That being said, if you know what you are doing and you tune your automatic properly (a lot harder to do these days) you can get it to always shift at exactly the right time. Since automatics can shift faster than humans (if they are tuned right – luxury cars shift much slower) which they have since Chrysler made the A727 transmission in the early 50′s, they lose less power during the shifting process.

I’m unconvinced that modern cars really get very good mileage-at all. A 1968 Dodge Charger with a 318 (5.2L) will get 22-24MPG highway with today’s gas (it would get better with 100+ octane like it should have). It weighs almost exactly the same as a 2009 Toyota Camry with a V6, yet the Camry only gets 28MPG. Now I know that’s with all of the amenities, but the ’68 is using points ignition and a carburator. If you swap it to electronic ignition and add a few other modern goodies, like an electric fuel pump and water pump a 60′s 318 will hit 30MPG.

And though the Camry’s V6 has more power on paper, it gets it at over 2x (for both torque and horsepower) the RPM that the 318 gets it at. Which means to get any real performance, you have to floor it and then that 28MPG goes out the window. The 318 has a low powerband, so you get the performance without having to rev the engine and thus you get better mileage.

We hate the bit of having to stop on a hill going uphill, with another vehicle right on our tail, then having to work the brake clutch and accelerator all at the same time to get going again with only two feet, AND not rolling backwards and hitting that idiot that is crowding our tail. It’s really nerve wracking!

Manuals are good if you live where you want to use them to control the speed going downhill, but you can downshift with an automatic to do it. We have decided we just don’t want to mess with the manual any more.

If we want people to drive less, raise the gas tax and give subsidies to alternative energy/ fuel efficient vehicles. Demanding people drive a certain type of car be it hybrid or manual is absurd.

Also, this is a good thing. Bush moved the time table up and increased the CAFE standards. No, I don’t agree with 99% of Bush’s legislative agenda, but this was a good decision. When you bash it, it just shows how biased and unreasonable you are. Just because an incompetent, uncaring president suggested it, doesn’t mean it is a bad suggestion.

Charles – your comment on driving a manual helps the driver pay attention is spot on, at least for me. I get incredibly bored driving an autotragic, and my mind usually starts to drift. A manual keeps me engaged, and makes the whole driving experience a lot more fun. I don’t like appliance cars, and I think driving SHOULD be fun. So give me a manual anyday.

Yes, there are automatically shifted manual transmissions. One example is VW’s DSG transmission. Its fuel efficiency comes close to that of a manual. But I still wouldn’t want one if I can help it.

As for MPG differences. The CVT is heavy compared to the MT, giving the MT a bit of an advantage. As well as other advantages others have in their posts.

As for driving what you need. If you own a boat, please do not buy a big truck or SUV to tow it a few times a year. You can rent a big SUV for about $100/day. A Ford Escape hybrid can pay for a days rental in about 2000 miles.

Also, due to the nature of CVTs, they naturally have more parasitic losses. Although, if tuned right I believe they might have promise.

… 43 mpg by 2016 seems crazy. This would likely make the average cost of a new car increase dramatically because the automakers would have to spend more on technology/lightweight materials/etc. That is, unless Americans decide that they only really need to buy a car that will accommodate their needs, and not one that is super-huge.

Lets put more pressure on them so they’ll “act again”. :-p

My 2cent on CVT vs. MTs:
In theory CVT should always win against AT and MT but early CVTs had many issues and so, like diesel, has a tarnished reputation. And yes, depending on how the CVT is implemented (read Wikipedia or something), it can be less efficient than MT (or even AT).

The fact that Honda discontinued MT on their hybrids (at least Civics, just bought one recently) should be an indicator how mature it is becoming.

I can’t find the link article (maybe video) CVT and MT on a uphill but I can’t see how MT would be better than CVT uphills.

If trying to speed up going uphill (from a complete stop for example) then you’ll upshift and each time car will jerk and you slide back or rather slow down a little (one normally let go of gas pedal, press clutch, shift, then accelerate again).

Even if you are just trying to maintain speed, chances are you’ll have to down shift most likely (unless hill relatively flat or small).

With CVT, you won’t notice a thing! Therefore, a good CVT will always win when it comes to acceleration and efficiency (assuming only difference is transmission). One of “disadvantages” is drivers tend to think the car is less powerful because it is so quiet and smooth… -_- Then again, hybrids usually get smaller engines.

If you are going on a flat road with no stopping, depending on distance, you are probably better off driving a hybrid without its electric motor/batteries! The advantage of hybrids is because that not what real world conditions are!