The auto is faster.
Originally Posted by CarNutz
OK.. I agree with you when it comes to "real" drag cars.. I'm an old drag racer myself.Spent many a Friday night at test and tune and Saturday at brackets. Before the imports came to the dragway.. Things were much simpler then. A fast auto setup was a 2-speed powerglide. Manuals were the Muncie "rock crushers".
The manual in the G35 made me think of the rock crusher again... with all the vibrations coming through the shifter...
The manual in the G35 made me think of the rock crusher again... with all the vibrations coming through the shifter...
but yes, you are right when it comes to just daily driver cars the manual is faster with a matched driver.-sean
Originally Posted by Derp
Theoretically faster.. theoretically better gas mileage... but DEFINITELY more enjoyable.
My exact thoughts. I'm on stick #4.
Given the choice of a car I knew was faster but automatic and a slower but manual car. I'd go with the manual. That is a non-negotable when I buy a car. It'll be a sad, sad day when the world stops making manuals.
Didn't they gear the auto tranny lower than the 6MT? I recall reading that somewhere but I can't seem to find specs on the auto tranny.
That could account for the feeling of being faster. One review I have read had placed the Auto vs the 6MT within a tenth of eachother.
What does it matter? if you can't decide, flip a coin
That could account for the feeling of being faster. One review I have read had placed the Auto vs the 6MT within a tenth of eachother.
What does it matter? if you can't decide, flip a coin
Originally Posted by Cyanide Ride
Didn't they gear the auto tranny lower than the 6MT? I recall reading that somewhere but I can't seem to find specs on the auto tranny.
That could account for the feeling of being faster. One review I have read had placed the Auto vs the 6MT within a tenth of eachother.
What does it matter? if you can't decide, flip a coin
That could account for the feeling of being faster. One review I have read had placed the Auto vs the 6MT within a tenth of eachother.
What does it matter? if you can't decide, flip a coin

In the 1st Gen the A/T cars had 3.357:1 and the manual tranny and G35X had 3.538:1 rear diffs.
Originally Posted by GEE35X
Thats right about the different gearing on the 1st gen G35, but on the 07 G35 the final gear ratio is 3.692:1 for all model 07 G35 cars.
In the 1st Gen the A/T cars had 3.357:1 and the manual tranny and G35X had 3.538:1 rear diffs.
In the 1st Gen the A/T cars had 3.357:1 and the manual tranny and G35X had 3.538:1 rear diffs.
well from Infiniti specs the auto has 287 hp while the manual has 298 hp.
furthermore, people like manual better (for the most part) because they have more control of the gears in which case they can move to the rpms they choose.
hope that helps
furthermore, people like manual better (for the most part) because they have more control of the gears in which case they can move to the rpms they choose.
hope that helps
Originally Posted by Rphillips6487
well from Infiniti specs the auto has 287 hp while the manual has 298 hp.
furthermore, people like manual better (for the most part) because they have more control of the gears in which case they can move to the rpms they choose.
hope that helps
furthermore, people like manual better (for the most part) because they have more control of the gears in which case they can move to the rpms they choose.
hope that helps
Man, the manual / auto topic is getting OLD! Hey, you guys that bought a 6MT, more power to you. You like that better, feel like it gives you more control over the car, and HAVE to have one. Great, it's a great choice and I'm sure you're having fun!
For me, and probably a lot like me, I can drive an MT just fine, but chose the auto sport because a) like most on the forum I'm not taking it to the track, b) the paddles let me choose the gear (requirement) while keeping both hands on the wheel, probably making me faster in the twisties, and c) the difference in performance between the two is so minute it's unlikely to be perceived by 90% of the forum drivers - whatever their opinion.
Peace.
The way the power is delivered is key for me. the manual has a direct physycal connection (through the flywheel, clutch disc, & pressure plate) where the Auto uses a TC (Fluid coupling) I've driving both type of cars hard and the auto can't handle extreme handling situations(drifting, J-turns, etc) as well IMO.
It really comes down to the driver and some(most IMO) of the MT drivers just aren't that good, the auto will suite more people that don't really understand the fundamentals of driving. If you have the same driver, with similar cars; one auto, one MT, more than likely, the MT fill be faster at the track. Honestly, I can take one hand off the wheel for a split second in a turn and place the trans in the exact gear I want without losing focus on the road, it's all about situational awareness, and know what the car is capable of.
It really comes down to the driver and some(most IMO) of the MT drivers just aren't that good, the auto will suite more people that don't really understand the fundamentals of driving. If you have the same driver, with similar cars; one auto, one MT, more than likely, the MT fill be faster at the track. Honestly, I can take one hand off the wheel for a split second in a turn and place the trans in the exact gear I want without losing focus on the road, it's all about situational awareness, and know what the car is capable of.
For what it's worth, I wasn't ******* anyone who chose the AT for either practical or preferential reasons.
I prefer the MT even though I know that the "advantages" are just theoretical best-case senarios and despite the fact that a MT can be a hassle in stop and go traffic, or on hilly streets with stop signs, or when you're trying to drive and also keep your hand on the bag of food in the passenger seat so it won't flop over and spill french-fries all over the floor. I just prefer to shift myself.
Both transmissions provide excellent performance. Picking one over the other is a subjective decision. People usually pick the "logical" reasons supporting a decision after they've already made the subjective decision about what they want.
I prefer the MT even though I know that the "advantages" are just theoretical best-case senarios and despite the fact that a MT can be a hassle in stop and go traffic, or on hilly streets with stop signs, or when you're trying to drive and also keep your hand on the bag of food in the passenger seat so it won't flop over and spill french-fries all over the floor. I just prefer to shift myself.
Both transmissions provide excellent performance. Picking one over the other is a subjective decision. People usually pick the "logical" reasons supporting a decision after they've already made the subjective decision about what they want.
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 13,068
Likes: 101
From: Southern Cali --> 818
Originally Posted by Garnet Canuck
I am not sure if you were joking or not, but either way reading these type of comments toward the auto gets tiring. 

I wouldnt mind owning an auto, but it's not my personal preference.
Im just getting tired of seeing ignorant threads stating "Auto's are faster". I can understand "Auto felt faster", but to state that the auto is faster is plain ignorant.
People get automatics for their own reasons, which I respect. BUT when someone starts stating "Autos are Faster" or atleast try to make their point about how they're "sportier", I have to get on their case.
Im getting just as tired & annoyed with threads such as this one.
PS. In response to the "Auto's are the preferred tranny of Drag Racers"... the only reason of that being the fact that their cars are just way too quick for them to shift. They would have to shift into 2nd within a fraction of a second.
.
You guys do know that the 5AT's torque converter provides 2x torque multiplication from a standstill, right? Yes, there is greater drivetrain loss, in gears 1, 2, 3 but gear 1 benefits from the torque multiplication. The TC can electronically lock in gears 4 and 5.
It's one of the reasons the 5AT is "close" to a 6MT in 0-60 times w/ only a 3.3final drive vs. 3.5 for the manual and only 280 hp vs 298 for the manual.
Nissan engineers worked out the gearing and design to make both very similar in performance. The numbers speak for themselves.
Now here's the kicker: the 6MT sucks in these cars - thread after thread of problems. I was disappointed on my test drive by the vibration and roughness of the 6MT (and I had been driving a 5MT Saturn for 12 yrs). The auto was silky smooth and I was sold. I hated the MM mode to start, but it's really good for controlling speed now that I've gotten used to it (took nearly a year to unlearn the usual shifting of a MT).
All of these types of threads seem to end the same way - to each his own...
It's one of the reasons the 5AT is "close" to a 6MT in 0-60 times w/ only a 3.3final drive vs. 3.5 for the manual and only 280 hp vs 298 for the manual.
Nissan engineers worked out the gearing and design to make both very similar in performance. The numbers speak for themselves.
Now here's the kicker: the 6MT sucks in these cars - thread after thread of problems. I was disappointed on my test drive by the vibration and roughness of the 6MT (and I had been driving a 5MT Saturn for 12 yrs). The auto was silky smooth and I was sold. I hated the MM mode to start, but it's really good for controlling speed now that I've gotten used to it (took nearly a year to unlearn the usual shifting of a MT).
All of these types of threads seem to end the same way - to each his own...
Originally Posted by Rphillips6487
well from Infiniti specs the auto has 287 hp while the manual has 298 hp.
furthermore, people like manual better (for the most part) because they have more control of the gears in which case they can move to the rpms they choose.
hope that helps
furthermore, people like manual better (for the most part) because they have more control of the gears in which case they can move to the rpms they choose.
hope that helps
talking about 2007 models G35s all have 306HP
Here are the ratios for the 2007 6MT. Now need to find the auto.
ENGINE
Type: V-6, aluminum block and heads
Bore x stroke: 3.76 x 3.20 in, 95.5 x 81.4mm
Displacement: 213 cu in, 3498cc
Compression ratio: 10.6:1
Fuel-delivery system: port injection
Valve gear: chain-driven double overhead cams, 4 valves per cylinder, hydraulic lifters, variable intake- and exhaust-valve timing
Power (SAE net): 306 bhp @ 6800 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 268 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm
Redline: 7600 rpm
DRIVETRAIN
Transmission: 6-speed manual
Final-drive ratio: 3.69:1, limited slip
Gear: Ratio: Mph/1000 rpm Max test speed
I 3.79 5.5 42 mph (7600 rpm)
II 2.32 9.0 68 mph (7600 rpm)
III 1.62 12.9 98 mph (7600 rpm)
IV 1.27 16.4 125 mph (7600 rpm)
V 1.00 20.8 158 mph (7590 rpm)
VI 0.79 26.4 158 mph (6000 rpm)
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.2 in
Track, front/rear: 59.8/59.8 in
Length/width/height: 187.0/69.8/57.2 in
Ground clearance: 5.3 in
Drag area, Cd (0.29) x frontal area (25.2 sq ft, est): 7.3 sq ft
Curb weight: 3583 lb
Weight distribution, F/R: 53.3/46.7%
Curb weight per horsepower: 11.7 lb
Fuel capacity: 20.0 gal
CHASSIS/BODY
Type: unit construction
Body material: welded steel stampings
INTERIOR
SAE volume, front seat: 55 cu ft
rear seat: 41 cu ft
trunk: 14 cu ft
Front-seat adjustments: fore-and-aft, seatback angle, front height, rear height, thigh support; driver only: lumbar support, upper and lower side bolsters
Restraint systems, front: manual 3-point belts; driver and passenger front, side, and curtain airbags
rear: manual 3-point belts, curtain airbags
SUSPENSION
Front: ind, unequal-length control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar
Rear: 1 control arm, 1 lateral link, 1 trailing link, and 1 toe-control link per side; coil springs; anti-roll bar
STEERING
Type: rack-and-pinion with variable hydraulic power assist
Steering ratio: 16.4:1
Turns lock-to-lock: 3.1
Turning circle curb-to-curb: 35.4 ft
BRAKES
Type: hydraulic with vacuum power assist, anti-lock control, and electronic panic assist
Front: 13.0 x 1.3-in vented disc
Rear: 13.0 x 0.6-in vented disc
WHEELS AND TIRES
Wheel size: F: 7.5 x 18 in, R: 8.5 x 18 in
Wheel type: cast aluminum
Tires: Bridgestone Potenza RE050A; F: 225/50R-18 95W, R: 245/45R-18 96W
Test inflation pressures, F/R: 33/33 psi
Spare: high-pressure compact
C/D TEST RESULTS
ACCELERATION Seconds
Zero to 30 mph 2.0
40 mph 2.8
50 mph 4.0
60 mph 5.2
70 mph 6.9
80 mph 8.6
90 mph 10.5
100 mph 13.1
110 mph 15.8
120 mph 19.0
130 mph 23.8
140 mph 30.2
150 mph 38.2
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.8
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 8.7
50-70 mph: 7.8
Standing 1/4 mile: 13.9 sec@ 103 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 158 mph
BRAKING
70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 160 ft
HANDLING
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
Understeer: minimal moderate excessive
FUEL ECONOMY
EPA city driving: 18 mpg
EPA highway driving: 25 mpg
C/D observed: 17 mpg
INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL
Idle: 41 dBA
Full-throttle acceleration: 79 dBA
70-mph cruising: 67 dBA
ENGINE
Type: V-6, aluminum block and heads
Bore x stroke: 3.76 x 3.20 in, 95.5 x 81.4mm
Displacement: 213 cu in, 3498cc
Compression ratio: 10.6:1
Fuel-delivery system: port injection
Valve gear: chain-driven double overhead cams, 4 valves per cylinder, hydraulic lifters, variable intake- and exhaust-valve timing
Power (SAE net): 306 bhp @ 6800 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 268 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm
Redline: 7600 rpm
DRIVETRAIN
Transmission: 6-speed manual
Final-drive ratio: 3.69:1, limited slip
Gear: Ratio: Mph/1000 rpm Max test speed
I 3.79 5.5 42 mph (7600 rpm)
II 2.32 9.0 68 mph (7600 rpm)
III 1.62 12.9 98 mph (7600 rpm)
IV 1.27 16.4 125 mph (7600 rpm)
V 1.00 20.8 158 mph (7590 rpm)
VI 0.79 26.4 158 mph (6000 rpm)
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.2 in
Track, front/rear: 59.8/59.8 in
Length/width/height: 187.0/69.8/57.2 in
Ground clearance: 5.3 in
Drag area, Cd (0.29) x frontal area (25.2 sq ft, est): 7.3 sq ft
Curb weight: 3583 lb
Weight distribution, F/R: 53.3/46.7%
Curb weight per horsepower: 11.7 lb
Fuel capacity: 20.0 gal
CHASSIS/BODY
Type: unit construction
Body material: welded steel stampings
INTERIOR
SAE volume, front seat: 55 cu ft
rear seat: 41 cu ft
trunk: 14 cu ft
Front-seat adjustments: fore-and-aft, seatback angle, front height, rear height, thigh support; driver only: lumbar support, upper and lower side bolsters
Restraint systems, front: manual 3-point belts; driver and passenger front, side, and curtain airbags
rear: manual 3-point belts, curtain airbags
SUSPENSION
Front: ind, unequal-length control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar
Rear: 1 control arm, 1 lateral link, 1 trailing link, and 1 toe-control link per side; coil springs; anti-roll bar
STEERING
Type: rack-and-pinion with variable hydraulic power assist
Steering ratio: 16.4:1
Turns lock-to-lock: 3.1
Turning circle curb-to-curb: 35.4 ft
BRAKES
Type: hydraulic with vacuum power assist, anti-lock control, and electronic panic assist
Front: 13.0 x 1.3-in vented disc
Rear: 13.0 x 0.6-in vented disc
WHEELS AND TIRES
Wheel size: F: 7.5 x 18 in, R: 8.5 x 18 in
Wheel type: cast aluminum
Tires: Bridgestone Potenza RE050A; F: 225/50R-18 95W, R: 245/45R-18 96W
Test inflation pressures, F/R: 33/33 psi
Spare: high-pressure compact
C/D TEST RESULTS
ACCELERATION Seconds
Zero to 30 mph 2.0
40 mph 2.8
50 mph 4.0
60 mph 5.2
70 mph 6.9
80 mph 8.6
90 mph 10.5
100 mph 13.1
110 mph 15.8
120 mph 19.0
130 mph 23.8
140 mph 30.2
150 mph 38.2
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.8
Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 8.7
50-70 mph: 7.8
Standing 1/4 mile: 13.9 sec@ 103 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 158 mph
BRAKING
70-0 mph @ impending lockup: 160 ft
HANDLING
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
Understeer: minimal moderate excessive
FUEL ECONOMY
EPA city driving: 18 mpg
EPA highway driving: 25 mpg
C/D observed: 17 mpg
INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL
Idle: 41 dBA
Full-throttle acceleration: 79 dBA
70-mph cruising: 67 dBA



