Stop calling a PDK an “automatic”

All this discussion about a newer better version of an automatic being referred to as an automatic made me wonder.....

As far as the manual trans guys go, are the owners of the newest versions annoyed by them being referred to as such?

Is it OK to say "manual" instead of-

6 speed manual with triple cone synchro's, multi plate hydraulically actuated self adjusting clutch and dual mass flywheel/etc/etc??


I feel the term manual may be generalizing and glossing over distinctions between the newest versions that have had over a century of technological advancements vs a crash box from the late 19th century.

Just asking

 

Omg you forgot to mention it's gated. I'm devastated.

 

Please accept my apology, I did not intend to offend.

 

If it has rev match we need a new category

 

You can't use vague terminology when the vague term you are using has meant something completely different than what you are talking about.

If "automatic", used as a single word to describe a transmission, didn't have a very, very, very specific connotation about what type of transmission it is, for the last 70 years, then you'd be right.

However, since "automatic", as a single word, has had a very specific meaning about transmission type for the last 70 years, you are wrong. Get over it.

I mean no disrespect, but I think you guys are full of it and are just trying to stir the pot. You can't sit in any meaningful conversation with car guys and use the term automatic and have it be understood what you are talking about.

Porsche track guys conversation:
Man 1: I have an automatic
Man 2: You track a Tiptronic??????
Man 1: No, it's a PDK
Man 2: Well then why the **** didn't you just say that instead of telling me you had an automatic
Man 1: Because it can sometimes shift automatically?
Man 2: So you run it in automatic mode on the track?????
Man 1: No, I use the paddles, but it can shift automatically. And, you know, when I use the paddles, some stuff is automatic
Man 2: And you think "automatic" is the best way to describe the transmission???? Can I have my 5 minutes back.

 

What defines an automatic transmission as an automatic transmission?

Not trying to stir the pot, simply disagree.

A ZF8 or a tiptronic (and many others) are also either paddle shifted or automatic.

 

PDK and Tiptronic are just two of many possible implementations of an automatic transmission. Seems obvious to me and I'm not sure why anyone would be sensitive about it. It isn't good or bad. It just is.

 

Simple answer -- the physical transmission that is in the car you are talking about defines the transmission type.

When you say "my car has an automatic" -- the statement can't help but be interpreted as talking about the transmission itself -- not some aspect of how it can optionally be operated.

The presence of paddles has nothing to do with it. Yes the Tiptronic in my Q5 had paddles and the Tiptronic in our old 996 had steering wheel buttons -- in no way when driving the Q5 or 996 with paddles or buttons would you ever, even for a second, think it wasn't an automatic transmission. I disliked 996's for a decade because of the Tiptronic -- no fun to drive at all even with manually button pushing. A decade later I bought a 6-speed and at 2900 lbs with the a manual, I think it's one of the best driving cars I've ever driven (including many other 911 models). I know from my Maserati F1 experience, that if our old 996 had an F1 transmission (Porsche didn't have it back then) instead of Tiptronic, I would have liked driving it about 70% as much as the 6-speed -- because it gives the exact direct feel and control of a manual when you paddle shift it (the 30% would be me still missing the shifter, even though it shifted way faster than I could manually shift). The PDK in the Macan is designed to be softened for smoothness in an SUV, so it's only subtly more crisp than the Q5 Tiptronic in normal driving, but the difference isn't subtle at all when you manually shift (the Q5 is comparatively lethargic on every paddle shift).

 

I would call PDK and F1 automated manual transmissions. They are manual transmissions with automatic functionality, should the user want it.

Automatics as most refer to them are old-style units with torque converters.

 

Does PDK have a selector for "P R N D" and maybe a low or something? And two pedals? If so, it is an automatic.

My Tesla has those two things, even though it only has one gear, so no shifting at all. Yet I still would refer to it as an automatic.

My 612 does not have a selector for "P R N D" but it also doesn't have a clutch pedal... yet I would still refer to it as an automatic.

Some people just seem incredibly sensitive about the idea that they are driving an automatic-- it seems to offend their self image. It's okay to drive an automatic! We're not judging you!

 

Nobody is offended about it being called an automatic. It's just extremely misleading to call it automatic -- not only is it vague (is it F1/auto/CVT?????), it is misleading because in the absence of more info, any car person is going to think you are talking about a traditional automatic, and not a clutch-based transmission that mimics the operation of an automatic. Why would anybody in a real-world car conversation be so incomprehensibly lazy to use an ambiguous and misleading term to describe their transmission (see Porsche conversation in post #80). I'm certain you guys are just stirring the pot.

Not only am I not offended about it being an automatic (operationally), I'd much rather have an automatic in my Macan. That would mean I wouldn't have a $1300 PDK oil change at 37,000 miles, and I could keep the Macan past warranty, which I can't do because PDK repair costs without warranty are insane. I would lose about 2 MPG if the Macan had an automatic because automatic is far less efficient, but it would be worth it to not have to worry about PDK (and the more subtle performance benefits aren't needed in an SUV).

In a sports car, F1 transmission is worth it, performance-wise, and night and day better than an automatic that has paddles -- it's even better than manual in terms of control and performance when you want to drive it hard -- but there is a cost in living with F1 transmissions long-term (I won't do it again).

 

More like:
Guy 1 my 911 is automatic
Guy 2 cool mine is PDK too lets go driving on the track
Vroom vroom

 

"Talking about the transmission itself" Yes, the question is, what about the transmission itself defines it as automatic?

Saying it's misleading to call a transmission that shifts automatically an automatic seems silly to me

 

As an adjective, it’s automatic. As a noun, automatic is totally inaccurate.

You guys are trying to use an adjective as a noun. Not on my watch!

 

Still waiting on what defines a transmission as automatic.

 

Based on the intense feelings about it, seems more like a pronoun.

 

After a sales demonstration a client and I had a friendly discussion about his “manual” SMG gearbox in his M3.
He insisted it was a manual.
I called it an automatic.
I believe the job was lost because he felt insulted.
From now on it’s a manual.

 

To be fair, the "M" in the acronym does stand for "Manual"

 

Call it an automated manual and he will only be partially insulted.

I can't imagine getting upset about something so trivial.

 

I seriously doubt he felt insulted, he was likely in disbelief that you refused to recognize the difference between a traditional automatic and an F1 transmission (which is very literally an "automated manual", as @zygomatic points out is in the SMG acronym itself) -- and it is nothing even remotely like an automatic internally, and everything like a manual inside.

There's nothing wrong with tossing out "automatic" once in a conversation as lazy shorthand to describe to how the transmission can operate (in other words, using "automatic" as an adjective) -- it's another thing altogether to have a protracted discussion among car guys where you continue to insist it is an automatic when the transmission is nothing like an automatic and everything like a manual where it counts.

If the business discussion was car related -- I would have bailed on you also 1000% -- 0% because I was offended, and 1000% because you either didn't know the difference between an automatic and an F1, or were too stubborn on a point you could not have been more wrong about. Honestly I would have bailed even if the business wasn't car-related.

Automatic as a lazy adjective in a non-technical discussion to describe how it can operate? Fine.

Automatic as a noun, in a protracted discussion discussion among car guys? In the words of John McEnroe -- you cannot possibly be serious .

 

Fine.
The automatic that identifies as a manual.

 

If you change the filling inside a bowling ball, does that make it a baseball?

Doesn't matter how it works under the covers. You either manually, physically operate the gear changing mechanism or gear changes are automated.

The discussion you're trying to pretend you're not having is "my automatic transmission is better than yours."

 

It’s hard to believe these are serious posts. The “inside” is what dictates how the transmission performs. Paddle shifting on a fluid transmission is a joke. Paddle shifting on an F1 is virtually the same as manual shifting (for obvious reasons).

I hated my first Tiptronic 996 because it was slow (for a 911) and paddle shifting absolutely sucked (every shift was slow and feels/performs nothing like a manual). I love the 6-speed 996 we have now - far faster and a more responsive and fun - you would never guess they were the same car. If they had a PDK for the 996 back then, it would be 80% as fun and perform better than the manual (for obvious reasons).

There is a night and day difference between the way they perform because of what is inside the transmission. How can you possibly focus so myopically on the most superficial aspect that they can optionally share an operational mode with an automatic????

 

Huh? It is you who can't possibly be serious. How a thing accomplishes what it does doesn't change what it does. Is a Mazda not a motorized vehicle because it has a rotary engine? Is an OLED not a TV because it doesn't have a tube? It's light years better, yeah, but it's still a TV. Your "logic" is crackers.

 

But who the hell talks about cars in such generalized terms as motorized vehicle? What’s inside is what matters and dictates how it performs.

The analogous term for your “TV” example would be “Transmission”. TV’s have different flavors (OLED, plasma), transmissions have different flavors (F1, automatic, CVT).

You can get away with automatic as an adjective to describe how it can optionally operate - not as a noun.

All of the manufacturers have a separate name for their F1 transmissions. I think they would know what to call them.