And some of the most fierce muscle cars of all time were automatics..

 

All I've driven are automatics and it certainly isn't as fun as a manual, regardless of the power output. I find myself wishing my daily driver Crown Vic came with a 5 or 6 speed manual from the factory. The automatic doesn't do anything for me other than convenience. I wish there was a way to flip a switch and get full manual operation or automatic operation (not tiptronic or clutchless shifting, but a completely manual / automatic) to get the best of both worlds.

You can utilize engine braking with a manual, control the RPMs, and rev-match for ultra smooth shifts. It also gives you something to do in traffic. I also swear that my stock manual GT sounds louder and roudier than the stock automatic GTs on the road because I can keep it at certain RPMs without the trans automatically grabbing the highest gear possible.

Automatics can be built very well for consistent straight line shifting. But if you look at the Europeans, they mostly prefer manual transmissions for road courses. Downshifting isn't nearly as smooth on automatics because you have to go WOT to force it, and it can shift the weight balance and unload too much torque into the rear wheel(s) causing loss of traction and handling while before or after a turn. I agree that this is just my personal opinion and you have every right to disagree

 

Seems to me like a stick would be faster. 35-40lbs less weight plus 7 or 8 more hp to the wheels.

Especially with a good driver in the stick.

 

I agree, speed shifting or (gasp) power shifting is key to getting the fastest 1/4 ETs and trap speeds. There's no way granny shifting is going to get you to the line with a low ET, but you may end up with a decent trap speed.

 

I agree, speed shifting or (gasp) power shifting is key to getting the fastest 1/4 ETs and trap speeds. There's no way granny shifting is going to get you to the line with a low ET, but you may end up with a decent trap speed.

 

Thats what I was pointing out! Thats gotta count for something.

 

Power shifting these cars does NOT work well for max ET, I've found out. The rpm's go up and hit the limiter, and when you bang it into the next gear, it takes a quarter second or so to get full power back from the limiter.

 

Quotes by metroplex:

All I've driven are automatics and it certainly isn't as fun as a manual, regardless of the power output. I find myself wishing my daily driver Crown Vic came with a 5 or 6 speed manual from the factory. The automatic doesn't do anything for me other than convenience. I wish there was a way to flip a switch and get full manual operation or automatic operation (not tiptronic or clutchless shifting, but a completely manual / automatic) to get the best of both worlds.

And I've driven nothing but sticks except when I had to convert to an auto once (too much HP). It seems as if we both needed a change, and change is good.

Automatics can be built very well for consistent straight line shifting. But if you look at the Europeans, they mostly prefer manual transmissions for road courses. Downshifting isn't nearly as smooth on automatics because you have to go WOT to force it, and it can shift the weight balance and unload too much torque into the rear wheel(s) causing loss of traction and handling while before or after a turn.

Can't argue there. If you plan to hit the twisties, manual is the way. I plan to go 1320, therefore the auto is the perfect choice for me.

 

First of all, there is no point in shifting really close to the limiter because our powerband max is around 6K rpm. I raised my limiter to 6500rpm so I never hit the limiter when powershifting, because if you do it correctly your revs will only go up a few hundred RPM.

 

Good point! Get both!

 

Good idea. I'll just go and pick up a GT500. LOL

 

Like what?

 

I've always preferred manual transmissions. But then before I bought my Mustang, I've always owned little cars with little engines. When you're dealing with limited HP, the inefficiencies and extra weight of an automatic become quickly obvious. For example, my last car was a 325Ci BMW. It showed 0-60 times right in the sales brochure and the automatic car was a whole second slower. But then that car also had only a 2.5 liter engine. Now with our V8s making 300HP in stock trim and the fact that automatics have been considerably improved in recent years, it seems that the driveline losses are simply not a factor any more. I'm starting to thing that the next car I buy, be it a newer Mustang - or maybe a Challenger, those things look sweet - will be an automatic.

 

Daimler had to use a torque limiter on the R/T and SRT-8 Hemi V8s to prevent grenading the automatic transmissions due to the enormous amount of torque coming out of those engines (300+ ft-lb from 1500+ RPM).

 

One example of a fierce muscle car with an automatic transmission is the 1970 Buick GS Stage 1. I think it is one of the top 10 fastest muscle cars of all time. Motor Trend magazine tested this car in 1970 with both transmissions and the automatic was faster. It was the fastest car Motor Trend tested in 1970. If the article isn't online I can provide the test results.

I personally owned the automatic version of the '70 Stage 1 and can tell you the tranny was tricked out from the factory. Bone stock, during casual driving, the car had freakishly quick shifts from 1st to 2nd, like getting a mini-whiplash while driving only 10 mph or so. Under full throttle, watch out! The shifts were so intense there was a sort of sonic boom from 1st to 2nd, causing the backend to kick out sideways. 2nd to 3rd was very tight too, leaving 3rd gear posi marks. In other words, almost no time was lost during shifts in the automatic.

 

lol save the vs for non mustang cars, cant we all just get along...

 

Sorry, I should have clarified. When I think race car I think of a road course car. Aside from drag cars, my statement stands true.

 

Like Fireball1 said; The 70 Buick GSX AND the 87 Buick GNX. That's just two of many.

 

The torque on that monster is freakish enough.. 510 lb-ft of it