Results are in... To be honest difference is not as much as i expected. 7kw more for manual on a much cooler day. I think people talk up manuals a bit too much. Yes manual is a lot quicker but its mostly due to shorter gears not the actual power at the wheels............. (blue line in the manual dyno refers to LPG)

http://i1012.photobucket.com/albums/af244/e363ma78/4SpeedAuto.jpg
http://i1012.photobucket.com/albums/af244/e363ma78/5SpeedManual.jpg

Agreed! My automatic vr-x went hard.
However it seemed to have its good and bad days in terms of power, manual is good all the time :)

I think a lot of it depends on what you're after - outright power, driveability, or economy.

EDIT: Assuming the engine made 225kW at the flywheel, 157kW is an exact 30% loss. That's pretty high for a FWD auto.

I think a lot of it depends on what you're after - outright power, driveability, or economy.

well really all 3 go in favor of manual.

Auto is just for lazy people or people who can't drive gears. but no i'm not biased, i think automatics in terms of the brains behind them are awesome.

well really all 3 go in favor of manual.

Auto is just for lazy people or people who can't drive gears. but no i'm not biased, i think automatics in terms of the brains behind them are awesome.

Auto boxes are made with black magic and voodoo. Manuals are made with science and engineering.

A manual would seem to be the better choice in just about any argument, but sometimes automatic is so much more practical.

You're forgetting that in a manual you have a lot more control over launch and what gear you want to be in, skipping gears etc etc..

I always thought the greatest draw back of automatics - aside from LACK of control of gears/shifting - was the heat and weight. All the hot fluid. Not to mention the power losses in pumping all that fluid around.

The ratio's and overall ratios in the Magna 5spd auto isnt much different from the 5spd M. That 7kw, could it have been lost in the 2% slip of the torque converter? Unless it was locked up I guess.

As much as prefer manual transmissions I'm stuck with an auto, and I'd really like the Magna auto to be "just as good" as the manual - I dont think the dyno run applies to real world driving. Nothing beats the feeling of shifting up under power, or shifting down into a corner and rolling the throttle out. You can do it an auto... but its like a cheap Chinese knock off of the original.

Haha, you've been robbed :)


If I'm reading the dyno charts correctly, then this is a bad dyno comparison as the gearing is VERY different.
The fact that you see a 7kW gain in peak power is pretty good - the speed is about 30kph faster in the manual thanks to taller gearing.

In my old Daihatsu, that was almost 1 whole gear.
What gear was each tess run in? Were the wheels + tyres the same each time (different diameter would affect gearing, but not by 20kph)
The auto was 4sp and from memory on this site, it's 2nd is about the same as 3rd in the 5sp auto - not sure how it compares to a manual though.

I overlayed the two charts:
one based on aligning the entire chart, which I assume is close to the same RPM. the taller gearing on the manual shows it having a little less power than the auto, but maybe it is just shifted to the right a little?
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b129/Ogier/Cars/th_45.jpg (http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b129/Ogier/Cars/45.jpg)

the other is by matching the road speed from the two charts - this shows the auto way ahead at every speed, just because it has higher rpm at that speed though.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b129/Ogier/Cars/th_45b.jpg (http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b129/Ogier/Cars/45b.jpg)

When I made the first half of each power curve align, they matched quite well until the 121/138kph mark where the manual keeps climbing and the auto falls off.
The auto revs out at 150kph and the manual revs out at 173 kph. That's accelerating from 120-150 with a flat 157kW or from 140-170 with 160 climbing to 164kW the whole way.

Just at a guess, if you had the same gearing I'd say you've got over 180kW with the manual.
(maths: (173-150)/150 = gearing % difference = 15.333%. 164.8x1.1533 = 190 kW)


Most interesting to me is that at high RPM the auto's power peaks and goes flat , but the manual keeps increasing power.
Can anything be done to an auto to stop this flat spot? It's like a slipping clutch and throwing power away. Unless the increasing power was thanks to colder air on that day - ooh -you have to throw away a few hp for having colder air on the manual's test :)

Auto is just for lazy people or people who can't drive gears..

Its funny how many people say this.... I drive Wollongong to Sydney Pretty much every Day..... 8 years in Manual Cars..... And trust me, when you are always getting stuck in Traffic, especially on an Incline.... Clutch in, Clutch out, HAndbrake up, Handbrake Down, Ride the Clutch, Change Gears....... You get sick of Driving Manuals.... Its not Lazy...... its just more Sense... ;) My Current Ride is a Mitsubishi Colt VRX with CVT Transmission..... So so Smooth... :)

wheel & tyres were exactly the same, in dyno chart it says 3rd gear for the auto, but thats wrong it was done in 2nd. manual was done in 4th

I've owned all 3, 4spd, 5spd and 5spd manual. I can tell you now the 4spd is way behind the 5spd's in performance, but it is much better on fuel. There is not alot of difference between the 5spd auto/manual, manual probably slightly quicker with perfect shifts, but I haven't really felt any difference in power between the 2.

I just finished converting my 4 speed auto to 5 speed 3.0L manual box yesterday.

It's a MASSIVE difference. Maybe on the dyno it won't be much more but the difference is you have the power on tap, on demand, anytime you want it and it comes on straight away.

Honestly, I scared myself when merging on the highway, did not expect the power to come on instantly like that.

First gear is also not to be messed with!

As for fuel economy, the manual gets much better economy than the 4 speed it seems.

These results are no surprise to me. My 5 speed tippy Ralliart comfortably out accelerated plenty of manual VRX's before and after mods. But, in the end it really comes down to the driver. More skill with only a few kW btwn each car with similar weight... the better driver will always win even if he's driving an auto which is a little bit down on power.

Horses for courses I say. Manuals are more suited to racing for sure, but if you can't drive it well then it won't make you faster because it's a manual. All in all my comparison is with the 5 speed tippies. I have to be honest and say the 4 speeds were rubbish boxes and the noticeable difference in comparison to a manual were obvious.

wheel & tyres were exactly the same, in dyno chart it says 3rd gear for the auto, but thats wrong it was done in 2nd. manual was done in 4th

Are you certain? Shouldn't it be done in 3rd (the auto) as it's the direct drive ratio ?

Well i assume judging from the ks 2nd in 4 speed auto red lines at about 140ks . I assume it was too hard to do it in 3rd as it would kick down a gear under load

yes manual has downsides in the bumper to bumper traffic..

but i converted my gearbox from auto to manual and i have never looked back. It is a totally different car! Better feel, sound, skip gears if you want and have the power ready without having to wait for the downshift.

Tippy seems to be the middle ground. No clutch but can hold and drop gears, but i still love the sound of a manual