Will it have Thunderbird's Select Shift Transmission AKA Autostick or Tiptonic at some point?

 

That's a great question that I would like to know also? Since the auto transmission is the same as in the Lincoln LS whcih does have this feature and this is a sportscar than why wouldn't they?

 

I don't think that is part of the plan for the '05 model year.

I would be willing to bet we'll see some items like that saved for upcoming years. They gotta hold some cards back to sweeten the pot between major model changes.

 

Why would you want to get a select shift? Just buy a manual.

 

Faster shifts for one, personally I'd like to see a paddle shifter in one of the future Stang models.

You gotta figure that the ability to modify a regular auto to a tiptronic is only going to be a matter of time.

 

Some of us prefer an auto because of traffic and a select shift is a sweet thing. On curvy roads it will hold the gear you've chosen and won't upshift until you want it to, just like a stick. To me it's the best of both worlds.

 

I heard that a select shift will let you rev the engine only so much before it automaticly just upshifts? Is that true?

 

I'm not sure about the Mustang but that isn't true of my Mazda 6. It'll bump the rev-limiter and never up-shift. It will down-shift for you however as you slow down (or you can do it yourself).

 

I asked about this one a long time ago... The current Mustang is your standard Auto "Stick it in D and go" type. The tiptronic's and Mazda's version the "Manumatic" are not on the 2005 Mustang.

Save for Mazda that is a feature only available on the higher priced cars to the best of my knowledge. It would be nice to have on the Stang so we can just say NO to the clutch .

 

My X5 upshifts automaticlly if the revs get too high for that gear.

 

VW and Subaru also have this tranny, as do a lot of cars in the low to mid 30's range.

 

VW and Subaru also have this tranny, as do a lot of cars in the low to mid 30's range. [/b][/quote]
The 2005 Nissan Altima has it as well.

Having used it a bit in my Mazda I can say it's pretty cool being able to shift it yourself or just stick in D and go but it doesn't take the place of a real stick. Being that my knee problems prevent me from driving a stick, it was a better choice than a regular auto.

 

Ive driven dozens of LS's and T-birds with it, its worthless(it also is with every other make ive driven with it). It will upshift automatically and sometimes you go up and dont realize it then downshift one or two to the wrong gear. Its totally unituitive and is just a gimick. I guarantee it ads NOTHING to making the car go faster then letting the computer(which will shift according to how you are driving anyway). All it does is give you a chance to botch a shift with an auto. Stupid. You take a computer controlled modern auto that reacts in milliseconds and then try to outshift it manually, its impossible. Everybody that gets it uses it for a few days and gives up on it entirely. It in no way shape or form emulates a manual transmission.

 

kevin, my experience with the tranny is with VW, Audi, and Mercedes. I never had an unintended upshift and I thought they were great, but I've never driven a Ford with one.

 

I've used them on the Hondas and Acuras and they worked very well.

 

I'm scared the auto is going to put up faster times consistently, and i dont want that. I'm a fan of manuals and would like an advantage.

 

It would be interesting to see Ford offer a computer-controlled manual transmission (e.g. SMG) instead of a traditional automatic. Doesn't seem like that would involve a lot more weight or cost than auto, but what do I know?

 

I disagree on the manu-matics/trip-tronics/etc. Computers are good when you're running the quarter; they can predict based on foot-to-the-floor what you're trying to do. But they are not smart. They can't predict that a turn is coming and you want to downshift, or that you're in ice/snow and you want to be up a gear or two to artifically reduce your torque. Or things like even though you are stepping on the gas hard (and you like the pull of some torque) you are shifting earlier because you want to be quieter or aren't really trying to pull away as fast as the gas pedal implies. And so on.

The point of the manumatics is that you can let the computer drive when you want, or you can take control when you want (and be predictive). Of course with control comes responsibility, and you can botch things. But a lot of times what you're doing to "botch" things from the computers point of view, is doing exactly what you want for the conditions.

 

I've driven a few "autosticks" (PT Turbo, 300C and 04 Thunderbird with the OPTIONAL Select Shift...standard auto is an otherwise regular slushbox) and once you get used to it, it's a lot of fun.

Manumatics may or may not be faster, but they are more entertaining than regular automatics. Ford invented the "select shift" back in 1966 but not anywhere near the current art of ATXs.

I've had stick shift cars for years (72 Pinto, 82 Capri HO, 86 Taurus MT-5 (that's dedication!), 64 Falcon Sprint convertible, 90 Mustang 5.0 LX convertible and 94 SHO) and I'll admit manuals have been typically faster, but the current crop of automatics are darn close in performance and are more versatile.

 

you won't be seeing the manu-matic on the ford or any other add-on, imo...that's exactly what ford wants to stay away from with the mustang. thecost to the manufacturing process to offer the added goodies adds too much to the bottom line and ford, knowing their customers, wants to keep the bottom line as low as possible. it kills me that i can't get the fog lights on the v6 but that's what it takes to be able to sell the 05 for under 20k with all the goodies...keep the options list low and the cost of building the car at rock bottom. jackg 90seville 95k