![]() |
|
|
|||||||
| Transmission Talk Discussion area for transmission and related issues and concerns. |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
Having seen a lot of complaints about NB AT transmission, I am wondering whether its manual transmission also has the similar problem or not? Or its manual transmission is much more reliable than its AT counterpart?
I am going to buy a New Beetle, either 2007 model or 2010 model, one is with manual shift; the other is AT. Has anyone had no problem with AT after 2007 year model? Is manual shift always more reliable than AT? ![]() |
| Sponsored Links | ||
Advertisement | ||
|
||||
|
Manuals rarely have issues. The only big (which when compared to problems with the autos is not big at all) is needing to replace the clutch. But that can go for 150k+. The autos fail a lot. Its not so much if, its when.
Not so sure on the new transmissions. I'd stick with a manual myself though. Much less to go wrong and much cheaper to fix and replace.
__________________
The Baby: Darla, 102k, '99 New Beetle GL 5-speed. Bone stock. Acquired 4/6/05. Gave her life for me 8/17/11. RIP ![]() The Project: Klaus, 180k+, '84 Jetta GL Turbo Diesel. Rebuilt and bringing 50+ mpg. Slightly improved from stock Acquired 7/12/08The Baby Brother: Günther, 20th Anniversary Edition GTI ![]() The money saver:2001 Jetta TDI GL. 114k. Dead auto, swapped to 3 pedals. Hubby's DD and our trip car |
|
||||
|
Don't think you can say that...the new Mustangs have some serious trans issues, keeping them from being able to shift and from what I've read, the dealer can't seem to fix it. Its an inherent problem with the transmission itself (a Chinese unit...need I say more?). I've actually seen people on TCL say that they wish they would have stayed away from the manual on those cars...and anymore, the autos are getting more efficient than a manual as they turn more to DSG.
|
|
||||
|
Have to agree with SB, Foxie, you can't generalize like that. GM automatics, at least the tried and true ones that have been used for decades, go hundreds of thousands of miles with absolutely no service, no leaks, no slips, no top-offs, nothing. And I tow with most of my vehicles. Millions of miles ago I had to have the bands adjusted on a '71 Cutlass Vert, I restored. As to performance, some ATs will out perform MTs. Back in the day, Pontiac Racing Division, used the 3spd Hydromatic coupled to their 389 HOs and 421s, in their race cars, and Buick had a killer 2spd Dynaflow coupled to their 426 nailheads. I was a big street racer and drove both.
And regarding the later DSG (02E) trannies in the late model NBs, I don't remember reading any threads indicating any issues. If you check the EPA fuel economy specs for the NBs, you'll also find the ATs get slightly better fuel economy with highway driving. M. |
|
||||
|
Sure, if we're talking about a 2006 or later and automatic Beetle (what the poster asked about) isn't so bad.
My mom had about 5 automatic GM or Ford cars that I can recall (the Turino being the most craptastic of them all), my dad had a rule about buying used cars with under 150k miles. All of them had transmission failures, it got to where every year or two my dad just bought another clunker. Meanwhile in 1989 my grandfather bought a brand new Black-over-red Dakota Sport. 244k later, the clutch went out. He traded it for a 2001 Colorado manual, in 2011. Dad's Golf had never had a clutch replaced till he did it, because we knew the first and second owners (met the first via the second who was our neighbor). This car had an easy 400k on it since the odometer stopped at 260k and the guy we got it from drove from Memphis to Asheville twice a week for work for a year (that's 1000+ miles a week). When the clutch went he sold it to my dad for $500, we're still driving that car. And if that's not enough, the upkeep in fluid alone for an automatic vs a manual is considerable. It takes 2QT of fluid at about $40 in a manual VW gearbox. The automatic takes more like 4.2QT or just over a gallon of fluid. Even if it costs the same, more volume means more cost. There is also the filter to replace. And the interval; a DSG needs its fluid ($129, 6.3QT of fluid) changed every 40,000 miles for optimal performance. The manual transmission has its gear oil replaced every 100,000 miles. For the cost of a single DSG change, I can afford to change the fluid on 3 manual transmission cars totaling 300k of service for the single 40k service of a DSG. But, in the end, it's about how long you intend to keep it / how old it is if you're buying it and how hard you drive it. All these high miler autos and manuals are driven gently. But until I see more 250k mi flywheel didn't grenade my transmission DSGs, I'm still saying, get the manual transmission. |
|
||||
|
Get what you really want. If you want an AT good.If you want a manual good. try to remember what kind of driving you are going to do, lots of stop and go can get old with a manual.
An automatic with fluid changes (not flushes)( alright let the flames begin. We've had the flush vs change debate before on the forum)can be a good long lasting trans. |
|
||||
|
Quote:
Sent from my DROID X2 using AutoGuide App |
| Sponsored Links | |
Advertisement | |
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Manual transmission fluid | Smileybug | Transmission Talk | 18 | 06-04-2011 01:15 PM |
| Manual Transmission Won't Go Into Reverse - Help! | Jon Lloyd | Transmission Talk | 8 | 05-22-2011 02:21 PM |
| Manual Transmission | cataldo279 | Suggestion Box | 1 | 08-29-2009 03:29 PM |
| Manual Transmission Problems!! | JoDiazz | Questions, Issues, Concerns, or Problems with the New Beetle | 4 | 09-10-2008 09:35 PM |
| Redline MTL or MT-90 for Manual Transmission? | [lot] | Transmission Talk | 3 | 08-14-2008 04:13 AM |
|