly different set of compromises. I'll take a DSG or TC-SST over a normal torque converter automatic so I can get the feel of positive clutch engagement and quicker reaction times, but I'll still take a manual over any of them so I can have 100% control.

WHY???? DSG is quicker... I drove one and its really nice but it ain't stickshift its like playing a video game...

Clarkma5, do you ever get to feeling like we're Luddites?

Once in a while I wonder if my devotion to proper manual transmissions is wrong...maybe I've missed some sort of boat and am sticking with a dead technology...like people who refused to give up VCRs and stuff.

I think I might call my local Mitsubishi dealer and see if they have an EVO with the TC-SST for me to try, and see how I feel about it.

I have mixed feelings about DSG in the GTI I drove. For puttering around town when I'm not pushing the car, I appreciated the flawless smoothness of each shift. When I was pushing the car very hard on a twisty country road, I appreciated the ability to keep both hands on the wheel, focus on the steering, braking, etc, and just tap to shift and have the revs match perfectly. However, when I was doing the 7/10ths and 8/10ths driving, I wanted the involvement of a traditional manual over the performance of a DSG unit. The DSG definitely makes you feel more distant from the mechanics of the car.

See, for me, it's about every day driving. If I'm feeling even a little bit down, going for a drive in the Impreza and shifting makes me happy...making nice downshifts, heel-toeing into a corner...even trying to keep revs below 2000rpm to save fuel makes me smile a little bit. When the shifting is done for me, I don't get the same feeling. Granted I have only experienced traditional automatics, and some with shift override features...but I assume these twin clutch set ups will be more like a really good automatic with shift override than a slightly less involving manual.

I've only driven two flappy-paddle cars...a Toyota MR2 Spyder (worst transmission evar, not a dual-clutch) and an Audi A3 2.0T non-Sport package (DSG, obviously).

The DSG makes for remarkably smooth shifts and reacts very quickly to input from paddles. It is remarkably impressive in that regard. However, when I booted the throttle in drive, it went to downshift two gears and it did this weird thing where it disengaged the clutches, rose the engine revs to the correct level, shuffled around the gears, and then engaged the clutches again. The result was this weird delay where the engine was revving at 5000 RPMs but the car was going nowhere and then the clutch grabbed and you were off. It's those sorts of unnatural moments that are just bound to happen when you're driving something that can only be reactive, not proactive. See, even the very best automatic transmission can't see into the future like a human being can.

So I don't consider that being a luddite at all. Like I've said, I think twin-clutches make excellent automatic transmission replacements. I'd much rather have a DSG than a traditional automatic. They are not, however, manual transmission replacements. Nothing replaces manual transmissions except for other manual transmissions.

Clark, I have no idea where you got that idea. I know how to drive stick. I've even driven stick in an E46 M3. For the way I drive, the DSG is more practical. Don't like that? Tough. It's my opinion.

If I ever have the financial capability of owning two cars, the weekender will be the one with a manual.

You know how to drive stick and yet you don't choose to? You do realize that makes you an enthusiast anomaly...aka a poooossssayyyyy.

"The way I drive"? Do explain how you drive precipitates owning an automatic. And have you ever owned a manual or do you just drive them on occasion?

Pretty much my thinking (said much better by midnight).

Here are the excuses I'll hear for a sporty car enthusiast not driving stick:

1) I've lost my legs in a landmine explosion.
2) I've driven stick for the last 40 years and I'm tired of it.

I don't even care if you live in San Francisco, drive stick damnit.

Right...so everyone who drives in F1, or who wants an F1-like driving experience in their sporty car, is a poser?

I personally prefer three pedals, but to say that ANYONE who seeks out a dual-clutch transmission is a poser is arrogant, stupid, and inaccurate.

On occasion. "The way I drive" was incorrectly worded. I meant more along the lines of "For the way that I live," basically my lifestyle. I run cross country. I row crew. I end up slumped in the car tired as hell after practices (sometimes the second of a set of two-a-days) and to be honest it would annoy me to have to drive a manual right after that (yes, these are activities I do YEAR ROUND). There's also the traffic issue, see what I'm going to write below.



I live right outside of Boston. Big Dig. Route 128. Yeah, same kinda thing, but it pisses the shit out of me driving in this traffic, manual or not. If it were a manual it would be worse, and I'd probably lose it on a daily basis. If I lived in an area with low to zero traffic, I'd start to reconsider, maybe.

F1 isn't about fun for the drivers, it's about the last tenths or hundredths of a second in extreme competition where massive companies are mobilizing tons of resources to prove themselves as better than everyone else they're competing against.

I never said "poser", but I gladly admit that I look down my nose at anyone who feels justified in trading actual driving enjoyment behind the wheel for the sake of a few tenths of a second on a race course and/or for the connection to high forms of motorsport such as F1. On a road car, it's just a dumb decision. Don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing Razor of using this line of reasoning for getting DSG or TC-SST or whatever; he's just being lazy. And I look down my nose at that too, sorry.

I don't look down my nose at people who have different preferences in their hobbies than I do in mine. I don't understand why some people prefer cruisers over sportbikes, or wine over beer, but that doesn't mean it's my job to judge them.

And it's not a dumb decision on a road car. If you deal with gridlock on a daily basis, the LOGICAL decision is a twin-clutch automated manual. The illogical passionate decision is a traditional manual.

Logic's boring.

Look, I have my opinions. I know I'm well beyond making any sort of objective sense. I'm passionate about this issue and you all know my stand on it and I frankly can't wrap my head around the contradictory viewpoints. I just cannot empathize with that.

Real men row their own gears....

Oh good lord, the irony, it burns!

People driving in F1 do it as their job, not as a hobby. They don't get to choose the manual version or a the flappy paddle version. Now people who want a F1 driving experience.. the only way that makes sense is if you have a F1 car of yester-years or drive in one of the formula series cars which the last time i checked werent normal road going cars.
Now for road going cars, if you get a flappy paddle gearbox to get a F1 like experience .. yes you are a poser.

How much downforce does that wing give you at 45 MPH, poser?

It does give me downforce when i go 120 mph on the race track. Pooooooooosssaaaayyyyyyyyy.

Real men don't judge others' choices when the other people's choices in no way affect the real man's life.

I think that a manual transmission is fun. There is absolutely NO logical reason for that. It's just my own totally subjective tastes, like my tastes in music or food. It's entirely possible to me that someone could subjectively enjoy the crispness and precision of a DSG in the way that I subjectively enjoy the feel of a clutch.

Looking down my nose at them for that is as arbitrary and baseless as looking down my nose at someone for liking a different genre of music. It's all subjective.

Ah but the difference is that we're car snobs, not music snobs. How else are you going to be a snob if you can't judge people as inferior for disagreeing with you?

As for the excuse "I drive through too much traffic so I own an automatic" is pretty pathetic. I drove through NYC traffic for 2 years during rush hour and really did not feel a need for an automatic. Sure its easier to talk on the phone and drink your coffee but its not difficult. This is true especially for most modern cars that do not have old school hard clutches. I also feel that a manual makes you a better driver, because it makes your pay attention to what you are doing. For example, I can't talk on the phone I drive...

Razor's a pussy. No one cares, lets move on.

Ok, so I like the DSG. I never said I don't like manuals, it's just that I'd RATHER have the DSG at THIS POINT in my life. An opinion is an opinion, but I guess that counts for nothing. Someone let me know what the car with the heaviest and most ridiculously difficult-to-shift clutch is so I can buy one someday and call you all pussies.

The Caterham is the stiffest and least progressive clutch I've ever manipulated, with a stiff shifter that has throws so short it makes a Miata feel like a semi-truck. That might do the trick for your e-penis.

I never driven a muscle car but my dad said that a 64 GTO he tried had a pretty tough one...

I got to drive a '55 chevy once, being used to a VW clutch, it was definitely stiffer, but nowhere near the point that I would say "I don't like this" "This is a chore to drive" etc.
But man when you got on it, the world just melted away and it was just me, a small block chevy, and all the back country road I could tear up...


Great experience.


That being said, any true car enthusiast worth his salt would prefer to put his own car in its own gear and have exact control to the amount of torque that reaches to wheels. Not let some little metal paddle do it for you. Those are just another way to make driving a car a mindless task....

This thread is retarded. Just because you don't prefer manual over an auto (or equivalent), doesn't make you any less of an enthusiast.

Thank you thank you thank you. I couldn't agree more, but I didn't want to just state and restate that position while the rest of the forum whined that I was badgering them in their badgering of Razor

This thread is retarded because you two are wrong and won't give up.

You're both wrong. And badgering Razor isn't the issue here, it's explaining without a shadow of the doubt that 3 pedals is greater than 2 (both figuratively and literally, in a mathematical sense obviously).

Clarkma5, you're less of an enthusiast because you drive a FWD car. See how stupid claims like that sound?

Actually you're right, it's not that different. Here's the way I see it: when a member here has a new (or new-to-them) car purchase choice to make, it is their "duty" to choose stickshifts over automatics, AWD/RWD over FWD, sport over luxury, etc., when at all possible (possibility takes into account stuff like budget). By duty I mean they're bound to raise the ire of everyone else here if they go against those guidelines.

Yes I drive a FWD car. I bought it 4.5 years ago when a RWD or AWD vehicle was out-of-the-question price-wise. I am not currently in the market, but when I am in the market I will be purchasing RWD with a stickshift (small chance of AWD but I doubt it).

You have a choice because you're talking about being in the market. You've chosen two pedals. Thus you must suffer the judgment of dieselstation. Make sense?

EDIT: This is only semi-serious. I'm trying to explain the attitude on dieselstation, which I personally don't think is wrong (though I acknowledge it can get obnoxious), but I certainly am in favor of not just knee-jerk saying "oh, that's nice" to everyone's decisions here.

What about when paddles are the only option?

Then you may rightly be judged for choosing the wrong vehicle in the first place.